1050/8 Valencia

Having already been postponed from April, on Thursday the Planning Commission will entertain a requested continuance until July 8 for the hearing of an appeal of the Planning Department’s preliminary EIR approval for the proposed 1050 Valencia project.

Once again, as proposed the project would demo the former Kentucky Fried Chicken and current Spork and build a five-story building with 16 dwelling units over a new 3,500 square foot full-service restaurant space in its place (which the operators of Spork would have the first right of refusal to occupy).

The preliminary Commission recommendation is to uphold the preliminary approval.

15 thoughts on “Don’t Put A Fork In Spork Quite Yet (The Appeal Of 1050 Valencia)”
  1. Makes sense to build 5-6 story condos in this corridor. I think Spork is kind of over-rated. Never had a really good meal there.

  2. It’s not just about Spork, which is great. It’s about building a huge building, totally out of proportion to everything around it — including commercial buildings on Valencia and houses on Hill Street, which is a tiny one-block street in the Liberty Hill Historic District, with houses from the 19th Century. This lot abuts the Historic District and will have an enormous negative impact. It’s about failure to notify the neighbors as required. It’s about Planning predicting that the new building will mean 34 new cars with zero parking spaces. It’s about lack of respect for the people and the history of this historic neighborhood.

  3. The cars impact argument is valid. It’s very difficult to park around there already. The historic argument is not valid. Let us remember that this was a Kentucky Fried Chicken for years and years and years. Which came first, the KFC or the “historic” egg thrower? Also, like it or not, but Valencia frontage is quickly becoming more and more vertical. And Valencia frontage is not Liberty Hill.

  4. 16 dwelling units = 34 cars? In what suburban universe is there a more than 2/unit demand? If Planning is “predicting” that, they are only doing so to test the most negative possible impact. Because it is not reality in this neighborhood. Particularly because if it is developed without parking it will attract buyers without cars. (No, I’m not a total pollyanna, of course some will have cars, but way fewer than average).

  5. I wish it were true that that buildings like this attracted people without cars; But I think they really just attract people who are willing to fight it out for street parking (which has a negative impact on the neighborhood).
    This building is on the edge of the historic district and is far larger than anything around it. It really needs to have fewer (and larger) units, fewer stories and some parking. That would lessen the impact on the area.
    I understand that developers need to make money, but they don’t need to cram a bunch of tiny one bedrooms and studios in the building to do so. This is a good location and could support larger, more luxurious units that command a higher price per square foot — there are certainly a number of precedents in the area.

  6. There are five story buildings on Valencia relatively nearby. Including a large turn of the century apartment building at 20th & Valencia…also directly adjacent to the Liberty Hill Historic District.
    While the height along Valencia is predominantly 2-3 stories, i don’t think five is completely out of context.

  7. Just to be clear, this isn’t a hearing to “approve” the project. It’s an appeal of the environmental review. Big difference.

  8. “…I think they really just attract people who are willing to fight it out for street parking (which has a negative impact on the neighborhood).”
    An easy solution for lack of open street parking spots is to increase the parking fee and/or reduce the parking time limit.

  9. The site is currently zoned for a new building of the height and bulk proposed. It’s within the Planning Code. If Liberty Hill neighbors want to stop the project, they need to address changing the zoning. The property owner has rights to build on his/her land.
    And,by the way, that current building and rear open space/parking lot is very suburban in nature and does not utilize the land in a way appropriate to the use and revitalization of Valencia St.

  10. The rear open space and parking aren’t ON Valencia Street. They’re on Hill Street. And appropriateness is always an issue. We know a bigger building will go on this lot. The building that is proposed is not appropriate, and the failure to notify neighbors of the EIR process is a violation that should not be rewarded with a shrug and approval to just go forward. There has to be a penalty for failing to follow procedure. And there has to be respect and sensitivity to both the commercial street and the historic residential street. Negative environmental impacts must be considered with input from all interested parties, not just the developer.

  11. A five story building is just devastating for this neighborhood. This neighborhood has a unique character, and to see buildings like the mammoth walgreens monstrosity at mission and cesar chavez breaks my heart. I know that there are big buildings in the mission, causing lack of sunlight, wind tunnels, etc. and I pray that they don’t become the norm. It wouldn’t be the same neighborhood.

  12. Sorry, but Valencia has been getting more vertical for years and the trend will continue. I applaud it. The best thing about the Mission is its density.

  13. Wendy, my heart is just bleeding for you and the devastation you are going to have to endure if a five story building is constructed on Valencia.
    Hey, walk down a few blocks to 20th and Valencia and look up. 1-2-3-4-5. Feeling devastated?
    Oh, and Mission/Cesar Chavez intersection was really wonderful with that beautiful parking lot before. I’m so sorry it was devastated by that Monstrosity. I hope someone stops the bad people from doing things like that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *