Referral CEQA PC 070325

City Hall 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 244 BOARD of SUPERVISORS San Francisco, CA 94102-4689 Tel. No. (415) 554-5184 Fax No. (415) 554-5163 TDD/TTY No. (415) 554-5227 MEMORANDUM Date: July 3, 2025 To: Planning Department/Planning Commission From: John Carroll, Assistant Clerk, Land Use and Transportation Committee Subject: Board of Supervisors Legislation Referral -File No. 250701 Planning, Business and Tax Regulations Codes -Family Zoning Plan ? California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Determination (California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq.) ? Ordinance /Resolution ? Ballot Measure ? Amendment to the Planning Code, including the following Findings: (Planning Code, Section 302(b): 90 days for Planning Commission review) ? General Plan ? Planning Code, Section 101.1 ? Planning Code, Section 302 ? Amendment to the Administrative Code, involving Land Use/Planning (Board Rule 3.23: 30 days for possible Planning Department review) ? General Plan Referral for Non-Planning Code Amendments (Charter, Section 4.105, and Administrative Code, Section 2A.53) (Required for legislation concerning the acquisition, vacation, sale, or change in use of City property; subdivision of land; construction, improvement, extension, widening, narrowing, removal, or relocation of public ways, transportation routes, ground, open space, buildings, or structures; plans for public housing and publicly-assisted private housing; redevelopment plans; development agreements; the annual capital expenditure plan and six-year capital improvement program; and any capital improvement project or long-term financing proposal such as general obligation or revenue bonds.) ? Historic Preservation Commission ? Landmark (Planning Code, Section 1004.3) ? Cultural Districts (Charter, Section 4.135 & Board Rule 3.23) ? Mills Act Contract (Government Code, Section 50280) ? Designation for Significant/Contributory Buildings (Planning Code, Article 11) Please send the Planning Department/Commission recommendation/determination to John Carroll at [email protected]. FILE NO. 250701 ORDINANCE NO. Mayor Lurie BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 [Planning, Business and Tax Regulations Codes -Family Zoning Plan] Ordinance amending the Planning Code to: 1) create the Housing Choice-San Francisco Program to incent housing development through a local bonus program and by adopting a Housing Sustainability District, 2) modify height and bulk limits to provide for additional capacity in well-resourced neighborhoods, and to allow additional height and bulk for projects using the local bonus program, 3) require only buildings taller than 85 feet in certain Districts to reduce ground level wind currents, 4) make conforming changes to the RH (Residential, House), RM (Residential, Mixed), and RC (Residential-Commercial) District zoning tables to reflect the changes to density controls, and parking requirements made in this ordinance, 5) create the RTO-C (Residential Transit Oriented-Commercial) District, 6) implement the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Transit-Oriented Communities Policy by making changes to parking requirements, minimum residential densities, and minimum office intensities, and requiring maximum dwelling unit sizes, 7) revise off-street parking and curb cut obligations citywide, 8) create the Non-contiguous San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Sites Special Use District, 9) permit certain Legacy Businesses to relocate without a conditional use authorization and waive development impact fees for those businesses, 10) make technical amendments to the Code to implement the above changes, and 11) make conforming changes to zoning tables in various Districts, including the Neighborhood Commercial District and Mixed Use Districts; amending the Business and Tax Regulations Code regarding the Board of Appeals’ review of permits in the Housing Choice Program Housing Sustainability District; amending the Local Coastal Program to implement the Housing Choice-San Francisco Mayor Lurie BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Program and other associated changes in the City’s Coastal Zone, and directing the Planning Director to transmit the Ordinance to the Coastal Commission upon enactment; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; making findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1; and making public necessity, convenience, and welfare findings under Planning Code, Section 302. NOTE: Unchanged Code text and uncodified text are in plain Arial font. Additions to Codes are in single-underline italics Times New Roman font. Deletions to Codes are in strikethrough italics Times New Roman font. Board amendment additions are in double-underlined Arial font. Board amendment deletions are in strikethrough Arial font. Asterisks (* * * *) indicate the omission of unchanged Code subsections or parts of tables. Be it ordained by the People of the City and County of San Francisco: Section 1. Environmental and Land Use Findings (a) On November 17, 2022, the Planning Commission, in Motion M-21206 certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the 2022 Housing Element of the San Francisco General Plan (Housing Element EIR), as in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq), the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15000 et seq.), and Chapter 31 of the San Francisco Administrative Code. Copies of the Planning Commission Motion M-21206 and Housing Element EIR are on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors in File No. 230001. (b) On December 15, 2022, at a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted findings under CEQA regarding the 2022 Housing Element’s environmental impacts, the disposition of mitigation measures, and project alternatives, as well as a statement of Mayor Lurie BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 overriding considerations (CEQA Findings) and adopted a mitigation monitoring reporting program (MMRP), by Resolution 21220. (c) The Planning Commission then adopted the proposed 2022 Housing Element in Resolution 21221, finding in accordance with Planning Code Section 340 that the public necessity, convenience, and general welfare required the proposed amendments to the General Plan. (d) On January 31, 2023, in Ordinance 010-23, the Board of Supervisors, adopted the 2022 Housing Element. That ordinance confirmed the certification of the Housing Element EIR and made certain environmental findings, including adoption of the MMRP and a Statement of Overriding Considerations. (e). On __________, 2025, the Planning Department published an addendum to the Housing Element EIR, which concluded that no supplemental or subsequent environmental review is required for the Family