Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Eastern Neighborhoods topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission hears staff warnings on Eastern Neighborhoods resolution; administration warns of EIR rescoping and delays
Summary
Planning staff told commissioners that the Board of Supervisors' Eastern Neighborhoods resolution would require re‑scoping and could delay the EIR and plan adoption unless feasibility qualifiers are added; commissioners and community speakers pressed for time to review amendments and asked staff for a briefing ahead of a scheduled Nov. 20 hearing.
At the Oct. 12 meeting, Planning Department staff flagged potential technical and timeline risks in responding to the Board of Supervisors’ Eastern Neighborhoods resolution and related community improvements legislation.
Deputy director Dr. Ghosh said the resolution, as revised by the board and land‑use committee, asks the department to concentrate significant housing production targets and many policy protections in the Eastern Neighborhoods area. Staff explained that, to meet the board’s articulated objectives and maintain consistency with the city’s general plan and housing element goals (the housing element targets roughly 20,400 units by 2009, of which about 13,500 should be below‑market), the department would likely need to rescope the draft EIR to cover a larger geographic area and additional policy objectives. Rescoping would add time and resource needs and could delay certification well beyond current schedules.
Commissioners expressed frustration at the short notice: several said the board waived a 30‑day period, leaving staff and the commission limited time to examine amendments. Public commenters, including neighborhood coalition representatives, urged the commission to insist the board formally refer the legislation for commission review rather than treat referral as a courtesy. Staff said it had scheduled an informational hearing for Oct. 20 and the commission set a subsequent Nov. 20 consideration date for the resolution.
Commissioners asked staff to provide a detailed briefing on the policy differences between the existing EIR/plan scope and the board's resolution, to clarify feasibility constraints, and to identify where competing general plan objectives may require 'on balance' findings rather than strict, per‑objective compliance.
