Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Zoning And Regulation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning staff briefs commission on new dwelling‑unit demolition legislation; public raises procedural objections

San Francisco Planning Commission · May 1, 2008
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

Planning staff told commissioners the Board signed legislation codifying residential demolition policies and it will take effect May 18; public commenters urged the Planning Commission retained review rights and complained the Board acted after substantial changes.

Planning Department staff on May 1 briefed the San Francisco Planning Commission on recent codification of the Commission’s residential demolition policies into an ordinance the Board of Supervisors adopted and the mayor signed. Craig Nikitas told commissioners the Board approved the consolidated legislation and the ordinance is scheduled to take effect on May 18.

Staff said trainings for department staff are underway to implement the codified rules and provided commissioners with a memo describing changes that occurred at the Land Use Committee. The memo included a table identifying where Board actions altered the commission’s original recommendations.

Public commenters, including Marilyn Amini, challenged the process. They argued that the commission — which the charter gives a first‑pass right on land‑use legislation — had not been given an opportunity to review substantive post‑referral amendments and raised concerns the changes shifted discretionary policy to administrative decision‑making. Amini and other commenters called the changes "fast‑tracked" and said there had been insufficient public review and no environmental review attached to the Board’s final package.

Planning staff responded that much of the range of options was discussed at commission hearings and that some Board edits were not considered substantive; staff also noted the 30‑day period before the ordinance becomes effective. Commissioners asked for clarifications and indicated they might follow up with the department to ensure the commission’s roles were preserved during implementation.

Next steps: Staff will provide trainings and a memo summarizing adopted changes; commissioners and the public may request additional briefings or seek the item’s return if they find substantive changes that require further commission review.