Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Formula Retail 1680 Market topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Commission rejects Subway at 1680 Market, cites formula‑retail and neighborhood character

San Francisco Planning Commission · May 29, 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 recommended denying conditional use for a Subway at 1680 Market because of formula‑retail provisions and multiple nearby Subway locations; the commission voted unanimously to disapprove after public comment split between neighborhood groups and advocates for added low‑cost food access.

San Francisco — The Planning Commission voted unanimously on May 29 to disapprove a conditional‑use request for a Subway sandwich shop at 1680 Market Street, accepting staff analysis that the proposal was neither necessary nor desirable in the location and would undermine neighborhood commercial character.

Planning staff told the commission the chain would be a formula‑retail use under Section 703.3 of the planning code and that five other Subway locations already operated within roughly a one‑mile radius. "The proposed restaurant could put pressure on existing independent restaurants, which already offer a similar menu," staff wrote in its recommendation and told commissioners the stretch has a concentration of independent merchants that define the character of the corridor.

A proposed franchisee, Aki Patel, said the shop would provide affordable, healthy food, accept EBT and create jobs; local social‑service and neighborhood organizations likewise said the outlet would be useful to low‑income residents and shelter guests in the area and help activate a vacant storefront. "It would provide employment opportunities and healthy, inexpensive dining options," said a supporter from the Alliance for a Better District 6.

But the Hays Valley Neighborhood Association and other local groups urged denial and argued the segment of Market is already served by nearby outlets and is undergoing carefully managed change under the Market Octavia plan. Commissioners said they were persuaded that the plan's formula‑retail rules exist to protect neighborhood character and to preserve locally owned businesses.

Commissioner Catherine Moore moved to disapprove and that motion carried unanimously, with the record citing code consistency and neighborhood character concerns as the overriding considerations.