The website declares:Located on this highly desirable palm tree lined street, you'll find the perfect homecoming for elegant and contemporary living with magnificent bay and hillside views. Perfectly located Noe Valley condominium units with walk-out balconies and landscaped areas.But the MLS listing (May 9, 2007) says:
Contstruction site - owner/builder must be present at showings ... Do not enter construction site without an appointment and authorization!Nothing has changed there. Check out what we've found since we last looked at this property:
August 29, 2007 - Board of AppealsMinutes aren't available for the Board of Appeals from August 1, 2007 and April 16, 2008, but it's clear from all the appeals that the developer wasn't getting the answer he wanted. But what happened then? There's no other record, and the Notice of Violation is still active.
Appealing a Notice of Violation dated June 1, 2007, addressed to Dolores Street Holdings LLC, regarding the unauthorized demolition of a previously existing (non-complying) one-story rear addition at the subject property.
September 12, 2007 - Board of Appeals
Appealing a Notice of Violation dated June 1, 2007...
October 24, 2007 - Planning Dept - Appeal for Zoning Variance
2007.1102V: 1266B DOLORES STREET on the west side of Dolores Street, between Clipper and 26th Streets; Lot 051 in Assessor’s Block 3557 in an RM-2 (Residential, Mixed, Moderate Density) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
REAR YARD VARIANCE: The proposal would reconstruct a nonconforming two-story rear portion of the building demolished during remodeling. The demolished rear portion of the building extended into the legally required rear yard and was originally intended to remain but was inadvertently demolished.
Section 134 of the Planning Code requires a rear yard of 22 feet where a rear yard of 3.5 feet is proposed.
January 30, 2008 - Board of Appeals
Appealing the denial on Nov. 9, 2007, of Rear Yard Variance (reconstruct a non-conforming two-story rear portion of the building which was demolished during remodeling).
February 20, 2008 - Board of Appeals
REHEARING REQUEST: Subject property at 1266B Dolores Street. Letter from Lu Blazej, agent for Dolores Street Holdings LLC, appellant, requesting rehearing of Appeal No. V07-214, decided Jan. 30, 2008. At that time, upon motion by Commissioner Knox, the Board voted 5-0 to uphold the denial of the subject variance.
February 21, 2008 - Planning Commission
Board of Appeals report: Rehearing request for 1266b. Dolores Street. The Board found that there was no new information.
Which? Sucks for them. At least one of the buildings is still open to the rain, but they have (finally!) repaired the sidewalk and cleaned up the curb.
Neighbors of the construction have a two-post blog last updated a year ago that's worth a read. This project seems to have run into more than just NIMBY-ism:
I think many of us are frustrated with the developer's seemingly good luck in getting everything he has wanted so far. He has bullied, verbally abused, ignored city regulations and Notices of Violation and then to hear his lawyer state that any stop work orders have caused an undue hardship on the developer insinuating that the city and neighbor's are causing him to lose money when in reality it is his own doing. When you cut corners and get caught... who's fault is that - perhaps not cutting corner's in building these two monstrosities in the first place would have been prudent.And you gotta love this great quote from the same blog:
This is about ethics, breaking the law and as both the developer and project manager have said "We can do what ever the "bleep" we want to and there is nothing you can do about it."Should be an interesting disclosure packet. Again, from the above blog post:
Buyer Beware. The workmanship is low-end, the price per apartment is high and and the developer is shortcutting to get his way.We've tried contacting the seller but haven't heard back. Perhaps he'll comment here.
[NVSF: 1266 Dolores St.]
[NoeValleyNeighbors: Version 1, Version 2]
[Official Site: 1260-1270 Dolores St]
I am one of the neighbors near this new set of buildings. From day one they have wrecklessly damaged the building next to and behind their lot promising, then to fix whatever they break. We are still waiting...
ReplyDeleteThe repair costs keep mounting and they have denied damaging the buildings even though there were several witnesses to the damages.
OSHA cited them for unsfae workplace, the Building Inspection Department visited this site on numerous occasions citing the builders with Notices of Violation which are still outstanding. They did not passed the fire inspections.