Loading...
(a) Project Authorization Required. During the approval period, every site or building permit application for an office development must, before final action on the permit, include a copy of a project authorization for such office development, certified as accurate by the Planning Department. No such application shall be considered complete and the Department of Building Inspection shall not issue any such site or building permit unless such a certified copy is submitted. No site or building permit shall be issued for an office development except in accordance with the terms of the project authorization for such office development. Any such site or building permit which is inconsistent with the project authorization shall be invalid.
(b) Application for Project Authorization. During the approval period, an applicant for approval of an office development shall file an application for a project authorization with the Planning Department contemporaneously with the filing of an application for environmental evaluation for such development. Such application shall state such information as the Planning Department shall require; provided, however, that an application for a project authorization for each office development for which an environmental evaluation application has been filed prior to the effective date of this Section, shall be deemed to have been filed effective as of the date such environmental evaluation application was filed.
(c) Processing of Applications.
(1) The approval period shall be divided into such review periods as the Planning Commission shall provide by rule. The first review period shall commence on the effective date.
(2) Applications for project authorizations shall be considered by the Planning Commission during a specific review period in accordance with the following procedures:
(A) During a specific review period the Planning Commission shall consider all project authorization applications for which, prior to the first day of such review period, a final Environmental Impact Report has been certified, or a final Negative Declaration has been issued, or other appropriate environmental review has been completed; provided, however, that during the first review period, the Planning Commission shall consider only those office developments for which (i) an environmental evaluation application and a site or building permit application were submitted prior to June 1, 1985, or (ii) a draft environmental impact report or a preliminary negative declaration was published prior to the effective date.
(B) The Planning Commission may hold hearings on all project authorization applications assigned to a specific review period before acting on any such application.
(C) In reviewing project authorization applications, the Planning Commission shall apply the criteria set forth in Section 321, and shall, prior to the end of such a review period, approve, deny, or, with the consent of the applicant, continue to the next subsequent review period each such application based on said criteria.
(D) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section or Section 321, the Planning Commission may at any time, after a noticed hearing, deny or take other appropriate action with respect to any application for a project authorization as to which environmental review, in the judgment of the Commission, has not been or will not be completed in sufficient time to allow timely action under applicable law.
(E) Any project authorization application which is denied by the Planning Commission, unless such denial is reversed by the Board of Appeals or Board of Supervisors, shall not be resubmitted for a period of one year after denial.
(d) Appeal of Project Authorization. The Planning Commission’s determination to approve or deny the issuance of a project authorization may be appealed to the Board of Appeals within 15 days of the Commission’s issuance of a dated written decision pursuant to the procedural provisions of Section 308.2 of this Code, except in those cases where either (i) a conditional use application was filed, or (ii) the project would proceed under terms of a development agreement authorized by Government Code Section 65865 or any successor section. In such case, the decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed only to the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Section 308.1 of this Code. The decision on the project authorization by the Board of Appeals or Board of Supervisors shall be the final administrative determination as to all matters relating to the approval of the office development that is the subject of the project authorization, except for matters, not considered in connection with the project authorization, which arise in connection with a subsequent building or site permit application for the development in question.
(e) Modification of Project Authorization. The Planning Commission may approve a modified project authorization, after a noticed hearing, during the review period in which the initial project authorization was approved or a subsequent review period. Approval or denial of a modified project authorization shall be subject to appeal in accord with Subsection (d).
(f) No Right to Construct Conveyed. Neither approval nor issuance of a project authorization shall convey any right to proceed with construction of an office development, nor any right to approval or issuance of a site or building permit or any other license, permit, approval or authorization which may be required in connection with said office development.
(Added by Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 255-88, App. 6/22/88; Ord. 188-15
, File No. 150871, App. 11/4/2015, Eff. 12/4/2015; Proposition E, 3/3/2020, Eff. 4/17/2020)
AMENDMENT HISTORY
Division (a) amended; other nonsubstantive changes; Ord. 188-15
, Eff. 12/4/2015. Division (d) amended; Proposition E, 3/3/2020, Eff. 4/17/2020.
