urbanpioneer

Didn't Save-A-Lot recently pull out of the newest Avondale Town Center redevelopment proposal? Yet the developer had the advantage of a big HUD grant as well as a few million from the City. The original incarnation of the Avondale Town Center failed because the grocery store quickly became a hub for drug dealing and other crime. I hate to say it but forcing inorganic development in Avondale has a history of failure. This is why the proposal by Young and Simpson seems ill-conceived to me, and likely motivated by electoral concerns. Believe me, I'm no fan of Mayor Cranley but, because of similar electoral concerns, he's probably gleeful about this last-minute proposal. Maybe some people on this forum aren't thrilled about Children's Hospital's expansion plans but many people consider the place a jewel in the Queen City's crown. And institutional expansion of this sort is what DOES succeed in the neighborhood. Simpson talked about Children's needing to be a good neighbor in Avondale, but it works both ways. Maybe the design wouldn't have to be so "fortified" if it were safer around there.

Moderators, I'm mindful that this is way off-topic... Anyway, as far as I know it's illegal to install old "big flush" toilets. Maybe some states still allow it, and there are probably some plumbers who will install them in any case. In the past, I've been in the market for old toilets and especially old tank lids for our 100+ year-old apartment building. But I gave up and gave in to new toilets, especially since American Standard had a model (Portsmouth/Townsend) that looked like an old style, and with a tall tank. Unfortunately it was discontinued. Story of my life. Toto makes one that's styled like an old one but the tank isn't as tall. The tall tanks help to conceal holes in the marble wainscoting that the old toilets caused, plus the taller toilets look better in bathrooms like ours with high ceilings. Jake, there's a vendor on eBay, "birdcycle" who sells old tank lids for BIG bucks. You may want to tell your friend he could charge even more -- birdcycle's asking $195 for an American Standard lid I could use!

Why do I suspect Simpson's stance on this will only serve to help Cranley's re-election effort? That she and Young want Children's Hospital to pay $14 million more, in addition to the $11 million already offered, for a grand total of $25 million, sounds like a form of extortion to me.

"The couple’s purchase appears to be the culmination of a comedy of errors involving a $14-a-year property tax bill that the homeowners association failed to pay for three decades. It’s something that the owners of all 181 private streets in San Francisco are obliged to do." I'm curious about the nature of the $14 per year tax that the home owners failed to pay. Even if it's a minor assessment that was tacked on property taxes ages ago, it seems so very very low for a city that's one of, if not THE most, expensive to live in. The fact that this couple laid low for 2 years shows just how shrewd they are. I can't wait to see how this turns out!

I've heard complaints about the building's low ceilings (8') in the sense that the residential market today generally wants at least 9' or 10'. But with the perennial popularity of mid-century modern interior design, I'd think this wouldn't be a big problem, but I'm just guessing -- maybe it really is. I doubt if it would be a problem at all if it became a hotel again, with no residential component whatsoever.

Since Chris Finney's name was brought up, I should mention that a friend of mine told me he bought a portion of a building on the streetcar line recently, at 633 Main Street.

^ Is the Kaplan family, who owned the Donato's bldg. seemingly forever, contending that it loses money or is it NorthAmerican Properties? If it's the Kaplans, I suppose if the property taxes are high (too lazy to check) that's possible, but I know from years of observation that the they did THE bare minimum, if even that, when it came to maintenance. They really really neglected it. Without knowing the rent they pay, I suspect the Donato's lease was the best thing to happen to that bldg. in decades, once the old Kay Furniture Store (a Kaplan family enterprise) went out of business 30+/- years ago. On the other hand, if it's NorthAmerican making the claim, it makes sense since they apparently paid over $800,000 for it. Does anyone know when the Donato's lease expires, or if NorthAmerican plans to buy out the remainder of the term?

Actually, the northern-most part of the Aronoff Center was built on a surface lot that used to run along the south side of 7th Street between Main and Walnut. And part of the library expansion was built on a surface lot at the NW corner of 9th and Walnut. BUT, it just goes to show there's effectively a domino effect when permission is granted to demolish old buildings to create surface lots.

Hmm, I thought there was a parking lot, at least at the NW corner of 9th and Walnut Streets, before the library was expanded to the north. I've lived in the CBD for a long time and I don't remember all of those bldgs. along 9th Street. If they were all there until the early 1990s then I guess I'm losing it. It's hard to believe the library expansion is already obsolete. Planning for it obviously occurred before it was understood how the internet would impact library use. The south bldg. used to be absolutely bustling when I first moved downtown. Also, the bldg. at the SW corner of Court and Walnut Streets was shortened by a floor after a fire caused serious damage. I think there were artists' studios in it before the fire.

