San Francisco Planning Commission Meeting - July 30, 2026

The San Francisco Planning Commission met on Thursday, July 30, 2026, and conducted a full agenda. The Commission welcomed three new members (Commissioners Michael Chen, Elizabeth McDonald, and Joel Coppel) and bid farewell to outgoing Commissioner Derek Braun. All votes during the meeting were unanimous (6-0 or 5-0 where recusals applied). The Commission approved continuances, consent calendar items, and considered major planning code amendments, a development impact fee report, and a discretionary review.

Consent Calendar

• Item 1 (871 De Haro Street): Continued to September 17, 2026, by a 6-0 vote.
• Item 2 (2071 Union Street): Conditional use authorization approved on consent (6-0).
• Item 3 (1649 Divisadero Street): Commissioner Chen recused himself due to a potential conflict; the item was approved on consent by the remaining five commissioners (5-0).

Commission Matters

• Welcome to New Commissioners: Each new commissioner introduced themselves: Joel Coppel (IBEW Local 6, now with San Francisco Electrical Contractors Association), Michael Chen (housing advocate, former public commenter), and Elizabeth McDonald (former UC Berkeley professor of city and regional planning, public realm expert).
• Farewell to Commissioner Derek Braun: President Campbell, Commissioner So, and Commissioner McGarry praised his thorough preparation, thoughtfulness, and love for San Francisco. Director Phillips presented him with a planning department bag.

Director’s Announcements

• Lulu Huang Proclamation: Special recognition for Lulu Huang, who retired after 43 years as the longest-tenured planning staff member. The Commission issued a proclamation honoring her contributions to digital and OASIS teams.
• Board of Supervisors Update: Staff reported that the Land Use and Transportation Committee forwarded the street tree standards ordinance to the full board, continued the landmark designation for the Compton’s Cafeteria riot site, and passed several landmark designations. The full board approved the Hotels in RH Districts ordinance and House of Latin Rock landmark designation.

General Public Comment

• Former Commissioner Derek Braun expressed gratitude to colleagues and staff, highlighting the commission’s work on equity, housing, transportation, and land use.
• Mr. Washington (Fillmore Corridor Ambassador) strongly opposed the Fillmore Community Action Plan, alleging lack of community input and calling for the plan to be sent back to the drawing board. He stated the process felt exclusionary and referenced historical urban renewal as “Negro removal.”
• Georgia Shudish (Noe Valley resident, 47-year resident) raised concerns about the HCSF (Homeownership and Community Stabilization) program, noting that projects on small lots (2,500 square feet) could become “needles” with impacts on neighbors. She requested proactive community liaison and attention to construction impacts, especially under streamlining. She also referenced a Wall Street Journal article about upcoming housing units.

Discussion Items

Item 7: Signs in Mixed Use Districts [BF 260679]

• Presented by: Veronica Flores and Madison Tam (Supervisor Dorsey’s office). The ordinance increases signage allowances on parcels over half an acre in Mixed Use Districts, particularly in the Mixed-Use Office District south of Townsend Street.
• Key changes: Allows additional wall signs up to 80 square feet and 80 feet in height (corrected from staff report’s mention of 60-foot limit for urban mixed use districts), with backlighting rather than direct illumination.
• Public comment: Tom Tunney (Ruben & Junius) strongly supported, noting a 250,000 square-foot tenant (Sierra AI) that needs appropriate signage.
• Commission deliberation: Commissioner McGarry supported for flexibility and uniformity. Commissioner So asked about lighting (confirmed indirect backlighting). Commissioner McDonald inquired about sign height measured from grade. President Campbell expressed support but noted the ordinance is essentially limited to one building and encouraged broader application. Madison Tam indicated the supervisor could consider broader policy. The Commission voted unanimously (6-0) to recommend approval.

Item 8: Commercial to Residential Adaptive Reuse

• Presented by: Lily Langua and Madison Tam. The ordinance exempts adaptive reuse projects downtown from certain parking, loading, street frontage, FAR, and car share requirements to address physical constraints of existing buildings.
• Staff modifications: Four modifications recommended, including waiving bike parking only when no accessory off-street parking is provided, waiving street frontage only if ground-floor parking is proposed, technical consolidation of loading provisions, and allowing retained existing parking to serve new residential uses without triggering additional requirements.
• Public comment: Jack and Mark Babson (Emerald Fund) supported, citing a pending application at 150 Hayes Street (100+ units) that became feasible thanks to the program.
• Commission deliberation: Commissioner McDonald raised concern about ground-floor interface with the public; staff clarified active use requirements remain. Commissioner Coppel praised the city’s work on recovering downtown. President Campbell commended the city’s comprehensive incentives. The Commission voted unanimously (6-0) to recommend approval with modifications.

