Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission opens informational hearing on broad planning‑code rewrite; schedules December follow‑up
Summary
An omnibus planning‑code update introduced by Supervisor David Chiu drew strong praise for code simplification and sharp critique over scope and process. Stakeholders flagged concerns about surface parking lot phase‑out, parking‑rate language, port/Burton Act conflicts and grandfathering. Commissioners scheduled an informational hearing on December 15 and asked staff for targeted recommendations.
Planning staff and Supervisor David Chiu’s office presented a sweeping set of code changes that seek to simplify the planning code, reduce parking requirements in transit‑rich neighborhoods, incentivize adaptive reuse and affordable housing, expand transfer‑of‑development‑rights (TDR) flexibility, and tighten sign controls.
Supervisor Chu’s legislative aide, Justin True, framed the ordinance as a policy package to make the code coherent with objectives in the General Plan — encouraging transit use, protecting historic buildings, and making it easier to produce affordable housing — while staff summarized ten topic areas including parking, TDRs, awning and sign consolidation, and exemptions to facilitate reuse of Articles 10 and 11 buildings.
Public comment was extensive. The Port of San Francisco raised concerns about potential conflicts with the Burton Act and urged close coordination on waterfront lots and seawall parcels; parking‑lot operators warned the proposed phase‑out and new parking‑rate formula could produce large revenue impacts and legal challenges; neighborhood advocates and preservation groups requested more granular outreach and code excerpts tied to specific code sections; bicycling advocates and housing developers spoke in favor of provisions that encourage bike parking and exclude affordable units from FAR calculations.
Commissioners emphasized the ordinance’s potential benefits while voicing caution about scope and unintended consequences. They requested clearer, neighborhood‑by‑neighborhood summaries, specific staff recommendations, additional outreach to the Port, MTA and affected stakeholders and robust grandfathering language for projects with existing entitlements. Given the volume and complexity of comments, the commission agreed to hear the ordinance again as an informational item on December 15, with preliminary staff recommendations circulated about two weeks in advance and the possibility of an action hearing in January.
Next steps: Staff will prepare a matrix tying proposed code changes to affected neighborhoods and legal code sections, conduct further outreach to Port and MTA, and present draft recommendations to the commission in advance of the December 15 informational hearing. The public hearing will remain open.
