Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission backs changes to sign-permit review for downtown historic buildings with staff edits
Summary
The commission recommended approval Dec. 7 of a planning-code amendment to require greater Historic Preservation Commission oversight of new business signs on Article 10 landmarks while keeping streamlined review for many Article 11 downtown properties, passing 5 to 2.
The San Francisco Planning Commission on Dec. 7 recommended approval of a planning-code amendment that would tighten review for new business signs on landmark (Article 10) buildings and require a higher level of review for some Article 11 conservation-district properties in the downtown/C3 area.
Michelle Taylor of the Planning Department told commissioners the ordinance would require Certificate of Appropriateness hearings for new signs on Article 10 properties and a major permit and HPC hearing for major sign work on Article 11 properties in downtown, while preservation staff would continue to review certain minor scopes administratively.
The department proposed modifications intended to preserve over-the-counter (same-day) review for most Article 11 signs in conservation districts while requiring additional findings for Article 10 landmarks. The staff recommendation is aimed at balancing downtown economic recovery with protection of historic character; the Union Square Alliance told the commission it supported the staff changes as striking that balance, while neighborhood advocates (SPEAK and the Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods) urged stronger HPC oversight and said planning staff had misapplied earlier legislation.
Commissioners discussed the trade-off between streamlining for businesses and careful architectural review. Commissioner Braun moved to approve the ordinance with staff recommendations; the motion passed 5 to 2 with Commissioners Imperial and Moore voting no.
The department said the change would increase review time and fees for some sign permits (from a flat fee of about $225 to a time-and-materials charge estimated between $400 and $600 and a realistic review timeline of two to three months for Article 10 sign permits), while preserving expedited review for many Article 11 sign applications to help businesses amid high downtown vacancy.
The commission will forward its recommendation and staff amendments to the Board of Supervisors for consideration.
