Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission backs temporary legitimization for Active Space tenants, limits office legalization
Summary
The Planning Commission approved a legitimization program for hundreds of small tenants at 3150 Eighteenth Street, giving most personal‑service and nonprofit uses a 10‑year path to legalize while limiting office uses to a three‑year discretionary review process; the move follows extensive tenant testimony urging longer protection.
The San Francisco Planning Commission on May 23 approved a legislated legitimization program to allow many existing nonconforming small businesses at 3150 Eighteenth Street, known as Active Space, to pursue permits that would legalize their uses for a limited period.
The ordinance as adopted allows personal services, health services and similar tenant uses to file for establishment/change‑of‑use permits that — if approved under the program — will permit continued operation for 10 years. Office uses may be considered through the program but would be eligible for only a three‑year authorization and would require mandatory discretionary review before the commission.
Supervisor Hilary Ronan’s legislative director, Carolina Morales, told the commission the proposal was intended to prevent the simultaneous displacement of more than 100 small businesses facing enforcement action and fines. Planning staff supported the overall goal but recommended several modifications, including shortening the program length for office uses to reduce the risk that higher‑rent office tenants would permanently displace PDR (production, distribution, repair) and other neighborhood‑serving activity.
During public comment more than two dozen tenants and small business owners — massage therapists, bodyworkers, speech therapists, tattoo artists and others — described Active Space as an important affordable cluster of services and urged the commission to adopt a 10‑year legitimization period for all qualifying tenants. Several commissioners said they were persuaded that the building’s aggregation of small, community‑serving uses merited longer protection.
Zoning Administrator Corey Teague told the commission the property had an unusually large number of units (roughly 287 units in the building) and that past enforcement found many spaces operating without permits and, in some cases, without business licenses. Staff emphasized the city’s limited ability to control post‑legalization rent increases by property owners.
After extended debate over balancing PDR preservation with displacement risks, the commission approved the ordinance with the staff‑recommended modification: personal‑service and nonprofit/social‑service uses would receive a 10‑year legitimization window; office uses would be eligible only for a shorter, three‑year path and would be subject to mandatory discretionary review. Commissioners supported directing staff and the supervisor’s office to pursue a more permanent zoning/rezoning solution for the site in the longer term.
The motion passed in the commission’s final recorded vote after amendments and procedural revisions. The commission also asked staff to keep enforcement actions in place so that vacant units can be returned to PDR use when appropriate.
What happens next: if adopted as written, tenants who qualify under the program will need to file the required permits and, for offices, pursue discretionary review; staff and supervisors indicated they will work on longer‑term rezoning or programmatic fixes while monitoring enforcement and rental impacts.
