Planning Commission backs West‑Side 'Family Housing Opportunity' SUD with staff changes

The San Francisco Planning Commission on June 1 recommended the Family Housing Opportunity Special Use District (SUD), a package of planning code and zoning map amendments aimed at easing construction of small multifamily projects in selected West Side neighborhoods.

The commission supported staff‑recommended modifications on eligibility and design, while voting against two staff recommendations the commission said need more work. The motion, moved by Commissioner Braun and seconded by Commissioner Moore, passed unanimously, 6‑0.

Supervisor Vallie Melgar, who sponsored the ordinance, told commissioners the measure is intended to address the West Side’s particular housing needs while protecting neighborhood character. “We wanted to add density within the parameters of what we have,” Melgar said, describing the effort as an attempt to create more options for seniors, young adults and families in single‑family areas.

Staff presentation and recommended changes

Planning staff described the SUD as a streamlined pathway for qualifying projects: single‑lot projects could propose 2–4 units; two‑lot mergers would be required to construct at least six but no more than eight units; and three‑lot mergers would be required to construct at least nine but no more than 12 units. The draft also would increase a height limit for qualifying projects to up to 40 feet, reduce rear‑yard requirements (to 30 percent) and subject units above the base density to rent control. Staff recommended several clarifications including adding RM‑1 zoning to the eligibility list, adjusting density exception limits for large parcels, and tightening protections so no more than two rent‑controlled units are demolished per project in the SUD and those units are not tenant‑occupied within five years or have had no‑fault evictions in the last five years.

Supervisors’ preview of amendments

Supervisor Melgar and Supervisor Guardio (recorded in the hearing transcript as several variants of the name) previewed amendments that staff did not have final language for at this hearing. Guardio described an amendment to allow corner‑lot projects to rise to 65 feet (six stories) with additional units for each lot merged and proposed allowing one‑bedroom units on those corner projects to encourage senior housing. Staff said it must analyze any such amendment and complete CEQA review before those changes would be considered formally.

Public input and concerns

Public commenters were split. Housing advocates and developers praised the SUD as a practical test‑bed for adding “gentle” density. Housing Action Coalition Executive Director Corey Smith said process changes and pro forma modeling with builders indicate feasibility. Opponents and community groups urged stronger anti‑displacement measures and more community outreach. “This legislation is full of developer giveaways,” said Priya Rocker of the Race and Equity in All Planning Coalition, and urged protections for vulnerable residents and deeper affordability requirements.

Staff and commissioners discussed implementation details: how SB 3 30 replacement obligations would be verified, which city agencies would enforce right‑of‑return notifications, and how to map RM‑1 areas within the SUD. Staff said the planning department and the rent board are developing more robust screening and coordination protocols and that some details remain to be worked out with the city attorney to avoid including existing multifamily buildings that should not be eligible.

What passed and next steps

The commission’s recommendation approves the ordinance as introduced with staff modifications 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8 and declines recommendations 3 and 4; it also asked staff to return with analyzed amendments and CEQA work if the corner‑lot 65‑foot proposal moves forward. The item will go to the Board of Supervisors and, if supervisors pursue amendments (such as the corner‑lot height increase), staff will prepare required environmental review and refined language.

The commission’s action does not itself change zoning; it was a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors and included multiple conditions about implementation and monitoring. The commission requested clearer outreach to West Side neighborhood groups and additional graphics to show how proposed lot‑merger and rear‑yard configurations would look in existing blocks.

Ending

Staff said they will return with draft amendment language and CEQA analyses for any substantive changes, and supervisors reiterated they plan outreach and continued refinement before the Board of Supervisors acts.