What Will It Take To Save Mid-Market?
The street that defines and divides the face of San Francisco has been reinventing itself for the better part of a century -- but always...
These are the comments for What Will It Take To Save Mid-Market?
The street that defines and divides the face of San Francisco has been reinventing itself for the better part of a century -- but always...
These are the comments for What Will It Take To Save Mid-Market?
Eric said:
March 11, 2010 1:00 AM
Reply
The solution to the mid-market problem is simple: rezone the area to allow residential construction. Luxury condominiums located close to BART and MUNI would sell out quickly and would quickly change the face of mid-market.
Unfortunately, may San Franciscans prefer crime and vacant buildings to luxury condominiums and property tax revenues to fund social services. Many San Franciscans are idiots, too.
Digidave said:
March 11, 2010 11:44 AM
Reply
Update: Susie's pitch on Spot.Us is fully funded! Thanks to everyone!
She worked very hard on the story and info-graphic. I am a particular fan of the info-graphic. It's one of those things I could sit and click all day just to see the action (guilty as charged for being an easy target).
But back to the point: I used to live by Mid-Market and I am still in awe of it. It feels like the rest of SF: Filled with ambitious but reality hits hard.
Shameless said:
March 11, 2010 2:59 PM
Reply
I live South of Market off 7th St, and worked at Van Ness & Market for five years.
If we're serious about making mid-Market a vibrant part of the city, both during the day and after dark, I don't think we should tolerate investors like David Addington "sitting on" vacant properties. By treating run-down buildings as future gold mines, Mr. Addington and others (like the owner of the South of Market building with the furniture hanging out the windows) ignore the effect that these empty properties have on the neighborhood today.
Investors are holding onto these vacant properties because they think they can get more money out of them in the future, when the neighborhood changes. But instead of making that change by developing their properties, they're waiting for someone else (usually taxpayers) to make the change for them, allowing them to reap the rewards down the line.
Instead of waiting for a $250 million grant, Mr. Addington and other investors need to recognize that their properties are overvalued; if necessary, the city should use eminent domain as a motivating factor: either develop it, or sell it at a fair market value (not future market value).
We can make mid-Market a healthier community to live in and to visit by ceasing to tolerate real estate speculation and putting these properties to use!
observesf said:
March 15, 2010 12:50 PM
Reply
Residential is not suitable for Mid-Market.
The two BART stops have the potential to bring great numbers of people to the area.
The solution: A unique Office and Entertainment District.
Offices to bring people in during the day, Entertainment at night.
Residential can't provide enough people.
The city needs the employment opportunities that only new office buildings can bring. And that requires BART.
Mid-Market is the only area in The City with underutilized BART stations and Available land with commercial zoning.
For more info, check out: http://observesf.com/.
SF Commercial Real Estate Broker said:
March 20, 2010 4:31 PM
Reply
It's already on its way... Just some TLC and a little more time. Hang in there.