Archive for the ‘real estate’ Category

Big Developer’s Big Western Addition Development at 400 Divisadero has a Meeting May 7th: “The Future of Retail on Divisadero Retail Workshop”

Thursday, April 26th, 2018

Ooh big, in’nt? This is about twice as big a footprint as I had imagined:

project-site copy

Anyway, you’re invited:

400 Divis

“The Future of Retail on Divisadero Retail Workshop

This workshop is sponsored by the developer of the proposal for 400 Divisadero 

What makes a successful commercial and neighborhood corridor? How can Divisadero continue to evolve as the center of our community? Come hear from the city’s top experts and local businesses about their insights and experiences.

Please join the developers of the 400 Divisadero site as they begin the community planning process for transforming this key corner with the next generation of local neighborhood-serving businesses.

PANEL:

Black Nose Trading Company, 342 Divisadero Street: Walt Bell

Black Sands Brewery, 701 Haight Street: Robert Patterson

Madrone Art Bar, 500 Divisadero Street: Michael Spike Krouse

Topo Designs, 645 Divisadero Street: Chanel Chang

Wholesome Bakery, 299 Divisadero Street: Mandy Harper

Yoga Garden, 286 Divisadero Street: David Nelson

KEYNOTE SPEAKER:
Amy Cohen, San Francisco Mayor’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development

When: Monday May 7, 6:00-7:30pm
Where: 1660 McAllister Street”

Welcoming “Haight Ashbury Neighbors for [More] Density” to Frisco – Now, POP QUIZ – Which is More Dense: Hong Kong or SF?

Friday, March 9th, 2018

Nah, this is a pop quiz – you gotta answer fast, there’s no time to check Wiki.

Too late!

ANSWER: San Francisco has a higher population density than Hong Kong.

So if you’re coming to town to start up HAND, Haight Ashbury Neighbors for Density, know that that train has already left the station, as we’re already quite dense here.

(Cf. HANC, which has been around for decades and decades, FBOW.)

Yes, denser than Hong Kong, China:

7J7C8350-copy

The question isn’t whether we want to have a high population density, it’s more like how dense should we be?

2526 Francisco: Well, Sure It’s Listed for $5 Million, But If Only They’d Accept Cryptocurrency for It – “BITCOIN ACCEPTED?”

Tuesday, February 13th, 2018

You’re in luck, Gentle Miners:

Capturejyhfjyfgkjh

And here’s the lawn sign, via davedog2000:

iwfvHID

That rider* at the bottom, that’s the icing on the cake, baby!

*That’s the name of that thing per signs.com, and they ought to know…

Marketing 101: Don’t Call Your LUXURY CONDOMINIUMS LUXURY CONDOMINIUMS until AFTER They are Built

Friday, September 29th, 2017

‘Cause not everybody agrees that what our Richmond District needs is (any?) (more?) LUXURY CONDOMINIUMS.

The Alexandria? Man, I saw E.T. here, man!* 

7J7C8967 copy

And I’m not exactly sure what LUXURY CONDOMINIUMS are, actually. (And even non-LUXURY CONDOMINIUMS can go for over a million dollars these days.)

In closing, SORT OF OUTER RICHMOND LUXURY CONDOMINIUMS FEVER – CATCH IT!

*Uh, the 20th Anniversary Edition with police guns replaced with flashlights, as I’m just a quasi old-timer, consarnit.

The Craziest Frisco Infill Development Scheme Ever: Five Units with Just 3.5 Feet of Frontage – At 1846 Grove AND 1815 Fulton

Wednesday, August 30th, 2017

Presenting 1815-1823 Fulton Street aka 1846 Grove Street – it’s that large parcel that prolly should be part of the backyards of people who live on the block bounded by Fulton, Masonic, Grove, and Ashbury in the 94117. But it’s not, so the plan now is to have this land used for five new units.

Access will be just to the right (east) of Bistro Gambrinus along a 100(!) foot path what’s just 3.5 feet wide.

Captureuhuhuh copy

This was the old plan, with just four units. The lot looks like Oklahoma with the panhandle part pointing upwards:

36d559246e69668bdc66bc8dc9a81534.jpg.max800 copy

So, how do you get your furniture in? Through the 3.5 foot wide access canyon on Fulton. I guess it’s wide enough, but how would get materials to the site? And forget about a garage, right?

