Tenderloin Rising: Plans For Eight-Stories Of Condos On EddyJune 20, 2014
Plans to build an eight-story, market-rate residential building on Eddy Street, between Leavenworth and Hyde in the Tenderloin, have been submitted to Planning for review.
As proposed by JS Sullivan Development, the 469 Eddy Street project would consist of 34 condos (a mix of 20 one-bedrooms and 14 two-bedrooms) over 2,100 square feet of retail space and 15 parking spaces for residents in an underground garage.
The façade of the existing two-story garage on the site would be retained and incorporated into the design.
Comments from Plugged-In Readers
Yes, definitely keep that beautiful facade. Still, great news that we’re getting some market rate condos in the area.
If the developer’s willing to do it, why deride them for it? I think it’s great to preserve some history and character – certainly it’s going to be better than yet another stucco and glass post-modern facade.
It was a joke. The facade looks atrocious now, but I’m assuming that they’ll remove the jail bars and tagged metal rollups, etc.
oh sorry. goddess yes, they’d better do some restoration to the facade…
Amen! That’s really good news. They just desperately need a grocery store there. It’s a food desert. I’ve seen some empty/underutilized lots just crying out for a market with housing above.
food desert?? this hood is awesomely packed with markets. just on that block there’s the Cambodian market, a block up on Ellis you have 2 full service Latino groceries (one with a butcher) and a Viet grocery. a block further and you can add 3 more groceries (all three with butchers). up on Geary you have a Chinese one, a north African halal one and a Pakistani one. this excludes the Japanese place on turk, the heart of the city farmers market on weds and Sunday at civic center, the super market on polk, trader Joe way up Hyde or a variety of small places (California produce, the green green apple, Jerusalem grocery, the Viet place on larkin, and more). there is no better served hood in the city for markets! like get real.
Amazing how one persons “food desert” is another’s oasis. I’m sensing the definition of “food desert” in this case has everything to do with a lack of either a high-end white person Whole Foods/Bi-Rite, or a middle-ground Safeway/Lucky.
there’s a whole foods on California between Polk and franklin, I shop there all the time. because of the competition in the area, it’s the cheapest whole foods in the city except maybe ocean ave which is comparable (I’ve literally compared prices at all of them).
that whole foods isn’t in the tenderloin. that’s “lower pac heights” or whatever you want to call it.
All those boutique markets are fine for ethnic items and picking up a loaf of bread, but the prices are much above what you’d pay at a major chain supermarket or, better yet, a Wal-Mart. This area is populated by low income people. The lack of chain shopping make the city seem more hip, but it kills their wallets and pocketbooks. Let something like Wal-Mart new smaller urban stores bloom in the ‘Loin.
you clearly have never shopped here- the cheapest markets in the city aside from the mission.
thank you for providing those options but i’m not going to “like get real”. just google “tenderloin grocery store” and all the articles are about a lack of full service grocery stores there. i’m not making up this problem. i’m really glad that there are a lot of diverse smaller markets, but the neighborhood needs something more regular than a farmers market (which by the way is awesome- i go every weekend). the trader joe’s is nice, but is too far and uphill.
translation – it’s a white yuppie-food desert.
Exactly wrong. It’s a mecca for white hip gourmets like me who cook ethnic food as a hobby and go to the ‘Loin for esoteric ingredients. It’s not so great for poor people trying to buy cat litter and bread cheaply.
Disagree. Poor white people, perhaps. The small markets of the Tenderloin are swamped with poor folks of other ethnicities buying cheap veggies, etc. C
yes, thanks for making race a part of this, because as we all know only white people shop at supermarkets. thanks for clarifying this complex issue with ad hominem attacks!
I’ve lived in the neighborhood for 10 years (I’m Vietnamese). I’ve only ever seen white people complain about the “lack” of cheap food options.
BTinSF — will you marry me?
David M. – You hit the nail right on the head. The Loin is up and coming. Given its proximity to downtown, it is a better investment bet than the BayView district. If you could buy the whole block instead of individual small buildings, it increases your footprint.
Buy up a whole block and do what with it? Build one massive, luxury, market rate condo building boasting open floor plans and micro-balconies on select units? The Loin is interesting from an architectural standpoint because the individual buildings create a true neighborhood, regardless of socio-economic status.
Great news about market rate. That area is excessively bogged down in subsidized housing and SROs.
Don’t equate BMRs with shelters and SROs. You didn’t explicitly say it here but you’re implying it. New constructions doesn’t have to be market-rate for honest, hardworking, sober people to live in it.
Here comes the ‘loin….
My favorite street! This area will turn around eventually. Sooner rather than later. Not sure how / where the displacement will impact the rest of the city.
people have been talking about making the loin nicer and gentrification for the 20yrs ive been in SF. i see little progress in that time. I really hope it actually happens now. its an embarrassment so near to union square, downtown, and the potential of market street. This is not an anti-poor people rant. It is anti- open drug dealing, crime area. if the police wont crackdown (no pun intended), then adding more market rate residents will impact the area in a positive way. this area needs more of a mix
Probably the quickest and easiest way to reduce crime and make the area safer is to eliminate the street parking.
you must be joking
no! please don’t go there this early in the morning. you’re going to highjack this entire thread and it’ll turn into a parking debate.
although- yes i see your point. i read that study where they moved all the cars off the street and crime dropped because people weren’t dealing drugs behind trucks and didn’t have as many places to hide.
In the 1960s the city intentionally shut down gentrification of the tenderloin with (a) a height limit in most places of about 9 stories and (b) a ban on conversion of SRO hotels to tourist hotels. Since then, the city has been locating every service for the poor, addicted and down/out there. Had it not been for SF government, this area would have been completely gentrified by now.
I think the best way is to eliminate the Glide food line. Street parking is hardly the issue.
Agreed. Can’t the poor just go starve to death somewhere?
that said, this is a special walking hood and it would suck to have all these parking curb cuts slice across it. I’d actually prefer that nothing more is built in the tl for a few more years until the developers and politicians come around to the reality that the cars are a problem and prohibit parking in new to construction. until then, it’s just development we’ll regret (unless it’s very well done, unlike blanc on post, for instance, which kills the street only slightly less than the Geary court).
“…nothing more is built in the tl for a few more years…”
How enlightened! You and Daly and Campos and Kim make good comrades. Let’s keep the Tenderloin a slum, with convenient drug dispensers every half block, your local sex workers fully employed. What a great future you promise them!
Will buy a unit in this building just to support the ‘Loin. (Won’t flip, won’t Airbnb, but still). The architecture and housing stock of the ‘Loin is like none other in the country. Glad to give it a needed boost. More please.
with enough adjacent development this could be good ,
As for shopping you can reach dozens of great shopping destinations in minutes ,
Plus you can also just take a 47 Van Ness down to Costco, or Rainbow Foods
If you are an old lady or disabled person on a small fixed income, not only does the cost of frequent Muni trips add up (even at the discounted rate) but they may be more than you can physically handle. They need a store in the middle of the neighborhood they can walk to.
safeway delivers. we live in the 21st century
safeway delivers for a fee.
That’s true. Your point is?
buy a clue. Maybe safeway can deliver it to you for $9.95.
hopefully, you aren’t so poor that the delivery fee would dissuade you.
hopefully, you aren’t so poor that you don’t have an internet connection or a computer.
hopefully, you aren’t so poor that you don’t have a credit card.
So you want to subsidize a grocery store to open here? Why should we spend public money on something that is already available? Have the city subsidize grocery delivery to the area if you think it’s such a big deal that people must shop in local markets or walk a few blocks.
Nope, didn’t say anything about that. There are more possibilities than safeway delivery or government subsidy.
You may need to buy clues in the handy bulk package.
Please let us know how you plan to force grocers to open in the Tenderloin then.
What is it with you and coercion? Why would you want to force anyone to open a store or think that is the alternative to a government subsidy?
These are rhetorical questions. Have given up expect a useful answer until you win the lottery of clues.
So your point is that the Tenderloin does not in fact need a grocery store? I agree.
No, I haven’t said whether I think they need more grocery stores or not.
Why do you bother to guess at what others think?
I do think you are asking the wrong questions and pointing in the wrong directions.
So you’re basically just commenting in a thread for no apparent reason. Why are you doing that?
Yesterday I pointed out why safeway delivery is not a good solution for some people in the neighborhood.
All the rest since then is just you wandering around in the weeds and me making sure you don’t put words in my mouth or incorrect inferences to my words.
No. You pointed out that Safeway delivers for a fee. You didn’t point out why that was not a good solution. It’s expected that people should pay for services provided.
