Mayor’s Zoning Plan Advanced on a Close Planning Commission Vote

By Nancy Shanahan and Stan Hayes

THD joined a long list of organizations and individuals testifying at the 10-hour marathon Planning Commission hearing on September 11th voicing opposition to Mayor Lurie’s “Family” Zoning Plan (“Mayor’s Zoning Plan”), co-sponsored by our recently elected Supervisor, Danny Sauter. As reported in the companion piece by Romalyn Schmaltz elsewhere in this issue, the vote at the end of the evening was 4 to 3, with the Mayor’s four appointed Commissioners voting in favor of the Mayor’s Zoning Plan. This article discusses THD’s opposition to the Plan and shares the critiques of Commissioners Kathrin Moore and Gilbert Williams, who together with Commissioner Theresa Imperial, voted against it.

REMOVE NORTH BEACH, TELEGRAPH HILL, AND THE NORTHERN WATERFRONT FROM THE MAYOR’S ZONING PLAN!

THD’s primary concerns are the significant impacts to our neighborhood from the height increases and density decontrols now included in the Mayor’s Zoning Plan for major portions of Telegraph Hill, North Beach, and the Northern Waterfront that were not a part of the 2022 Adopted Housing Element unanimously adopted by the Board of Supervisors in 2023.[1] Throughout the lengthy public planning process and environmental review leading up the adoption of the Housing Element by the Board of Supervisiors, these areas were never proposed for upzoning, nor were they shown on any proposed upzoning maps, which was predicated on new housing being concentrated on the less dense west side of the City.

But Mayor Lurie’s new Zoning Plan shifted the concentration of proposed new development to District 3, intensifying height and density increases in North Beach, Telegraph Hill, and the Northern Waterfront. As shown on the attached figure, while the approved Housing Element targeted already-dense District 3 with 800 net new housing units by 2031, the Mayor’s Zoning Plan now proposes 5,900 units, a stunning 650% increase.

These major height and density increases are intended to incentivize private developers to build the 5,900 new housing units in the city’s densest neighborhoods causing significant, long-term impacts on our existing tenants, small businesses, important historic resources, parks and open spaces, and the diverse culture of District 3, resulting in displacement and gentrification.

THD’s letter also identified major impacts to District 3 neighborhoods not addressed in the Housing Element environmental impact report, including new threats to existing tenants and rent-controlled housing, new impacts to small businesses, new impacts to historic resources, new shadow impacts to parks and open spaces in North Beach, and new impacts on the Northern Waterfront. The letter also pointed out that the State’s mandate to build affordable housing in the Mayor’s Zoning Plan is significantly overstated, since it is based on outdated high-growth population projections that no longer apply. THD noted that the State’s Department of Finance now forecasts that in 2030, and even in 2050, thousands fewer people will live in San Francisco than in 2020, with THD wondering then why we are letting Sacramento push San Francisco into building 82,000 new units.

Why were North Beach and Telegraph Hill and the Northern Waterfront suddenly included in the Mayor’s Zoning Plan? According to individuals in the Planning Department and confirmed by emails obtained through a Sunshine Act request, the addition of these areas was done with the specific approval of Supervisor Danny Sauter who is also a co-sponsor of the Mayor’s Zoning Plan.

NOTES FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING

Following 10 hours of public comment, 75 percent of which were in opposition to the Mayor’s Zoning Plan, it was time for the Planning Commissioners to have their say. Some of the comments of Board of Supervisors appointees Commissioners Gilbert Williams and Kathrin Moore are shared below.

Commissioner Gilbert Williams

“If our city wants to make permanent changes in our zoning laws changing decades of land use controls that will affect hundreds of thousands of San Franciscans, put tenants and small businesses at risk of displacement, straining public transportation, water and electricity needs, increasing demands on public education systems, and negatively impacting the environment is too broad and too impactful not to be decided by all San Franciscan residents.”[Commissioner Gilbert Williams, September 11, 2025, SF Planning Commission]

Constantly changing zoning maps without community engagement leads to resistance and distrust. Commissioner Williams acknowledged the many comments he heard from community members concerned about the upzoning maps that have been continuously changing, especially the addition of North Beach and areas in D3. The planning staff failed to answer his question as to who recently added North Beach and Telegraph Hill to the Mayor’s Zoning Plan map.

