Purchased as a vacant 7-unit building for $4.95 million in 2009, the 14,000-square-foot structure at 104 Presidio Avenue, which sits on the border of Pacific and Presidio Heights, was effectively gutted, remodeled and a new seven car garage was added below.

The approved permits and plans for the multi-million dollar renovation did not allow for a merger of any of the units – at least not technically – but did note that layouts would be “altered” and floor plans “reconfigured.”

With the renovations completed last year, the building’s owner and occupier is now seeking permission to legally merge two of the “existing” one-bedrooms units into a 3,179 square foot two-bedroom on the second floor, while merging another four of the “existing” units above into a single, 11,000 square foot six-bedroom unit across the building’s top two floors.

The estimated cost of now “merging” the units, following the multi-million dollar renovation by Butler Armsden Architects: $100,000.

Keep in mind that the merger of a unit in San Francisco which is valued at under $1.63 million is subject to being denied. And as such, the building’s owner is now “undergoing unit appraisals to confirm that none of the existing units” are valued below said threshold.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Harambe

    Aren’t we supposed to be dividing larger, excessive units into more smaller units?

  2. Posted by Conifer

    No, we are supposed to be creating “units” that people who own them want to live in, including families. The people are just doing what hundreds of other people do routinely by right in other cities, including Paris, London, New York, Barcelona, Amsterdam and Brussels.

    • Posted by Sammymc

      More chance that the planning commission will use eminent domain to seize the property and use it to “solve” the homeless problem I would think.

    • Posted by Alai

      Well… subject to a whole bunch of rules that have the effect of forbidding cheap units.

      You can find plenty of families willing to live in 1000 square feet. People do it every day.

  3. Posted by Mark

    $100,000 seems very low.

    Let’s see if the reconfiguring includes eliminating a few of the parking spaces in the 7-car garage. Most likely the owners will rent out the extra spaces. Because they can.

    • Posted by Sammymc

      Yeah, cause billionaires rent out their spare spaces…

    • Posted by frozentoast

      haha! I know who the owners are and trust me they will not be renting out any extra space.

  4. Posted by Footie

    I was wondering how this merger could be happening — there is now an indoor basketball court on the ground floor.

  5. Posted by Just Me

    What a waste.

  6. Posted by MarinaBoy

    I think that is a great use of this space it will encourage families to stay in the area and I am sure they will not be renting out the extra parking spaces. Plus it will increase the tax basis for the city.

  7. Posted by katdip

    If I’m reading this correctly, this seems like a brilliant play. Do a big renovation that “preserves” the existing units, but designed in such a way that it’s relatively easy to remove some non-load bearing walls and repurpose the 7 kitchen(ettes?) and a couple of bathrooms into more functional rooms. The renovated units now exceed the $1.63M minimum, so voila, you can merge them! Not bad for only an extra $100K. I just wish I could sign up to get the almost-new appliances, countertops, sinks that get sacrificed.

  8. Posted by Ramon Sampedro

    Hideous building. Looks like it should be a bus shed for MUNI. Seriously.

  9. Posted by Aaron Goodman

    for all the millions, a couple solid bollards or a concrete planter would help protect the lower floors… those two poles look a bit skimpy if a bus/truck or heavy piece of equipment rolled over the curb…

  10. Posted by Mr Pants

    Pretty sure this will be blocked because the city is taking a very anti-net-loss to housing units in the city.

    Sorry property owner, you got screwed by buying in the City.

    • Posted by SocketSite

      We’d take the other side of that wager. Regardless, we’d also be willing to bet that the “proposed” merger has already been completed, at least functionally, and the property owner is doing just fine.

  11. Posted by EBGuy

    I guess the market will always find a way. And I thought we couldn’t get any crazier than TICnation. Wonder if they had to lease any gold fixtures from the Trumps to get the valuations?

  12. Posted by Froggie Woggie

    This article is 5% fact, 60% wild speculation and 35% fiction posing as cock-sure certitude..

    • Posted by SocketSite

      Our report is speculation and fiction free, having been based on the approved permits, tax records and actual application to legally merge the units (which was submitted to the City on January 24, 2017).

      That being said, if the facts as stated in the aforementioned application, which was submitted to Planning under penalty of perjury, are fictional, we’d be happy to set the record straight.

Add a Comment

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