Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procedures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission delays vote on new rules after extensive public debate over timing and presentation limits
Summary
The Planning Commission deferred final action on draft rules and procedures after hours of public comment and commissioner debate over presentation time limits, submittal windows (1—4 weeks) and whether 3D renderings should be required for certain cases.
The San Francisco Planning Commission on April 3 deferred action on a proposed overhaul of its rules and procedures after extended public comment and a lengthy discussion among commissioners about how much material applicants must file in advance, whether project presentations should be capped, and when staff should require three-dimensional renderings.
Attorney Daniel Lipkin, representing land-use clients, told the commission that two proposed changes would undermine public participation: cutting developer presentation time for some projects to 10 minutes and requiring staff reports and submittals four weeks before hearing. "Projects simply can't freeze for 4 weeks," Lipkin said, arguing that project packets could be stale and reduce meaningful public review.
City planning staff urged a more nuanced approach. "My fear is if we gave you a packet 4 weeks in advance from now, we'd have even less certainty on what your calendar would look like when we came along," said planning staff advisor Larry Badner, arguing that some lead time helps staff but may produce stale materials without an update mechanism.
Neighborhood representatives, architects and developers offered a range of views. Some urged stronger advance notice and a longer window so neighbors can respond; others said mandatory 3D models or tight pre-hearing deadlines would be burdensome for small projects. Stakeholders sought a single chart of submission deadlines tied to project types so the rules and procedural guidance would not contradict one another.
Commissioners debated officer succession language, consent calendar clarifications, public-comment timing and whether the rules should formally codify practices already in use. After the discussion the commission voted to continue the item to April 17 so staff can return with revised language that incorporates the commission's direction.
What happens next: Staff will prepare options and a consolidated procedural chart for commissioners to review at the April 17 meeting before taking final action.
Provenance: Planning Commission April 3, 2008 meeting (public hearing and discussion on rules and regulations).
