More homeowners with high incomes. Isn’t that what we all want? ;)

Last time I checked, we still can’t bring people back from the dead which means we won’t be able to reanimate all the people who built the 2 and three story Victorians everyone seems to care so much about. (never mind the fact that there are buildings from every decade on Valencia and there are a fair amount of 5 story buildings as well. But hey! It’s only the 2 and 3 story twee victorians that matter. right?)

this new thing is “bland” and “ugly” …but the Marsh building is “charming”? That only makes sense if “charming” is a code for “short” and “already there”.

I actually think it looks like a great place to live. Lots of light and those bay windows will make for rooms that feel big and are amenable to modern open floor plans. The bay windows also help blend in with the Victorians in the neighborhood (and IMHO living in a carved up shotgun Victorian sucks… I don’t understand peoples attachment except for the exterior appearance).

I get the parking complaint though. The mission long range plan calls for less than one parking space per new apartment and my personal feeling is that’s just dumb. People still need cars to get in and out of the city.

I also understand the height problem. Again, the long range plan is at fault. The max height for new construction is 55’ so every developer submits a plan for a 55’ building in order to maximize profits at the expense of blending into the surroundings. My belief is that the max height should be 55’ feet or the height of the highest adjacent building plus 12’, which ever is less. Possibly slap in an exception to allow a 3 story building next to a one story building.

I honestly don’t have an issue with a new, taller building on the street. I just want something that speaks better to the character of the neighborhood. This building could exist anywhere. I get it, it’s better than a KFC, but developers desperately want to move into this corridor, so let’s challenge them to come up with the next architecture style of San Francisco.

This ain’t it.

(And that first floor retail space is begging for a Quizno’s or a Starbucks.)

And finally {continuing to shake fist}

While I don’t like the design, it seems to exactly take into account the “nature of the neighborhood,” while adding some vertical height, which provides density we desperately need. Architecturally, it has that quasi-bay window thing that is included for one reason - to echo the bay window norm of Victorian buildings. It also seems to be working that Parisian cafe look on the first floor, which any neighbor would love if [insert artisanal coffee house] were there, but looks like Starbucks to some, because, well, it’s new. It’s very hard to design-in patina.

I would much prefer something that completely ignored the nature of the neighborhood - it’s 2012, dammit. But this is the kind of design that anticipates those kinds of complaints, and panders to them.

Now, if your problem is just height, well, sorry. It’s great that you can afford to live in a city with such low supply, but we need to increase supply so *other* people can afford it. Height makes that possible.

derp!