The site of the future Eddy & Taylor Family Housing
The Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corp. (TNDC) has acquired the 22,000-square-foot surface parking lot on the corner of Taylor and Eddy, and according to J.K. Dineen, the designs for development include both apartments (13-story building) and a 15,000-square-foot ground-floor grocery store.

Eddy & Taylor Family Housing will be comprised of 130 studio, one-, two- and three-bedroom apartments. At least 20 percent of the apartments will be reserved for formerly homeless households. The building will include play areas for kids and community gathering venues.

David Baker + Partners have been tapped for the design. The grocer has not been named. And completion is slated for 2012.
Developer takes on one of S.F.’s toughest corners [Business Times]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by perhaps

    the only 15,000 sf format market out there is Fresh + Easy (Tesco), which is also not afraid of “transitioning” neighborhoods (see South LA). All other grocers typically won’t look at less than 35,000 sf, and don’t have the same tolerance for secondary neighborhoods. I’d bet it will either be F+E or a private grocer…

  2. Posted by Usually Named

    The non-profit mafia continues to build its empire….

  3. Posted by anoneconomist

    Why would anyone live there with a 20% reserve for ‘previously homeless’?
    I love how SF constantly helps the homeless and bottem 15% of society, whom do not want to work and improve their lives. What about the middle class??? Teachers, police, firefighters, small business owners, etc. why not help the middle class find affordable housing? The way you do this is to increase the supply. That area in the Tenderloin should be quickly redeveloped by any means necessary-close the homeless shelters, the drug hotels, massage parlors, etc. Build apartments of any kind (I am not saying affordable housing, b/c it just encourages the formation of projects) to increase the supply, which will entire pull down the pressure of home prices and apt prices. Supply and Demand–econ 101. The reason why we have not had a sharper drop in home prices or rents, because the SF/Bay Area economy is so strong (we are expected to add $10,000 new jobs in ’08), and we do not have sufficient housing for the working class. Maybe SF should start helping people that want to be helped and move their family up in the world. You can only help those, whom want to help themselves, think about it SF.

  4. Posted by tenderloiner

    anoneconomist – your comments are very harsh…
    Living in the ‘loin, I have come to understand that homelessness is a complex issue and the US does not have a social safety net to help people from becoming homeless. As a society we should help everyone in our city. I am lucky to be educated, have a job and own a super tiny home – though still struggling to live in such an expensive city. I wish everyone int he city had these opportunities.
    The city does need all types of housing, but I don’t think many teachers/police/fire/etc would even consider living in the ‘loin. Right now it is a great area to live if you do not mind the dealers. Most people in this area would like the city to prosecute the dealers (most of them are from the EB) and get them off our streets. We do not wish for the area’s immigrant residents and restaurants to be replaced by gentrification.
    The TDCC is a great benefit to this neighborhood and we look forward to any projects they develop. Their last project for homeless families, the Curran House, has helped the neighborhood a lot and did not upset the diversity of this area.
    On the practical side, I am excited to have a grocery store in the neighborhood. Currently, I trek 6 blocks up nob hill to shop at Cala Foods and then shlep the food back down the hill. I buy only what I can carry of the heavy stuff. Though, I buy most of my fresh fruits/vegetables and meats at the locel corner stores and sunday farmer’s market. I wonder how these stores will survive when the grocery store opens.

  5. Posted by HomesRus

    The silver bullet is adjusting the affordability levels for the Mayor’s Office of Housing inclusionary housing program. Under current scenarios, two teachers with a kid do not qualify for affordable housing. Neither would a family of firefighters, cops, you get the picture. The 100% of median income cut-off leaves out way too many of this city’s blue collar workers. Not until the thresholds for qualification are adjusted to 175% of median income would that family of teachers (making $60K each) be able to qualify for affordable housing.
    At that rate, they could qualify for (and afford according to the MOH) a $475,000 2 bed, which is still a tremendous discount off market rate. Additionally, these $475,000 affordable units are more than twice what an affordable 2 bed would be priced at off the current 100% of median income threshold. Therefore, a developer can do twice as much affordable housing (for the people that need it most), while still not blowing up their project.
    One last thing, calling it 175% of median income as the MOH does is not entirely accurate. The median income is simply multiplied by 175%. Medians down work that way, they area a gradient. MOH is assuming that 100% of median income represents a person that is making less than half the city and more than the other half of the city. 200% of median income would not equal the salary of the person making the highest salary in SF, it would be much lower. And therefore, their 175% of median income, according to the gradient of incomes, is actually much closer to 110%-120% of median income of the full range of incomes in SF. Much more politically palatable (and accurate).

