Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Parking Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board committee delays wide parking policy hearing after merchants and residents weigh in

Government Audit and Oversight Committee, San Francisco Board of Supervisors · June 11, 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

A Board of Supervisors committee continued a broad hearing on parking, neighborhood garages and a proposed 1:1 parking ratio for housing units after attendees — merchants, residents and business improvement district leaders — urged more outreach and a district‑by‑district approach.

The Government Audit and Oversight Committee continued a scheduled hearing on the relationship between parking, neighborhood businesses and families — including discussion of a possible 1:1 parking ratio per housing unit — after community members asked for more time and outreach.

Supervisor Ali Lopire, who sponsored the hearing, told the committee the subject merits “a full and proper conversation” and asked to continue the item to a later meeting. The committee agreed to continue the matter to the call of the chair so it can be scheduled when members have more time.

Commenters from retail and merchant groups urged different approaches. Issa Mahawi, a long‑term merchant in Noe Valley, said there are solutions “outside the box” to be discussed; Herb Cohn, representing merchants in Upper Market, said merchants favor a 1:1 ratio after years dealing with developers’ proposals that reduced off‑street parking. Others warned the measure could add vehicle trips and pollution if implemented citywide and asked for hearings that reflect neighborhood differences.

Speakers also called for more data about parking garage revenues, the size of a fund set up when developers build without required parking, and district‑by‑district impacts; committee staff and the sponsor promised to schedule more detailed discussion at the next meeting.

The hearing will be rescheduled at the chair’s call and the sponsor urged interested parties to leave contact information for the office to follow up and circulate materials in advance of the next hearing.