Meeting: What Should Happen To The Real Foods Building?

It’s true: There are plans underway to develop the empty storefront across from Whole Foods on 24th St – the space formerly known as Real Foods. So what will it be: A Trader Joe’s? A climbing gym? A brew pub? Condos? Nails/Waxing? Now is your chance to find out – and more importantly to weigh in.

At 7pm Thursday (that's tomorrow) at St. Philips Parish Hall the developers will be offering a preview of what’s in the works. There will be plans displayed and architects on hand to describe the drawings and answer questions. Stakes are high for such a central location in Noe Valley – this should be worth attending.

What: Real Foods Building Plans Presentation
When: Thursday, January 22nd at 7pm
Where: St. Philips Parish Hall, 725 Diamond St

[NVSF: Real Foods: I Wish This Was...]

Coming Soon: Plans To Develop Real Foods Building

You know how you walk past that empty storefront across from Whole Foods and wonder what the hell? Or maybe you remember that eleven years ago Real Foods was abruptly shut down and there have been years of drama since. Maybe your remembrance is that Big Corporate America is against unions. Or maybe you don't care what happened. Regardless, many of you have had opinions over the years about what should happen to this prime Noe Valley space.

Andrew Ross writes (albeit in a bit flowery way) on SFGate that plans are finally moving forward to develop the Real Foods location. He references a visit Scott Wiener and others made to Utah in October of 2013 to meet with the current owners - Nutraceutical. And he tells of a promise made ("a solid oath") to rebuild on the site. None of that is news.

What is news: Nutraceutical is ready to present plans to the public - there will be a meeting in January. This type of meeting is standard procedure for developers looking to submit high-profile plans to the Building Department so don't expect final drawings and a committed tenant. Instead expect concept drawings and be prepared to give feedback on the project. Want to make sure it doesn't house a bank, nail salon or title company? Let them know how you feel.

We asked a few local people in the know for some more information. Todd David of Friends of Noe Valley told us the architect is SF-based Jackson Liles Architecture. Brian Liles is the project lead. Principal Julie Jackson is active in the public school system and has children at James Lick.

Carol Yenne, past president of the Noe Valley Merchants and Professionals Association, gave us a bit more information:

I went on the trip in Oct 2013 with Scott to meet with the owners of the property. The plans to develop the property had stalled during the downturn in the economy in 2008 but we discovered when we arrived that the company was already starting to work on plans again. San Francisco is trying to encourage housing and we all are on the same page about wanting to get the property developed into active retail and housing so that it does not continue to be a vacant space. The company asked for ideas for the retail space and we encouraged them to consider active retail or a restaurant which they seemed to take to heart. The space will likely be two businesses and the housing will be a minimum of four units.

Todd and Carol both let us know that neither FoNV nor the NVMPA have an official or active role in directing how this space is used.

So this is your chance to weigh in - mark your calendars for the community meeting and bring your opinions.

What: Community Meeting to present plans for Real Foods building
Where: St Philips Church, 725 Diamond St
When: January 22, 2015, 7:00PM
Bonus: Todd told us there's a rumor of childcare provided.

[Andrew Ross: Noe Valley’s Real Food to be reborn]
[NVSF: Real Foods - I Wish This Was...]

Photos: Inside The Luxe

Eileen Bermingham toured the new condos at 28th and Church this morning and posted preview photos on her blog. She states a professional photographer was setting up when she left, and that theluxesf.com should have photos soon.

What's not explained is why the developer changed the building's marquis by adding an "e" since the name was chosen for historical significance:

The name "The Lux" for those of you who do not know, was one of the several names of the building when it operated as a movie theater back in the early 1900's.

Whatever. Still classier than "blue church."

[ISSFRE: First Look: The Luxe Condos in Noe Valley]
[NVSF: The Lux Condos Come To Life]
[NVSF: Announced: The Lux Condos On Outer Church]

The Lux Condos Come To Life

Now that the scaffolding is down, here are a few more details via Eileen Bermingham about The Lux apartments at 1596 Church St. From the blueprints (PDF):

• 13-car parking (including five with a "rotating parking lift") and a Church Street facing commercial space at street level. However, the 1527 sq/ft commercial space is specified as "office use only." Maybe a title company/bank/dentist will set up shop, but don't hope for a cool cafe/bar/gym.
• The second floor has three 2BD/2BA units and a outdoor courtyard (with "outdoor kitchen"). 
• The third/fourth floors have three two-level units that are 3BD/3BA with internal staircases. 

The information provided to us last November from agent Keely Ferguson says they'll be "high-end modern homes." Per Eileen, the 2nd floor units are priced at about $900k, the upper units are $1.3M-$1.6M. Expect an official opening in January 2012.

