555 Fulton Approved Design

Not only did San Francisco’s Planning Department brush aside an appeal of the proposed 555 Fulton project, but went so far as to approve the original Saitowitz design. Booyah!

555 Fulton Original Design Detail

The residential parking ratio was, however, reduced to 0.5:1.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Dan

    Sanity and good design prevail. Yay!

  2. Posted by Tweety

    Wish it was taller.

  3. Posted by g

    Suck it, NIMBYs!

  4. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    Nice ! While I was not bothered by the other incarnation, this one looks a lot better. I hope reality matches the rendering closely.

  5. Posted by mikey woodz

    Right on, Go Stanley

  6. Posted by Invented

    Brilliant — even if only 5 floors…. It’s time. (I’ll miss the marble sculptor/ glass etcher studio there tho…)

  7. Posted by Mikey

    It’s better than the revised version. Still a cliche and uninteresting, but bland and inoffensive enough.

  8. Posted by Channel Glass

    Dear Stanley,
    Is that channel glass? If so hope the contractor follows your design specifications to the “T”.

  9. Posted by Snork17

    Nice! I like this much better than the bastardized version.

  10. Posted by kathleen

    Not a Saitowitz multifamily fan.
    I must be the only one. Needs more parking.

  11. Posted by curmudgeon

    although not generally a fan of Stanley (at all), I am hopeful that this project will be “warmer” than most of his, and I welcome some architectural variety into the district. Hope it goes forward soon.
    And, of course, happy the planning commission squashed the nimbys

  12. Posted by jose

    channel glass. the stuff is wildly expensive. surprised stanley is using it again. the third st garage sits with half or more of its proposed glass missing due to the cost.

  13. Posted by alex

    hurrah, anything but more heller-manus crap…

  14. Posted by rubber_chicken

    Actually, ALL the channel glass at the UCSF parking garage was removed. Apparently some pieces broke/ blew/ fell off. At best, the idea as realized was weak. Stanley falls in love with his renderings and the buildings rarely measure up (1234 Howard being a notable exception).

  15. Posted by stucco-sux

    Everyone is a nimby, depending on the subject. SF argument: You’re nothing but a NIMBY! Oh yeah, well you’re nothing but a FASCIST! Oh yeah, well you’re a FASCIST NUMBY!
    Did you see Betty White on SNL? Yes, she was great. NIMBY! FASCIST!

  16. Posted by stucco-sux

    OK, for no reason in particular, other than I think Socket SIte readers are such a class among themselves, a real estate reminiscence… I just have to share it.
    Yesterday my other half and I drove past a place we lived, a long time ago and saw a for-sale sign in the window. Its what was, when we lived there, Patty’s apartment, now a TIC for sale.
    But to us it will always be Patty’s apartment. She was our next door neighbor.
    We moved in the Indian summer of 1991, and our 1st Saturday on the deck was watching the Oakland Hills fire, from the 1st minutes to the last embers.
    And a few days after we were relaxing on the deck and kept hearing a thump, thump, thump coming from the deck next door. I looked over, and it was Patty, asleep in her bikini, in the kiddy pool she liked to lay in, with an empty liter plastic bottle of gin blowing in the wind against the inside lip of the pool.
    Thump, thump.
    Patty. She slung cocktails at every legendary SF nightspot in its heyday. She picked up cabbies if they were cute and a lot of other men. She LOVED men. Especially gay men. She drove a vintage black corvette. She had boobs the size of liter bottles of gin, and she loved her cat, Sterling. Though he was long gone. Her apartment was an homage to Sterling, however.
    Here’s Patty’s place, for sale as a TIC, now — at well over $800 a square foot. What a town. But if you buy it, understand you have some gi-normous bra cups to fill, and much more. This town is about the people you meet here. And if you don’t come for that, please spend your $800 a sq. ft. someplace else.,-N246832,-N,-A,-N23473178
    Patty spent one night on a kitchen stool till we stumbled in from the clubs at 2:30 am. There was a possum in her bedroom (not uncommon in those days on twin peaks — possums & skunks).
    We found it hiding in her stuffed toys — I kid you not. Like E.T. Just another furry face, trying to blend in.
    Have a nice weekend.

  17. Posted by noearch

    What the hell does that have to do with this project?
    By the way..I’m not a huge fan of Saitowitz, but I think this one is a winner…fresh, very modern, unique.
    Let’s get it built.

  18. Posted by Jlasf

    While I admire Stanley’s aesthetic, how many people can actually live in his type of design? If you look at the floorplan at 1234 Howard, the “2 bedroom” isn’t a 2 bedroom – unless the user of that bedroom has no need for privacy. (Office, media, dining room – that works.) I wonder if this new project will have same “open” type of interiors? (

  19. Posted by Mole Man

    Open living exchanges one set of limitations for another. Some like it that way and others do not. Making variations available expands the market.
    Many two bedroom apartments are actually used as one bedroom and office spaces. In that context the two bedroom units at 1234 Howard are more of like modest single floor live/work spaces.

  20. Posted by hugh

    I lived on this block of Birch in 1992, when it was populated by cracked-out prostitutes and discarded mattresses, the site of a robbery/murder of a taxi driver, and a four-bedroom flat went for $800.
    Obviously it’s changed. and this development is a huge improvement over the block-long wall facing Birch. I have to agree with the concerns of the planning department, though. Even though it’s pretty, it’s monotonous. There’s something about a block-long development that feels bland even with the best design. Granted, mega-development is perfectly congruent with everything on Laguna north to Post St. (the tragic Fillmore redevelopment that will probably be there forever).
    This will be great for property values on Grove, acting as the official northern border of the yuppie part of Hayes Valley.
    Wouldn’t it be more urban-feeling to have two or three separate, different residential developments on the block instead? So much of the new development here feels so LA. I’m convinced that a lot of the character of SF has to do with the original narrow lot sizes.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles