Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors oppose rezoning tied to lawsuit settlement; Planning Commission considers alternatives
Summary
A proposed rezoning of small city parcels to resolve an access lawsuit drew strong neighborhood concern over potential development, hillside destabilization and lack of a public sale process; staff said alternatives (staircase, easement) were infeasible and the rezoning was part of a settlement.
The Planning Commission on Dec. 21 considered a proposal to rezone two city‑owned parcels and a paper‑street segment near Burnett Avenue to RM‑1 to enable sale and access as part of a settlement resolving a long‑running access lawsuit.
Staff told commissioners that the parcels currently lack feasible public access solutions: building a pedestrian stair over a steep slope, creating an easement, or forcing connection to an HOA private driveway were all described as impractical by DPW and SFPUC. The settlement would allow the appellant to acquire the parcels and gain access; staff recommended rezoning to match adjacent RM‑1 zoning.
Neighbors who live immediately behind the parcels — many on Greystone Terrace — urged disapproval, citing concerns about hillside stability, erosion, the loss of open green space and the fact that the parcels were not offered through a public sale process. Several speakers suggested the city should offer the parcels to affected neighbors before approving a direct sale to a private party.
Deputy City Attorney Rob Caplan clarified that the settlement involves the city, the HOA and the adjacent owner; SFPUC and DPW conveyed constraints about subdividing or selling portions of their parcels because of fair‑value and marketability rules.
Commissioners asked staff for additional analyses of likely buildout scenarios under RM‑1 and options for parcel configuration; staff said potential development could yield up to roughly a dozen units depending on lot merger and configuration and emphasized that any future lot merger or development would require additional environmental and neighborhood review. Commissioners directed staff to provide more detailed parcel‑configuration and development‑potential modeling before taking final action to forward the rezoning to the Board of Supervisors.