Housing Rezoning Program, because the environmental impacts of these amendments were adequately identified and analyzed under CEQA in the Housing Element EIR, and the proposed amendments would not result in any new or more severe environmental impacts than were identified previously. (f) The Board of Supervisors has reviewed and considered the Housing Element EIR and the Addendum, and concurs with the Planning Department’s analysis and conclusions, finding that the addendum adequately identified and analyzed the environmental impacts of the Family Housing Rezoning Program, and that no additional environmental review is required under CEQA Section 21166 and CEQA Guideline Sections 15162-15164 for the following reasons: (1) the Family Housing Rezoning Program would not involve new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of significant effects previously identified in the Housing Element EIR; Mayor Lurie BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (2) no substantial changes have occurred that would require major revisions to the Final EIR due to the involvement of new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of effects identified in the Housing Element EIR; and (3) no new information of substantial importance has become available which would indicate that (i) the Family Housing Rezoning Program will have significant effects not discussed in the Final EIR; (ii) significant environmental effects will be substantially more severe; (iii) mitigation measure or alternatives found not feasible that would reduce one or more significant effects have become feasible, or (iv) mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those in the Housing Element EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment. The Addendum is on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors in File No. __________. (g) The Planning Department has determined that the amendments to the Local Coastal Program are exempt from CEQA review under Public Resources Code Sections 21080.5 and 21080.9, and CEQA Guidelines Section 15265. Said determination is on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors in File No. ___. The Board affirms this determination and incorporates the determination by reference. (h) On __________, the Planning Commission, in Resolution No. __________, adopted findings that the actions contemplated in this ordinance are consistent, on balance, with the City’s General Plan and eight priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1. The Board adopts these findings as its own. A copy of said Resolution is on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors in File No. __________, and is incorporated herein by reference. (i) Pursuant to Planning Code Section 302, this Board finds that these Planning Code amendments will serve the public necessity, convenience, and welfare for the reasons set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. _______, and the Board adopts such reasons Mayor Lurie BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 as its own. A copy of said resolution is on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors in File No. ________ and is incorporated herein by reference. Section 2. Additional Findings. (a) This ordinance shall be known as the San Francisco Family Zoning Plan. (b) California faces a severe crisis of housing affordability and availability, which has prompted the Legislature to declare, in Section 65589.5 of the Government Code, that “California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of a chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the state’s environmental and climate objectives.” (c) Numerous factors have contributed to the high cost of housing in most of California’s coastal cities and suburbs, including the dwindling supply and high cost of available land, and zoning regulations that restrict residential density, limit efficient land use, and create and reinforce inequitable patterns of discrimination and segregation. (d) This crisis of housing affordability and availability is particularly severe in San Francisco. The City has seen dramatic increases in both rent prices and home sale prices over recent years. (e) Limits on residential density can also contribute to the housing crisis by restricting the number of units per lot. The origins of density limits in San Francisco date back to the Cubic Air Ordinance, an 1870 anti-Chinese ordinance requiring 500 cubic feet of space for every person residing in a lodging. The City’s first zoning law was passed in 1921 and largely reproduced the City’s existing development pattern, limiting density in areas of the City that were already low-density. In the 1960s, the City underwent a rezoning process, though the Mayor Lurie BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 existing development patterns were largely maintained, with the exception of downtown and neighborhoods significantly impacted by City planning redevelopment plans. (f) Starting in 1980, the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission, and the Planning Department responded to community concerns about neighborhood character by establishing and refining a set of new districts covering many of the City’s neighborhood commercial streets. These districts imposed highly-detailed controls tailored to the specific character of each neighborhood. The 1987 Neighborhood Commercial Districts were based on the then-relatively new idea that the City should be more selective in its pursuit of economic growth. All of these Neighborhood Commercial District plans included numerical density limits for residential development. (g) By removing these numerical density limits from Neighborhood Commercial Districts and replacing them with form-based density, which allows the density to be determined by the buildable area of a building, this ordinance aims to increase housing supply and reduce the factors that have contributed to the lack of housing in San Francisco. (h) Under California Housing Element law, San Francisco must identify sites to accommodate its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goal of 82,069 new units in the next eight years. Because San Francisco does not currently have sufficient capacity to accommodate the RHNA goals, it must rezone sites to meet these goals, and must do so by January 31, 2026. Additional capacity will be created through amendments to the Planning Code and Zoning Maps. This ordinance implements commitments made in the City’s 2022 Housing Element Update. The ordinance modifies zoning policies primarily in the well-resourced neighborhoods, which are sometimes referred to as Housing Opportunity Areas, are neighborhoods or areas with existing infrastructure, transit, businesses, well-performing public schools and lower levels of environmental pollution. The ordinance also aims to