Good point. I forgot about that.

It makes me sick that City Council is folding under pressure from Otto Budig over this stupid skywalk. What a huge waste of money. What's wrong with putting a crosswalk in its place for those who want to keep parking on the west side of the hall??? Having said that, count me as a BIG opponent of the cobblestones on Elm Street in front of the hall. I've seen old people stumble over them, for crying out loud. No wonder they may prefer to avoid crossing there. So many stupid decisions...

jjakucyk makes a good point, although a more illustrative example may be how the 580 Building's 6th Street and Main Street first floors were recessed in the initial design. For decades, the recesses really hurt the value and potential of those commercial spaces, which surely must be why the recesses were eliminated by the current developer. Fortunately for @580 the surrounding sidewalks are so wide there's still plenty of room for outdoor seating.

I don't mind the recess at all and really really dislike when outdoor seating encroaches too much on sidewalks, like on the west side of Walnut Street south of 7th (The Scene and Righteous Room bars), or on the Walnut Street side of Jeff Ruby's (the cigar smokers' seating). Walnut's a busy pedestrian thoroughfare and at times there's hardly enough room at rush hour to navigate around the seating outside of those bars. Like jwulsin I'm curious about the criteria for permitting outdoor seating, if there even are any criteria. Plus, there used to be loud music blaring from one of those bars on the west side of Walnut, which seems to have stopped. I wouldn't be surprised if the condo dwellers above the bars complained. Outdoor seating and the accompanying loud talking, outdoor music, and residences don't always mix very well...

Someone just told me that the problem with the shared wall only effects the one-story addition at the back of the building (behind Big Jay's convenience store, formerly Cianciolo's), NOT the entire building. If this is true the problem isn't nearly as severe as I thought.

It's my understanding that Eric Lusain sold the abutting bldg. and one next to it that he owned to a group of attorneys who are turning the apartments into condos. If anyone has additional or more accurate info about the new ownership it would be of interest. If I were the owner I'd sue the Josephs, sue the consulting engineers and architects they employed in the Dennison case, and although I suspect civic board members may be immune or exempt from liability, if they're not I'd sue the ones who voted in favor of demolition too. If indeed attorneys own the former Lusain property then their legal expense outlay could be minimal. I hope they go for it. I wonder if engineers and architects can be somehow penalized for malpractice -- aside from a case where an aggrieved plaintiff sues for damages -- like, penalized/admonished by some sort of professional guild or whatever???

It seems the "experts" the Josephs hired to testify in the various hearings were even more incompetent or else even more intellectually dishonest than I thought. How on earth could an architect or engineer miss something major like this? And were Cranley's appointees on the various boards who voted in favor of demolition aware of, or even the least bit curious about the possible jeopardy to the abutting structure? I'm cynical enough to wonder if the Josephs were in fact aware that the Dennison demolition would cause serious structural problems for the abutting building, and now they hope to acquire it while the owners are under duress. The Josephs should have to pay whatever (and all) costs that must be born to shore up their neighbor's building. Anything less would be a crime. There could be a domino effect if they keep tearing down this portion of Main Street. Maybe that's their game plan. It's sickening!

I'm having a hard time understanding why people are complaining about lower TAVs, when they're entirely different than FMVs :wtf:

Fair Market Value (what a home should sell for) isn't the same AT ALL as its Tax Assessed Value (county appraised values for property tax purposes). TAV are almost always lower, and sometimes by a lot, than FMVs, plus there's a bias against older homes when appraising them for tax purposes. Luckily for those of us who like older or historic properties and have invested a lot of time and money into their preservation, we get a break on property taxes!!! I may be wrong but I suppose there's a bias against older homes because it's presumed that structural types of decline caused by longer exposure to deteriorating environmental conditions (causing things like roof, basement, and foundation issues), termite damage, possibly even the higher risk of hazardous materials like asbestos, etc., AND just more years of wear and tear than in newer structures. I doubt if the criteria used to assess values here are based on any negative sentiment Dusty Rhodes may have about downtown.

I'm all for historic preservation but I wonder if it could be better if the little building at Main and Central Pkwy. came down? It appears to be a nice building (at least the exterior does) but IMO it's way too small and out of scale for such a wide street like Central Pkwy. On the other hand, I don't know if that location, right on the Main Street streetcar tracks, would be better or not if higher rise development occurred there. I suspect it would though. And I'm not bothered by garage and dock access on Central Pkwy. -- it seems to me, considering the streetcar tracks on Main Street -- that garage and dock access would be safer on the pkwy. anyway. Surely some kind of attractive streetscaping could be implemented to help offset the appearance of vehicle access. Besides, the pkwy. doesn't exactly lend itself to small storefront-like development...

^^Yup Ram23, I agree. I may drop Netflix too. We initially subscribed to watch House of Cards, which gets worse every season. Cord cutters are signing up in large numbers right now though.

Thanks for the replies. I suspected something of the sort but it's good to know for certain why so [relatively] little is available for streaming. Smart TV functions are rendered nearly useless if content can't be streamed though... Oh well. I'm old and there aren't that many films that interest me nowadays anyway. I'm also not interested in most of the major networks' fare either. I would mainly like to be able to stream Independent movies, older movies, and some TV shows. BTW we haven't "cut the cord" and still subscribe to Spectrum. I may be wrong but I doubt we'd get very decent reception from an antenna, here in the CBD. We couldn't before, way back when -- that's a big reason why we were glad when cable was finally installed. In fact we had to FIGHT for it -- TWC tried to weasel out of its obligation to connect the CBD and there were hearings at City Hall about it. Yeah, Spectrum is expensive but it's a luxury we're willing to indulge in so far. It would be different if we were younger and not at home so much. I don't want to have to go through any bother or jump through any hoops for sports or video entertainment. But good luck to the rest of you -- you're definitely saving a lot of money. We pay about $130-$140/mo for TV and internet -- and that's AFTER my husband called recently to try to get the price down, and prevailed -- once he threatened to have Fioptics installed in our building. Before that, our bill was over $160/mo. and steadily rising. So cutting the cord is very tempting, and if TV fare gets much worse we just may do it.

I subscribe to Netflix but have to admit I'm not terribly impressed with it. SO I don't understand why its stock soared today. We have 3 smart TVs but almost every time I search for films or shows available on Netflix they're not available for streaming! Sheesh. What's the problem? I don't want to have to bother with a Blu-ray player or whatever, and mailing discs back. Amazon Prime isn't much better, but in a different way -- it often charges me extra for stuff I want to watch. I once went through almost its entire library and a huge portion of it was soft porn. Having said that, at least I got to watch Manchester By The Sea for free. Does anyone know why so little of the Netflix library is available for streaming?

I haven't been there but I've heard the prices are just too high at the Clifton Market. I have checked out the Epicurean Mercantile Co. on Race Street in OTR and the prices seem high there too. Kroger's has, IMO, improved so much in recent years that it will pose a serious challenge for any competitors as far as pricing and selection go. Convenience is a different matter, but the new Corryville Kroger store renders nearly moot the convenience the Clifton Market offers. Still, I'm a little surprised that it hasn't been able to draw sufficient shoppers from the large, immediate residential area. Is traffic congestion a problem/deterrent on Ludlow Ave? The EMC in OTR offers little in the way of produce and meats, which of course can be easily found right across the street at Findlay Market, but it does have a decent selection of packaged/prepared foods. If I lived nearby I'd definitely be willing to pay higher prices just for the convenience. Hopefully it'll hang in there until there are more residents in the area.

I'm not knowledgeable about any variations in park policies that may exist pertaining to holiday hours, but some of my best friends used to live on Luray, near the part of Eden Park in question. The overlook became totally out of control with drug dealing and other nuisances, and it's my understanding that it's been more aggressively policed, including traffic flow, for many years now.

I agree with 1400 Sycamore -- it's glitz free and unpretentiously rehabbed. It looks like as much as possible that's original has been preserved and restored, and any new additions seem to fit in seamlessly. It amazes me that so much of the original floor tile remained intact. The bar was apparently salvaged from another location but looks right at home in the Bay Horse. Well done!!! I hope this thoughtful rehab project inspires others in the vicinity to do their part. The jewelry store, Richter and Phillips, did a beautiful job when they moved across to the other corner. The old Spatz Health Food building and old Player Piano Shop need some serious investment and I hope it's not too long before it happens. Parts of Main Street have been about the most decrepit areas of the CBD for too long. Restoration of the Bay Horse Cafe is a big step in the right direction.