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

Committee continues ADU ordinance to allow further amendments after HCD review

January 22, 2024 | 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 »

Committee continues ADU ordinance to allow further amendments after HCD review
The Land Use & Transportation Committee on Jan. 22 continued a state‑mandated accessory dwelling unit ordinance to give staff and the city attorney time to prepare amendments requested by supervisors and to respond to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

Veronica Flores of the Planning Department told supervisors the ordinance implements recent state law changes and a 10/26/2023 letter from HCD and would relocate the local ADU rules into new code sections (207.1 and 207.2). Flores said the latest draft circulated last week highlights HCD‑requested changes and planning commission recommendations.

President Erin Peskin and other supervisors asked staff to address a broader set of state changes and local concerns before moving forward. Peskin flagged recent state actions that reduce appeal rights, cited Assemblymember Haney’s changes and urged staff to ensure public notice and tenant protections are preserved where appropriate. She also recommended that historic‑resource protections be broadened to cover known or eligible historic resources beyond narrowly defined Article 10/11 landmarks.

City planning staff noted one HCD concern prompted removal of a “notice of special restrictions” requirement in the draft and said that amendment was not ready for committee. Deputy City Attorney Anne Pearson advised a two‑week continuance to allow the requested changes to be drafted and reviewed by the planning commission.

Ryan Patterson, general counsel for Yes In My Backyard, urged the committee to revisit proposed reductions in allowable ADU square footage in the draft, saying a reduction to 850–1,000 square feet could violate SB 330’s prohibition on reducing residential intensity.

Member Peskin moved to continue the ordinance to Feb. 5 and the committee voted to continue the item. Staff said they will return with redline amendments and planning commission input; no final policy changes were adopted in committee.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee