Rich SF residents get a shock: Someone bought their street

[DTComposer]

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/matier-ross/article/Rich-SF-residents-get-a-shock-Someone-bought-11738236.php

"Since the purchase in April 2015, the couple have been quietly sitting on the property, talking to a number of land-use attorneys to explore their options...

...He and his wife see plenty of financial opportunity – especially from the 120 parking spaces on the street that they now control.

"We could charge a reasonable rent on it,"  Cheng said.

And if the Presidio Terrace residents aren't interested in paying for parking privileges, perhaps some of their neighbors outside the gates – in a city where parking is at a premium – would be.

Except that public parking isn't an issue in this part of town, and the residents of this street park in their garages. Most likely they're looking to maximize their profit by charging the homeowners' association a significant amount to buy the street back.

[sparker]

That is fucking hilarious!  You'd have though the HOA would have been on top of this from the start, but obviously they fell down on the job.  But the end game will be likely that the HOA, or a few of the property owners, will offer this couple a decent profit (probably at least doubling their money) and get their street back.  Also, since Ms. Lam and Mr. Cheng are now property owners within the site, the HOA could send them (a) an invoice for HOA fees, and (b) a bill for 1/36 the cost of that staffed security gate; that might prompt a "OK, what did we get ourselves into" reaction from the couple.  It'll be fun to see how this all plays out!

[nexus73]

There is no Free Parking space on a San Francisco Monopoly board...LOL!

After reading the story, it looks like the HOA dropped the ball.

Rick

[Brandon]

I love it.  If I were them, I'd negotiate with the City and County of San Francisco for a trade.  Get a usable parcel and make the once-private street into a public street (thus removing the guard shack and gate - I hate gated communities anyway).

[jeffandnicole]

Except that public parking isn't an issue in this part of town, and the residents of this street park in their garages. Most likely they're looking to maximize their profit by charging the homeowners' association a significant amount to buy the street back.

You could've quickly looked at the aerial view to realize how wrong you are there.  I counted nearly 3 dozen vehicles parked on the street.  https://goo.gl/maps/RuywnexjuJS2  Maybe some are visitors, and maybe these people could just park in their driveways, but I think there is quite a number of residents are actually parking on the street.

[Brandon]

Except that public parking isn't an issue in this part of town, and the residents of this street park in their garages. Most likely they're looking to maximize their profit by charging the homeowners' association a significant amount to buy the street back.

You could've quickly looked at the aerial view to realize how wrong you are there.  I counted nearly 3 dozen vehicles parked on the street.  https://goo.gl/maps/RuywnexjuJS2  Maybe some are visitors, and maybe these people could just park in their driveways, but I think there is quite a number of residents are actually parking on the street.

Streetview from the main street there shows quite a few parked on the street. https://goo.gl/maps/snqny1DRpA12

[The Nature Boy]

I love it.  If I were them, I'd negotiate with the City and County of San Francisco for a trade.  Get a usable parcel and make the once-private street into a public street (thus removing the guard shack and gate - I hate gated communities anyway).

Would the city really want to take on an additional road to maintain? I don't see what the city gains from this trade.

More than likely they end up selling to the HOA for a profit.

[vdeane]

Plus something tells me that the HOA wouldn't want random public people parking on the street or for the street to become public.

Perhaps the HOA should say something along the lines of "now that you own this street, you must maintain it yourselves, out of your own pocket".  That would probably cause them to get rid of the street real quick.

[empirestate]

Plus something tells me that the HOA wouldn't want random public people parking on the street or for the street to become public.

Perhaps the HOA should say something along the lines of "now that you own this street, you must maintain it yourselves, out of your own pocket".  That would probably cause them to get rid of the street real quick.

To which they might reply, "OK, but you must turn over all maintenance fees, which you are bound by contract to collect from the residents."

On a similar matter, I assume the parcel comes with easements or covenants to allow adjoining homeowners access to their property. 'Cos otherwise, that could get messy...

[vdeane]

Why would the HOA be required to turn over the maintenance fees?  They don't own the street, the couple does!  The HOA shouldn't have to pay one penny for something they don't own.  The new owners should be responsible for that.  They wanted the street, it should be their responsibility.  Plus, last I checked, that's what "our of you own pocket" means.

[gonealookin]

It's a cute story but I doubt it works out for the couple in the long run.

As it stands now the 35 property owners pretty clearly have a prescriptive easement to use the street for access to their properties, and the couple has an obligation to maintain the street for emergency vehicle access to those properties.

Most likely a court will order the couple to sell the parcel back to the 35 homeowners for the amount that was due at the tax sale.  The city will be required to refund the sales price that was in excess of the taxes, interest and penalties, on the grounds that

The residents say the city had an obligation to post a notice in Presidio Terrace notifying neighbors of the pending auction back in 2015 – something that "would have been simple and inexpensive for the city to accomplish."

The only winners will be the lawyers.

[empirestate]

Why would the HOA be required to turn over the maintenance fees?  They don't own the street, the couple does!  The HOA shouldn't have to pay one penny for something they don't own.  The new owners should be responsible for that.  They wanted the street, it should be their responsibility.  Plus, last I checked, that's what "our of you own pocket" means.

