Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lot Split Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds zoning administrator and allows lot split at 995 De Haro despite neighborhood objections
Summary
The Board of Appeals upheld the zoning administrator’s decision to grant variances allowing a lot split at 995 De Haro Street, voting 3–1 after hearing neighbors’ concerns about precedent, parking and loss of affordable rental stock.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Jan. 18 upheld variances allowing the lot split at 995 De Haro Street, reversing an appeal by the Potrero Boosters Neighborhood Association that warned the split would create substandard lots and hasten condo conversions.
The board voted 3–1 to deny the appeal and uphold the zoning administrator’s finding that exceptional circumstances—most notably that the rear building was moved to the site in 1949 to accommodate a freeway—supported the variances and associated conditions limiting further expansion. Commissioner Fung moved to deny the appeal; President Michael Garcia and Vice President Chris Huang joined him, while Commissioner Kendall Goh dissented.
Why it matters: Opponents argued the split would set a harmful precedent for lot subdivision and erode affordable rental stock. Respondents and planning staff said the property’s unusual history and current financing difficulty constitute an extraordinary circumstance meriting relief; planning added conditions prohibiting expansion of the building envelope and protecting neighborhood impacts.
Key details: Planning staff explained the rear building appears to have been moved to the lot in 1949 and that the property’s configuration and financing constraints reduced saleability as a single parcel. The proposed split would create two lots (approx. 38.5 ft x 25 ft and 61.5 ft x 25 ft) and would preserve existing noncompliant conditions rather than expand them. Planning advised conditions including no further expansion to manage neighborhood concerns. The board concluded that the zoning administrator did not abuse discretion in granting the variances.
What happens next: The variances are upheld and the owners may proceed under the conditions set by planning. Neighbors remain concerned about long‑term implications for affordability and precedent; the Potrero Boosters voiced their continuing opposition during the hearing.
Quote: "There are no legal or ethical basis for the board to overturn the zoning administrator’s decision and we respectfully ask the board to deny the request," respondent counsel Craig Niketas told the board; the board's majority agreed that planning staff had appropriately applied variance standards.
