San Francisco staff present plan to ban natural gas in most new buildings; commissioners press for clearer exemptions

San Francisco officials presented an informational briefing on an ordinance (Board of Supervisors file no. 200,701) that would prohibit natural‑gas systems in most newly constructed buildings and require all‑electric heating, cooling, water heating, cooking and clothes‑drying equipment for projects that submit initial building permits on or after Jan. 1, 2021.

Jacob Mintliff of Supervisor Rafael Mandelmann’s office, who introduced the measure on the supervisor’s behalf, said the change is essential to achieve the city’s climate goals and to reduce health and safety risks associated with gas. “Natural gas is a leading source of carbon emissions in San Francisco,” Mintliff said, adding that the ordinance would apply to roughly 60% of the current development pipeline and include limited exceptions for cases where all‑electric construction is technically infeasible.

Cindy Comerford, climate program manager at the Department of the Environment, walked commissioners through the ordinance’s main elements and implementation plan. Comerford said commercial food service operations may continue to apply for mixed‑fuel permits for cooking equipment until Jan. 1, 2022 to allow outreach and training for cooks and owners. In rare cases where electrification is physically or technically infeasible, Comerford said project sponsors would submit a waiver request supported by verification from a third‑party reviewer; that process will be spelled out in an administrative bulletin prepared by the Department of Building Inspection (DBI).

Ned Fenny, vice chair of the Code Advisory Committee, told the commission the draft ordinance reflects extensive outreach but that committee members want more analysis of the potential need to upsize electrical service — and whether that would trigger sidewalk transformer requirements for some smaller projects. “There’s a lot of learning involved,” Fenny said, urging more detail on transformer siting and the administrative guidance that DBI will use to evaluate exemptions.

Public commenters were split but heavily engaged. Dozens of callers and two multi‑signatory letters read into the record urged the commission to limit exemptions, make the exception process public, require electric‑ready infrastructure as a baseline, and remove the proposed one‑year delay for restaurant spaces. “We need to make the exception process more transparent,” said one caller who identified himself as a chemist and supported a public‑interest review for waivers. Several callers cited health research linking gas stoves to worsened indoor air quality and childhood asthma.

Industry speakers urged caution. Sean Kieglen, identified as representing restaurant/industry interests, said the change is not cost neutral for many projects and warned of disproportionate expense for small two‑to‑seven‑unit buildings that might require costly sidewalk transformers. “Most were saying 40% increase,” he said of a membership meeting he described; he asked for more time for manufacturing and training to reduce near‑term cost and operational impacts.

Commissioners said they generally support the city’s direction toward electrification but pressed staff for specifics. They asked DBI and the Department of the Environment to publish the administrative bulletin and the Department of Public Works planning guidance on sidewalk transformer siting before the ordinance returns for formal consideration in August. Staff responded that the planning department has completed design guidelines and DPW is reviewing a public work order that will be referenced in DBI’s guidance.

Comerford and other staff emphasized that the ordinance is informational at this hearing; the commission will hear the item again in August with the administrative bulletin and further technical detail. The primary next steps described by staff were finalizing the administrative bulletin (which will define the narrow technical/physical infeasibility exemptions and third‑party review) and publishing a DPW planning document on transformer siting for review by the commission.

The commission took no formal vote on the ordinance at the July 15 meeting. The presentation and follow‑up discussion were framed as preparatory work before any action item is scheduled.