A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Planning Commission recommends removing life-science special-use district, adds grandfathering for projects with applications on file

July 22, 2021 | San Francisco City, San Francisco County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Planning Commission recommends removing life-science special-use district, adds grandfathering for projects with applications on file
The San Francisco Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend changes to the city's zoning code that would eliminate the life science and medical special-use district and remove the Industrial Protection Zone (IPZ) special provisions that exempt certain uses from underlying UMU and PDR rules. The amendment, introduced by staff and sponsored by Supervisor Walton, would substitute underlying UMU and PDR controls for the SUD's current exemptions.

Planning Department staff told commissioners the change clarifies overlapping land-use definitions and better protects production, distribution and repair (PDR) uses in the Eastern Neighborhoods. "The ordinance reduces overlap and confusion between land-use definitions," Planning Department staff member Jeremy Shaw said, noting life-science growth outside the SUD and the IPZ's references to now-outdated M zoning.

Public commenters were split: neighborhood advocates and PDR supporters welcomed stronger protections for industrial uses, while developers and project sponsors asked for a grandfathering provision to avoid disrupting projects that have already progressed through entitlement processes. "If it's prohibited by the time they get to their permits, that project will not be able to move forward after going through the entire entitlement process," an industry representative told the commission.

Commissioners agreed to staff's recommended modifications but also to include a grandfathering clause for any project application on file as of the hearing date so that projects that relied on the previous zoning would not be retroactively invalidated. On that motion, Commissioner Tanner voted in favor and the motion passed 6-0.

The commission's recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors as part of the formal ordinance process; staff and commissioners said they will continue to coordinate outreach with neighborhood groups and project sponsors as the item moves forward.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee