1532%20Harrison%20Street%20Site.gif

The half-acre parking lot at 1532 Harrison Street which fronts Norfolk, Harrison and 12th Streets has been acquired by developer Build Inc. with plans to build around 120 rental units on the site.

The parcel which sits across the street from the Eagle Tavern is zoned for a building up to 65 feet in height with the potential for five stories of housing over ground floor retail.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by town and gown

    I can see it now, residential and clubs do not mix. Even when residential land use has preceded clubs (not this case) the big entertainment lobby led by State Senator Mark Leno (whose Campaign war chest grows fat from entertainment contributions) essentially has it’s way with the SF Entertainment Commission. the Commission membership for the most part comprised of those in the industry. And please don’t start with, “why did you move there to begin with”. In our neighborhood’s instance residential land use was hear both before and after the 1906 F and E.

  2. Posted by sjg

    town and gown:
    The Eagle has dealt with new residential neighbors before with no issues. When the condos were built next door (I think back in the 90’s), the new neighbors started to complain about the noise coming from the Eagle. They were unsuccessful in their quest to restrict The Eagle, even back then.
    The Eagle is a very important historic business in the gay community, and has recently weathered many challenges, and it has strong support from the political class in SF. It will continue to operate as is, the new residents will adjust, as it they should.

  3. Posted by mdg

    The Eagle: Much ado about nothing

  4. Posted by Drew

    The Eagle does not really produce a lot of noise. If residents have a problem with it, they have moved into the wrong neighborhood. It’s like moving to the Castro and complaining about gay pornography and nudism. Oh, wait…

  5. Posted by frog

    I live a quarter block from a club in SoMa. On weekends I can hear some thumping at night. And most nights there are loud homeless people outside. But I wanted to live in the middle of an urban area. It’s occurred to me to move. I’ve often thought about telling the people outside to shut up. But I’ve never considered complaining about the club. That would be stupid.
    The possibility of late night noise should be disclosed to buyers, and then it’s their problem, not the club’s.

  6. Posted by curmudgeon

    The patio at the Eagle is busy Sunday afternoons. Otherwise, any performances are confined to the inside of the club. And it’s not really a dance venue, so there’s no huge thumpa thumpa thumpa. Good to see this lot developed.

  7. Posted by Pastist

    Well at least we can rest assured knowing that the building will feature as much scarce parking as its removing, and that it will be really interesting architecturally, and that lots of really delightful warm people will move in to these apartments.

  8. Posted by moistpup

    The planning commission needs to make it condition for the construction permit on this lot that the residents complaints will not be heard by the nightlife commission.

  9. Posted by town and gown

    When I mentioned “clubs” i was not talking about Eagle. The other clubs!! Eagle is a good neighbor…wow how everyone jumps to conclusions. The straight clubs have NOT been good neighbors. The club owners care only about the almighty dollar, they have not given anything back to the community, they just take.

  10. Posted by MysteryRealtor

    I’m really glad to see this lot finally being developed. I’ve been going to the Eagle since I was 17 (waaaaay back in the early 80’s) and I’ve often wondered why nothing was ever built there.

  11. Posted by curmudgeon

    It is a point that we are focused on the Eagle, but the prime 11th Street club strip backs up to this property across Norfolk Street. We all know that residential projects have been developed on this strip (one loft building at Harrison, and one renovation at Folsom; there may be others) over the past 10-15 years, and gosh gee willikers once folks move in they start complaining about the noise. I believe there was/is a notorious resident of the renovated brick building at 11th and Folsom who constantly was trying to get DNA Lounge closed down, among other things.
    I wish everyone were like Frog, above, but there are no lack of people who act like utter idiots about these things. So, in short, I would love to see the potential late night noise issue fully disclosed to tenants/buyers, and make them sign (in blood, if necessary) that they know exactly where they are moving.

