Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Doctor Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission adopts new discretionary‑review rules, allowing one commissioner to call hearings
Summary
After months of debate and public testimony, the commission voted to adopt changes to the discretionary‑review ("Doctor") policy that clarify the 'exceptional and extraordinary' standard, create internal residential design review, and allow a single commissioner to request a hearing. The package carries a 24‑month trial/sunset and drew both neighborhood support and opposition.
The Planning Commission voted to adopt revisions to its discretionary‑review procedures (commonly known as "Doctor"), aimed at tightening when administrative review may replace a public commission hearing and clarifying criteria for discretionary review.
Key changes: The adopted package clarifies the definition of "exceptional and extraordinary" circumstances, requires residential design team (RDT) screening for certain cases, mandates a more robust pre‑application process for identified project types, and sets a 24‑month trial period after which the Board of Supervisors may extend or allow the changes to lapse. Importantly, the commission accepted an amendment that permits a single commissioner to call for a hearing on RDT‑screened cases.
Why it matters: The Doctor process is the commissions long‑standing mechanism to review projects that, while code‑compliant, raise neighborhood or emerging policy concerns. Supporters argued the revisions reduce frivolous appeals and improve consistency; opponents said the changes raise barriers to public access and risk transferring discretion to staff.
Public response and data: Planning staff presented multi‑year case‑level data showing increased concurrence between staff recommendations and commission decisions after internal reforms in 2009. That analysis was used by staff and reform advocates to justify delegation for some cases. Neighborhood groups, the Green Party and others urged preserving open access to hearings and warned against raising procedural thresholds.
Outcome: The commission adopted the amended policy in a 5–2 vote; Commissioners Moore and Olague dissented. Staff will monitor the trial period and return reports as required.
