Purchased for $600,000 in 2005, the 765 square foot building at 1785 15th Street between Guerrero and Albion was foreclosed upon in 2011 and resold for $430,000 that November.
Luckily for the buyers, the San Francisco’s Planning Department has determined that the shed behind the building which was demolished last year was not a historical resource.
Having determined that the building itself isn’t a historical resource either, a finding that could, of course, be appealed under the California Environmental Quality Act, the buyers plan to raze the building and build a 52-foot-tall, 5-story building in its place:

The first floor of the eight-unit building would be finished in stone with the rest of the facade in stucco and Hardie-plank siding with aluminum windows and painted wood bays and window trim. No parking is proposed. If you want to learn more about the exterior sidings, a Hardie plank siding atlanta service similar to M&M Home Exteriors may have you covered, or you can check with a company more local to you.
The estimated cost of the project is $2.2 million and the project sponsor hopes to begin construction in January 2014. Any opposition to the project has until May 21 to appeal the Planning Department’s determination and attempt to force a full environmental report.
? Supervisor Showdown: Wiener Versus Kim, CEQA, And Waste [SocketSite]

22 thoughts on “Appealing Plans Or Certain To Be Appealed?”
  1. Damn…that’s going to be a serious money maker for the developer. Talk about a good buy….

  2. Cool. There are sad little shacks like this all over the Mission, waiting for development.

  3. Don’t get too excited, this is just the preliminary environmental phase. There will be several more rounds of Planning, Historical & Neighborhood review before this project breaks ground. Even if the shack isn’t historical, the new building will have to be reviewed in the context of the adjacent historic buildings. I’d say more like January 2016.

  4. It warms the cockles of my heart to see serious people with serious money saying “parking? Not worth it.”

  5. Too tall! Everything seems to be going up one more floor than necessary compared to its surroundings.

  6. Marten: This height is exactly what we need. The City desperately needs a greater supply of housing. And as this location is within a few blocks of many public transportation options, it’s a perfect candidate for higher density. The entire block should be upzoned.

  7. Question: Who IS living in all this housing that is being built and all that has been built? (Market st, around the Caltrain, etc) Question: Who is NOT living in all this housing that is being built?….Anyway, Too tall for a non aterial street..this is 15th, not Valencia or Guerrero.

  8. Uh, it’s a two-lane one-way.
    Sparky beat me to the wheat-grass reference. 🙁 Do the cops still get their bodywork done next-ish door? That always seemed like a decent security system back in the old VG days.

  9. Uhmmmm no parking planned, might be a tough sell in a hood with tight street parking now. I wonder how the neighbors feel about adding 8 units to the hood and competing for scarce parking?

  10. Yes, the cops still get their cars repaired nearly next door. There are 1 or 2 auto-body shops there. Also a few doors down is the new SRO thingy that is going in and up 15th at Dolores is the new 20 unit building about to be completed.
    The 20 unit building applied for 17 parking spaces and the hood revolted and the City relented and allowed for 20 spaces for 20 units.

  11. Quick question: has someone programmed a little bot crawler thingy here that spits out the same tired, cliched, hackneyed “planning speak” comments to every post — using the same tired, cliched, overused and ultimately meaningless planning key words such as density and transit options? Its like “Through the Looking Glass and what Diane Feinstein found there.” We already said no to ruining this town with too many ugly boxes 30 years ago. Expect a major backlash once all these latest ugly boxes are up and Ed Lee is back to shining Rose Pak’s shoes.

  12. malted: the issue is that most of the people who want to put up many, many ugly boxes weren’t here thirty years ago and equate those who were and don’t like the ugly boxes as backward-looking NIMBYs who prevent “progress” (where “progress” is defined as “anything that assists relatively newly-arrived developers make money”).
    And some of them like all the ugly boxes and deride those who don’t as suffering from nostaliga.

  13. Where by “the hood revolted”, you mean, “Peter Lewis revolted.” He inserted himself into the planning process for the 15th and Dolores project and tried to prevent them demolsihing the fire-gutted church that formerly occupied thr lot. He fights tooth and nail for 1:1 parking spaces on new projects even though the city has capped parking at a max of 3:4. The only reason the 15th and Dolores project could have gotten 1:1 is that they were tied up in the planning process for a decade–thanks to Mr. Lewis’ intervention.

  14. The Planning Commission has adopted the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and exemption from full environmental review for 1785 15th Street, which, if you’re the developer or proponent of the project, is a good thing.

Leave a Reply

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