Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Map Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds zoning administrator on bank-use dispute at 2400 Irving Street
Summary
The Board of Appeals upheld the zoning administrator’s letter of determination that a full bank use across the split‑zoned parcel at 2400 Irving Street is not allowed without rezoning; the board voted 4-0 and discussed options such as internal layout or rezoning.
The Board of Appeals upheld a zoning administrator determination that the 1‑story building at 2400 Irving Street cannot be converted into a full branch bank without a zoning map amendment because part of the property lies in an RH‑2 residential district.
Tina Tam of the Planning Department explained that the parcel has a split zoning (NC2 at the frontage and RH2 on the northern portion) and that while a bank building was approved in 1973, a later change in use to a retail video store removed any continuing nonconforming bank use for the full structure. Tam told the Board that a conversion of the whole building back to a bank “would therefore not be allowed given the fact that part of the building is in the RH2 Zoning District.”
Appellant Lou Blaget argued the split zoning was a historical error and submitted maps and floor plans showing how the building’s back-of-house functions (vault, restrooms) could be confined to the RH2 portion or designated for employees only; he proposed either redesigning internal access or pursuing rezoning. Blaget said his client would “be prepared to go through the rezoning process” but noted it could take about a year and asked for a pragmatic solution to allow the prospective tenant to take the site.
City attorney (Deputy City Attorney) Catherine Barnes advised the board that zoning maps are ordinances and the Board cannot unilaterally set them aside because of an alleged historical mistake; rezoning would require the formal process through planning commission and the Board of Supervisors.
After discussing possible interim measures (internal reconfiguration, limiting public access to the RH2 portion, or filing for rezoning), President Garcia moved to uphold the Zoning Administrator’s letter of determination; the motion passed 4–0. The Board’s decision leaves the property owner with options to pursue rezoning or reconfigure uses to comply with existing zoning.
Next step: The owner may pursue a zoning map amendment (rezoning) via the planning commission and Board of Supervisors or revise interior layout and uses to conform to NC1/NC2 and RH2 restrictions.