[Inside SF RE: Wraps Off: Noe’s “Luxe” Condos Closer to Market]
[NVSF: Announced: The Lux Condos On Outer Church]

Announced: The Lux Condos On Outer Church

We noticed the above rendering of the development planned for 1596 Church St this morning, now to be called The Lux. The only information posted on the billboard is for Vangaurd real estate agent Keely Ferguson - nothing about financing, contractors or a time line. It's been more than a year since the Blue Church was converted to a vacant lot, but nothing has happened on the permit side of the equation other than a few complaints.

Seems that the original demolition permit was for "INTERIOR NON STRUCTURAL DEMOLITION WORK ONLY. MEZZANINE AND ALL STAIRWAYS TO REMAIN." And while there have been a few complaints, all have been abated with no action. The only new building permit application has been for a "street space" (read: less parking around job site).

The original and approved construction permit reads: "HORIZONTAL & VERTIAL ADDITION: SELECTIVE DEMO OF (E) CHURCH STRUCTURE W/ NEW VERTICAL ADDITION TO CREATE 4 STORY MIXED USE BUILDING HOUSING 6 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, RES. PARKING GARAGE & STREET FRONT COMMERCIAL SPACE."

All that jives with what we found searching for more info. An early rendering (with an equally silly name) from Kotas/Pantaleoni Architects shows the same design with less color:


Here's what they say about it:

Located on outer Church Street in San Francisco, the Del Mar Residences re-imagines a controversial blue church building for new uses in this quiet neighborhood. Our remodeling creates three flats and three townhouses over a new neighborhood commercial space. The building's base is reconstructed to create transparency and lightness, with a deeply recessed pathway on the south and a tall set of windows wrapping the corner. Large bays mark the intersection for drama and to collect light. The building is shaped to distinguish its parts and to balance the mass of a noteworthy large older building across the street.

So... Pretty pictures, but no new permits, no mention of financing and no time line. Will this development happen or are developers just gauging interest? Stay tuned.

Update (11/29): We received the following from Keely Ferguson:

Hello,

The project is fully entitled. The project will have 6 residential units over commercial space:

• 3 x 2 bd/2 ba flats, approx 1050s.f. each.
• 3 x 3 bd/2.5ba townhomes, approx 1750-2150 s.f. (they differ)

High end modern homes. All units have 1 parking space. Shared interior courtyard – some units have decks. Hope to deliver Spring 2012.

Thanks, Keely

In case you're wondering, here's what fully entitled means. Still no change on the building department's permits status page.

[NVSF: Blue church: Slated For Demo]

Teardowns: Prices Dropping?

Check out 469 Valley St: $649k for a total teardown. The MLS describes it as a probate sale and "absolutely uninhabitable under current conditions." But even given the condition we'd expect a bit more, especially because of the potential for views.

Compare it to a few recent sales that were also torn down or majorly fixed:

1409 Sanchez sold in September 2008 for $875k. It returned to the market as an empty lot with approved plans for $1.25M. It didn't sell, and was eventually withdrawn from the MLS.

168 Clipper St sold in 2007 for $800k and is currently slated for demolition and working through the approval process for new construction.

4033 26th St sold in 2007, was raised 2 levels and is now offered as a $2.595M single family home.

Has the market changed that much? Or is the risk to developers just too high, and construction loans that hard to come by? Maybe it's just not Noe Valley enough?

Blue Church: Demolished

The developer may not start construction for 9-10 months (according to the Voice), but they're not risking losing the project to appeal after such a lengthy battle for permits.

Update: A couple reader-submitted photos from just before the Blue Church was only a hole in the ground.

Photo: S Yao

Photo: K Wallace

[NVSF: Blue church: Slated For Demo]

Blue church: Slated For Demo

Word from Felicia is that the Blue Church's days are numbered:

Yesterday the "Blue Church" (Church at San Francisco) located at 28th and Church was boarded up by the sheriff's department and an eviction notice posted. Folks living at the church were given notice several weeks beforehand, however a number refused to leave. The Sheriff's department were to allow them to reenter the building today to gather their belongings. The word is that demolition should begin in 2-3 weeks time.

Longtime residents will recall that this project has been in limbo since the current tenant accused neighbors of racism, sold to the current developer and then sued the developer for fraud. A permit for condo development has been on hold since then, and neighbors have complained about illegal construction and lodging (of homeless) within the church. And that lock on the bathroom door at Martha & Bros? Residents of the Blue Church were 'showering' in the bathroom.

[NVV: Fed-Up Pastor Sells Church to Condo Developer]
[NVV: Rumors: That Blue Church]

This Week at the Planning Commission

A weekly look at Noe Valley projects in front of the Planning Commission. Information is provided by the Planning Commission, and taken from its published agenda. All hearings begin at 1:30pm, Room 400 in City Hall.

