Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Sustainability Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors amend Transportation Sustainability Fee but continue ordinance for redrafting
Summary
After lengthy presentations and public comment, the Land Use and Transportation Committee adopted several amendments to the proposed Transportation Sustainability Fee — including removing a plan-area credit, raising a PDR exemption threshold, eliminating a hospital exemption, shortening the feasibility study review period, adding a nonprofit student‑housing exemption and tiering fees — and voted to continue the measure for two weeks so city attorneys can draft a consolidated ordinance.
The Land Use and Transportation Committee spent the bulk of its meeting debating a proposed Transportation Sustainability Fee (TSF) that would establish a citywide fee to fund transit, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and suspend the existing Transit Impact Development Fee while the TSF is operative. The proposal, introduced by the mayor with Planning and SFMTA staff, followed a nexus study and economic feasibility work and drew extensive public comment from universities, hospitals, developers, transit advocates and neighborhood groups.
Chair Supervisor Malia Cohen described several amendments she circulated, including removal of the plan-area credit (which she said could keep approximately $1.1 million per year in neighborhoods where development is occurring), raising the PDR exemption threshold from 800 to 1,500 gross square feet, and removing the hospital exemption so large trip-generating hospitals pay the fee. SFMTA and consultant staff described years of stakeholder work and modeling to reach the fee proposal; Victoria Wise of the MTA’s Sustainable Streets division and other agency staff were present to answer technical questions.
Public comment was contested: University of San Francisco representative Charles Cross and hospital representatives asked for exemptions, warning fees could affect charity care and hospital finances; hospital advocates argued added fees would be passed on through insurance and reduce community benefits. Advocates for transit and open-streets urged the committee to increase the mitigation rate and consider tiering. Commercial developers and the Chamber of Commerce cautioned that steep increases for large commercial projects could harm feasibility.
The committee then took amendment-by-amendment roll-call votes. Key committee outcomes were:
- Eliminate the area-plan TSF credit (motion adopted). Chair Cohen said removing that credit would “keep the dollars in the neighborhood where the development is happening” and estimated it could generate approximately $1,100,000 per year.
- Increase the PDR exemption threshold from 800 to 1,500 gross square feet (adopted).
- Remove the hospital exemption so nonprofit hospitals would generally pay the TSF (adopted; Supervisor Scott Wiener recorded a "No" vote).
- Change the economic-feasibility-review requirement from every 5 years to every 3 years and include the Planning Commission among entities that may call for earlier review (adopted).
- Exempt nonprofit post‑secondary educational institutions that build student housing (adopted after roll-call; Chair Cohen recorded a "No" vote on that motion).
- Direct the Planning Department and Controller to study a geographic approach to fee variation (adopted).
- Adopt a two‑tier fee schedule for residential and nonresidential projects with higher per‑square‑foot fees for larger projects; committee clarified the higher per‑square‑foot rate will apply only to the square footage above the designated threshold rather than retroactively to an entire project (adopted after roll‑call votes and drafting clarifications).
After resolving the amendments, the committee voted unanimously to continue the consolidated ordinance for two weeks to allow the city attorney to prepare a single drafted ordinance reflecting the committee’s votes. Deputy City Attorney John Gittner confirmed drafting points, including that supervisory votes intended the grandfathering change to apply to residential projects that filed after the ordinance’s introduction date and to leave nonresidential grandfathering intact until the ordinance takes effect.
Next steps: City attorney staff will prepare a consolidated draft that captures the committee’s amendments for the Board agenda (the clerk noted items acted on would appear on the Oct. 20, 2015 Board agenda unless otherwise stated). The committee’s amendments change the fee’s scope and exemptions substantially and will be reviewed again at the next Land Use and Transportation Committee meeting.