Because I would imagine the homeowner's contract with the HOA states that they must pay maintenance fees to the HOA for upkeep of the street and common areas, and I doubt it's contingent upon whether the HOA actually owns those facilities. So, the homeowner is required to pay fees to the HOA, which is contractually bound to use them for maintenance. If the HOA, having responsibility to maintain the street, demanded that the street's owner carry out this maintenance personally, I think the street owner would have every right to request these funds from the HOA.

[vdeane]

But the point of requesting the new owners maintain it personally is to give them a financial penalty for having bought the street.

[empirestate]

But the point of requesting the new owners maintain it personally is to give them a financial penalty for having bought the street.

Sure, and the point of them replying as I imagine would be to get out of it.

Do you imagine it playing out differently? What do you think the street owners might say in response?

[DTComposer]

You could've quickly looked at the aerial view to realize how wrong you are there.  I counted nearly 3 dozen vehicles parked on the street.  https://goo.gl/maps/RuywnexjuJS2  Maybe some are visitors, and maybe these people could just park in their driveways, but I think there is quite a number of residents are actually parking on the street.

I appreciate your "research" - but here's the thing: I know three of the residents of this street. One of them is the Board president of the non-profit I work for. Another is a owner of a building complex that contains one of the spaces we utilize. I'm on this street on a regular basis - at least weekly, sometime more.

If you actually look at the types of cars that are on this street, you'll quickly realize they're not in line with the houses themselves. These cars mostly belong to service workers. Gardeners, housekeepers, social event service providers - at the higher end you will find the cars of personal assistants and the like. Even from the aerial view I can tell that many of those vehicles are pickup trucks and delivery and cargo vans.

I will be getting the real scoop on this story once I return from vacation, but I thought I'd post it here first to see what the general reaction would be before I tipped my hat.

[bigdave]

Most likely a court will order the couple to sell the parcel back to the 35 homeowners for the amount that was due at the tax sale.  The city will be required to refund the sales price that was in excess of the taxes, interest and penalties, on the grounds

that The residents say the city had an obligation to post a notice in Presidio Terrace notifying neighbors of the pending auction back in 2015 – something that "would have been simple and inexpensive for the city to accomplish."

This doesn't seem likely as the one year window to buy back has elapsed.

Not to mention this is the second time around for these folks not paying their taxes.

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/2nd-time-unpaid-taxes-have-come-back-to-bite-11743680.php

[jeffandnicole]

""They are opportunistic, know exactly what they bought, and would like to exploit a bureaucratic oversight to their advantage,"  Emblidge said."

DUH!

[skluth]

You could've quickly looked at the aerial view to realize how wrong you are there.  I counted nearly 3 dozen vehicles parked on the street.  https://goo.gl/maps/RuywnexjuJS2  Maybe some are visitors, and maybe these people could just park in their driveways, but I think there is quite a number of residents are actually parking on the street.

If you actually look at the types of cars that are on this street, you'll quickly realize they're not in line with the houses themselves. These cars mostly belong to service workers. Gardeners, housekeepers, social event service providers - at the higher end you will find the cars of personal assistants and the like. Even from the aerial view I can tell that many of those vehicles are pickup trucks and delivery and cargo vans.

Some probably are, but I doubt it's more than half. At least one house (second on the right from the entrance) doesn't appear to have a garage. There are several nice cars and SUV's in the mix. Residents may have a nice vehicle or two, second and third cars are frequently more typical nice cars like Civics and Buicks and especially when they're for the children. I've also known a few wealthy people who love their pickup trucks. I'm not buying the "not in line with the houses" argument.

[bing101]

http://m.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/San-Francisco-s-privately-owned-streets-Do-you-11746359.php

Here is an update from SF gate on this argument. Some San Francisco street may be privately owned.

[Techknow]

Since certain people can get their way, the couple who purchased the street were forced to return it, sadly.

http://www.businessinsider.com/presidio-terrace-couple-speaks-out-against-homeowners-2018-2

[DTComposer]

Since certain people can get their way, the couple who purchased the street were forced to return it, sadly.

http://www.businessinsider.com/presidio-terrace-couple-speaks-out-against-homeowners-2018-2

This article misses a lot, including the previous passive-aggressive statements by the couple regarding their proposed use for the street, and the ineptness of the city government in doing their due diligence once the tax notices were being returned to them and once the street was actually put up for sale.

In terms of the "rich-always-get-their-way" aspect of this - from the article:

Presidio Terrace was one of several hundred parcels (mostly vacant lots) that hit the auction block in 2015, according to the San Francisco Office of the Treasurer and Tax Collector. Cheng said that during his research, he discovered that two of those parcels were private streets like Presidio Terrace: one in the Balboa Park neighborhood, and the other in Outer Richmond.

Both parcels sold in less affluent neighborhoods.

"Nobody cared," Cheng said.

Of course nobody cared, because the buyers wouldn't be able to bully the less-affluent residents into buying the street back at a huge profit under the threat of selling the street parking.

And the idea that the couple "didn't know about the significance of the street when buying it" is highly suspicious against their supposed love for the city and its historical significance. You didn't Google the street which would have instantly told you about the history and some of its former residents? I call BS.

It's always fashionable to pile on rich people, but again, as someone who has personal contacts in the middle of this particular situation and has watched it unfold over the last year, it's a bureaucratic snafu and everyone should just walk away.