Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Votes Roundup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves multiple planning, housing and public‑works items; several appeals continued
Summary
At its Sept. 4 meeting the Board of Supervisors passed a range of planning, housing and finance measures (items 6–14, 8–9, 10–12), affirmed a mitigated negative declaration for an Alcatraz ferry project, and continued several appeals and conditional use items for later hearings.
On Sept. 4 the San Francisco Board of Supervisors disposed of multiple agenda items by roll call or without objection. Several measures were taken with little extended discussion; the board also continued a set of appeals and a conditional use authorization for later hearings. Key outcomes below are drawn from the meeting roll calls and motion text recorded in the transcript.
Summary of votes and procedural outcomes
- Item 6 — Planning Code amendment to prohibit retail cannabis and medical dispensaries in the Chinatown mixed‑use districts; motion passed on final reading (recorded tally: 8 ayes, 3 noes). The clerk recorded supervisors Ronan, Brown and Mandelmann voting no; other supervisors voted yes. (Transcript roll call.)
- Item 7 — Planning Code amendment to allow payment of an in‑lieu fee for a street‑tree requirement (NCD); ordinance finally passed (recorded tally: 9 ayes, 2 noes; supervisors Feuer and Kim recorded as no). (Transcript roll call.)
- Items 8 and 9 — Two resolutions: (8) authorize execution of a multifamily housing revenue note not to exceed approximately $35,700,000 for an 81‑unit project at 490 South Van Ness; (9) authorize a 75‑year ground lease on city‑owned land at 490 South Van Ness with $15,000 annual base rent for a 100% affordable 80‑unit development. Both resolutions were adopted unanimously (11 ayes). (Transcript roll call.)
- Items 10–12 — Three retroactive authorizations for Department of Public Health Community Behavioral Health Services and a contract with the Regents of the University of California for behavioral health services; passed unanimously without recorded opposition. Item 12 listed a not‑to‑exceed amount of approximately $22,800,000 for a contract term July 1, 2018–June 30, 2022. (Transcript summary.)
- Item 13 — Ordinance to conditionally permit certain massage establishments in the Union Street neighborhood commercial district; passed unanimously. The ordinance applies only to the Union Street NCD and allows three vetted businesses an 18‑month extension to complete permitting. (Sponsor comments summarized in transcript.)
- Item 14 — Planning Code amendment to permit 100% affordable housing on undeveloped parcels in SLI (Western SoMa) zoning where no habitable buildings exist; passed unanimously. Sponsor emphasized the change would not displace existing arts/production uses and would restore a use removed by the Western SoMa plan. (Transcript comments.)
- Item 15 — Ordinance to repeal the reclaimed water use ordinance in the Public Works Code. The board voted to send the item back to the Land Use and Transportation Committee for additional amendments to maximize water‑use efficiency; motion to return to committee was made and approved without objection.
- Items 16–19 — Four appeals of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed Central SoMa plan (special order). Supervisor Jane Kim moved to continue the appeals to the week of Sept. 11; motion was seconded and the board continued the appeals to Sept. 11, 2018.
- Items 20–23 — Special order on the Alcatraz ferry embarkation project (mitigated negative declaration). Supervisor Peskin moved to affirm the final mitigated negative declaration (item 21) and to table associated items; the motion was seconded and passed without objection. The planning department presented analysis concluding no significant environmental impacts requiring an EIR, subject to mitigation measures.
- Items 24–27 — Conditional use authorization and related matters for a project at 143 Corbett Avenue (appeal). Supervisor Mandelmann moved to continue the item to Oct. 2 to allow parties, planning and building inspection to confer; the motion was seconded and the continuance was adopted.
What this means: Several planning and housing actions that the board characterized as routine were adopted quickly, while higher‑profile or contested land‑use appeals were continued to permit more public input or inter‑agency discussion. Several measures included financial authorizations for affordable housing projects and contract approvals recorded on the consent or adoption calendars.