  12. Posted by badlydrawnbear

    A similar issue happened in Chicago years ago.
    two gay clubs (and I mean loud 4 am deep bass clubs) next to each other. One is sold and becomes 6 stories of condos. The other club remains open.
    shady stuff starts happening with the club and bars nearby; noise complaints and police raids called in by the developers it appeared.
    So the club just puts up giant florescent signs in their windows telling prospective buyers what the developers/realtors won’t. That loud music and drunks crowds until 4AM (5AM on Saturdays) are going to be a nightly occurrence.
    Eventually, one of the condo owners tries to get the block voted dry by the ward residents to close the club that had been there for years prior.
    Ultimately they failed and the club is still open to this day. Not sure how well the resale prices did however.

  13. Posted by Zig

    My bother-in-law bought a condo near a bar in Hoboken, NJ and started having problems with late night fights in the street and excessive drunk people throwing up and passing out on his steps
    That’s when, being the good yuppie he is he started taking the lead on complaining to his council person
    He then got a lesson in local politics New Jersey style. People there know people and in so many words he was threatened to pipe down and mind his own business.
    Thankfully for him the market took over and the guidos are dying out there with a classier quieter place taking over but sometimes that is the way it goes.

  14. Posted by town and gown

    Beg your pardon. Residential land use has been in this part of Western SOMA since BEFORE the 1906 F and E. Go check out the old Sanbourn maps. The place I live and have lived over the last 20 years is a residential apt that has been here since 1937. Go do you own fact checking before you make assumptions sunny. Any by the way, everyone deserves a place to live and having a good neighbor and landlord and occupying business that respects their neighbors. Go try your worn out lines on someone else.

  15. Posted by Mark

    @Zig: as a “guido” I take offense. It’s like saying “all the fags out there…”
    Anyway, the project will bring more residents to this area. Perhaps in 15 or 20 years more developments will take (residential and commercial) to give this area more of a 24/7 life to it. Then, maybe only then, will transit upgrades be considered.

  16. Posted by mikebr

    I have lived on Norfolk Street for over ten years now. A building in that location won’t hear much boom-boom music noise from the clubs, rather just the noise from their patrons coming and going

  17. Posted by curmudgeon

    Town and Gown, I was speaking specifically about the block of 11th between Folsom and Harrison. It has three residential structures on it (I just checked on googlemaps). ALL of them have been developed in the past 10-15 years, well after the street became the center of clubland. One could certainly argue that the zoning shouldn’t have allowed that, but it apparently did. What I’m arguing is that such residents should be fully aware of what they are buying (or renting) in to.
    No one disputes that there are many residents scattered all around West Soma. This is San Francisco, there a residential units everywhere. That doesn’t mean a small group of residents (of any neighborhood) are the only valid voice in public policy.

  18. Posted by soccermom

    How much did they pay for the lot?

  19. Posted by Mike

    Build Inc. spokesman Vasquez describes the site as “nice”. I think it is a dump.

  20. Posted by terrance allan

    Funny how when a resident asks a club to do some sound proofing (aka comply with the maximum legally allowed decibel levels) its viewed as an attack on the SF nightlife. You would not get this kind of attack rhetoric in dealing with any other for profit industry.

  21. Posted by Rillion

    “as a ‘guido’ I take offense. It’s like saying ‘all the fags out there…'”
    Yep, I remember the days when it was illegal to be a guido and the government completely disrepected their rights of free speech and freedom of assembly. When it was routine for families to disown and kick out their guido kids, for people to beat up guidos and too many guido teens killed themselves due to anti-guido bullying. Yep, it’s just like that…

  22. Posted by moz

    I’m not sure they’ll be able to hear any noise from the Eagle with the freeway right across the street.

  23. Posted by curmudgeon

    Rillion, you may joke about it, but Guido is in the same as Polack, Spic, Kike, Fag or the dreaded N word. It’s meant to be derogatory. So why use it?

  24. Posted by Mon

    no, it isn’t. It has lost a lot of its old ethnic connotations and largely now means a particular type of east coast cheesey. Nor is polack as big a deal as some of those other words any more. Get real and go out and earn a big boy pc police badge if you want to go there.

  25. Posted by Jimmy (No Longer Bitter)

    I don’t really think Guido is that derogatory. Now, Wop, that’s an insult.

Add a Comment

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