Built in 1920, the two-story and 19,739 square foot parking garage at the corner of Hyde and Russell contains 58 parking spaces. As proposed, the Russian Hill garage would be expanded by a floor and converted into a seven-unit residential project with fourteen parking spaces and a ground floor commercial space of approximately 860 square feet.
Specifically, the project includes the following alterations: Conversion of the ground floor front to commercial use; the second floor, and rear portion of the ground floor to residential condominiums; insertion of a pedestrian entrance to the residential spaces in the northern arch on Hyde St; infill of the remaining arches with compatible glazing and a retail entrance; conversion of the blind arch in the first Russell St bay to a window; conversion of one of the ground floor windows on Russell St to a vehicular entrance; addition of a penthouse structure set back 12+ feet from the Hyde St elevation and within the Russell St parapet; replacement of non-repairable windows with visually identical units.
Opposed by the Russian Hill Community Association and Russian Hill Neighbors claiming concerns over lost parking and “that the proposed fourth floor addition will make the building too massive, would cause a substantial adverse change to the historic nature of the building resource and would conflict with a proposed historic district on Russell Street,” the Planning Department recommends the Planning Commission approve the project as proposed.
Nimbys will have a field day with this. Perhaps something will happen by 2020.
I hope the NIMBYs aren’t able to stop this project. If you read the analysis, the Planning Department has adequately determined that this will have no effect on hysterical preservation.
The concerns over parking are also easily dismissed because these residents have no vested interest in a private owner maintaining a parking garage for their benefit. If the neighborhood wants to maintain a parking garage here, it should have bought the garage in the first place and hired someone to manage it.
@sfrenegade, did you mean to say ‘hysterical’ instead of ‘historical?’ Because if not, I think it might one of the best and most well-placed typos I’ve ever seen! =)
I live in Russian hill near this proposed project and I support it completely.
The russian hill neighbors have been courting me for years to be a member and there is no way I will ever join.
They do some good work, but they virtually oppose all new construction. They treat the neighborhood like a gated community.
“did you mean to say ‘hysterical’ instead of ‘historical?'”
Yes, I did mean to say that. How else would you describe the NIMBYs saying the North Beach library should be preserved because of its bookshelves?
The Planning Commission will approve this project. They will approve anything that reduces parking spaces. They would approve a prison to replace the Mark Hopkins on Nob Hill if it made parking harder. Car owners should be made to suffer, as they are the incarnation of the devil.
Which is not to say that it is not a meritorious project.
really? A project the planning commission has approved? I am instantly suspicious.
Is there a render available in the doc (too big to open just now)? Anyway, opposition to this sort of project is just the sort of thing that makes me fly into a rage. Like seriously, virtually anything that increases stock should be considered, and assuming it meets basic planning and design demands, it should be approved as a matter of course. On principal, these neighborhood gangs should have no input whatever in these sorts of use decisions, especially when it’s a matter of removing a privately-owned parking structure. In this case, because of transit issues related to heavy tourist use of the cable car, I sympathize just a little, but really, it’s manageable (I live just up the block on the other side of Broadway and have no vehicle).
used to live right near here – feel the same as David M.
was this always a ‘parking garage’ and zoned that way? Or was this a auto-repair place?
ok, admitted tangent: I don’t understand how it can be both. I have always been dumbfounded by how many auto-repair places are located in nob/russian hill until one day I got wind that the owner was also leasing out parking spots here. I approached them to ask about parking. At first denied, and then reluctantly admitted they did and one is available at $350/mo (5 yrs ago). $350x58spots=$20,300/mo in income. Is all that getting reported from this ‘repair shop’? If so, great, if not, then the city (needing revenue) should go around to all the repair shops in SF that are doubling as a parking garages.
Is it just a coincidence that the president of one of the opposing groups has parked in the garage for some time. Hell has no fury like a displaced parker.
If it goes any higher than 2 stories we will be Manhattan and our island will sink into the ocean.
where am I supposed to park when I go to Frascati?
This is totally irrelevant, but one night while walking to Swensons, I passed this garage while a woman was spray painting the “No Parking” notices on the garage doors. You can see them in red above.. She was on her last door when I stopped to tell he she had spray painted the “G” backwards on every door. It’s since been fixed but I’ll never forget her expression or the expletives that came out of her mouth….
Yes, it’s hypocritical of RHN to support last year’s Chiu legislation that makes it harder to insert garages in existing residential structures and yet opposes conversion of parking to housing in this instance – makes me think there is a back story (see braised leeks above). Bunch of hypocrites the RHN – like HANC in the Haight, they are way past their sell-by date.
I think the city government, by eminent domain, should appropriate every garage, private and public, in San Francisco, for the good of the People, and turn them all into affordable housing.
A simple solution to the huge car problem and the virtually intractable homeless problem in one swell foop.