Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Unit Merger topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission narrowly approves merger of two Royal Towers units after debate over housing loss
Summary
The commission on June 2 split 4–3 to allow the merger of two dwelling units at 1750 Taylor Street, approving the project with a finding urging the owner and cooperative board to consider re‑establishing two units on future sale. Supporters said the change enables multigenerational living; opponents warned it reduces unit count in an already tight market.
The San Francisco Planning Commission voted 4–3 June 2 to approve a conditional‑use authorization allowing the merger of two units (804 and 805) at Royal Towers, a 72‑unit cooperative at 1750 Taylor Street, after months of debate about whether unit mergers worsen the city’s housing shortage.
The applicants said the combined 3,300‑square‑foot unit would allow a multigenerational family to live together and to better accommodate an elderly relative’s mobility needs. The project sponsor’s representative said the co‑op board supported mergers in the past and the owners purchased the second unit with the stated intent of forming a single flat. "I wanted to put a human face on this — my mom’s 89 and she literally gets lost in the current layout," a project representative told commissioners.
Opponents — including neighborhood advocates and several commissioners — argued mergers remove permanently available dwelling units. Longtime community speaker Sue Hester told the commission such conversions set a harmful precedent that shrinks the middle‑income housing supply. Commissioner Moore, who moved to disapprove early in the hearing, said the commission has consistently denied similar mergers nearby to protect unit count.
After an initial motion to disapprove failed 3–4, the commission adopted an alternate motion to approve the merger while adding a formal finding encouraging the owner and the cooperative board to support re‑establishment of the two separate units if the property is ever offered for sale. That motion passed 4–3.
The action allows the particular merger to proceed under current planning code standards and makes clear the commission’s concern about unit preservation, but it does not change city code on mergers. The decision leaves in place the commission’s discretion to weigh future mergers on a case‑by‑case basis.
