Latest news with #PermitSF
San Francisco Chronicle
14 hours ago
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
Mayor Lurie names new S.F. planning director, after a contentious approval process
Sarah Dennis Phillips, a veteran San Francisco real estate executive who has had top roles in both the private and public sectors, has been named the city's planning director, replacing Rich Hillis, who announced in May that he would be stepping down. The appointment took place after a contentious closed-door planning commission meeting on Wednesday, during which three of the seven commissioners walked out because they objected to the process by which the decision was made, according to department sources familiar with the hearing. The walkout was first reported by Mission Local. The three planning commissioners who walked out objected that they were not given a more prominent role in reviewing applicants. In the past, planning director appointments involved a nationwide search and commissioners reviewed a pool of applicants, eventually providing the mayor with a list of at least three qualified candidates. The process took several months. In this case, the mayor's staffers submitted Phillips' resume less than a day before the vote, which prompted commissioners Kathrin Moore, Gilbert Williams and Theresa Imperial to walk out in protest, refusing to participate in the interview or vote on the appointment. All three were appointed by the Board of Supervisors, whereas the four who voted in favor of Dennis-Phillips were appointed by former Mayor London Breed. The San Francisco Charter dictates that the planning director serves 'at the pleasure' of the commission and that the mayor and the commission 'agree about who will be the planning director.' The pick, which Mayor Daniel Lurie announced Wednesday, is part of a shuffling of San Francisco's top land-use brass. Phillips, who is currently the executive director of the San Francisco Office of Economic and Workforce Development, will be replaced by Anne Taupier, who currently heads up development for the mayor. In addition, Liz Watty, who heads up current planning for the planning department, will oversee the multiagency PermitSF initiative, which is focused on reforming San Francisco's famously cumbersome and time-consuming building permitting process. In a press release, Lurie said the new economic development team would help implement his efforts to bolster San Francisco's post-pandemic economic recovery by 'cutting red tape, supporting small businesses, adding housing, and revitalizing downtown.' Lurie said Phillips, Taupier and Watty 'have the leadership, experience, and track record to drive our city's economic recovery.' He said the three have 'helped generate billions of dollars in economic activity, create thousands of new homes across the city, open small businesses in every neighborhood and support major initiatives downtown.' Phillips in particular will be in the spotlight over the next seven months as the city is finalizing a rezoning that will allow more height and density in big swaths of the city in order to accommodate 46,000 units of new housing. The rezoning, which Lurie calls the 'Family Zoning' plan, is due to be adopted by the Board of Supervisors by Jan. 31, 2026, or the city risks losing state funding for transportation and housing projects. Phillips spent time as a city planner and deputy director of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development before taking a job in the private sector with real estate giant Tishman Speyer. While the planning director search didn't follow the established process of allowing commissioners to vet candidates, it was similar to the shortened process Lurie used to pick Julie Kirschbaum as the director of SFMTA and Dan Tsai as the city's public health director.
San Francisco Chronicle
30-05-2025
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
New S.F. data is most detailed yet on how long it takes to move through city's notorious permit process
The time it takes to get approval to build something in San Francisco has fallen since a number of streamlining measures were implemented last year — but some departments still struggle to meet the city's new target times. That's according to new data compiled by the Planning Department and the Department of Building Inspection, which is published in a new dashboard tracking the processes as part of Mayor Daniel Lurie's PermitSF initiative. The effort aims to simplify the city's notoriously long and often convoluted permitting process. The dashboard includes two main components: one tracks the median number of days it takes to get through the entire planning or building process, and the other breaks down how long the planning and building departments each take to complete their steps in the process. Together, the dashboard and underlying data provide more transparency into San Francisco's permitting process than previously existed. Using the data, a Chronicle analysis found that the time it takes to approve a project or issue a permit has sped up in recent years. Michelle Reynolds, a spokesperson for PermitSF, noted that the city made 'significant changes' to the planning and building review processes starting in January 2024, in response to state law as well as local changes under former Mayor London Breed. The time spent in both planning and building dropped after those changes were implemented, the data show. Planning approval plummeted from a median of 222 to 133 days, and building went from a median of 258 to 209. So far this year, the median times are on track to be even faster. Within the process, each step now has its own target for how long it's supposed to take — a metric dubbed the 'shot clock' in a press release from Lurie's administration. Such goals 'make the process more predictable for homeowners and businesses' and hold departments accountable for any delays, the release said. The target times went into effect this month. So far, according to the dashboard, the city seems to be faring well: Over the last year, though the targets had not yet been set, the building