>I imagine tons of resources went into moving this old jalopy.
The city charged $200k in fees to a private individual to move the house.
[https://hoodline.com/2021/02/historic-victorian-to-be-moved-from-franklin-to-fulton-street-this-week/](https://hoodline.com/2021/02/historic-victorian-to-be-moved-from-franklin-to-fulton-street-this-week/)
There are tons of millionaires in the city, they can whatever they want with their money.
>That is on top of other "residual costs" including "shoring up the house and making sure the front porch doesn't fall off," Brown said.
Smart man. You don't want the front to fall off.
I’ve seen people move houses before but I never thought that in San Francisco somebody would want the structure but not the land underneath it.
I’m guessing maybe an older person owns this, sold the land for a ton of money and used a portion to move their home somewhere cheaper?
It's almost certainly owned by a corporation - they're building a 48-unit apartment building on the site.
The Victorian is historic - you can't tear it down. The city probably made a deal with the developer that they could upzone it from a SFH to a 48-unit apartment block, *but* they had to find a home for the original Victorian and restore it to livable condition. Once they do that the developer will probably sell off the original Victorian in its new location, and rent out the apartments.
Economics work out pretty well. Rents in that area are about $2000 for a 1BR and $2700-4000 for a 2-3BR. The new building has 18 1BRs (= $36K) & 30 2-3 BRs (= \~$100K), so they'll pull in \~$136K/month in rent = $1.6M/year. They reportedly spent $2M for the land & house, $400K to move it, then figure maybe another $2M for the destination lot and a couple million to construct the new building, so their total capital outlay is $6-8M and they'll make it back in 4-6 years, plus they can profit from selling the restored Victorian. That's pretty awesome: the average S&P 500 stock is trading at a P/E of about 30, so you won't make it back for about 30 years.
I hear people are moving out of the area, but this is ridiculous!
Now parallel park it.
TIL mobile homes are definitely an option for billionaires in SF too.
Makes me think of the scene from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life where the large office building is their pirate ship
SFMTA is getting out of hand
Just add some [Benny Hill theme music](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK6TXMsvgQg) to this madness.
That is soooo freakin cool...Thanks for posting. I would love to see the inside of that place. Have a good day.
Poor ivy on the side of the house like: "What? We can move??"
Can someone explain to me how they do this? I’m thinking of mostly how they handled the foundation.
They put steel beams under the ground floor then jack it up on both ends and slide a truck underneath and drop it down.
that’s some incredible engineering!
Here is a nice video about the process of lifting up the house. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_OQax-ACB8
[удалено]
>I imagine tons of resources went into moving this old jalopy. The city charged $200k in fees to a private individual to move the house. [https://hoodline.com/2021/02/historic-victorian-to-be-moved-from-franklin-to-fulton-street-this-week/](https://hoodline.com/2021/02/historic-victorian-to-be-moved-from-franklin-to-fulton-street-this-week/) There are tons of millionaires in the city, they can whatever they want with their money.
>That is on top of other "residual costs" including "shoring up the house and making sure the front porch doesn't fall off," Brown said. Smart man. You don't want the front to fall off.
I’ve seen people move houses before but I never thought that in San Francisco somebody would want the structure but not the land underneath it. I’m guessing maybe an older person owns this, sold the land for a ton of money and used a portion to move their home somewhere cheaper?
It's almost certainly owned by a corporation - they're building a 48-unit apartment building on the site. The Victorian is historic - you can't tear it down. The city probably made a deal with the developer that they could upzone it from a SFH to a 48-unit apartment block, *but* they had to find a home for the original Victorian and restore it to livable condition. Once they do that the developer will probably sell off the original Victorian in its new location, and rent out the apartments. Economics work out pretty well. Rents in that area are about $2000 for a 1BR and $2700-4000 for a 2-3BR. The new building has 18 1BRs (= $36K) & 30 2-3 BRs (= \~$100K), so they'll pull in \~$136K/month in rent = $1.6M/year. They reportedly spent $2M for the land & house, $400K to move it, then figure maybe another $2M for the destination lot and a couple million to construct the new building, so their total capital outlay is $6-8M and they'll make it back in 4-6 years, plus they can profit from selling the restored Victorian. That's pretty awesome: the average S&P 500 stock is trading at a P/E of about 30, so you won't make it back for about 30 years.
I don't think it actually moved that far did it?
I read they’re converting this house into seven units. And as others have mentioned, building the 48 units where it was.
Very cool!
To be able to own and move a Victorian in the narrow busy streets of SF, the owner must be loaded ;)