Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Process Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Department moves to overhaul discretionary-review process; code amendments initiated
Summary
After extensive public comment and a multi-month staff outreach process, the Planning Commission voted to initiate amendments to Planning Code Sections 3.11 and 3.12 to pilot a two‑year discretionary‑review reform emphasizing stronger pre‑application outreach, an internal Residential Design Team (RDT), defined criteria for “exceptional and extraordinary” cases, and timelines for review.
The San Francisco Planning Commission on April 2 initiated amendments to city planning code sections 3.11 and 3.12 and endorsed a phase‑one experiment to reform the city’s discretionary‑review (DR) process. Planning Department staff framed the changes as a two‑year trial that emphasizes early neighborhood engagement, new internal review checks and clearer criteria for Commission hearings.
The department said its proposal aims to reduce the time and cost of DR cases by strengthening the pre‑application process, requiring standardized neighborhood notices and meeting packets, and routing many cases through a multi‑planner Residential Design Team (RDT) before a commission hearing. Staff said the RDT would document technical reviews, identify cases that present “exceptional and extraordinary” circumstances and escalate only those for full Commission consideration.
Why it matters: Community groups have long criticized DR as unpredictable and costly for homeowners and developers, while the Commission has expressed interest in freeing meeting time for higher‑level policy work. Staff said reform will provide clearer, consistent application of design standards, introduce timelines (RDT review in 30 days; Commission hearings within 90 days when warranted), and require written findings and public reporting to improve transparency.
What was proposed and debated: Phase 1 proposals include a standardized pre‑application packet and mailing timeline, a sign‑in and issue/response form for neighborhood meetings, and a plan‑check sheet with quantitative triggers to prompt RDT review. Phase 2 — to be considered only after assessment of Phase 1 — would examine story poles, 3‑D renderings and the possible role of an independent hearing officer.
Public response mixed: Neighborhood and preservation groups voiced broad support for early outreach and timelines but urged caution about delegating hearing‑level decisions to staff. Several speakers asked that rejected DR requests be reported to the full Commission during the trial period and recommended quarterly reports on emerging policy issues derived from RDT review.
Next steps: The Commission formally initiated the legislative amendment process; staff will prepare draft ordinance language and schedule a public hearing. The Commission set a target to consider the code changes in mid‑May, with an 18‑month review after implementation to evaluate outcomes and, if needed, propose further revisions.
