Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Code Omnibus topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission sends large downtown planning-code package back for focused work; March 1 continuance set
Summary
After three hearings on a broad set of downtown and waterfront planning-code and zoning-map changes, the Planning Commission agreed to a targeted continuance to March 1 for Items 15 and 16, asking staff and the sponsor——Supervisor Chiu——to provide a refined packet and to sever several controversial pieces for separate consideration.
The San Francisco Planning Commission on Feb. 9 moved to continue a broad package of planning-code text changes and companion zoning-map amendments to a focused hearing on March 1, asking the sponsor——the office of Board President David Chiu——to provide a clearer, narrowed set of materials for commission review.
Judson True, legislative aide to Supervisor David Chiu, told the commission his office "is committed to separating out this legislation into at least, at least 3 ordinances" and to pulling certain elements (including parking-facility pricing and specific parts of the C3 density/FAR proposals) onto a slower track for additional outreach and analysis. True said two pieces he expected to move more slowly were the FIRE exemption and the 155gs parking-rate provisions.
The package under consideration would make multiple downtown and waterfront changes: rationalizing C3 (downtown) controls, adjusting parking requirements and exceptions, altering certain nonconforming-use rules, permitting FAR exclusions for on-site affordable housing, refining transfer-of-development-rights language, and changing special-use-district boundaries and signage rules. Planning staff and the Port of San Francisco supported much of the technical approach but asked for more coordination on waterfront SUD language. Staff described the package as implementing General Plan goals such as transit-first incentives and adaptive-reuse facilitation.
Public testimony was mixed. Housing and urban‑policy groups including the Housing Action Coalition and Livable City praised the ordinance——especially incentives for on-site affordable housing and tools to encourage adaptive reuse——but neighborhood groups and some merchant associations warned the changes could erode local protections. Concerns focused on the use of exceptions instead of conditional uses, the treatment and grandfathering of surface parking lots, and the potential consequences of FAR and density decontrols in sensitive neighborhoods. Priority Parking and other parking-lot operators urged careful treatment of long-standing lots that operate as businesses.
Commissioners debated several procedural options: a short continuance to allow staff to incorporate specific amendments; passing the package out with no recommendation; or denying the staff recommendation. After extended discussion the commission adopted a motion to continue Item 15 (uses, signs, FAR, parking, and compliance in specified use districts) to March 1 by a 5–1 vote, and continued Item 16 (zoning-map amendments for waterfront and special districts) as a focused continuance as well; Commissioner Fung recused himself from Item 16. The commission asked staff to provide materials one week before the March 1 hearing so commissioners and the public can review the refinements.
What happens next: Supervisor Chiu's office has said it will formally sever certain pieces of the original omnibus proposal and will pursue additional outreach on parking-rate amendments and select C3 provisions before land-use committee hearings. The Commission——which issues advisory recommendations to the Board of Supervisors——will revisit the severed pieces when they return to the commission or when requested by staff.