The “affordable housing crisis” is rooted in long-term policy failures, not land use or zoning controls. Commissioner Williams provided the historical context for today’s “affordable housing crisis” revealing that none of it has to do with land use policies or zoning controls. He traced the “housing affordability crisis” back to federal budget cuts by the Reagan administration in the early 1980s, the reduction to zero by 1996 of federal funding for new public housing, the end of redevelopment agencies that funded affordable housing development, and the rise of private equity firms and hedge funds buying millions of foreclosed homes and apartment buildings following the foreclosure crisis of 2008. It is estimated that institutional investors will own 40% of single-family homes nationwide by 2030.

He also pointed out that the state level, there has been a refusal to abolish the Costa Hawkins law that prohibits the expansion of rent control, and the Ellis Act, which allows landlords to evict tenants and leave the rental market, which over the last two decades has been used to evict thousands of San Franciscan residents. And the legalization of short-term rentals that today lists 7,300 listings in San Francisco.

Failure to meet affordable housing goals undermines equity commitments. Commissioner Williams reminded his fellow Commissioners that the state mandates that 57% of San Francisco’s new housing be affordable, yet the proposed plan does nothing to ensure this outcome. This disconnect undermines the Housing Element’s commitment to racial and social equity, as affordable housing is key to stabilizing historically marginalized communities.

Mass deregulation without tenant or small business protections, and failure to meet affordable housing goals, while silencing public participation.

“This upzoning plan, aka family zoning plan, is simply mass deregulation being forced through the housing element without any tenant protections, no small business protections, doesn’t address our housing elements requirement for 57% of new housing be affordable. […] No provisions for residents with disabilities, no protection for our priority equity geographies, and allows demolition of rent-controlled units and buildings with existing small businesses.”[Commissioner Gilbert Williams, September 11, 2025, SF Planning Commission]

Commissioner Williams ended his comments by pointing out to his fellow commissioners that the proposed upzoning plan effectively strips the Planning Commission of its authority by transferring approval powers to the planning director, thereby silencing public participation.[2]

Commissioner Kathrin Moore:

“I have focused my own career on being a practicing urban designer, planner, and architect. For that reason, I like to talk about the a-typical approach of this particular rezone that is a-typical for any large planning effort ever undertaken by this city in the past. This is a city known for its exceptionally crafted, large-scale urban design plans that have attracted worldwide attention with numerous awards and have created the remarkable city that we live in.

“What we are looking at today is not a Plan. It is a document primarily responding to a mandate for numbers, without a vision of what the upzoned city will look like. There’s no hint anywhere of what this future city looks like – and there has been no participatory process to shape a vision for what we want our city to look like in the future. We’re simply responding to numbers.” [Commissioner Kathrin Moore, September 11, 2025, SF Planning Commission]

Many critical issues remain unaddressed. Commissioner Moore highlighted that many critical issues remaining unaddressed, including affordable housing goals, funding plans, tenant protections, historic preservation, and environmental accountability. She underscored the absence of a phasing plan, labor standards, construction sequencing, net-zero initiatives, infrastructure guarantees, transportation planning, and open space commitments. This absence, coupled with confusing and inconsistent policy applications, has eroded public trust in the process.

European cities demonstrate the possibility for urban design success. Commissioner Moore contrasted the Mayor’s Zoning Plan with exemplary urban design success stories from European cities that change and reinvent themselves around the principle of keeping history alive – preserving the old, using the old as a nucleus for the development of new neighborhoods and city densification. She used Copenhagen, as an example, to illustrate that it is possible to reconcile housing scarcity and lack of affordable housing with a good mix of residential and commercial areas, with affordability and equity built in, with good architecture, a wide range of different housing options, and a well-designed living environment. Today, Copenhagen is the most talked about and most recognized example of a successful city in the world. San Francisco used to be one of those cities, and it is Commissioner Moore’s expectation that with the proper urban design and planning, San Francisco could recapture some of our famous ranking for the benefit of all.[3]

* * * * *

Thank you to all of the THD members who came out and testified and to the Planning Commissioners who stood up for our neighborhood. We will continue to fight this catastrophic plan that threatens to upend our incredible historic neighborhood.

[1] THD’s full letter is available for your review and download at https://semaphore.thd.org/thd-letter-dated-september-9-2025-opposition-to-proposed-family-zoning-plan-2021-005878-gpa-pca-mapitems-14a-14b-and-14c-general-plan-amendments-planning-code-text-amendments-and-zoning-m/

[2] A YouTube of Commissioner William’s making his comments is available here: