Purchased by Steel Arc Properties (a.k.a. the Martin Building Company) for $4.6 million last year, plans to add two modern stories and twelve apartments atop the former Volvo Centrum shop at 3512 16th Street have been drafted by BAR Architects.

In addition to the twelve new residential units, the proposed redevelopment includes a new 3,300-square-foot restaurant, 2,000 square feet of other commercial space and a 262 square foot “medial office” on the ground floor.

Four private roof decks would occupy the roof, connected to the two and three bedrooms below. And the plans do not include a replacement garage.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by ben z

    wonder how long it takes zeitgeist to file a complaint about a shadow…

  2. Posted by scott f

    Looks ridiculous. Tear it down and build an 8-story building instead.

    • Posted by Elitist Pig

      Right… let’s just do a max. height version of the new addition.

      • Posted by SocketSite

        The site is zoned for development up to 45 feet in height, which is the full height of the project as proposed and rendered above.

    • Posted by The dude

      Actually looks amazing. Clear contrast between old/new and heavy/light.

      • Posted by Brian M

        Tosh. We only complain here as we are all world class architects with boatloads of money who can always do it better.

    • Posted by Chris

      Since the zoning only allows 45 feet, nothing like what you propose will happen. Also, do you know anything about SF? This is a city where people appeal projects over a mere 5 feet and bring lawsuits at the drop of a hat. So, no, there will be no 8-story building at that location, and it is quite possible nothing will get built at all.

      • Posted by scott f

        I know plenty about San Francisco and how its politics are changing. 87% of Millennials in SF support more housing construction in their neighborhoods. Our neighbors of all ages increasingly understand the need for adequate housing in order to preserve the city’s heart and soul. We will organize and demand reasonable height limits, which, on this centrally located site, 45′ is not.

        • Posted by AB

          Where do you get the 87% figure from? Genuinely interested.

          • Posted by scott f

            Apologies, I heard it verbally from someone who it turns out got it wrong – it’s 70% of Millennials who support more housing in their neighborhoods. 57% (still a majority!) of people aged 40 to 64.

            Thanks for calling me out. Those numbers are clearly high enough to build a political movement around, but I should be careful not to inadvertently exaggerate.

          • Posted by Jake

            Uh, you’ve still got your facts wrong. This was a 9-county poll and they did not breakout the SF results from the overall Bay Area results (pdf at namelink). The sponsor of this survey is the Bay Area Council, which describes themselves as “a business-sponsored, public policy advocacy organization for the nine-county Bay Area.”

            They surveyed 1000 people, of which ~13% live in SF and ~37% are age 18-39, which is their definition of “millennial.” No way to know from this if SF “millennials” “support the building of new housing in my neighborhood” (the survey question) by 100% or zero percent. No way to even know from this if they surveyed any “millennial” residents of SF. FWIW, they surveyed as many residents of Solano+Sonoma as SF.

            I’m not aware of any SF neighborhood in which it is not legal to “build new housing”, though not sure about the Presidio.

            The survey did not ask tough choice questions, such as would you favor building new housing in your neighborhood even if it increased traffic congestion in your neighborhood. The survey did find that among the “3 most serious problems facing the Bay Area today”, “housing” declined for the third year in a row, while “traffic” increased and was only behind cost of living.

        • Posted by Spencer

          Not that many people with money. Are what millenials think, and millenials will become more conservative as they get older, same as every generation before them

  3. Posted by Jason

    I’m fine with this in theory but this is stunningly ugly.

    • Posted by Orland

      That was my inclination toward the initial renderings for the Rockwell condos on Pine @Franklin including a couple of old garages as the building’s street facade and entrance. However, I very much like the result.

  4. Posted by Adam

    Another interesting modern design ruined by this need to save another boring brick garage. There are buildings worth saving-this is not one of them.

  5. Posted by bachman_erlich_overdrive

    This is great, in the same way watching a Greyhound trying to mount a Cocker Spaniel is great.

    They’re both nice dog breeds with selling points, but together seems…. awkward.

    421 Arguello, 1335 Larkin: A veritable mini-generation of buildings that will be difficult to justify in years to come.

    “See, son people loved cars so much they loved the buildings that went ’round ’em.”

    “But Dad, that’s just stupid. -Wait the Guber’s here. Let’s go.”

  6. Posted by Dave

    This old building has character, something that can’t be said for many of the new modern buildings going up in SF. Glad they’re saving it.

  7. Posted by Nelson

    The problem with making more and more housing is that no new roads are being added or old roads widened. What good is cramming another hundred thousand people into San Francisco is everyone is stuck in traffic?

  8. Posted by Matt M

    Fine if I’m in the minority, but I love this project. The new addition enlivens the entire structure and breathes life into a neglected block of the Castro. More please.

    • Posted by Government Shrinkage

      I live very close and I completely agree.

  9. Posted by Brad

    I quite like this design. A nice change of pace.

Add a Comment

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