Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dwelling Merger topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission denies request to merge units at historic 722 Steiner, preserving a rent‑controlled unit
Summary
After a contested hearing, the commission voted 6–1 to deny a proposal to merge two units at a landmark Painted Ladies property, with staff citing loss of an affordable, rent‑controlled unit and neighbors raising preservation and zoning concerns.
The Planning Commission on July 16 denied a request to merge two units at 722/722A Steiner Street — a historic Painted Ladies property in Alamo Square — in a 6–1 vote, siding with staff and housing advocates who warned the merger would remove a rent‑controlled unit from the housing stock.
Planning staff recommended disapproval, saying the merger would "result in a loss of an affordable rent‑controlled unit and would be detrimental to the supply of affordable housing stock in the area." Shannon Ferguson, the presenting planner, told commissioners the property is subject to rent control and that department records showed the smaller unit had been legalized in 1978 and had an open short‑term rental enforcement case. "Staff recommends disapproval," Ferguson told the commission.
The owners, Komal Guiou and Charlene Lee, said the house was historically a single‑family dwelling (built in 1892) and that returning it to single‑family use would aid preservation and owner‑occupancy. "Returning the home to its original single‑family status will be beneficial for preservation," Komal Guiou said, describing flood damage and the challenges of insuring the home with the separate unit in the basement.
Neighbors and housing advocates urged the commission to preserve the rental unit. "We need more housing, not less," said Beth Loughborough, who called in to support staff’s recommendation to deny the merger. Richard Drury, representing DR requesters for another item, warned more broadly about preserving rental stock and consistent zoning enforcement.
Commissioners cited precedent and the planning code’s goals for RH2 zoning in concluding the merger should be denied. Commissioner Moore moved to disapprove, and the motion passed 6–1, with Commissioner Fung the lone no vote. The commission’s decision preserves the smaller unit as a separate, legally recognized dwelling and keeps it subject to rent‑control and other regulatory mechanisms.
Because the commission’s action reversed the owners’ requested change, staff will update permit files and enforcement status as necessary; the commission noted the owner may pursue other remedies through the Board of Appeals or landlord/tenant processes but declined to authorize the merger.