  6. Posted by The 1st Noe 94131

    A nonprofit works to convert a parking lot in a sketchy neighborhood to housing for families and, to Socketsite posters, that’s a bad thing. Usually Named sees it as evil and/or dangerous (you can’t spin the “mafia” and “empire” references any other way). Anoneconomist (who isn’t one, I’ll bet) can’t figure out that the 80% who aren’t “previously homeless” may be just the working class people upon which the city’s economy and diversity depends. Instead, the focus is upon living in proximity to “those people.” Oh, the Horror. Face it, you don’t have the personality to be happy living in a city. Gated communities were invented for people like you. Move there.

  7. Posted by Ben

    Drug dealers all from the East Bay? Uh huh. Sure.

  8. Posted by MarkSFCA

    I think this is awesome news for the Tenderloin. I applaud the Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corp for taking on a project that a normal developer wouldn’t touch. We need housing for the people who work in the hotels, restaurants and retail establishments . . . businesess that don’t pay high wages but are essential elements to keep a thriving tourist industry.

  9. Posted by Jordan

    This is great news! I am at this corner every sunday to pick up my little brother, and that parking lot is always bordered by inebriates laying on the sidewalk, drinking at 11 in the morning.
    That having been said, it would be great if more market rate units were introduced into this struggling neighborhood. If I’ve learned anything from reading about poverty, it is that concentrating poor people into a confined neighborhood is a great way to create an environment that is ripe for crime to grow.

  10. Posted by zzzzzzz

    I would echo the complains that the definition of “affordable” housing in SF has come to exclude the middle class. Daly’s proposed huge budget set-aside, for example, limits participation to individuals and families earning 80% of area mean income. I would argue that encouraging the presence of a stable middle-class population is far more beneficial to the City than creating concentrated pockets of poverty.

  11. Posted by Mark Ballew

    I think that one less parking pad in the downtown area is great, and I applaud this developer for stepping in and taking a risk on this blighted ‘hood. A Fresh and Easy or similar is exactly what this area needs as well
    The Taylor and Eddy parking lot area currently is used as a place to loiter, sleep, do/sell drugs, and at night as a urinal for the B&T kids visiting clubs via the party bus.

  12. Posted by City Lover

    If only we could start redeveloping parking garages into something more useful as well, instead of just parking lots.

  13. Posted by zig

    Please stop with the firefighter nonsense
    firefighters do quite well with overtime (way over the median salary) and the vast majority don’t want to live in San Francisco

  14. Posted by Live Smart

    Great news to revitalize a sketchy neighborhood. I am pro-development and subscribe to the theory of highest and best use in all secondary neighborhoods especially w/ two and three bedroom units for families.
    The loin may not be great now but with this project, it will be much more stabilizing in a few years.

  15. Posted by Usually Named

    “A nonprofit works to convert a parking lot in a sketchy neighborhood to housing for families and, to Socketsite posters, that’s a bad thing. Usually Named sees it as evil and/or dangerous (you can’t spin the “mafia” and “empire” references any other way).”
    Non-profits acquiring property at firesale prices because of backroom deals made with certain BOS members, and providing terrible living conditions for its residents does not sound like a positive thing to me.
    It’s just business-as-usual in corrupt San Francisco. It’s just because they are a “non-profit,” they get a pass, and they absolutely know it.
    Wake up San Francisco.