Yes, and yesterday I also pointed out that not everyone has a credit card, computer, internet…
Even when you are handed clues you remain clueless.
That still doesn’t point out why it’s not a good solution. You’re connecting dots that aren’t there.
Safeway allows you to sign up for the service at a store and make a deposit, after which you can draw down that money and eventually even qualify for Safeway credit where you can purchase more than your account currently has on hand. After an account is created, orders can be made by phone.
You’re connecting dots that most people don’t want to bother with in real life. So, while it is possible to get delivery from safeway, it is not a “good” solution for people with limited means.
If you don’t understand that by now, then maybe you should think about households with $25k income or less paying safeway $500/year just to get a bag or two of groceries each week.
If I’m wrong, I guess there must be plenty of safeway delivers in the tenderloin for this “good” service that has been around for years.
Thank you for admitting you’re wrong.
Once again your reading comprehension has failed you.
At least you are consistent in that.
Again, thanks for admission of being wrong.
Yes, I agree.
You are delusional.
I’m not the one denying the existence of a current massively-used service.
Neither you nor anyone else on this thread have demonstrated that this service is massively used by poor people in the Tenderloin.
But don’t let that stop you. Please go ahead. The depths of your delusion entertain me.
And, just to be clear, no one in this thread had denied the existence of Safeway’s delivery service. That was never an issue.
Your failure to comprehend is quite comprehensive.
Just to be clear, you have not demonstrated that this service is NOT massively used by poor people in the Tenderloin, you’ve just assumed that it isn’t. Since your other assumptions were full of demonstrably false statements (you have to have a computer to use it, etc), why should we believe your assumptions?
I didn’t claim this service was massively used or not massively used. You did.
I have my doubts, but I didn’t make a claim I can’t support like you did.
I also didn’t write that a computer was necessary to use the service. The service is a better service for people with computers, internet, and credit cards than people without. It’s also better for people that can easily afford the delivery fee.
Remember, all of this long exchange between us has been about how “good” this service is for poor people, not whether it is possible or impossible, or even how much it used.
And how could you possibly know what I assume, when you don’t even understand what I have written. Your powers of self-delusion amaze.
All this comes down to is that I don’t think it is a “good” service for poor people. If you think it is, well, you seem very committed to your little fantasy. Enjoy it and be happy.
You’ve certainly given me a few laughs.
Um, you claimed this:
“it is not a “good” solution for people with limited means.”
That is a bold claim, and you’ve not backed it up with anything except insults.
Since when did the poor, who mostly lived on fixed low incomes, become able to afford delivery of groceries? The delivery cost could equal their food budget for one day. I’m curious to know how you became so convinced that food delivery is an option for the poor?
Perhaps you should research the subsidies that the city and Safeway provide for those on fixed incomes. Hint: Safeway specifically has an SF-only program that provides free delivery twice a month.
OK, I called safeway customer service for their home grocery delivery service.
The nice gentleman there was clear. He told me in detail and confirmed each of the following:
1) Orders must be placed via safeway.com. No phone orders are accepted.
2) Credit/debit card payment only. No prepaid accounts.
3) Minimum delivery charge is about $4 (for $150 order and 8 hour delivery window).
4) They do not have an “SF-only program that provides free delivery twice a month.” They do have a first time free delivery promo available to anyone.
5) They do not allow you to “make a deposit” at a store.
6) They do not have “subsidies … for those on fixed incomes.”
I don’t think you could be more wrong about Safeway’s service if you tried.
If you would like to explain their service to them, here is their phone number and contact info page:
BTW, I also called SF city gov human services. They don’t have a discounted delivery service like you described either.
Meals on Wheels (415-920-1111) does have a free service for people over 60 that are disabled, homebound, or unable to prepare their own meals. The food and delivery is free (all their services are free). The waiting list is currently one month.
Perhaps you could upload a voice recording of your phone call as evidence. I stand by my claims.
Of course you do.
I would have been so disappointed if mere truth were enough to stop you from trolling.
It wouldn’t take you any longer to make the call yourself than to listen to a recording of a call.
I really couldn’t ask for better evidence of your cluelessness.
So Long, and Thanks for All the Laughs.
UPDATE: Tenderloin Rising: 28 New Condos on Eddy Closer to Reality
Comments are closed.