Man, when the neighbors find out about this, well, some of them will not be pleased, I promise you.

Hey, if you want to yammer about this plan, come to the Page Branch of your San Francisco Public Library on September 6th, 2017 at 7:30 PM for the mandatory Pre-Application meeting. I’m sure they’ll have plans for the current proposal.

This is Masonic. The back fences of these places are the eastern edge of the access path:

7J7C8904 copy

Oh here it is – this is your view from the sidewalk of Fulton. This is all the frontage you get to share with four other units:

7J7C8908 copy

Existing gate:

7J7C8911 copy

Fulton again:

7J7C8913 copy

And a wide angle view:

7J7C8914 copy

Now let’s go around the block to what I’m guessing is 1846 Grove. I suppose this area wouldn’t change:

7J7C8920 copy

I don’t know what else could be done with this parcel. So I suppose this plan would be the highest and best use. But I’ve never seen anything like it.

Here’s something from 2006, when the plan was to use the Grove side for access:

Capturedfsddgdd

Dear Mr. Teeters: Planning Department staff has reviewed your letter of December 15, 2005, requesting a determination of the procedural requirements for development of an interior lot with a 3’-6” wide pedestrian access to Grove Street. Both proposed schemes involve the construction of two structures of two dwelling units each. Scheme A keeps the lot as it is, while Scheme B subdivides the lots. I have made the following determinations.

1. Scheme A requires the following applications: • A variance under Section 134 for construction in the required rear yard • A variance under Section 151 for the lack of parking • A conditional use application under Section 209.1(g) to develop more than two units on the lot. • Building Permit Application with Section 311 neighbor notification

2. Scheme B requires the following applications: • A variance under Section 134 for construction in the required rear yard • A variance under Section 151 for the lack of parking • A variance under Section 121 for the lack of street frontage • Building Permit Application with Section 311 neighbor notification • Application for subdivision through the Department of Public Works.

This application does not need to be initiated or complete prior to Planning Department approval, however approval will be conditional on subdivision approval.

UPDATE: Early indications are there will be some opposition, to say the least:

ALERTALERTALERT

Our Golden Gate Park is Nothing But an Advertising Opportunity for Some Local realtors

Monday, May 1st, 2017

As you can see:

7J7C1281 copy

This is firmly inside of GGP, on MLK, not that far from Lincoln, way out there on the West Side.

Does our RPD have an advertising policy for GGP? IDK, but I doubt that this ad is kosher.

(The word realtor should never be capitalized. IMO. The people responsible for advertising here in GGP are agents and/or brokers and maybe realtors or not, but prolly there’s a realtor involved somewhere along the line.)

In closing, I’ve never seen this in GGP, in all my years. Tsk tsk, area realtors.

Public Housing Project Posted as PRIVATE PROPERTY?

Friday, November 4th, 2016

I guess this sign means that not just anybody has permission to come on in.

20161102_153734-copy

But it’s public property, right?

Rich Lady Wonders If Gentrifying the Western Addition is the Right Choice for Her

Monday, August 1st, 2016

7J7C9541 copy

Sign of the Times: “BUBBLE REAL ESTATE”

Wednesday, July 20th, 2016

I’d seen this before, but I hadn’t seen the actual sign:

7J7C8970 copy

Still not sure how serious this venture is…

Disrupt Sea Cliff: Somebody’s Buying 7200 Square Feet of Real Estate Near West Clay Street But It’s a Communal Driveway for Millionaires?

Monday, June 27th, 2016

Reddit asks, “Is this a joke?

But it’s right here on the MLS – yours for $35,000:

a2f495e81d3aa8761e451b175239b344l-m0xd-w640_h480_q80 copy

And here’s an aerial view:

Nx2o8Yn copy

That was the wind-up, now here’s the pitch:

“Existing driveway that has easements for all owners to use. You will own property in San Francisco and control the driveway. You can not build or park anything in this driveway since there is no room. Lot with no warranties expressed or implied about use or zoning. I know, it’s crazy, but this is a way to own real estate in the city! And yes, you will own the air and underground rights. Get creative!

I don’t see how the buyer is going to get any money out of this parcel, but I’m not so creative.

If you have more money to burn like this, consider nearby Red Rock Island and the northern tip of San Francisco County