Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Code Windows topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances ordinance to loosen window-replacement rules in San Francisco
Summary
The Land Use and Transportation Committee voted 3-0 to amend and forward an ordinance that narrows planning oversight of residential window replacements, a measure proponents say will reduce cost and permit delays and critics say could harm local window makers and historic character.
The Land Use and Transportation Committee of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors on March 17, 2025, voted 3-0 to adopt amendments and forward an ordinance to the full board that would limit planning-code restrictions on window replacement projects in certain buildings.
Committee Chair Supervisor Myrna Melgar, who introduced the measure, said her office heard from “dozens of San Franciscans struggling with unnecessary red tape and excessive cost” and argued the ordinance will help “bring down the cost of housing for homeowners and for renters while we meet our climate action goals.” Michelle Taylor of the Planning Department explained that the Planning Commission recommended approval on Feb. 27 by a 6-1 vote and described specific modifications incorporated into the version before the committee.
The ordinance as amended would clarify that the department will not regulate frame and sash materials for replacement windows, add language to avoid conflicts with other planning-code sections, create flexibility for future cultural-district objective standards, and replace the ordinance’s standalone historic-building language with the definition already in the planning code, according to Taylor.
Supporters at public comment included Mission Housing Development Corporation, which said current regulations “make it difficult to complete necessary upgrades, delaying essential supportive services and general maintenance for our residents.” Tenants and residents also said drafty, unrepaired windows have harmed sleep and raised energy costs. A D8 resident identified as Peter described paying higher power bills and relying on space heaters because older windows left units cold at night.
Business owners and tradespeople testified against weakening material standards. Michael Kehinde, vice president of Fox Hill Windows and Doors, said the claim that nonwood windows are more energy efficient is “just a lie” and warned that the changes could let landlords install inferior products that hurt local businesses. Steve Wilson of Steve Wilson Glass and Window said many older wood windows can be repaired or retrofitted and stressed concerns about changes to the city’s aesthetic character.
Chair Melgar responded to public comments by stressing that “nothing in this legislation mandates a specific type of window” and that the ordinance exempts historic districts and properties already deemed historic or Category A. Melgar moved to adopt the amendments Michelle Taylor read into the record and to send the amended legislation to the full board with a positive recommendation as a committee report. The committee recorded three ayes (Vice Chair Chen — I; Member Mahmoud — I; Chair Melgar — I) and the motion passed.
The ordinance now goes to the full Board of Supervisors for consideration; the committee record notes the Planning Commission’s recommendation and the amendments that narrow how the city will regulate replacement windows.
