CFAH

3584 California Street Site

The 26-space parking lot on the northeast corner of California and Spruce could soon be history as plans to build a four-story building, with 12 condos over a 3,700 square foot retail space and garage parking for 20 cars, including 8 spaces for the medical building next door, have been submitted to planning for review

Plans to redevelop the Presidio Heights site known as 3584 California have been on and off the boards for over four decades, with the last detailed set drafted by Kotas/Pantaleoni Architects in 2001.

Gary Gee Architects has been engaged to refine the designs this time around.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Sierrajeff

    This would be excellent – Laurel Heights could use this infill in place of a fugly parking lot.

  2. Posted by Oh Dear

    Should be taller, at least 400 feet. Oh this isnt the O and M planning area….sorry.

  3. Posted by Joel

    An apartment building with pitched roofs… what is this, the peninsula?

    • Posted by Mark

      No different than the colonial architecture I see popping up in the far east bay.

    • Posted by Orland

      Absolutely terrible design, but do not fear. NIMBYS by avocation will be coming out of the woodwork.

    • Posted by Zig

      Since the area is near a very suburban part of SF seems appropriate

  4. Posted by anon

    It certainly could be taller here, but anything to replace that nasty parking lot would be welcome.

    • Posted by Mark

      Agreed. Especially on a corner. 6 stories isn’t unreasonable.

      • Posted by moto mayhem

        agree, 6 stories would be optimal

        • Posted by Sierrajeff

          6 stories would be completely out of character with everything around it. This design is perfectly acceptable.

          • Posted by moto mayhem

            the entire laurel village “strip mall” should be destroyed and rebuilt at 6 floors with ground floor retail.

          • Posted by Ep

            There’s really no perceivable difference on the street between a 4 story building and a 6- or even 8-story building of that massing. All this “out of scale” talk that gets thrown at every development is a bit silly. Not every building needs to be the exact same height.

          • Posted by Mark

            Sorry, but you’re wrong. There are many examples of 6+ story buildings on corners that fit quite well with the streetscape. Check out Judah/9th…a nice Edwardian on the corner surrounded by smaller buildings.

          • Posted by anon

            There’s a 6 story building in literally the next block west.

  5. Posted by eddy

    Good. They should add a story.

  6. Posted by steff

    As someone who lives in the neighborhood, the height proposed will be equal (or around the same) as some newer condo’s down the street. If higher, it would look very out of scale in that space.

    • Posted by Mark

      With that logic I guess all buildings under 10 stories in the FiDi should be razed and replaced with highrises because they look out of place.

      • Posted by Sierrajeff

        Well actually I would agree with that. The block between Davis and Drumm in particular is ludicrous – I mean, I get why it’s (partially) preserved, for historic reasons – but every time I look down on it, it just seems so ridiculously under-built.

        But more to your snark – there’s a big difference between something being uniquely tall, and standing out, versus being uniquely short, and being lost in the shuffle.

        • Posted by Orland

          You didn’t seem to feel that way about Foundry Square.

  7. Posted by John

    I think 4 stories is fine in a neighborhood like Presidio Heights. If it was 4 stories in central SoMa next to Caltrain (which is often the case), then it would be an issue.

  8. Posted by Futurist

    One of the least talented architects practicing today in San Francisco. Zero talent producing crap.

    • Posted by Serge

      Gary Gee Architects? Looking at their work, they have done some good work (77 Van Ness and the SFR on Clayton). 188 King and 8 Landers don’t look too bad, either.

  9. Posted by sf

    Is Peter Keating the architect?

  10. Posted by Serge

    Did Kotas/Pantaleoni really design that sketch? Looking at their past work, they seem to be fond of the “make a box and cut out some square windows” design. And I use “design” loosely.

    I called the owner of this lot (and the adjacent medical office building) some time ago and he was completely opposed to selling. I do however believe they were hoping to get a JV going for the development. Looks like they scrounged up some cash.

  11. Posted by Joe

    This plus the massive plans to remove the UCSF building 2 blocks away and replace it with a mixed housing and retail on that spot, too, are nice signs of progress for what otherwise is a pretty dull zone. Also, not really Presidio Heights — more Laurel Village

  12. Posted by spencer

    Isn’t this laurel heights, and not presidio heights?

    [Editor’s Note: Technically, no. The dividing line is California Street.]

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles