California ‘upzoning’ proposal: Read the complete rulings

ORIGINAL 1:44 AM REPORT: Just before the long holiday weekend, we reported on the city Hearing Examiner‘s decisions regarding the “upzoning” proposed for a block-plus stretch of California SW south of the Admiral District: Examiner Sue Tanner recommends the City Council approve the proposal to change the zoning from NC1-30 to NC2-40, meaning larger commercial spaces and taller buildings allowed. She also ruled against a community activist’s appeal of the city’s determination that the zoning change would be environmentally “nonsignificant.” We received the decisions via postal mail; we immediately requested electronic copies – and they’ve finally arrived in e-mail, so we have uploaded them to our site for you to read in their entirety if you’re interested: The decision recommending City Council approval of the rezone is here; the decision affirming the “determination of (environmental) nonsignificance” – denying community activist Dennis Ross‘s appeal – is here. As noted in our story a week ago, September 16th is the deadline for people “substantially affected” by the rezone approval recommendation to appeal; we are checking to see if the council’s Built Environment committee has a date yet for its vote on the rezone proposal.

ADDED 9:36 AM: Just talked with Michael Jenkins from the council’s Central Staff. He says the council has 90 days to get the proposal before the committee – and it’s not likely to happen any time soon, since the council will be busy with the budget for the next few months. If the Hearing Examiner’s recommendation is appealed, he says – noting that a few people have inquired about that process, though no formal appeal has come in yet – that ups the time line to 120 days. He has one other note: By law, council members cannot be contacted directly about matters like this; if you want to find out how to comment, or have other questions about the process, Jenkins says he’d be happy to help – e-mail him at

3 Replies to "California 'upzoning' proposal: Read the complete rulings"

  • Mark September 10, 2010 (2:38 pm)

    Dennis Ross… You lose! In fact, you got spanked! The report reads like you weren’t even remotely prepared. Did you really think you could present all those claims and expect them to be accepted without documentation or evidence to support them???

  • nou September 10, 2010 (9:36 pm)

    Thanks WSB. Do you know if there is any opportunity to comment besides the appeals process? Or at any point can council members be contacted directly?

    I commend Dennis Ross for appealing the finding of non-significance related to environmental impacts. I agree with and see a lot of merit in his arguments. It’s very hard to produce data and studies in a short turnaround period with no specific plan on the table. I think the point is that the city hasn’t, yet is recommending a huge rezone. Thank you, Dennis!

    • WSB September 10, 2010 (10:09 pm)

      Nou, I have read through the city’s online brochure re: rezoning process and can’t tell exactly where public comment might come in – plus, given the situation mentioned to us by the council staffer, with the timetable likely to be a long one considering the council is caught up in budget matters for the next few months, I’d strongly suggest contacting staff directly to get them on the record re: what interested citizens are allowed to do in this case – TR

Sorry, comment time is over.