360 5th Street

With a bit of drilling going on at the lot on the corner of 5th and Shipley, a reader wonders what’s in the works for the Central SoMa site.

360 5th Street Site

As proposed, the three two-story buildings at 360 5th Street, 210 and 212 Clara Street will be razed, the western half of the block will be excavated to a depth of 15-feet, and a 123-unit residential building will rise between four and seven stories across the site, with 1,200 square feet of retail space fronting 5th Street, 8,000 square feet of “artist/craftsman commercial space” (i.e. PDR) and a basement garage for 41 cars.

360 5th Street Massing

And if approved by the end of the year, the 360 5th Street project, which won’t need an up-zoning in order to proceed as proposed, could break ground in the middle of 2017. We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Alex

    Horrible use of land. The central subway is only blocks away. This project should at least go up to 10-15 stories especially since they’re rezoning much of the area anyway.

    • Posted by SocketSite

      The proposed Central SoMa Plan would not increase the height limit for the 360 5th Street site above the 85 feet for which it is currently zoned.

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      this should definitely be upzoned and be at least 10+floors in this location

    • Posted by Sabbie

      If it’s so incredibly transit friendly, why do they need 41 parking spaces? That space could be used for more housing units instead.

  2. Posted by Hunter

    Agreed – too short.

    Loosely related: Would love to see a SocketSite report on why the ground-floor retail spaces at so many new buildings remain entirely empty (see: Mosso on nearby Folsom/5th, Nema on Mkt/10th, etc.). What’s the point of requiring this space if it’s unused?

    • Posted by RobBob

      I’m sure if they dropped the rental asking price enough, someone would move in. At least for a business either the economics make sense or it doesn’t, unlike people’s private residences.

    • Posted by Dave

      Good point – the code should be changed to allow other ground floor uses. The way we shop is changing and over time its likely going to get harder to fill these spaces up.

    • Posted by SFRealist

      I heard a developer once say that the space in most of these buildings was too small for retail. He didn’t think that those size stores were viable. (Is that true? I don’t know. That’s what he said.)

      • Posted by Hunter

        Weird—I’ve heard from retailers that it’s the reverse: Older buildings have small, narrow spaces that work for a variety of uses; often these new developments have spaces that are 3000+ sq feet.

  3. Posted by Bobby Mucho

    The point of ‘requiring’ them is to add an additional revenue stream, community amenities, safer and more active streets and perhaps. Just because it isn’t full yet, doesn’t mean there isn’t a need or desire. Cost and terms are often a massive deterrent.

    • Posted by Hunter

      If the landlords have no issue leaving them empty for years, then I would say the cost / lease terms need to change. And since developers don’t care if there is vacant space on the ground floor, making a neighborhood feel empty and less safe, then the City needs to incentivize getting tenants in there. From the outside, it doesn’t look like Mosso or Nema care about finding an actual tenant.

  4. Posted by Just Me

    Outrageous. This building should be at least 358 stories tall to accommodate all of the East Coast transplants who want to live in San Francisco! Harrumph! (paid post by SFBARF).

    • Posted by van nessident

      Wow, the free movement of people between US states is something that’s permitted? The NERVE! Where are our internal passports?

  5. Posted by SFRenter

    I am not a real estate developer – in fact, I don’t even own any real estate but I enjoy reading this website and find most Socketsite contributors to be very intelligent and insightful. Do you guys think anyone from SF Planning Department reads Socketsite comments? I wish you guys ran the SF Planning Department…

  6. Posted by Conifer

    I am old enough to remember Herb Caen’s phrase “south of the slot” applying to everything south of Market Street, but mostly this neighborhood. With all these new apartments, many hundreds more coming, mostly too small for a family, how are the singles and couples faring without the normal services of a SF neighborhood? Do they have a Safeway? Do they have a Mayflower Market for good sandwiches? An equivalent of Bryan’s, and a dry cleaner and hardware store? Pas de commerces?

    • Posted by Hunter

      Hmmm the neighborhood has a Whole Foods one big block over, and a Cole Hardware a few blocks up. More amenities should be coming via the ground floor retail, but they’re not filling the spaces very quickly…

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles