Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Ceqa Notice topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Commission delays Chapter 31 CEQA notice changes after public objections

San Francisco Planning Commission · May 27, 2010
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning Commission continued proposed administrative code changes affecting CEQA appeals and notice to allow more public outreach after neighbors and advocacy groups said legal and newspaper notice requirements weren’t met.

The San Francisco Planning Commission on May 27, 2010 agreed to continue proposed amendments to administrative code Chapter 31 — measures that would change how CEQA appeals and notice are handled — after multiple speakers and commissioners raised concerns about inadequate notice and missing legislative materials.

Public commenters urged the commission to delay action so the public could review a legislative digest and receive the 20‑day newspaper notice the administrative code appears to require. Hiroshi Fukuda, chair of the Coalition for San Francisco Land Use Committee, read a letter from Coalition President Judy Berkowitz asking the commission to continue the item until “proper, adequate, and accurate notice is provided.” Speakers cited San Francisco administrative code chapter 31 (sections 31.505(h), 31.4(b)–(c), and 31.01(c)) and board rules that call for a city attorney digest of multi‑page ordinances at introduction.

Planning staff said the supervisor requested the continuance and that department staff supported the request. Commissioners also said they wanted staff to verify noticing and correct an incorrect file number printed on the calendar materials before the item returns. Commissioner Segaye suggested asking the supervisor to review section 31.008 of the administrative code for possible changes and left the return date open to accommodate further outreach.

The motion to continue the code amendments to June 24, 2010 carried on a roll call vote. The commission asked staff and the supervisor’s office to ensure that the board’s legislative digest, published notices and outreach meet statutory and local procedural requirements before the item is rescheduled.