department completed tasks within the target window most of the time, and the planning department only missed its target for resubmission reviews. Still, that doesn't mean that all projects and permits are suddenly sailing through: In both the planning and the building departments, nearly 30% of permits took longer than the target 30 days to get through a first review. Missed target times will be incorporated into staff performance plans, according to Lurie's office. The metrics don't measure any time spent on required pre-application neighborhood outreach, which can add significant delays to projects. Michelle Reynolds, a spokesperson for PermitSF, noted that in July 2023, the city removed the pre-application requirement for most projects, although some bigger projects, like new construction or additions over a certain size still need it. Additionally, the total time metric for planning approval does not include checking whether the application is complete, a process that can take multiple rounds of submittals to the city. That metric is measured, however, in the planning department's 'shot clock' dashboard, with a target time of 21 days. The new data also reveal how long permits spend at each 'review station,' or city departments that need to check various permits for safety and code compliance. While the complexity of what each department must review varies with each project, some hit the city's new targets more often than others. A number of stations fell behind in the first review stage, which is when a plan is first checked for compliance (the city sets a 30-day target for these), but most hit the target for rechecks, or reviews of plans that have been revised, over the last year (a 14-day target). Of departments that completed at least 200 reviews from May 2024 and through April 2025, only one missed the target on most projects for both first reviews and rechecks: the Bureau of Urban Forestry, which handles permits on street trees and foliage. (Because the targets are new, the Bureau of Urban Forestry was not technically held to these targets over the 12 months ending in April, but has been starting this month.) In an email, Chris Heredia, a spokesperson for the Bureau, said that slower response times are due to a 'staffing issue,' as inspectors, who are also tasked both with upkeep of existing city trees, can only allocate about 20% of their time to permits. 'San Franciscans want trees with new construction,' he wrote, noting that construction, and the load on inspectors, had seen an uptick. 'We don't have an adequate number of urban forestry inspectors to meet the demand.' Still, he said that review times had improved in recent months.
San Francisco Chronicle
20-05-2025
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
This S.F. cafe nearly closed over a permit nightmare. Mayor Lurie's new plan promises a fix
Over the past eight years, Rich Lee and his wife, Liza Otanes, have built Spro Coffee Lab into a San Francisco institution. The couple began selling artisanal coffee drinks out of a food truck in Mission Bay in 2017 and quickly gained a loyal clientele for their high-end ingredients and unique flavors reminiscent of craft cocktails. As Spro gained popularity, Lee and Otanes expanded to three brick-and-mortar locations across San Francisco. But behind the scenes, Lee was considering calling it quits. He was struggling to keep up with the high costs and subpar street conditions that often define doing business in the city. Not only were there mounting utility and garbage fees, but Lee says he also twice had to replace cafe windows shattered by homeless people, setting him back thousands of dollars. The ultimate insult, however, came in early 2024, when city inspectors notified Lee that the tiny tables and chairs he'd been placing for years outside Spro's Church Street location were unauthorized. He needed permits, which required a detailed computer-generated site plan, application fees that could be in the hundreds of dollars and a certain level of insurance coverage. Until the permits were approved — which could take two to six months — Lee was prohibited from putting the tables and chairs outside. The reason for the crackdown? A random 311 complaint alleging that the tables and chairs were blocking the sidewalk. They weren't, as the complainant's photo evidence showed. It didn't matter. The complaint triggered the city's cumbersome regulatory process, which became 'a nightmare' to deal with, Lee told me. He said it took between eight and 10 weeks for his permits to be approved — partly because the city kept asking for revisions to his site plan, which he'd hired a professional to develop. Each day without the outdoor tables cost him about 15% in sales, Lee estimated, because only a few tables could fit inside the small cafe. In a city with limited resources that's struggling to fill empty storefronts, why do our rules enable this wasteful dance between city bureaucrats, nagging neighbors and struggling small businesses? It's a question that Mayor Daniel Lurie told me he's been asking. On Tuesday, he plans to introduce a new permit streamlining package as part of his larger PermitSF initiative to cut red tape. (Last week, he unveiled proposals to slash requirements for bar and nightclub owners.) A key piece of the package is aimed at making it easier for small businesses to do things that should have been easy from the start — like setting up outdoor tables and chairs and merchandise displays. Under Lurie's proposed legislation, business owners like Lee wouldn't need to apply or pay for permits at all. They would simply register their outdoor furniture with the San Francisco Public Works Department and attest that they understand the city's accessibility and safety guidelines and insurance requirements. Businesses would still need to keep furniture and merchandise displays along their facades and would be prohibited from placing items on the curb. The city wouldn't hit noncompliant businesses with fines until after a second violation. 'This is all about just making life easier for our small businesses and those owners that are putting in hard work every single day,' Lurie told me. This was music to the ears of Hilda Mendez, who has run a tiny Nob Hill restaurant called Cafe Isabella for decades. Last year, I wrote about how Mendez feared that she could lose her business after a 311 complaint led to her being cited for having a few small outdoor tables and chairs that in no way blocked the sidewalk. (Mendez was also ordered to remove two potted cacti; city regulations for spiky and thorny plants remain in place.) When I connected with her on Friday, she said that six months later, she was still wrangling with the city over the details of the computer-generated site plan. When I told her that such requirements would be eliminated if the Board of Supervisors approved Lurie's legislation, she gasped in relief, 'I am happy for the news!' Lurie's legislative package would also remove permit and fee requirements for most common business signs. Believe it or not, a business currently has to get city signoff for something as simple as painting its name on its own facade. The San Francisco planning code also requires at least 60% of the windows and doorways in ground-floor commercial spaces to be transparent. This makes sense for window shopping, but not necessarily for sensitive locations such as childcare centers, schools, religious institutions, reproductive health clinics, homeless shelters and mortuaries. Lurie's legislation would exempt those facilities — and security gates for most buildings — from transparency requirements. The legislation would also make it easier to open pop-up retail shops and other installations by simplifying San Francisco's sprawling temporary use permit system, which currently has 19 categories, making it difficult for businesses to figure out which one they need. Finally, it would eliminate 'minor encroachment' permits for objects that extend as little as 4 inches into the sidewalk, such as accessibility buttons to open doors, wheelchair lifts that temporarily occupy the right-of-way and water spouts or standpipes. 'We want the city to get out of the way of people's creativity so that businesses can thrive and our economy will flourish,' Katy Tang, executive director of San Francisco's Office of Small Business, told me. Lurie's proposed reforms already seem to be having an effect. Lee, the Spro co-founder, is no longer considering leaving San Francisco. In fact, he's considering taking out a loan to open a fifth location in the Financial District. 'I'm betting on this city,' Lee told me. A big reason he feels confident is that San Francisco no longer seems interested in 'nickel and diming businesses.' Of course, permit reform won't immediately solve all the challenges small businesses face. But it's a big step toward finally making businesses feel like City Hall isn't out to get them. Emily Hoeven is a columnist and editorial writer for the Opinion section.
San Francisco Chronicle
12-05-2025
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
First wave of fixes to S.F. permitting red tape would help bars and nightclubs
Mayor Daniel Lurie floated the first reforms in his promised overhaul of San Francisco's famously convoluted permitting process on Monday, proposing to cut red tape for bar and nightclub owners looking to extend hours or offer live music. Speaking at the annual Nightlife and Entertainment Summit, Lurie told a room full of nightclub owners and impresarios that the reforms would make 'permitting faster, more predictable and more transparent.' Lurie said he plans to introduce legislation next week that would eliminate the need for Planning Department approvals for two types of permits: limited live performance and fixed-place amplified sound. About 60 of these types of permits were sent to the Planning Department during the last fiscal year, which cost about $12,000. In addition, businesses will no longer need the Department of Building Inspection approval for permits for entertainment and extended hours. The changes will shave 30 days from the approval process. 'You are the visionaries and operators who help this city shine after dark,' said Lurie. 'Our job at City Hall and in government is to create the conditions for your success. We want people off the couches, and I want them in your bars and on your dance floors.' The modest changes are the start of an initiative Lurie is calling PermitSF, which the mayor has promised will speed up approval for housing and small businesses and improve permit tracking technology. Lurie also vowed to implement a 'shot clock' that would limit the amount of time that the city can review permits, potentially ending instances where applications languish for months or years. 'We are going to be cutting red tape by ensuring that entertainment permits only go to the departments that actually need to review them,' said Lurie. 'That means no unnecessary reviews from planning or building inspection when they are not relevant.' In mid-February, Lurie said the reforms would be introduced within 100 days. While the streamlining would only cut a few of the dozens of bureaucratic sign-offs bar and nightclub owners have to deal with, business owners at the entertainment summit applauded the proposed changes. David Kiely, who owns Mars Bar in SoMa, said making it easier and faster to obtain permits 'is tantamount to our economic survival.' He said Mars Bar is currently trying to extend its hours and get special entertainment permits. 'It's what we need,' said Kiely. 'Anything we can do that is going to draw people to come in and have events is only going to help us.' Entertainment Commission President Ben Bleiman said at the summit that the city's permitting process for bars and nightclubs is 'a hodgepodge of rules overlapped on one another.' The regulations change from neighborhood to neighborhood, often driven by complaints from residents. 'There was no vision or forward thinking on how these things were put together,' he said. 'These things are extremely frustrating for us and more importantly, frustrating for our faith in our government. If we don't believe our government works, everything falls apart.'