3645 23RD STREET - south side between Fair Oaks and Guerrero Streets; Lot 032 in Assessor’s Block 3647 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under Planning Code Section 317 requiring review of residential demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2007.10.10.5010, proposing to demolish a one-story, single-family dwelling in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the demolition permit.

3645 23RD STREET - south side between Fair Oaks and Guerrero Streets; Lot 032 in Assessor’s Block 3647 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under Planning Code Section 317 requiring review of the replacement building in association with residential demolition, of Building Permit Application No. 2007.10.12.5328, to construct a three-story over garage, two-family dwelling in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the new building permit.

Also of interest is this item from the edge of Noe:

3398 22Nd street - northeast corner at Guerrero and 22nd Streets, Lot 028 in Assessor’s Block 3617 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 145.2, 303 and 710.26 to legalize a walk-up facility (ATM), dba "Swipe USA", that is not recessed 3-feet from the property line, in an NC-1 (Neighborhood Commercial Cluster) Zoning District with an 40-X Height and Bulk designation.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

NOTE: Will also include a brief informational presentation regarding Swipe USA's practice of installing ATMs within the City and County of San Francisco.

These machines are everywhere - there's even two within 10 feet of each other at 24th & Church. Is the City likely to start regulating where they go, or will they all be approved like the above location? And if approved, what's the point in the conditional use?

1260-1270 Dolores St: Under Fire

All of the windows at 1266 Dolores have 2-3 bullet holes in them. Random street gang target practice or have neighbors taken their disagreements to a new level? Besides taking sniper fire, there's been some more activity according to a neighbor's blog:

In November the builder began working on the second building again laying down the floors and breaking up and laying down the sidewalk, and cleaning up and putting in a yard which all look nice but if you really look closely there are bubbles in the wood and the first building has been exposed to the elements for so long that the wood is rotting and peeling away from the building. You can see it from the back side of the buildings.
...
Is this the kind of builder we want in San Francisco? Would you want to buy a new home from these guys?

There have also been 5 new complaints at the Planning Department:

12/29/08: Unsafe bldg.
01/23/09: Installed gas fireplace w/o permit; Installed fire sprinkler w/o permit; Installed 3 gas fireplace without permit; Installed fire sprinkler w/o permit.

All previous violations are still outstanding.

[NVSF: For Sale: 1260-1270 Dolores & More Than A Few Headaches]
[NVSF: 1266 Dolores St.]
[NoeValleyNeighbors]

This Week at the Planning Commission

A weekly look at Noe Valley projects in front of the Planning Commission. Information is provided by the Planning Commission, and taken from its published agenda. All hearings begin at 1:30pm, Room 400 in City Hall.

December 18

4033 26th STREET -- south side between Noe and Sanchez Streets; Lot 035 in Assessor's Block 6564 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2008.03.17.7283 proposing to add two additional stories of enclosed living space with a horizontal addition to the rear of the subject building. The project proposes to add one vertical story flush with the front building wall and a second vertical story that is set back approximately 12' from the front building wall. The project also proposes to add a second off-street parking space. The subject building is a single-family home located within an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve the project with modifications.

[NVSF: Hiding in Plain Sight]

For Sale: 1260-1270 Dolores & More Than A Few Headaches

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 Appeals

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.

Minutes 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.

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]

1266 Dolores St.

Most development in Noe Valley seems to begin and finish very quickly. But for almost a year, construction at 1266 Dolores St (actually two buildings) has been halted. We're trying to figure out what's going on. Here's what we've found at the DBI's website:

Permit #200508261391 issued on 3/3/06 to "ERECT ONE 4-STORY, TYPE 5, 3 FAMILY DWELLING UNITS, RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. Cost: $825,000.00"

Various complaints since then:

May 23, 2006: "Filthy job site, dust and dirt everywhere. 2 inch thick, over 40ft long. Needs to be cleaned." Status: abated.

May 24, 2006: "Deep excavation less than 5 ft. going on and the excavation company doing the work has no license. There is a ccident happen plywood blew out into sidewalk and the old lady was seriously injured. Please check ASAP." Status: abated.

August 2, 2006: "Demolition not remodeling, and a bar can hit someone if it'll be to windy." Status: abated.

November 22, 2006: "Work w/out a permit; unsafe bldg." Status: First Notice of Violation Sent (NOV) 11/22.

March 9, 2007: "THE WORK AT 1266-B DOLORES STREET HAS EXCEEDED THE SCOPE OF DEMOLITION AT REAR 25' FT." Status: open.

March 27, 2007: "NEW CONSTRUCTION HAS CAUSED DAMAGE TO NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY AT 1272 DOLORES ST." Status: open.

