Special Joint Building Inspection and Planning Commission Meeting: Site Permit Reform Project - May 11, 2023

The San Francisco Planning Commission and Building Inspection Commission held a special joint hearing on Thursday, May 11, 2023, to receive an informational presentation on the proposed Site Permit Reform Project. The project aims to replace the current site permit process with a new 'development review permit' that would streamline review, consolidate agency comments into a single 30-day cycle, and provide a clear implementation roadmap for applicants. The hearing featured extensive public comment from architects, developers, and community members, followed by detailed commissioner discussion on project management, interagency coordination, staffing, and accountability.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Charlie Chen (architect): Expressed support for the reform but urged the Planning Department to better control input by, for example, eliminating unnecessary reviews for in-law units, raising the historical preservation threshold from 50 to 100 years, and allowing straightforward projects to bypass neighbor notifications.
• Christopher Roach (architect, AIA Public Policy & Advocacy Committee) : Expressed strong support for the reforms, calling it a historic opportunity to improve permitting. Noted that the 'devil is in the details' and asked for continued collaboration with architects.
• David Gast (architect): Broadly supportive, highlighting the need for concurrent review, digital tools, and clear checklists. Urged bringing the Department of Public Works (DPW) and Fire Department fully on board.
• Serena Calhoun (architect): Supported the reforms but stated she generally does not advise clients to use the current site permit process due to two-to-five-year timelines. Requested eliminating separate site permit/full permit paths, publishing unwritten planning policies, limiting design reviews to objective code terms, and improving the Accela interface.
• Lev Weisbach (architect): Supported the reforms as a top priority from the AIA small firms committee. Expressed concern about DPW delays (citing a 7.5-year project) and the difficulty of working with PG&E on transformer vaults.
• Mark Loper (entitlements lawyer): Welcomed planning handling minor projects without other departments. Supported advanced interagency review and urged faster DPW processes.
• Jerry Dratler: Urged expediting site permits to help housing production, noting San Francisco is the only major California city that processes site permits with building permits, causing 4-18 month delays.
• Georgia Shudish (building code expert): Called for changes to slope protection requirements, egress issues, and demolition thresholds. Noted that demo counts must be provided at intake, not later.
• Sean Keegrin (Residential Builders Association) : Urged a pause on moving the site permit process to the Planning Department, arguing other broken pieces (backlogs, planner responsiveness, 311 notice delays) must be fixed first. Said concurrent plan checking is unrealistic when projects go through many revisions.
• Jake Price (Housing Action Coalition) : Expressed gratitude for the reform and support for using digital tools from start to finish. Said they will continue to solicit feedback from members.
• Kevin (architect, no last name given) : Emphasized the need for accountability, noting that planners often do not respond to emails or phone calls in a timely manner.
• Anonymous resident (name not stated) : Described a 1.5-year process to legalize an unpermitted unit, asking for shorter timelines and separate pathways for ADU legalization.
• Dennis Richards (former commissioner) : Enthusiastically supported the reform, calling it 'allelujah' and a '10 out of 10.' Noted that similar improvements were called for 20 years ago.
• Instavantis (architect) : Stressed that interdepartmental communication must include PG&E and DPW. Suggested contracting out DPW services to speed up small projects.
• Sue Esther: Urged Planning and DBI to use the same computer system for transparency, noting past manipulation issues. Called for a report from DBI on their plans.
• Carrie Green (architect, AIA San Francisco) : Supported reforms but added two points: ensure applicants are qualified per state law (Business and Professions Code) and be aware of new state law on architectural copyright protection.

Discussion Items

• Presentation by Michael Christensen (Principal Planner, Permit Center) : Reviewed the current site permit process (a uniquely San Francisco concept) and proposed a new development review permit. Key changes include: single online intake via Planning's Accela system; concurrent 30-day plan check by Planning, DBI, Public Works, and Fire with consolidated comments; checklists to define review scope; a roadmap of all needed permits; and issuance directly from Planning. The new process mirrors what other California cities do. Statistics: 96% of new building projects currently use site permits (only 7 small sheds do not). For alterations, the mix varies.
• Commissioner questions and staff responses:
  • President Tanner emphasized the value of legislated timelines (citing Prop H success). Asked about ideal total timelines and number of review cycles. Liz Wadi (Director of Current Planning) said the 30-day completeness check and 30-day plan check are already being implemented starting July 1, 2023, as part of Permit Streamlining Act compliance. Michael Christensen noted that tools like Airtable have worked for Prop H and could be scaled. Neville Pereira (Deputy Director, DBI) reported DBI already limits to two revisions before supervisor escalation.
  • Commissioner Diamond raised concerns about geotechnical reviews (neighbors often worry about undermining). Staff said triggers for geotechs (slope, excavation) are defined and will be flagged early via checklists, but two versions (preliminary vs. final) may still exist. She also noted architect Calhoun's reluctance to use site permits—staff replied the new process will make site permits more attractive.
  • Commissioner Braun asked about staffing capacity and budget. Wadi acknowledged challenges but said new management dashboards (showing planner workloads in real time) and a recent re-org have improved efficiency. She also noted the department is fee-for-service and will need to set rates appropriately. Regarding the impact of commission changes on interagency-reviewed projects, she said the checklists will help planners understand which changes affect other agencies.
  • Commissioner Koppel praised the collaboration and stressed the need for a bulletproof system to prevent abuse (referencing past corruption scandals). He also urged not to neglect downtown commercial building permits in the reform.
  • Vice President Moore cautioned that management alone cannot solve all problems; leadership and human capital are essential. She emphasized that checklists must be co-created with architects to avoid omissions. She also highlighted the need for clear plan submittal guidelines.
  • Commissioner Imperial asked for case studies to be presented to the commissions during the summer to see how the new process works in practice.
  • BIC Commissioner Shaddox echoed the need to involve PG&E early.
  • BIC Commissioner Alexander Toot inquired about long-term data collection and interdepartmental management. Christensen said they will use Accela to track tasks and due dates, enabling proactive management.
  • BIC Commissioner Tam asked if applicants could log in to see comments in real time. Staff confirmed that Accela's Property Information Map shows workflow status and documents post overnight, but the official consolidated letter will still be issued.
• Public Works (Deborah Lutzky) confirmed 100% commitment to the project, stating they are working on checklists for early input on transformer vaults, tree removals, right-of-way changes, and street improvement permits. She noted that PG&E has been asked to provide transparent materials on vault requirements.
• Fire Department was not present but staff said they are engaged.

Key Outcomes

• No formal vote was taken; this was an informational presentation.
• Commissioners and staff agreed to continue outreach, including smaller working sessions with stakeholders to walk through example projects.
• The project will proceed with developing checklists, case studies, and a legislative package targeted for summer 2023. Concurrently, Planning is implementing 30-day completeness and plan check timelines starting July 1, 2023, as part of Permit Streamlining Act compliance.
• Direction was given to involve all relevant agencies (DPW, Fire, PUC, SFMTA, PG&E) and to address specific concerns: integration of DPW's 'Clarity' system, resolution of conflicting comments between agencies, and creation of submittal guidelines in consultation with architects.
• President Tanner and President Beto committed to continued joint work and annual reviews to hold staff accountable to metrics.
• The meeting adjourned with a note that the road to success is always under construction.