Board upholds conditional-use approval for cannabis shop at 800 Taraval after hours, delivery and consumption limits

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved a conditional-use authorization for a cannabis retail use at 800 Taraval Street, but only after adding conditions that restrict hours, deliveries and on-site consumption following a long public hearing and an appeal from nearby merchants and residents.

The decision overturns the Planning Commission's original motion in part: the board voted 9-2 to adopt a modified approval after Supervisor Matt Haney Melgar moved amendments and Supervisor Hillary Ronan seconded the change. The board separately tabled the commission's original approval on a related item by an 11-0 vote.

The case drew large in-person turnout and extensive remote comment. Appellants argued the proposed dispensary would operate in a building that shares an address with the Gold Mirror restaurant and that the second-floor mezzanine described in the application was in active use rather than vacant. Many neighborhood speakers, several represented through Chinese and Taishanese interpretation, urged supervisors to expand the city's 600-foot buffer to include preschools and other child-focused uses.

"We support the legal, safe, and ethical use of cannabis. We are in no means against cannabis. We just wanna make sure it's used in a responsible manner and kept away from children," said Lefteris Leftario, who represented merchants and residents objecting to the proposal.

Planning Director Liz Waddy told the board the Planning Code allows owners to carve out surplus space from an existing business and dedicate it to a new commercial tenant, and said on-site edible consumption is permitted "as of right" if later authorized by the Department of Public Health. "The planning code does not limit a property owner's ability to carve out surplus space from an existing business, add demising walls, and dedicate the space to a new business including a cannabis retailer," Waddy said.

Appellants pressed three points: that the application mischaracterized the mezzanine as vacant; that public notice and the Planning Commission's motion did not make the community aware of potential on-site edible consumption; and that the city's 600-foot buffer (as amended by Ordinance 229-17 in 2017) deliberately excluded some child-care uses and thus left a policy gap.

In response, the project sponsor, Angel Davis, said the applicant had deep neighborhood ties and pledged to follow state and city rules, comprehensive security planning and a Good Neighbor Policy. "We continue to be patient and we've taken all of this in stride and are here again before you to demonstrate our willingness to go above and beyond what any small business should be asked to do to open," Davis said.

Supervisor Matt Haney Melgar, who led the motion to amend, told the board that while the Planning Commission's findings could stand under existing law, the community's trust had been damaged by how some details were presented. Melgar won board support for conditions that: limit hours of operation to 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.; prohibit on-site consumption of packaged or prepared cannabis products at the site; require that deliveries occur only between 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Eighteenth Avenue entrance; require the Good Neighbor Policy to reflect the delivery and consumption restrictions; and require the sponsor to engage robustly with community groups about operations, parking and loitering.

Opponents described frequent child-focused uses in the corridor: day-care, martial-arts programs and a pediatric dental office within yards of the location. Many speakers also called for expanding the 600-foot buffer to include pre-kindergarten programs and similar child-centered services.

Appellants also pointed to Planning Code Section 306.1(d) in arguing that material misstatements in an application are grounds for denial; the planning department replied that whether a tenant space is vacant is not a criterion for conditional-use consideration. Planning staff said their site visit in December 2022 found the mezzanine not in active use, and noted the original application was filed during the COVID period when occupancy patterns were different.

The board's roll-call votes were recorded on the transcript. On the amendment and then the final approval with conditions, the votes were: Supervisors Chan, Dorsey, Mandelmann, Melgar, Peskin, Preston, Ronan, Safaie and Walton voted aye; Supervisors Engardio and Stephanie voted no. The board tabled the Planning Commission's original approval in a separate vote of 11-0.

The sponsor and Office of Cannabis staff said the Office of Cannabis (OOC) requires a site inspection and verification of separation from alcohol-serving spaces before a permanent city permit is issued; OOC staff said any fraud or misrepresentation during permitting "will be subject to disciplinary action, including decline of the permanent application." The city will also expect a community liaison in the Good Neighbor Policy who must respond to neighborhood concerns after operations begin.

What happens next: the board directed the clerk to file the amended conditions with the Planning Department, the Office of Cannabis and the Department of Public Health. Any subsequent changes in operations or ownership would trigger further review by city agencies and could require re-notification or transfer approvals under Police Code provisions governing cannabis permits.