The Planning Commission may by rule permit such persons as elect to do so, to submit a preliminary application on a proposed office development before submitting any application for a project authorization. Such a preliminary application shall contain such information as the Commission may require. With respect to each proposed office development for which all the information required by the Planning Department is timely submitted to the Department, the Director of Planning or his designee shall, in writing, issue an advisory opinion to the person submitting such information, as to whether he or she at that time intends to recommend, based on the information submitted to him or her, the proposed development for denial by the Planning Commission. The advice and recommendation of the Director shall neither convey, nor foreclose, any right to proceed with a project authorization application or the development and shall constitute neither approval nor denial of the development. The Director's recommendations under this Section shall be governed by Section 321(b) of this Code.
(Added by Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 188-15
, File No. 150871, App. 11/4/2015, Eff. 12/4/2015)
AMENDMENT HISTORY
(a) The Board of Supervisors declares that it is the policy of the City and County of San Francisco to:
(1) Provide a quality living and working environment for residents and workers;
(2) Foster the diversified development of the City, providing a variety of economic and job opportunities;
(3) Maintain a balance between economic growth, on the one hand, and housing, transportation and public services in general, on the other, and encourage a rate of growth consistent with transportation and housing capacity;
(4) Prevent undesirable effects of development on local air quality and other environmental resources; and
(5) Encourage development projects of superior design, optimum location and other desirable characteristics.
(b) In recent years, office development in the City has increased dramatically. Office development has already affected housing, transportation and parking capacities.
(c) The City has only limited legal authority to direct or control physical development, whether for office use or not, on land covered by approved redevelopment plans or under the jurisdiction of the Port Commission.
(d) There are competing legitimate public interests which must be balanced in the planning process. Environmental concerns are of great importance, but must be balanced against the need for continued, healthy economic growth and job creation, maintenance of municipal revenues for the provision of social services, effective preservation of historic buildings and other considerations.
(e) Based on developments proposed to date, general economic conditions affecting San Francisco, and the trend in recent years of an increasing rate of office development, it is likely that excessive office development will come before City agencies for authorization and approval during the years 1985 through 1988, and possible that excessive development would continue thereafter. It is therefore appropriate to approve during the three years after adoption of this ordinance only particular, proposed developments which serve the public interest, convenience and necessity, and to similarly limit approvals for further periods to the extent excessive development might otherwise continue to occur.
(f) Sections 320 through 324 of this ordinance are intended to further the policies noted in Subsection (a) and to aid in responding to the effects noted in Subsection (b), with due regard to the factors set forth in Subsections (c) and (d), by authorizing more effective regulation of the rate, distribution, type and quality of office development in the City and County of San Francisco. Control of office development will afford additional time to analyze and meet its effects.
(Added by Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)
(a) For purposes of this Section 324.1, “Development” includes, without limitation, development, redevelopment, reuse and reoccupancy; and the "Subject Property" is comprised of property within the dotted lines depicted on the following maps:
(b) Notwithstanding Part 2 - Annual Limit of Proposition M (November 1986) and other provisions of any San Francisco Code, the terms “office development,” “office space,” and “additional office space,” when used in Sections 320-325 of this Planning Code, shall not include Development on the Subject Property.
(c) No project authorization or allocation shall be required for any Development on the Subject Property. However, Development on the Subject Property that would require a project authorization or allocation but for this Section 324.1 shall be treated for all purposes as if it had been granted approval of a project authorization or allocation.
(d) Development on the Subject Property shall not affect the annual limit or the unallocated amount referenced in Sections 320-324. The amount of office development for which project authorizations may be granted under Sections 320-324 on properties other than the Subject Property shall be determined without regard to the amount of Development on the Subject Property.
(Added by Proposition O, 11/8/2016)
The limit on office development set out in Planning Code Sections 320, 321, 322, 323, 324 and 324.1 as of October 17, 1985, as amended by the voters on November 4, 1986 and November 8, 2016, shall remain in effect until amended or repealed by the voters of San Francisco at a regularly scheduled election.
(Added by Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Proposition M, 11/4/86; Proposition O, 11/8/2016)
(Added by Ord. 72-08, File No. 071157, App. 4/3/2008; redesignated as Sec. 421 by Ord. 108-10, File No. 091275, App. 5/25/2010)
(Added by Ord. 72-08, File No. 071157, App. 4/3/2008; redesignated as Sec. 421.1 by Ord. 108-10, File No. 091275, App. 5/25/2010)
(Added by Ord. 72-08, File No. 071157, App. 4/3/2008; redesignated as Sec. 421.2 by Ord. 108-10, File No. 091275, App. 5/25/2010)
Loading...