1830 Ocean Avenue
Empty since 2010 when Rite Aid vacated the 17,000 square foot site, this afternoon San Francisco’s Planning Commission is set to vote on whether or not Fresh & Easy will be allowed to convert the retail space at 1830 Ocean Avenue into a grocery store.
1830 Ocean Avenue Rendering
The Planning Department recommends the Commission approve Fresh & Easy’s request.
1830 Ocean Avenue: Fresh & Easy Request [sfplanning.org]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Local

    This is fantastic for the neighborhood. With the addition of the CVS, Whole foods, Chase I see this being the next hot spot in SF given the relative affordable housing, public / freeway access & proximity.

  2. Posted by Invented

    Don’t know where “1830” Ocean Avenue is. The street is miles long. Map please? Separately, love the suburban feel of parts of Ocean – and the ability to hop the Muni and be downtown fast. Best of both worlds. Would like to see MUNI connect to SFSU from Mission and SF College area. Connect the city.

  3. Posted by Jason

    Wouldn’t count on this actually getting built. I LOVE F&E but they just announced last week that they’re stalling almost all of their US store openings due to the chain’s inability to gain traction and likely won’t open more than a couple more in the next year. I think the proposed ones (such as this and the South Van Ness location, which they still haven’t begun work on) are unlikely to ever open.
    Source: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/story/2012-04-18/tesco-fresh-and-easy-stores/54398260/1

  4. Posted by Dan

    Jason, can you post a recent link to back up your statements– the one you posted is 6 months old, and states that they do plan to continue opening new stores.
    In August, Fresh & Easy stated stated that construction on S. Van Ness will start early next year. http://missionlocal.org/2012/08/new-fresh-easy-still-in-permit-process/

  5. Posted by Jason

    Dan — You’re right, I’m sorry about that. This is what I get for posting a comment when I’m running off to do something else!
    Here’s the real updated story (click from the blog post through to the later story and you’ll get all the details). This is all from two weeks ago:
    http://blog.retailtrafficmag.com/retail_traffic_court/2012/10/04/tesco-cuts-u-s-store-opening-plans/
    It doesn’t mean they’re opening ZERO stores, so these SF ones may well be ones they’re going to go through with anyway (and I sure hope they do; I am a regular and loyal F&E shopper).

  6. Posted by curmudgeon

    re: south van ness… dunno if Tesco slowed it down or not, but this is what Mission Local says
    http://missionlocal.org/2012/08/new-fresh-easy-still-in-permit-process/
    In other Mission neighborhood grocery news, it looks like Local Mission Eatery is proceeding with the grocery store on Harrison @ 23rd. Demolition started this week.

  7. Posted by Nelson

    This building is next to the 24 hour fitness. There is underground parking. Not a bad location at all.
    I was curious why 24 hour fitness didn’t take the space, but it seems that there were bigger plans for it. A good addition to the neighborhood.

  8. Posted by Zig

    Wife and I are looking for houses now and were just driving around Westwood park
    There is lots of nice bungalows seemingly owned by older white people and a few seem to be in our price range
    Downsides to me are the bad weather and ugly Ocean Ave.

  9. Posted by sparly*b

    What bad weather we are having, you are so right.

  10. Posted by Zig

    ^yes it is nice in Oct sometimes
    We all know this

  11. Posted by futurist

    Off topic probably, but:
    What an absolutely hideous, crude building this is. the architect, if there was one should be sent to prison.

  12. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    Yeah that was my first impression of the building too. Since it has external fire escapes it is probably a reskinned older building but still, that’s no excuse !
    What is the story on external fire escapes? I’ve only noticed them as retrofits to older buildings. Newer buildings seem to have fire escape routes designed into their floorplans. Are external fire escapes not allowed in modern code or are they just universally avoided because of their uglieness?

  13. Posted by futurist

    From my experience, fire escapes are no longer permitted in SF in multiple occupancy buildings.
    And yes, they are very ugly and not that safe.

  14. Posted by TEJ

    This chunk of hillside was the old Jewish Orphanage. http://www.outsidelands.org/homewood-terrace.php Ugly building dates from ’85.
    F&E will be a great improvement.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *