953 Treat Parcel

Speaking of a development which could be caught in the crosshairs of a threatened housing moratorium in the Mission, and another which borders the old Southern Pacific Railroad Right of Way, the parcel at 953 Treat, across the street from Parque Ninos Unidos between 22d and 23rd, is in contract to be sold with concept drawings for a modern four-story building to rise.

953 Treat Rendering

Keep in mind the project has yet to be submitted to Planning for review, much less approved.  But as drafted by Kennerly Architecture for the seller, the new building would rise adjacent to the little 700-square-foot home which currently occupies the southern side of the parcel.

And apparently the new building could yield up to 16 small apartments, or perhaps one big home.

21 thoughts on “Another Parcel Near Parque Ninos With Plans For Development”
  1. Ugly, like the new building on Albion. More single family row houses? Isn’t that what we have everywhere in SF already and the population stayed level for decades while the suburbs built all the single family homes to provide housing for corporate SF?

    1. It’s beyond ugly. The building that’s there now, while nothing special, is magnitudes more attractive than what is proposed. What’s with the light blue and purple? Who does that?

      1. You do realize, it is a sketch? The actual buildings probably will end up beige or grey, like every other safe, boring building going up. Also, exactly what color were the famous “painted lady” homes of the Victorian Era? Yes, many of them were painted garish colors, and some of them have been repainted in recent years to reflect their original colors.

        Paint is easy to change. I would worry more about the actual architecture, which to me seems boring, but not offensive at all.

        1. Of course. The building will likely end up with that oh-so-popular orange that everyone is using.

          Victorian Era houses were painted a chalky white, supposedly to hide the appearance of the wood texture (redwood). Later they were painted a “battle ship grey” from military surplus. Only in the 1960s did people start using lavish colors. Granted, it is possible some houses from the Victorian Era were in different hues, but likely only reserved for those who could afford fancy pigments.

          My comment about the paint color was secondary to the architecture. It’s going for a quasi-Bauhaus look, but failing miserably.

          1. Many Victorian homes built in the late 19th-Century (the late Victorian period) were paint vibrant multi-colors. You are incorrect in stating that Victorian era houses were painted a “chalky white,” at least with respect to late Victorian homes. Middle-class and upper-middle class individuals wanted to show off their affluence by painting their homes in bright colors. Of course, each individual homeowner had their personal preference, so not every home was painted a bright shade.

            It is not true that only in the 1960’s did people start painting Victorian homes colors. Now, what is true is that not all the colors people painted Victorian homes in the 1960’s (or paint them now in contemporary times) would be considered historically accurate.

            As for the architecture, I agree it is nothing special, but it is not really “ugly” (though each person has his or her own sense of taste), rather I would just say it is bland and unimaginative. I do not have a visceral response to the building as I do to some truly hideous looking buildings in the city.

  2. 3200 sq ft of usable lot space (subtracted 25% for rear yard) + UMU zoning (no density restriction) + 40 ft height limit = a very tight fit but technically not infeasible to build 16 units.

  3. Oh, we now name parks by foreign languages?if so where’s the Russian, Chinese, Vietnamese (and other) park names? Or, don’t they sell as well as Spanish?

    1. Many parks in San Francisco have Spanish names, e.g. Alta Plaza, Balboa, Buena Vista,…. A few are named after San Franciscans of asian heritage. Street signs on Grant and Stockton in Chinatown are in Chinese and English. Use of “parque” instead of “park” may be SF getting better at internationalization. What language is “San Francisco”?

    2. Yeah, this comment is pretty uncalled for. Also, for the record, the park was named long before the current Supervisor was in office (it’s been there for 10 years or so). Clearly, the intent was to celebrate the largely Hispanic neighborhood (more Hispanic then than now). I don’t see anything wrong with that.

  4. Rincon Park, Yerba Buena Gardens, Mission Dolores Park, Presidio, Potrero del Sol Park, Point Lobos, Balboa Park, Bernal Heights Park…. Spanish named parks is not a recent occurrence. Or are you just trolling?

    1. Well there! We need to get a renamin’ Rincon can be Pallin Park. Maybe Yerba Buena can be David Duke Gardens? Mission Dolores? Phsaw! We need a Billy Graham Park, not some Spanish Anti-Christ Papist crap! Point Lobos could be, perhaps, Der Wulfen Pointe, after the Master Race. Bernal Heights? Beige Heights!

    2. Not a single one of the place names you list is in Spanish. They’re English names referencing Spanish surnames or Spanish place names but in English, hence “Park”.

      Now, if this new place was going to be called “Parque Ninos Unidos Park”…

  5. Whatever. There is always a “next” horror on its way here and I suspect this is a harbinger of the queue: the MacRowManse. You were horrified by it here 1st, people.

  6. I hope its going to be a ten million dollar luxury house. Luxury trickles down and ends up helping the middle class.

Leave a Reply

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