Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Code Cleanup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission adopts large planning-code cleanup, clears clerical errors and consolidates formula-retail rules
Summary
Commission voted 5-2 to advance an omnibus planning-code cleanup that consolidates formula-retail definitions, clarifies 3.09 permit review, and tightens notification language in 3.11 (removing the word "access"). Historic Preservation Commission suggested additional changes to Articles 10 and 11; commissioners agreed to consider those separately.
The Planning Commission approved an omnibus package to correct clerical errors and consolidate code language across multiple planning-code sections on July 29, advancing changes staff described as mostly editorial and organizational rather than substantive.
Planning Department staffer Tara Sullivan told commissioners the project "is amending mainly clerical errors" and stressed the changes do not alter the substance of formula-retail controls but move and consolidate definitions: "Again, it's not a substantive change. It is just basically putting everything into one location." Commissioners and public commenters urged that no substantive changes to Articles 10 and 11 (historic preservation) be folded into the housekeeping measure and recommended separate joint hearings with the Historic Preservation Commission for controversial edits.
Key changes adopted by the commission included consolidating formula-retail definitions, streamlining Section 309 on C-3 downtown permit review (staff proposed removing a front-end notice requirement that it had not been following), clarifying the medical-cannabis-dispensary definition, and tightening the wording of Section 311's notice package (striking the ambiguous word "access" and requiring 11x17 drawings). The package passed on a 5-2 vote after discussion of notice, neighborhood impacts and the appropriate forum for more controversial historic-preservation amendments.
The commission added that further Article 10/11 edits proposed by the Historic Preservation Commission would be addressed separately. Staff said the changes should reduce confusion and better align code sections with departmental practice, and that they would circulate the final ordinance text in advance of the Board of Supervisors referral.
Outcome: Motion to adopt code-cleanup amendments passed 5-2; staff to carry forward non-substantive edits and process any Article 10/11 substantive proposals through separate hearings.
