2501 California Site

‘Friends of the Fillmore Neighborhood’ have been organizing opposition to the proposed renovation of the Pacific Heights Shell station on the southwest corner of California and Steiner, plans which include a reconfigured fueling canopy and an all-new “Loop” convenience store without a garage.

From the Friends’ flyers which have been hung around the neighborhood:

“Say “No” to outside developers who don’t even live here, changing our beautiful neighborhood for the worst. No more undesirable chain stores. Let’s keep our small local businesses & uniqueness.” Keeping small businesses afloat can be really hard especially with mounting electricity bills amongst many others. For that reason, it can be useful to do a business electricity comparison online to ensure your small business is on the most suitable plan.

And the arguments from the Friends’ online petition seeking support from Supervisor Farrell to block the project which will be heard by San Francisco’s Planning Commission this afternoon:

  • Mega convenience store belongs on freeway rest stop not Pacific Heights.
  • 24 Hour super size convenience stores have shown to increase crime.
  • More Gas Pumps+ Already Busy & Dangerous intersection= Safety Issue.
  • Uptick in traffic but not likely increased business for local businesses.
  • Loop chain store will undercut prices of other local business putting our local merchants at a disadvantage

No word on whether any of the nameless Friends organizing the opposition happen to be related to the operators of the garage which will razed, the competing gas station across the street, or the adjacent condos.

If you’re in the small business trade, it might be a good idea to look into business energy comparison. My friend was recently telling me about how he opened his own small convenience store, he mentioned that it is always a great idea to survey a wide range of quotes.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by cfb

    Haha… Ridiculous

  2. Posted by San Francisco

    “Let’s keep our small local businesses & uniqueness.” I think the people in Nigeria love the local Shell Oil company too. I am glad Friends of the Fillmore Neighborhood are able to stand up for this company that tortured and executed nine environmental activists in 1995. That is pretty unique.

    • Posted by Dan

      If only the complaint had even the tiniest connection to social justice, here. Because really, as much as I agree with you about Shell, the Friends of the Fillmore does not seem to be doing it for Nigerians.

  3. Posted by ck

    Is this a joke?

  4. Posted by Me

    Irony, party of 800,000.

  5. Posted by Jake

    Wonder what it is like to live in a neighborhood with so little change that people bother themselves over a 7/11 at a gas station that already has a grocery store across the street.
    FWIW, the petition is 10 months old and only has a few hundred supporters. Farrell wrote them that he also opposes this project.

    • Posted by wc1e

      Once again proving that the vocal minority has way too much sway in this town.

  6. Posted by Dixon Hill

    “No word on whether any of the nameless Friends organizing the opposition happen to be related to the operators of the garage which will razed, the competing gas station across the street, or the adjacent condos.”

    And what if they are? Should neighbors (residents and businesses) be disqualified from participating in neighborhood politics?

    I don’t think their stated arguments have much validity but they have a right to be heard. It’s also not clear to me that the developer’s plans do anything to improve the neighborhood. Losing a local auto-repair shop and gaining a convenience store is not a good trade. I keep saying it, but this strong market is a rare opportunity for the city to extract more from developers on behalf of San Franciscans (current and future).

  7. Posted by Cliff

    I love living in San Francisco, but sometimes these crybaby NIMBYs drive me crazy! They act like their constitutional rights have been violated when any change at all occurs.

    • Posted by iknowsnow

      Its every San Franciscans right to move to SF from some other part of the country, and then immediately demand nothing change.

  8. Posted by shza

    “for the worst [sic]” – ugh.

    • Posted by BobN

      Could’ve been “for the wurst”…

      Now I want sausage for lunch.

  9. Posted by eddy

    I’m mixed on this one. Seems like a dumpy use of the real estate but they should be allowed to put there what they want. Also, it Lower Pacific Heights. Just wait till the Chevron across the street closes, sits vacant for 18 months and plans for a 18 story condo get proposed. They really ought to build housing on both those lots.

    • Posted by Sierrajeff

      Agreed. Seems dumb for the owners to spend time and money on making it a slightly different gas station, especially at this location and with current land values. BUT, if that’s what they want to do and it’s within code, they should be allowed to do it.

    • Posted by Denis

      This just isn’t best use of the property. It’s a huge lot in a great location that begs for housing. Seems like a colossal waste. The Loop store isn’t that different from what’s there now. If people don’t want it, don’t go there. I won’t actively oppose it, but I’ll never go there. As for the increase in crime, etc… D7 is finally having many of the same issues the rest of the city has confronted over the decades. I can’t say for sure, but my guess is the construction boom has forced many of the mentally ill homeless into new areas, including north of California. Gaging from my Nextdoor account, it’s been a bit of a shock to residents.

  10. Posted by Raymond Lawton

    NIMBYism at its most pointless. First, this is a gas station with a service station, not a 40 year old barber shop. There is literally another one just like it across the street. Second, this all happened a year ago. Community discussion already happened, leases were signed, move-out day is set – the whole thing is a done deal. I’m sorry you have to cross the street to get an oil change for your Oldsmobile, but somehow I think you will manage.

  11. Posted by iknowsnow

    Thank you San Francisco for rendering private property rights completely meaningless.

  12. Posted by c_q

    “Mega convenience store belongs on freeway rest stop not Pacific Heights.”

    we could fix that simply by installing a freeway down california street. People go fast enough already…

  13. Posted by Pablo

    The City needs more housing – not more gas stations.

    • Posted by Orland

      Agree that I’d certainly rather see multi-unit residential over a gas station at any corner though they are somewhat a necessary “evil.” The way things are going, we’ll soon have to go down to South City just to refill.

      • Posted by Bruce

        We’ll all be driving electric cars by then anyway.

      • Posted by davistrain

        Just like all the cemeteries moved to Colma, some SF residents would like to see all gas stations move south of the county line, and all motorists charged “congestion fees” high enough to encourage them to park in Daly City and ride BART into SF.

    • Posted by US Citizen

      The City actually needs more gas stations as well as housing. Do you get it that a property owner can do what they want, with their own property, and that you really have NO say in what you THINK is the right use of the property, since, I bet you are not a real estate broker, agent, or appraiser, or the property owner, as they would likely have a much better idea of what the best use of the property is.

  14. Posted by anonymous

    Anybody know what happened at the Planning Commission?

  15. Posted by US Citizen

    Love the way people think they know what the best use of a site is. SF has much fewer gas stations then they did 20 years ago. The high cost of housing makes for very high land values if the zoning allows it. Let the property owner do what they want with their property if it fits within local zoning parameters. If you are not privey to their annual net income, their tax situation, or anything else a broker or appraiser might know, then by all means, you must be very qualified to state what the highest and best use of a property is. Definitely.

Add a Comment

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