April 24, 2007: "TWO BUILDINGS ARE POSSIBLY TRANSGRESSING THE HEIGHT LIMITS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD - PA #200508261391." Status: Referred to Senior Building Inspector.

October 3, 2007: "Additional complaint from Larry Badiner (City Planning) and Mr. Fallman neighbor - Mr. Mather [Ed - Inspector] is preforming complaint investigate re-additional work to rear building." Status: NOV issued.

October 16, 2007: "Additional complaint from Larry Badiner, City Planning and Mr. Fallman neighbor - Mr. Mather is prefoming complaint investigate re-additional work to rear building." Status: followed up, no work performed, abated.

All that to say that the project has been stopped for 13 months. The back of the light-colored building on the right has been open to the elements the whole time, no work has been performed. Oh - and the market may have crashed. The developer can't be happy about any of this.

Does anyone have any first-hand knowledge of this project? Is there other information we can't find? Is this a case of an angry neighbor, a "rogue" developer, a planning snafu or a combination of any of these factors?

Update: Planning Commission October 23, 2008

Last week the Planning Commission ruled on two projects on 24th St:

4128 24th STREET - Request for Conditional Use Authorization...to convert the existing, ground floor office space to a full-service restaurant, totaling approximately 350 square feet (dba “Noe Soup"). [Translation: the old BJ Droubi house is getting a restaurant]

3931-3933 - 24TH STREET – Request for Conditional Use Authorization...to allow the construction of one new dwelling-unit with no off-street parking. [Translation: Noe Bagel will have to close while the building is expanded]

Both projects were approved as part of the Consent Calendar. These two and three other projects were approved with a single vote and without public comment. That is not to say the Commission didn't ask for comment - no one showed up to give any. Color us surprised.

As we wrote last week, the conversion 4128 24th St to a restaurant is likely the last available conditional use permit for a new restaurant in Noe Valley.

The motion (brought by Supervisor McGoldrick) to ammend legislation to "require conditional use authorization for any permit...to remove dwelling units" was disapproved 6-1. This would have made mandatory a discretionary review (DR) for all residential demolition permit applications, including 1 and 2 unit buildings (and including dwelling unit mergers). Existing code allows for planning staff initiated DR hearings. Expect this to come up again (after the election).

Bonus: learned a new phrase - "Richmond Special." Seems to be a catch-all for illegal (non-conforming) dwelling units added to a single family home.

[NVSF: This Week at the Planning Commission]
[NVSF: Dwelling Unit Mergers]

690 Stanyan St: Approved!

Curbed SF is reporting that the Planning Commission yesterday gave unanimous approval to the development at 690 Stanyan St. Why do we care? Because the anchor tenant is Whole Foods, and it replaces a Cala (Bell) Market. Sound familiar?

The latest reporting in the Noe Valley Voice is that:

Bell Market...has lost its lease and will be closing in February 2009. However, the space will be occupied by a new Whole Foods Market, going in sometime after April 2009.
...
Mark Campagna, spokesperson for property owner Anchor Realty, told this Voice reporter last month that there were no plans to demolish the 16,000-plus-square-foot structure, although the 24th Street store is small by Whole Foods (and Kroger) standards, where the average size is twice to three times as large.

Campagna said he did not know how long it would take Whole Foods to reopen the store, but he estimated it would be a matter of several months.

FWIW, there is no record of a permit application on file with the Planning Department for the location on 24th St. So if they're actually planning on opening next spring they better get on it. At least the decision re: 690 Stanyan St. shows that if Whole Foods is subject to a large-scale review of any project on 24th St, they have a sympathetic ear at the Planning Commission.

While we'd prefer to see housing over retail and the elimination of the parking lot, we agree with the decision to keep the building as is and move in as soon as possible.

Now we have to see if Whole Foods continues to have faith in San Francisco in light of the recent economic downturn.

[Curbed SF: Approved, with love: 690 Stanyan's Mixed-Use Whole Foods]
[NVV: Rumors Behind the News - Market Fluctuations]

New Digs for Noe Bagel?

The owners of 3933 24th St filed a permit application in July to increase the size of the building. Application #200807116509 describes the project as:

Vertical and horizontal addition to existing building. Add 1 additional unit, 2 offices. Reconfigure and remodel all [existing] units. Top units to include 2 floors, 2 bedrooms, study, 2 full bath, 1 half bath. Lower unit: 1 bedroom, 1 bath. 1 office 2nd fl. Gr floor 1 office, 1 retail space.

Status: Awaiting Conditonal Use (and presumably a Discretionary Review at the Planning Commission).

We should note that this block has had its share of drama. There's the 5-Year Blight Formerly Known as Real Foods, and developers also met resistance just a few doors down.