Designed by Frederick Meyer and currently home to Cars Dawydiak, 1450 Franklin is proposed to become a 13-story mixed-use building with 69 condominiums (10 studios, 21 one-bedrooms, and 38 two-bedrooms) over two floor of parking and ground floor commercial (with another level of parking underneath for a total of 70 spaces).
And as J.K. Dineen reports, the proposal recently survived a “historic” challenge:
San Francisco Heritage Executive Director Jack Gold said he argued at the [San Francisco Redevelopment Agency Commission] hearing that the single-story building deserves preservation because it is part of the “auto row historic district,” a cluster of early automobile businesses on and near Van Ness Avenue.
“It’s one of a type of auto-related buildings in that neighborhood that represent the flowering of the auto industry in San Francisco,” said Gold.
Score one for the developers as the agency voted unanimously to approve the $30 million project. Budget at least two years to get it built (assuming final approvals and financing).
∙ Developer wins battle vs. preservationists [San Francisco Business Times]
∙ 1450 Franklin: Draft Environmental Impact Report (pdf) [ci.sf.ca.us]
Wow. I know the shop owner and have been there on numerous occasions. Wonder where they are going to relocate? This will be interesting to see.
Above ground parking in the proposal? What? I thought that wasn’t allowed in the Van Ness plan (of which I believe this project is controlled by).
Support not having the existing building be landmarked, but it’s too bad that this project has to be one of the buildings actually used for something good in the area. There are a ton of unused buildings in the area (like around the corner)
Do you have an historic building that no one will allow you to demolish? Want to build a 25 story building on the same property?
No probemo. Just build the new building around the old one, leaving the historic building standing underneath your skyscraper.
Put in a rubber gasket between the two buildings and you are good to go.
This one is on Market Street (the Bakery is in the historic building, with the 25 story building built on top and to either side):
http://www.mapjack.com/?XmAnW49AcFZC
What bugs me is the strip of buildings on Pine that have a deed restriction on them preventing the construction of anything taller than 60ft. Horrible waste of a great location. Basically everything from the Franklin corner to the Chevron is wasted (besides the Hertz Rental).
Yeah, that Hertz dealer is a real gem???
That whole area should be developed big time. I’m sure this is no shortage of people that want to live in that part of town.
tipster: I LOVE IT! Seriously, why not do that? Or, why not even taken the facade of the old building, reclaim it and try to integrate it into the new one… viola, problem solved.
^^^There is a proposal meandering its way through planning for that whole block. 30 stories I think?
“auto row historic district,”
Really??
Brutus: The Pine St deal? There was a proposal done for those lots years ago, it [looked like] a nice building. The deed restriction is still there though, so nothing can be done. I believe the restriction was put in place by the current owners (not AF Evans that proposed the plan), they happen to own the assisted living facility across the street and don’t want to encroach on the views.
^^^It was my understanding that they were still negotiating ways around that. Deed restrictions don’t mean much in this town if you can pull the right strings. I received an email about the project about three months ago, I’ll have to look for it.
[Editor’s Note: Who Are These “People” And What The Heck Are They Thinking?]
tipster: There is another one on Folsom st between 9th and 10th, an old single story building that has been built over by a 5 story loft development.
That’s interesting! I’d love to see something happen there. Funny story, but an old friend of mine that I’ve known for while and who also worked at my brokerage told me that his family used to own those buildings and sold them to AF Evans. I never even knew they owned it! The furniture manufacturer Deovlet & Sons is his grandfather I believe. The very corner lot was brought from a Church, however.
sf: you mean this one? http://www.mapjack.com/?zz5mWfz7bFMF
sfer- that’s the one, it actually doesn’t look bad but I can’t believe that NIMBYs are so shallow that they would actually accept this as “preservation of a historic building.”
Uh oh. I just bought a Vespa from this place a few months ago. Anyone know where these guys will be moving to?
The ultimate building on top of an older building, Hearst Tower in NYC:
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/MID/MID124.htm
I will miss the classic motors shop. It is on the way to my dentist and gives me at least something to look forward to.
Just picked this little tid bit up from the grapevine:
The current tenant has a quasi right of first refusal. They may buy the building back and continue to stay a tenant.
The only thing historical about that building is that it houses a used car dealer whose business model is to overprice all his inventory by about 20%…. which is exactly the same business model employed by all used car dealers since the beginning of time.
Its a profitable business but probably not profitable enough to buy an entire building in Pac Heights!
agree that this building is not “historice” More importantly, it is a complete eyesore.
Why are we trying to preotect “auto row?” is that part of the big 3 bailout plan?
eyesore? really? it is an adequately attractive and well-maintained building. i could not put this in the eyesore category. nor the historic category… i had to laugh at the pretzel logic the preservationist team had to use in order to come up with “historic auto row” in san francisco.
“Historic” just means “already built.”
Haha too funny. “Historic Auto Row” I mean really?
Educated in art school during high school and part of college, buildings that are longer than they are tall are not aesthetic. Reminds me of Wal Marts and Targets.
Why was this heard at the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency Commission and not at the Planning Commission?