  16. Posted by anoneconomist

    In response to “1st Noe’s” comments, I think it is hilarious that you are making comments about homeless people and the tenderloin, when you live in pristine Noe Valley, where there is no homeless, massage parlors, crack dealers, etc. That is so typical SF–residents vote on and make recommendations on areas, where they do not live and are sheltered from it all. I also have to laugh that I should live in a gated community (are you describing your own neighborhood, Noe, which is pretty removed from the grimier parts of SF). I have lived in Boston and NYC for most of my life, and love the variety that comes with downtown living. NYC and Boston, however, do not have such a big homeless problem nor ‘grimy’ area so close to their financial districts/business districts. Their governments have worked to clean up their downtown, while the government of SF does not, because they all live in places like Noe, Pac Heights, and Presidio Heights, and are so removed from the ‘Loin. This should be a beautiful part of downtown between the symphonies, Union Square, and Market st.
    I live downtown and agree with the Tenderloin resident–it is a godsend that they are putting in a grocery store in that neighborhood and getting rid of an empty parking lot. I also agree that this area is not a great area for families currently. It is, however, a great area for singles and couples, whom work downtown, so the building should be developed for those demographics.

  17. Posted by tenderloiner

    anoneconomist – I do not agreed with you statement that the ‘loin with its proximity to the finacial district is perfect for couples and singles. The ‘loin is not a future mini marina – try south beach.
    Everyone in the city has a right to live near services like business and great links to public transit. A lot of people who live in the ‘loin work nearby and walk to work.
    Currently, there are over 3,000 children living in the tenderlion. Most of the kids live in SRO hotels, studios and 1-bedroom apartment. Check out the Tenderlion Playgound on Ellis between leavenworth and hyde for evidence of the kids.
    The TNDC knows the demographics of the ‘loin and plans their development appropriately. That why people respect them.
    Personally, I like seeing all the kids on the streets, playing in the corner stores and playgrounds. It is a great neighborhood where people of all ages, cultures and religions live and work close together.

  18. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    “… firefighters do quite well with overtime (way over the median salary) and the vast majority don’t want to live in San Francisco”
    Zig – I wonder whether this is because firefighters are very aware of how much more vulnerable to a catastrophic fire much of SF is compared to the remainder of the bay area ?
    Otherwise why would firefighters avoid owning in the city compared to their similarly compensated peers from other professions ?

  19. Posted by Milkshake checker

    The vast amount of people from all professions avoid owning in the City – hence the City having only 11% of the metro population.

  20. Posted by S&S

    Firefighters work approximately 10 – 12 days out of a month, and they do get paid quite a nice salary w/great benefits. Many commute into the city from places like Vacaville or even Suison only a few times out of the month because they have shifts that span 1 – 3 or 4 days overnight. Why pay more money to live in San Francisco when, on a ff’s salary, they can live quite comfortably like kings in the outskirts? Many also have second jobs in the construction industry on their “off” days.
    Also, an agent I recently spoke with told me that the BMRs in the new developments are often sold to teachers, police officers and firefighters.

  21. Posted by rg

    “The loin may not be great now but with this project, it will be much more stabilizing in a few years.” – Live Smart, where do you live??? How long have you lived in SF??? This comment is SO laughable! The Tenderloin is not “stabilizing” nor will it probably EVER. This one building will do nothing to help that. I’m just sooo sick of these typical SFer comments! It seems that everything is “going to be a great place to live in the next few years.” Or, I recently read a r.e. listing that said, “the up-and-coming SOMA neighborhood.” Did these people just get off the boat?
    S&S – I usually like your responses, but I’m starting to hear a little crazy in you lately. “An agent I recently spoke with told me that the BMRs in the new developments are often sold to teachers, police officers and firefighters.” I don’t know any police officers or firefighters, but many of my friends are teachers and NONE – not ONE – owns in SF. They make high $40k to high $50k and even these $250k “BMR” condos are not “affordable” to them (or me, for that matter).
    And by “affordable”, I mean not spending 70% of your income on a mortgage – or what I would call “living how a rational human lives in any other part of the country outside of San Francisco.”

  22. Posted by S&S

    rg: I am laughing. I enjoy and revel in my craziness sometimes. Life is too short to be serious 100% of the time. But thanks for the 1/2 compliment of usually liking my responses. 😉

  23. Posted by scurvy

    This is good news any way you slice it. Anything is an improvement over what’s there now.
    For the record, I’d rather buy a place there than in soma.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles