24

Readers report over 125 commercial vacancies in Richmond District as part of #FewerVacancies effort

A close up of the reported vacancies in the Richmond District, as sent in by readers of the Richmond Blog

Despite what the SF Dept of Building Inspection may think, a recent effort by neighbors to count the number of commercial vacancies in the Richmond District has proven the obvious: there’s a lot of them.

As part of the #FewerVacancies effort spearheaded by Supervisor Sandra Fewer, we asked readers to submit commercials vacancies via an online form. Dozens of you participated and submitted 138 vacancies so far across the neighborhood (note: these have to still be verified).

Reports came in from the major commercial arteries like Clement and Geary, but also from side streets and outer Balboa (thank you Balboa Village Merchants Association for your submissions!).

Check out the interactive map below to view the reported commercial vacancies. Don’t see the one(s) on there near you? There’s still time to report the addresses through our online form.

Supervisor Fewer’s office will provide the final list to the Dept. of Building Inspection who will then verify the vacancies, and where needed, notify the building owners of their need to comply with city laws and ordinances regarding vacant properties.

Sarah B.

View Commercial Vacancies in the Richmond District in a full screen map

24 Comments

  1. so that’s it? she is simply going to turn the list into the dept who has already claimed that there are no vacancies? sandra is worthless

  2. I don’t see the former blockbuster at 17th and Geary that has been vacant for years!

  3. It’s great to see all of this collected on a map. It’s a shocking number of vacancies, and I hope this gets some attention!

  4. So time to shut down or seriously gut the office that is supposed to keep track of this stuff, right? Why do I think that won’t happen? Please hold our city government accountable.

  5. Who would want to rent anything in this town with such sky-high commercial rents and onerous regulatory processes? Is anyone at all surprised that there are so many vacancies? I’m surprised there’s not more. Good luck to politicians who think they can solve this.

  6. Walt: How is she “worthless” for proving that there are indeed vacancies? That’s worth a lot!

  7. What to do if you are a owner and cannot find a commercial tenant? Reading some have been empty for years. What are the laws? Can any of these properties be turned into living spaces with appropriate permits? VS sitting empty? Residential living may also help the existing businesses in the neighborhood.

  8. Well she put her name as part of the program… and for that I will not participate. Our elected officials need to know things like that

  9. There’s also a vacant retail space at 2200 Clement Street. Two medical supply companies were there in recent years, followed by a construction company. I believe it’s empty now.

  10. Get rid of the chain store regs. Eric Mar put in place. This will drive activity into the area and mom/pop stores will benefit.

  11. Fewer should rent some of these vacancies. Only businesses I see opening up are restaurants. Brick and mortar retail is dead. Most people
    shop online. High rent is not always the issue.

  12. franz, i dont know who you work for, but the mattress chain stores that dot geary have done nothing for local biz. and we just had a major chain shut its doors. that is not the answer, nor should you simply blame mar for a city wide rule.
    as for my remarks about fewer, she is the one who has stated that the dept has not done its job and that the yearly fine is a joke
    and she didnt do the work. readers of this site did.
    so the law must be changed.
    if a building owner cant get the rent they want, they have to do what residential landlords do and drop the rent…the law of supply and demand
    if regulations are onerous, then they too must be looked at
    we are in a state of emergency in regards to urban blight and if we dont take care of it asap, we are going to turn into detroit.

  13. The problem could be solved pretty easily with three things:
    1. Eliminate Prop 13 property tax limitations for Commercial Property.
    2. Relax regulatory limits on converting Commercial Property to Residential.
    3. Relax chain store restrictions.
    This would encourage property owners to utilize their properties rather than leaving them vacant as is the case today.

  14. hey mike, why did best buy close?
    why, when you walk or drive by any of the chain mattress stores on geary, are they all empty of customer traffic?
    now be open…which developer are you employed by?

  15. Walt – take a walk down Laurel, Filmore, Union and Chestnut Streets. They are not restricted by chain laws.

    With respect to my real estate knowledge, I have forgotten more than you know.

  16. Walt,
    Not a developer, Don’t be a conspiracy theorist.

    Prop 13 for commercial property allows property owners to sit on their vacancies indefinitely with very little cost. You don’t typically see new buyers sit on vacant property, just legacy owners.

    As to converting retail to housing, we are saturated with too much retail in the internet age. Time to adjust.

    And our chain store restrictions are too restrictive in a difficult retail environment.

  17. There should be tax breaks for small business owners and landlords. Remember old fillmore and old market street. Those were revived neighborhoods. Hayes valley has blossomed and so is dogpatch. Why are they so successful?

  18. Hayes valley and dog patch are cool places hipsters and millennials like to go. Not so much the Richmond district. We are the boonies.

  19. anyone who claims that filmore. laurel or chestnut are filled with chain stores, has never been to any of those shopping areas and is employed by an out of town developer bent on destroying my beautiful city

  20. If the city allowed these retail shops to be converted to a limited restaurant or full restaurant without the 6-12 month change of use process…say 30 days instead. These empty spots would find new tenants extremely fast.

  21. I’m late to this discussion. What I don’t understand is, if the space isn’t rented, presumably nobody wants to pay the rent. So, wouldn’t it make more sense for the property owner to lower the rent, as opposed to it being empty for years and no rent coming in. I’ve never understood this.

  22. There is one landlord who has a terrible reputation, no one wants to rent from them, they own all the shops in a certain location, all vacant.

Comments are closed.