Legislation

This resolution approves a $750,000 settlement for a claim against Shimmick Construction Company and F.D. Thomas, Inc. related to construction defects. The settlement resolves issues without going to court.

Resolution approving settlement of the unlitigated claim filed by the City and County of San Francisco against Shimmick Construction Company, Inc. (“Shimmick”) and F.D. Thomas, Inc. (“F.D. Thomas”) for $750,000; the claim involves compensation for construction defects allegedly caused by Shimmick Construction Company and F.D. Thomas, Inc.

This legislation involves a hearing for people who want to express their opinions about a project at 35 Ventura Avenue, which includes adding a second floor to a proposed single-family home. The hearing is to review whether the project is exempt from environmental review under California law.

Hearing of persons interested in or objecting to the determination of exemption from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act issued as a Categorical Exemption by the Planning Department on November 18, 2018, for the proposed project at 35 Ventura Avenue, Assessor’s Parcel Block No. 2816, Lot No. 008, to include the second floor addition of 15 feet in height for the proposed property that would consist of an approximately 30 foot tall, 3,000 square foot, single family home. (District 7) (Appellant: Ryan Patterson of Zacks, Freedman & Patterson PC, on behalf of Tom and Kari Rocca) (Filed August 30, 2021)

This ordinance extends various deadlines related to Medical Cannabis Dispensaries and Cannabis Retail Use in San Francisco, pushing them from 2021 to 2022 and 2023. It also allows for the extension of Temporary Cannabis Business Permits and the Cannabis Event Permit pilot program.

Ordinance amending the Health Code, Planning Code, and Police Code to extend the sunset date for provisions governing Medical Cannabis Dispensaries from December 31, 2021, to December 31, 2022; to extend the sunset date for allowing the conversion of Medical Cannabis Dispensaries with Planning Commission approval to a Cannabis Retail Use from January 1, 2022, to January 1, 2023; to allow the extension of Temporary Cannabis Business Permits for additional 120-day terms through December 31, 2022, rather than December 31, 2021; and to allow the extension of the Cannabis Event Permit pilot program through December 31, 2023, rather than December 31, 2021; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This ordinance extends the deadline by about two years for existing buildings with public access to meet accessibility requirements for people with disabilities. It also allows for longer periods to grant extensions and for the Department of Building Inspection to report to the Board of Supervisors.

Ordinance amending the Building Code to extend the time by approximately two years for existing buildings with a place of public accommodation to comply with the requirement to have all primary entries and paths of travel into the building accessible to persons with disabilities or to receive a City determination of equivalent facilitation, technical infeasibility, or unreasonable hardship; to extend the period for granting extensions from those deadlines; and to extend the time for the Department of Building Inspection’s report to the Board of Supervisors.

This resolution approves a 20-year lease for a telecommunications tower and equipment at San Francisco State University, with an initial yearly rent of $91,800 and annual increases of three percent. It also confirms that the lease complies with environmental regulations and city planning priorities.

Resolution authorizing and approving a renewal of a telecommunication lease of space for existing emergency radio telecommunications tower and associated equipment with the California State University, acting by and through the San Francisco State University, a State of California political subdivision, as landlord, for the Department of Emergency Management and the Department of Technology, at 1600 Holloway Avenue, Thornton Hall, at a yearly initial base rent of $91,800, with annual adjustments of three percent for a term of 20 years to commence on October 1, 2021, or upon approval by the Board of Supervisors and Mayor; adopting findings under the California Environmental Quality Act; and finding the proposed Lease is in conformance with the General Plan, and the eight priorities of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This ordinance removes the need for special permission to establish residential care facilities for seven or more people in certain residential districts, while requiring special permission for changes or demolitions of these facilities. It also affirms compliance with environmental regulations and aligns with city planning priorities.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to eliminate the requirement of Conditional Use Authorization for Residential Care Facilities for seven or more people in Residential, House (RH) Districts; require Conditional Use Authorization for a change of use or demolition of a Residential Care Facility, and consideration of certain factors in determining whether to grant Conditional Use Authorization; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making findings of consistency with the General Plan, the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1, and public necessity, convenience, and general welfare findings pursuant to Planning Code, Section 302.

This ordinance accepts a 12-kilovolt power line and related facilities for public use at the Seawall Lot 337 and Pier 48 Mixed-Use Project. It also ensures the line will be maintained by the city and complies with environmental and planning regulations.

Ordinance accepting the irrevocable offer of a 12-kilovolt power line and associated facilities (“12-kV Line”) servicing the Seawall Lot 337 and Pier 48 Mixed-Use Project, bounded by 3rd Street and Mission Rock Street, subject to conditions and limitations; dedicating the 12-kV Line to public use; designating the 12-kV Line for public power purposes; accepting the 12-kV Line for maintenance and liability purposes; affirming the Planning Department’s determinations 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; accepting a Public Works Order recommending various actions regarding the 12-kV Line; and authorizing official acts in connection with this Ordinance, as defined herein.

This hearing is to provide a six-month update on the implementation of new consumer protection measures in the Building Code, which include creating and publishing a list of compliance issues and notifying relevant parties about these issues. The Department of Building Inspection and the City Attorney's Office will report on the progress of these provisions.

Hearing regarding a six-month status update on the implementation of Expanded Compliance Control and Consumer Protection provisions per Building Code amendments enacted March 26, 2021, including but not limited to creating the Expanded Compliance Control list, reporting on the list to the Building Inspection Commission, referring listees to state licensing boards, publication of the list on the Department of Building Inspection website, and notifying all parties listed on a permit application associated that includes a listee; and requesting the Department of Building Inspection and Office of the City Attorney to report.

The resolution authorizes the sale of a specific piece of land in Alameda County to the State of California for highway improvements for $152,952. It also includes provisions for a sale agreement, confirms the property as surplus land, and states that a competitive bidding process is not necessary.

Resolution 1) approving and authorizing the General Manager of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (“SFPUC”) and/or the Director of Property, on behalf of the City and County of San Francisco (“City”), to sell certain real property located along State Route 84 and Interstate 680 in unincorporated Alameda County to the State of California (Parcel No. 65) for public highway improvements, acting through its California Department of Transportation (“Caltrans”), and the Alameda County Transportation Commission (“Alameda CTC” and together with Caltrans, the “Buyers”) for the amount of $152,952; 2) approving and authorizing an Agreement for Sale of Real Estate (“Sale Agreement”) for the sale of the Property to the Buyers, which includes a liquidated damages clause in case of default by the City; 3) authorizing the SFPUC General Manager and/or City’s Director of Property to execute the Sale Agreement, make certain modifications, and take certain actions in furtherance of this Resolution and the Sale Agreement, as defined herein; 4) adopting findings declaring that the real property is “surplus land” and “exempt surplus land” pursuant to the California Surplus Lands Act; 5) determining that a competitive bidding process for the conveyance of the Property is impractical and not in the public interest, in accordance with Section 23.3 of the Administrative Code; 6) affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and adopting the findings required by Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines previously adopted by Caltrans in conjunction with the Project; and 7) adopting the Planning Department’s findings that the Sale Agreement, and the transaction contemplated therein, is consistent with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This legislation involves a hearing for public input regarding a proposed project at 575 Vermont Street, which seeks to demolish a single-family home and build a new four-story residential building with multiple units and parking. The hearing allows interested parties to express their support or objections to the Conditional Use Authorization needed for the project.

Hearing of persons interested in or objecting to the approval of a Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Sections 209.1, 303, and 307 of the Planning Code, for a proposed project at 575 Vermont Street, Assessor’s Parcel Block No. 4010, Lot No. 006, identified in Planning Case No. 2020-000886CUA, issued by the Planning Commission by Motion No. 20921, dated May 13, 2021, to allow demolition of an existing single family home and construction of a new, four-story, 40-foot tall residential building containing two dwelling units, one accessory dwelling unit, one off-street automobile parking space, and three class one bicycle parking spaces within the RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. (District 10) (Appellants: Marion Parr, Scott Carr, Ron Altoonian, Victoria Carradero, and Chris Stephens) (Filed June 11, 2021)

This motion approves a Conditional Use Authorization for a project at 575 Vermont Street, following the Planning Commission's decision. It also includes environmental findings and confirms consistency with the city's General Plan and priority policies.

Motion approving the decision of the Planning Commission by its Motion No. 20921, approving a Conditional Use Authorization, identified as Planning Case No. 2020-000886CUA, for a proposed project located at 575 Vermont Street; and making environmental findings, and findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

The ordinance authorizes a payment of $580,000 to settle the City’s claim for attorney’s fees and costs related to a lawsuit filed by Contest Promotions, LLC regarding compliance with a previous settlement and the constitutionality of certain Planning Code sections. This lawsuit was consolidated from two cases filed in 2015 and 2016.

Ordinance authorizing settlement by payment of $580,000 to the City and County of San Francisco, of the City’s claim for attorney’s fees and costs arising from the lawsuit that Contest Promotions, LLC filed against the City; the lawsuit was filed on August 26, 2015, in San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. CGC-15-547630; entitled Contest Promotions, LLC vs. City and County of San Francisco; San Francisco Superior Court Case No. CPF-16-514771 was filed on February 9, 2016, and the actions were consolidated; the lawsuit involves a dispute about the City’s compliance with a prior settlement agreement between the parties, and the constitutionality of sections of the Planning Code regulating on-site and off-site commercial signs.

The ordinance authorizes a $40,000 settlement payment from Walsh Construction Company to the City of San Francisco to resolve a lawsuit filed by Stephanie Brunton regarding personal injuries from a dangerous condition on public property. Additionally, the City will dismiss its Cross-Complaint against Walsh Construction Company as part of the settlement.

Ordinance authorizing settlement of the lawsuit filed by Stephanie Brunton against the City and County of San Francisco by payment of $40,000 to the City by Walsh Construction Company; the lawsuit was filed on April 29, 2019, in San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. CGC-19-575558; entitled Stephanie Brunton v. City and County of San Francisco, et al; the underlying lawsuit involves alleged personal injury suffered as a result of an alleged dangerous condition on public property; other material terms of the settlement are that the City and County of San Francisco will dismiss its Cross-Complaint for indemnity and contribution against Walsh Construction Company.

The ordinance designates the fresco titled “The Making of a Fresco Showing the Building of a City” as a Landmark, ensuring its protection and recognition under the Planning Code. It also affirms compliance with environmental regulations and aligns with city planning policies.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to designate the fresco titled “The Making of a Fresco Showing the Building of a City” in the Diego Rivera Gallery of the San Francisco Art Institute, located at 800 Chestnut Street, Assessor’s Parcel Block No. 0049, Lot No. 001, as a Landmark consistent with the standards set forth in Article 10 of the Planning Code; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making public necessity, convenience, and welfare findings under Planning Code, Section 302, and findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This motion aimed to approve a Conditional Use Authorization for a proposed project at 450-474 O’Farrell Street and 532 Jones Street. However, it was ultimately rejected and is no longer moving forward.

Motion approving the decision of the Planning Commission by its Motion No. 20935, approving a Conditional Use Authorization, identified as Planning Case No. 2013.1535CUA-02, for a proposed project located at 450-474 O’Farrell Street and 532 Jones Street; and making environmental findings, and findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This resolution extends the time by 90 days for the Planning Commission to decide on an ordinance that would allow up to four dwelling units on corner lots in certain residential zoning areas. It also affirms the Planning Department's environmental review and ensures consistency with the city's General Plan and priority policies.

Resolution extending by 90 days the prescribed time within which the Planning Commission may render its decision on an Ordinance (File No. 210564) amending the Planning Code to provide a density limit exception for Corner Lots in RH (Residential, House) zoning districts, to permit up to four dwelling units per lot; affirming the Planning Department’s California Environmental Quality Act determination; and making Planning Code, Section 302, findings, and making findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This motion supports the Board of Supervisors' approval of a Conditional Use Authorization for a retail cannabis store at 5 Leland Avenue and 2400 Bayshore Boulevard. It has passed and is now officially adopted.

Motion adopting findings in support of the Board of Supervisors' decision to approve the proposed Conditional Use Authorization, identified as Planning Case No. 2021-000603CUA, for a proposed retail cannabis use located at 5 Leland Avenue and 2400 Bayshore Boulevard.

This ordinance designates the Ingleside Terraces Sundial and Sundial Park as a Landmark, providing it with special recognition and protection under the Planning Code. It also affirms that the designation complies with environmental regulations and aligns with the city's General Plan and priority policies.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to designate Ingleside Terraces Sundial and Sundial Park, Assessor’s Parcel Block No. 6917B, Lot No. 001, situated within Entrada Court, as a Landmark under Article 10 of the Planning Code; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making public necessity, convenience, and welfare findings under Planning Code, Section 302, and findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This resolution allows the California Enterprise Development Authority to issue up to $9 million in revenue obligations to fund various projects for Presidio Hill School, including construction and renovation of educational facilities. It is a formal approval necessary for tax purposes under federal law.

Resolution approving for purposes of Internal Revenue Code, Section 147(f), the Issuance and Sale of Revenue Obligations by the California Enterprise Development Authority in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $9,000,000 to finance and refinance the acquisition, construction, renovation, rehabilitation, improvement and/or equipping of educational and related facilities to be owned and operated by Presidio Hill School, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, or its wholly-owned limited liability company.

This legislation involves a hearing for public input on a proposed project at 450-474 O’Farrell Street and 532 Jones Street, which seeks to amend previous approvals for a mixed-use building that includes demolishing three existing buildings and constructing a new 13-story structure with commercial space and group housing. The hearing allows interested parties to express support or objections to the changes in the project scope.

Hearing of persons interested in or objecting to the approval of a Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Sections 303, 304, 415, 166, and 155 of the Planning Code, for a proposed project at 450-474 O’Farrell Street and 532 Jones Street, Assessor's Parcel Block No. 0317, Lot Nos. 007, 009, and 011, identified in Planning Case No. 2013.1535CUA-02, issued by the Planning Commission by Motion No. 20935, dated June 24, 2021, to amend the Conditions of Approval Nos. 24, 25, 26, and 32 of Planning Commission Motion No. 20281, adopted on September 13, 2018, for a revised project scope to include demolition of three buildings, construction of a 13-story mixed-use building with similar massing, ground floor commercial and a new church, and up to 316 group housing rooms instead of 176 residential units located in a RC-4 (Residential-Commercial, High Density) Zoning District, North of Market Residential Special Use District and 80-130-T Height and Bulk District. (District 6) (Appellants: Pratibha Tekkey, on behalf of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic, and Michael Shonafelt and Gregory Tross of Newmeyer & Dillion LLP, on behalf of the Pacific Bay Inn, Inc.) (Filed July 21, 2021)

The ordinance allows certain social service and philanthropic facilities in Chinatown with specific conditions, modifies use size limits and regulations for various districts, and permits lot mergers in the Polk Street area. It also exempts certain community uses from size limits and makes adjustments to zoning regulations to support local businesses and services.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to 1) allow neighborhood-serving Social Service and Philanthropic Facility uses in Chinatown Mixed Use Districts with conditional use authorization; 2) change the provision for abandonment of a use that exceeds a use size maximum in Chinatown Mixed Use Districts; 3) allow re-establishment of a nonconforming use size in Chinatown Mixed Use Districts under certain circumstances; 4) change the use size limit and use size maximum in the Chinatown Community Business District; 5) exempt Institutional Community uses and Legacy Business Restaurants in Chinatown Mixed Use Districts from use size limits; 6) allow lot mergers under certain conditions in the Polk Street Neighborhood Commercial District; and 7) exclude the portion of Powell Street south of Union Street from the North Beach Financial Service, Limited Financial Service, and Business or Professional Service Subdistrict; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making findings of consistency with the General Plan and the eight priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1, and public necessity, convenience, and general welfare findings pursuant to Planning Code, Section 302.

This ordinance modifies the Geary-Masonic Special Use District to require that inclusionary housing fees be used for projects within one and a half miles of the district or anywhere in San Francisco if not allocated within five years. It also affirms the Planning Department's environmental review and ensures consistency with the city's General Plan and priority policies.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to modify the Geary-Masonic Special Use District to require use of the inclusionary housing fee for a project within one and one-half miles of the boundaries of the district, or anywhere in San Francisco if not allocated within five years of payment; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making findings of consistency with the General Plan and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1; and adopting findings of public convenience, necessity, and welfare under Planning Code, Section 302.

The ordinance designates the San Francisco Eagle Bar at 396-398 12th Street as a Landmark, which provides it with special protections and recognition. It also affirms that the designation complies with environmental regulations and aligns with city planning priorities.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to designate 396-398 12th Street (aka San Francisco Eagle Bar), Assessor’s Parcel Block No. 3522, Lot No. 014, as a Landmark consistent with the standards set forth in Article 10 of the Planning Code; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making public necessity, convenience, and welfare findings under Planning Code, Section 302, and findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This resolution approves leases for food and beverage concessions at the Harvey Milk Terminal 1 in San Francisco International Airport, allowing Culinary Heights Hospitality to operate for 12 years with a possible two-year extension. The lease includes a minimum annual payment of $385,000 for the first year, starting after the Board of Supervisors' approval.

Resolution approving the Harvey Milk Terminal 1 Food and Beverage Concession Leases in Phases 3 and 4 - Lease 13, Lease No. 20-0043 between Culinary Heights Hospitality, and the City and County of San Francisco, acting by and through its Airport Commission, for a term of 12 years with one two-year option to extend at the Airport’s sole discretion, and a minimum annual guarantee of $385,000 for the first year of the Lease, to commence upon approval by the Board of Supervisors.

This ordinance clarifies the rules for building Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and ensures that landlords cannot remove certain tenant services without a valid reason, stating that simply getting a building permit is not enough. It also includes necessary findings related to tenant protection and environmental regulations.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to clarify the requirements for applications to construct Accessory Dwelling Units under the City’s local Accessory Dwelling Unit approval process; amending the Administrative Code to clarify that landlords may not remove certain tenant housing services without just cause and that issuance of a building permit does not constitute just cause; making findings as required by the Tenant Protection Act of 2019; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This hearing will discuss changes in the Planning Department's organization and practices, particularly regarding the Zoning Administrator and staff. The Planning Department is being asked to provide a report on these matters.

Hearing to discuss the recent reorganization and internal practices at the Planning Department, including with respect to the Zoning Administrator and other department staff; and requesting the Planning Department to report.

This ordinance allows businesses to place signs on awnings or marquees in certain commercial and mixed-use districts, in addition to existing regulations for projecting signs. It also expands sign controls to more Neighborhood Commercial Districts and confirms compliance with environmental and planning regulations.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to allow business signs on awnings or marquees in addition to projecting signs in various neighborhood commercial and residential-commercial districts, and in certain Chinatown mixed use districts; applying business sign controls to additional Neighborhood Commercial Districts; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1, and public necessity, convenience, and general welfare findings pursuant to Planning Code, Section 302.

This ordinance designates the Jones-Thierbach Coffee Company Building at 447 Battery Street as a historic landmark, ensuring its preservation. It also confirms that the designation aligns with environmental regulations and city planning policies.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to designate 447 Battery Street (aka Jones-Thierbach Coffee Company Building), Assessor’s Parcel Block No. 0206, Lot No. 002, as a Landmark consistent with the standards set forth in Article 10 of the Planning Code; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making public necessity, convenience, and welfare findings under Planning Code, Section 302, and findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This ordinance reallocates $400,000 from the Legacy Business Historic Preservation Fund to create a new grant program for Legacy Businesses in the 2021-2022 fiscal year. It aims to support these businesses through financial assistance.

Ordinance de-appropriating $400,000 previously appropriated to the Office of Economic and Workforce Development (ECN) for the Office of Small Business’ Legacy Business Historic Preservation Fund and re-appropriating $400,000 to ECN to provide a new grant program for Legacy Businesses in Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-2022.

This legislation pertains to a hearing for a proposed cannabis retail store at 5801 Mission Street, which is seeking approval for its Conditional Use Authorization. The hearing allows interested parties to express their support or objections regarding the project, which prohibits on-site smoking or vaporizing of cannabis products.

Hearing of persons interested in or objecting to the approval of a Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Sections 202.2, 303, and 720 of the Planning Code, for a proposed project at 5801 Mission Street, Assessor’s Parcel Block No. 6472, Lot No. 001, identified in Planning Case No. 2020-007152CUA, issued by the Planning Commission by Motion No. 20933, dated June 10, 2021, to allow cannabis retail use measuring approximately 2,055 square feet, with no on-site smoking or vaporizing of cannabis products, on the first floor of an existing two-story mixed use building within the Excelsior Outer Mission Street Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District, the Fringe Financial Services Restricted Use District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. (District 11) (Appellant: Pastor Roderick Gittens, on behalf of the San Francisco Christian Center) (Filed July 12, 2021)

This motion approves a Conditional Use Authorization for a project at 5801 Mission Street, following the Planning Commission's decision. It also confirms that the project aligns with environmental standards and the city's General Plan policies.

Motion approving the decision of the Planning Commission by its Motion No. 20933, approving a Conditional Use Authorization, identified as Planning Case No. 2020-007152CUA, for a proposed project located at 5801 Mission Street; and making environmental findings, and findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This ordinance updates the requirements for the inclusionary housing program in San Francisco, which mandates that new developments include affordable housing units. It also confirms that the changes comply with environmental regulations and align with the city's overall planning goals.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to update inclusionary housing program requirements; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1, and findings of necessity, convenience, and welfare under Planning Code, Section 302.

This ordinance authorizes the City to settle a lawsuit with Con-Quest Contractors, Inc. for $325,000 related to construction claims. The lawsuit was filed in April 2020 in San Francisco Superior Court.

Ordinance authorizing settlement of the lawsuit filed by Con-Quest Contractors, Inc. against the City and County of San Francisco for $325,000; the lawsuit was filed on April 9, 2020, in San Francisco Superior Court, Case No. CGC-20-584105; entitled Con-Quest Contractors, Inc. v. City and County of San Francisco; the lawsuit involves construction claims.

This resolution authorizes a loan of up to $33,903,540 to Hunters View Associates for infrastructure improvements in the Hunters View Project, which aims to develop up to 800 units of housing, including public, affordable, and market-rate options. It also confirms that the loan agreement complies with environmental and planning regulations.

Resolution approving and authorizing the Director of the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development to execute an Infrastructure Loan Agreement with Hunters View Associates, L.P., a California limited partnership, for a total loan amount not to exceed $33,903,540 to finance the third phase of infrastructure improvements related to the revitalization and master development of up to 800 units of replacement public housing, affordable housing and market rate housing, commonly known as the Hunters View HOPE SF Development (“Hunters View Project”); and adopting findings that the loan agreement is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act, the General Plan, and the priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

This resolution extends the time by 60 days for the Planning Commission to decide on an ordinance that requires special approval for large residential developments in certain zoning areas. It also confirms the Planning Department's environmental assessment and aligns with the city's General Plan and relevant planning policies.

Resolution retroactively extending by 60 days the prescribed time within which the Planning Commission may render its decision on an Ordinance (File No. 210116) amending the Planning Code to require Conditional Use Authorization for certain large residence developments in Residential, House (RH) zoning districts; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1, and findings of public convenience, necessity, and welfare under Planning Code, Section 302.

This resolution urges California officials to change regulations that currently prevent San Francisco from receiving funding for new affordable housing projects. It aims to address unfair distribution of resources that negatively impacts the city's housing development efforts.

Resolution urging Treasurer Fiona Ma and the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee (“CDLAC”) to amend the adopted CDLAC regulations immediately to address the regional inequities of the allocation system resulting in no awards to San Francisco for new construction affordable housing projects.

This ordinance designates the Crocker National Bank Building at One Montgomery Street as a historic landmark, ensuring its preservation. It also confirms that the designation complies with environmental regulations and aligns with the city's planning priorities.

Ordinance amending the Planning Code to designate One Montgomery Street (aka 1-25 Montgomery Street), Crocker National Bank Building, Assessor’s Parcel Block No. 0292, Lot Nos. 001A and 002, as a Landmark consistent with the standards set forth in Article 10 of the Planning Code; affirming the Planning Department’s determination under the California Environmental Quality Act; and making public necessity, convenience, and welfare findings under Planning Code, Section 302, and findings of consistency with the General Plan, and the eight priority policies of Planning Code, Section 101.1.

The motion confirms that the Planning Department has determined the project at 35 Ventura Avenue does not require additional environmental review due to its categorically exempt status. This means the project can proceed without further environmental assessments.

Motion affirming the determination by the Planning Department that the proposed project at 35 Ventura Avenue is categorically exempt from further environmental review.

This motion aimed to overturn the Planning Department's decision that a project at 35 Ventura Avenue did not require additional environmental review. The motion was ultimately rejected.

Motion conditionally reversing the determination by the Planning Department that the proposed project at 35 Ventura Avenue is categorically exempt from further environmental review, subject to the adoption of written findings of the Board in support of this determination.

This motion aimed to have the Board of Supervisors prepare findings to overturn the Planning Department's decision that a project at 35 Ventura Avenue did not require additional environmental review. The motion has been killed, meaning it will not move forward.

Motion directing the Clerk of the Board to prepare findings reversing the determination by the Planning Department that the proposed project at 35 Ventura Avenue is categorically exempt from further environmental review.