Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Demolition Controls topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission adopts tougher rules to limit demolition and loss of dwelling units

San Francisco Planning Commission · May 17, 2007
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

The commission adopted new code language and numerical thresholds to treat large removals as 'demolitions' and to require conditional-use review for sizeable losses of dwelling units; the motion passed 6–1.

The Planning Commission voted to adopt a new code framework to slow the loss of housing and to require discretionary review where projects are tantamount to demolition or remove multiple dwelling units. Staff presented criteria intended to clarify when an alteration becomes a demolition: (a) linear footage thresholds for front/rear facades; (b) perimeter‑wall percentage removed; and (c) thresholds for roof and floor‑plate removal. The proposed code allows the commission to adjust thresholds by up to 20 percent if the numerical tests proved over- or under‑inclusive in practice.

Commissioners discussed the appropriate unit threshold at which an application should be processed as a conditional-use review rather than as a ministerial or administrative review; staff recommended 4 or more units as the cutoff so larger multi‑unit loss becomes a policy decision appropriate for discretionary review. After deliberation the commission adopted the measure by a 6–1 vote (Commissioner Seguaya dissenting). Staff will prepare an implementation document with detailed procedures and example calculations, and return in a future hearing to show how the thresholds will be applied in sample cases.

Proponents said the rule preserves affordable, sound housing stock and gives neighborhood residents predictable standards for when major alterations prompt a commission review. Opponents cautioned that some substantial renovations or seismic upgrades could be caught by the new tests and asked for careful implementation guidelines; staff agreed to produce an implementation manual and to accept minor threshold adjustments if needed.