The decision clarifies that under current local code the 600-foot buffer remains defined as the city adopted in 2017, and that expanding that buffer to include preschool-aged programs would require new legislation.

Actions taken

- Motion to amend item 25 (approve conditional use with additional conditions) ' Mover: Supervisor Matt Haney Melgar; Second: Supervisor Hillary Ronan; Outcome: approved (9 ayes, 2 no). Vote record: Ayes ' Chan, Dorsey, Mandelmann, Melgar, Peskin, Preston, Ronan, Safaie, Walton. No ' Engardio, Stephanie.

- Motion to approve item 25 as amended and item 26 (findings supporting disapproval of original decision) ' Outcome: approved (9 ayes, 2 no). Same roll call as above.

- Motion to table item 24 (original Planning Commission approval) ' Outcome: tabled (11-0).

Speakers (attribution whitelist)

- Lefteris Leftario ' Appellant representative (speaker at public hearing; represented merchants/residents) - Angel Davis ' Project sponsor / representative - Michael Hall ' Equity applicant - Liz Waddy ' Director, Planning Department (current planning) - Christy Alexander ' Planning Department staff planner (project staff) - Matthew Chandler ' Planning Department, cannabis permitting coordinator - Office of Cannabis staff (unnamed staff member referenced on record) - Dorothy Peng ' Appellant speaker (rebuttal) - Supervisor Matt Haney Melgar ' Board member, mover of amendment - Supervisor Hillary Ronan ' Board member, second to amendment - President Aaron Peskin ' Board President, presiding

Authorities

- {"type":"code","name":"Planning Code Section 202.2","referenced_by":["body"]} - {"type":"ordinance","name":"Ordinance 229-17 (2017 amendment to cannabis buffer rules)","referenced_by":["body"]} - {"type":"code","name":"Planning Code Section 306.1(d)","referenced_by":["body"]} - {"type":"code","name":"Police Code Section 16O8 (cannabis permit transfer rules)","referenced_by":["body"]} - {"type":"other","name":"Planning Commission Motion (02/02/2023) approving conditional use for 800 Taraval","referenced_by":["body"]}

Clarifying details

- "mezzanine vacancy": Appellant asserted the second-floor mezzanine was in active use; Planning staff said a December 2022 site visit found the mezzanine not actively used and noted the original application was filed during COVID when occupancy patterns differed. - "on-site consumption": Planning staff said on-site smoking/vaping requires additional permits; prepackaged edible consumption is permitted under current code as an accessory use but a separate Public Health authorization may follow; sponsor agreed to forgo edible consumption at this site as a condition. - "hours": Board limited hours to 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. by condition. - "deliveries": Deliveries to be restricted to 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the Eighteenth Avenue entrance per the board's condition.

Proper names

- {"name":"Gold Mirror","type":"business"} - {"name":"Greater West Portal Neighborhood Association","type":"organization"} - {"name":"Office of Cannabis (City of San Francisco)","type":"agency"} - {"name":"Department of Public Health (San Francisco)","type":"agency"}

Community relevance

- Geographies: Inner Taraval corridor; Districts 4 and 7 (adjacent) - Impact groups: neighborhood businesses, preschool/daycare users, patrons of Gold Mirror restaurant

Meeting context

- Engagement level: Very high ' large public turnout in person (numerous speakers, interpreted testimony), extended hearing with appellant, planning department, sponsor, and rebuttal - Implementation risk: Medium ' final permit issuance from Office of Cannabis and site inspections remain required; potential legal or administrative challenges possible - History: Appeal of a Planning Commission decision dated 02/02/2023

Searchable tags

["cannabis","Taraval","planning","appeal","buffer_zone","preschools","public_hearing"]

Provenance

- transcript_segments: [{"block_id":"3573.895","local_start":0,"local_end":272,"evidence_excerpt":"Items 23 through 26. This is the items associated with the public hearing of persons interested in the approval of a conditional use authorization for the proposed project at 800 Taraval Street ...","reason_code":"topicintro"},{"block_id":"12329.774","local_start":0,"local_end":76,"evidence_excerpt":"There are 9 eyes and 2 no's. Alright. The motion is amended and on the motion to approve item 25 as amended and item 26 for findings related, to the conditional use authorization, a roll call please.","reason_code":"topicfinish"}]