Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighborhood groups urge broad outreach on rezoning; commenters press changes to demolition rules and local hiring
Summary
During general public comment, Neighborhoods United and others urged extensive public engagement and data on impacts before large rezoning and density changes; union and preservation commenters pressed for local hire, apprenticeship and adjustments to the city's demolition calculation procedures.
Several members of the public spoke during general public comment on March 6 about the city's rezoning efforts, demolition rules and labor standards.
Bridget Maley, speaking for Neighborhoods United San Francisco, said the coalition (she said it represents roughly 60 groups) submitted a letter and urged the Planning Commission to require robust public engagement, clear notification and a data-driven approach before rezoning moves forward. Her remarks called for town halls in affected supervisorial districts, transparent estimates of housing-unit production from existing policies (including state density bonus and pipeline approvals), and additional actions such as a housing-element monitoring report, changes to the building code to support single-stair exits for four- and six-plexes, and aligning definitions of demolition across codes.
Thomas Rorick, representing Carpenters Local 22, urged support for apprenticeship programs, local-hire goals, fair wages and comprehensive health and pension benefits for construction workers; he described apprenticeship as essential to workforce quality and to reinvesting in local businesses.
A commenter who identified themselves as Georgia Shutish raised concerns about how the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) is being used to arbitrate demolition definitions and said "demo calcs" are being abused to allow de facto demolitions that avoid Planning Commission review. The speaker asked that Planning Commission authority over demolition determinations be preserved and that planning code Section 317(2) be used to adjust demolition-calculation thresholds.
Other speakers asked the commission to be vigilant about conversions of residential hotels to tourist hotels and urged transparency where litigation or closed meetings had influenced outcomes. Several callers also referenced broad demographic shifts and the need for protections for existing tenants.
Commissioners acknowledged the comments and directed staff to note public concerns; some commissioners referenced forthcoming Board of Supervisors legislation on notification procedures that will come to the Planning Commission for review.
