San Francisco Planning Commission Hearing – March 19, 2026

The San Francisco Planning Commission met on March 19, 2026, to consider a consent calendar item, department announcements, a major SB 79 implementation ordinance, a large residential development at One Oak, and two discretionary review cases. The meeting included public testimony, commissioner deliberation, and votes on all items.

Consent Calendar

• Item 1 (Continuance): Unanimously continued to April 16, 2026.

Director’s Announcements

• The Director reported on the regional housing needs assessment: market-rate goals are behind, while very low and low-income goals are slightly better; a full presentation is scheduled for April 19, 2026.
• A development impact fee calculator was launched on the department website.
• Permit SF metrics showed 35% of permits are submitted off-hours, and a 100% increase in volume for door, window, and fire sprinkler permits since the February 13 launch.

Review of Past Events

• Board of Supervisors: The Mission & 9th Street Special Use District (SUD) and 2245 Post Street SUD passed first read; the Land Use Committee unanimously approved the Mission & 9th Street SUD to facilitate a 100% affordable housing project at 1270 Mission Street.
• Historic Preservation Commission: Adopted recommendations for legacy business registry applications (Renaissance Entrepreneurship Center, American Cyclery, Financial District Foot and Ankle Center, MSECI Jewelry); adopted survey findings for West of Twin Peaks, Lakeshore, and Sunnyside commercial districts; adopted a historic context statement for gardens; the Architecture Review Committee considered Clay Theater renovations.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Item 6 (SB 79): No public comment.
• Item 7A-E (One Oak): Six speakers addressed the Commission.
  • Ryan Hong (owner of adjacent Oak building): Generally supportive but asked to keep podium height at 120 feet to protect light and privacy.
  • Tup Fisher (Washington Capital Management): Strongly supportive; noted $1 billion in union pension fund investments and over 3 million labor hours.
  • Jay Anthony Menhivar (Carpenters Union Local 22): Supported, citing union jobs and family-supporting wages.
  • Chef Ku (property manager of adjacent Oak): Supported the project but expressed concern that the 139-foot podium would block sunlight and reduce privacy.
  • Ethan (resident of Oak): Opposed the podium height increase due to loss of natural light affecting mental health.
  • Eddie Reyes (Iron Workers Local 377): Supported, emphasizing apprenticeship opportunities.
  • Rudy Gonzalez (San Francisco Building Trades Council): Supported, noting economic output multipliers and the need to activate the mid-market area.
  • Jamie Mercurio (local resident): Supported the project to address housing demand.
• Item 8 (2620 20th Street): One speaker (Kevin Chin, DR requester) raised concerns about structural access, privacy, and a discrepancy between trellis and roof claims; he requested a setback and clarification.
• Item 9 (2460 Francisco Street): One speaker (Steve Grossman, DR requester) opposed the deck in the light well, citing fire safety, privacy, and cooking odors; he requested a 6-foot firewall and sprinklers. Project sponsor Judy Kimball opposed additional screening.

Discussion Items

• Item 6: SB 79 Transit-Oriented Residential Development Alternative Plan – Staff presented the ordinance to implement an alternative plan to state SB 79 default heights and densities. The plan permanently exempts three industrial hubs, temporarily exempts low-resource census tracts in Mission Bay and south of 16th Street until 2032, and adds a density exception up to 50% of SB 79 densities on about 2,000 parcels. The total capacity exceeds SB 79 defaults by over 100,000 units. The department recommended approval with a typographical correction. Commissioner Braun expressed full support; Vice President Moore and Commissioner Williams opposed due to disagreement with the underlying state mandate. Director Tan clarified that without the alternative plan, SB 79 defaults would apply citywide. Vote: 4-2 to recommend approval (Moore and Williams dissenting).
• Item 7A-E: One Oak (1500-1540 Market Street) – Modified Residential Development – Staff detailed a 541-unit, 508,000 sq. ft. tower (41 stories, 400 ft) with a 139-ft podium (increase of 81 units over 2022 approval). A zoning map amendment is needed to raise the podium height limit from 120 ft to 140 ft. The project includes 135 parking spaces, bicycle parking, and a public plaza. Six letters of support and one opposition were received. Commissioners discussed shadow impacts on Patricia Green (morning shadows), the removal of retail space, affordable housing (no on-site, $20.7 million in-lieu fee), and outreach to adjacent residents. Commissioner Imperial opposed, citing lack of on-site affordable housing and insufficient neighbor engagement. Vote: 5-1 to approve items 7A-D (Imperial dissenting). The Zoning Administrator also granted the variance for the above-grade parking setback with standard conditions.
• Item 8: Discretionary Review – 2620 20th Street – Staff recommended not taking DR, finding the rear addition and deck code-compliant. The DR requester Kevin Chin raised concerns about structural access, a trellis/roof contradiction, and privacy. The project sponsor stated the addition is modest and complies with all codes. The Commission found no exceptional circumstances. Vote: 6-0 to not take DR and approve the project as proposed.
• Item 9: Discretionary Review – 2460 Francisco Street – Staff recommended taking DR and approving with a condition of a 6-ft privacy screen above the deck to mitigate privacy concerns. The DR requester Steve Grossman argued the deck in the light well is inappropriate for cooking and compromises safety and privacy. The project sponsor (Judy Kimball) stated the deck has existed for 40 years and the proposed 42-inch firewall improves fire safety; she opposed any additional screening. The Commission agreed with staff’s recommendation. Vote: 6-0 to take DR and approve with conditions including a privacy screen to 6 ft above deck.

Key Outcomes

• Item 1: Continued to April 16, 2026 (6-0).
• Item 6: Recommendation of approval of the SB 79 alternative plan sent to the Board of Supervisors (4-2).
• Item 7A-D: Approved (5-1); variance granted by Zoning Administrator.
• Item 8: DR not taken; project approved (6-0).
• Item 9: DR taken; project approved with conditions (6-0).
• Future hearings: April 2, 2026, is likely canceled due to no agenda items; April 9, 2026, is already canceled.