Item 9: Office Development Annual Limit Program – Revocation and Allocation Policies

• Presented by: Corey Teague (Zoning Administrator). The policy establishes a three-tier system for revoking office allocations from projects that have not commenced construction, and sets priorities for future allocations.
• Tier 1: Projects past performance period with no progress – schedule revocation hearings after recess (Sept/Oct 2026).
• Tier 2: Projects with some progress (e.g., permits issued but not under construction) – 18 months to show progress.
• Tier 3: Projects with development agreements or public benefits already delivered – revocation at conclusion of each DA phase or as appropriate.
• New priorities: Future allocations will prioritize projects including affordable housing, those already shovels-ready, or sponsors who voluntarily forfeited past allocations.
• Public comment: None.
• Commission deliberation: Commissioner So acknowledged the difficult situation and urged fairness; asked about port projects (2.5 million sq. ft.) and whether they could be tracked separately (answer: would require voter approval to change Prop M). Commissioner Campbell asked about potential volume of tier one projects; Director Phillips noted active conversations with sponsors. Commissioner McDonald asked if office-to-residential conversions restore allocation to the cap (partially, under Prop C). The Commission voted unanimously (6-0) to adopt the policy.

Items 10a-d: Potrero Power Station Mixed-Use Project – Amendments to Development Agreement, SUD, and D4D

• Presented by: Monica Giacomucci (Planning), John Lau (OEWD), and project sponsor Fifth Space. The package of amendments increases flexibility in land use, heights (8 feet on residential blocks, 15-30 feet on commercial blocks), parking limits, and community benefit delivery, while preserving 30% affordable housing (minimum 2,600 units), library, YMCA, grocery, and other benefits.
• Three substantive modifications since staff report: (1) Allowing above-grade parking structures in SUD; (2) Clarifications to transportation plan (bus shelter, TDM, shuttle bus tied to second-to-last building in Phase 1/2); (3) TDM plan modifications.
• Public comment: Benwell Rodriguez (YMCA) supported, noting flexibility for child care and community facilities. One general public comment requested transparency in affordable housing data and addressed housing costs.
• Commission deliberation: Commissioners expressed strong support, highlighting the project’s scale, commitment to affordability, and public benefits. Commissioner So praised the accelerated phasing and historic waterfront access. Commissioner Coppel noted the risk and complexity. Commissioner McDonald appreciated the public realm. President Campbell requested the sponsor elaborate on phasing, land use flexibility, and street wall adjustments—they explained bringing forward parcels not dependent on PG&E, modest height increases for commercial footplates, and flexible child care delivery. The Commission voted unanimously (6-0) to recommend approval of all three documents with modifications read into the record.

Item 11: Development Impact Fee Report for Fiscal Years Ending 2025

• Presented by: Matt Snyder. The annual report covers 38 development impact fees, their revenues, expenditures, and fund balances, as required by the Mitigation Fee Act. A typo on page 61 was corrected (TSF expenditure corrected to $86,749,216).
• Public comment: None.
• Commission deliberation: Commissioner McDonald suggested including more visual celebrations of completed projects in future reports. The Commission voted unanimously (6-0) to accept the report and adopt findings.

Item 12: 646 Duncan Street – Discretionary Review

• Staff presentation: Trent Green. The project proposes interior renovations, horizontal and vertical additions (third floor), and a rear deck on a Category A historic resource. Due to preservation requirements, the third floor was set back 15 feet from the front, concentrating massing near the rear. The project sponsor voluntarily provided a 4-foot side setback. The DR requester (neighbor at 652 Duncan) claimed the configuration impacts light and air on their habitable rooms.
• DR requester (representative): Requested reconsideration to shift some massing forward to reduce rear impact, noting an earlier design with a 7.5-foot side setback was rejected by planning.
• Project sponsor: Explained that preservation staff required the current configuration; they already provided voluntary setbacks and were willing to mediate, but the DR applicant was not open to compromise.
• Public comment: None.
• Commission deliberation: Commissioner Chen questioned the process of discovering historic status mid-application, expressing concern about transparency for homeowners. Staff clarified that preservation review required the setback. The Commission found no extraordinary circumstances and voted unanimously (6-0) not to take discretionary review, approving the project as proposed.

Key Outcomes

• All agenda items were approved or adopted unanimously: Item 1 continued; Items 2, 3 on consent; Items 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 all passed 6-0 (or 5-0 with recusal).
• The Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the Signs in Mixed Use Districts ordinance with modifications.
• The Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the Commercial to Residential Adaptive Reuse ordinance with staff modifications.
• The Commission adopted a policy establishing a three-tier revocation system for office development allocations and new allocation priorities.
• The Commission recommended approval of amendments to the Potrero Power Station Development Agreement, Special Use District, and Design for Development Document with modifications read into the record.
• The Commission accepted the Development Impact Fee Report for FY2025.
• The Commission declined to take discretionary review and approved the project at 646 Duncan Street.
• The Commission recognized outgoing Commissioner Derek Braun and honored Lulu Huang for 43 years of service.