Planning commission backs mayor’s ordinance to expand permitted commercial uses, resists re‑introducing broad change‑of‑use notices

The San Francisco Planning Commission voted 5–0 on Feb. 22 to approve a duplicated ordinance that expands principally permitted commercial restaurant and retail uses in many districts, part of the mayor’s effort to reduce permit barriers for small businesses.

Katie Tang of the Office of Small Business, speaking for sponsor Mayor London Breed, described the ordinance as a citywide duplicate of legislation the Board of Supervisors adopted last year and said it aims to let more small firms occupy vacant ground-floor storefronts without long conditional-use processes. Tang said the proposal reduces the opportunity for protracted appeals and extends limited-hours permissions in certain districts while excluding formula retail from some residential districts.

Nate Harrell, legislative aide to Supervisor Peskin, described several targeted amendments the supervisor’s office was considering — notably (1) retaining neighborhood commercial district (NCD) controls so permitted uses align with local context, (2) preserving NCD-based use-size rules while accepting a 1,200-square-foot cap in some areas, and (3) considering limited reinstatement of a change-of-use notification for a narrow list of uses. Planning staff and Director Veronica Flores said the duplicated file reflects the land use committee’s recommendations but recommended against broadly reintroducing Section 3.11 change-of-use notices, saying that recent constraints-reduction legislation intentionally removed those notices for principally permitted uses to streamline openings.

Commissioners debated the tradeoffs between streamlining storefront openings and preserving local neighborhood controls. Several commissioners said they supported the mayor's goals to reduce vacancies and help small businesses, but asked staff to preserve finer-grained controls for certain NCDs and to examine whether a narrow notification for only a few sensitive uses might be warranted. Commissioner Coppell moved to approve the ordinance with the exhibit C amendments included (the motion was seconded and passed 5–0).

The commission’s approval does not include the previously discussed temporary five-year impact-fee waiver for change-of-use projects; staff said that item will be advanced separately for clarity. Commissioners asked staff to return and brief the commission further if Supervisor Peskin’s narrow amendments are formally introduced at the Board of Supervisors.