3060 Fillmore Street Site

Speaking of big plans for shuttered Real Food Company sites in San Francisco, the owners of the former Cow Hollow location on the southeast corner of Fillmore and Filbert have met with the City to discuss a conversion of the nearly 12,000-square-foot building into a “luxury fine casual restaurant and fitness studio.”

And according to a plugged-in tipster, said “luxury fine casual restaurant” is actually a Shake Shack, which would be the first Shake Shack in San Francisco and Northern California. The official plans are slated to be revealed to neighbors next week.

Keep in mind that the 3060 Fillmore Street site had been on the market and positioned as a prime redevelopment opportunity for a four-story residential building, or three stories of condos over a ground floor commercial space, but with a rather eye-popping price. We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.

64 thoughts on “San Francisco’s First Shake Shack Could Open Right Here”
    1. Stop. Just stop letting “no” be your knee-jerk reaction. You read three paragraphs and your reaction is “no”. Gosh my fellow citizens frustrate me sometimes.

      Here’s what I hear when I read your question (which is more of a statement). There is a company that started out with one store. People like it, and now there are multiple store. They have been successful and sell a product that people want. Therefore, there is no place for it in San Francisco.

      1. Walmart fits your criteria too: “There is a company that started out with one store. People like it, and now there are multiple store [sic]. They have been successful and sell a product that people want.”

        1. Are you really comparing Shake Shack to Walmart?
          I do believe that the starting point should be yes, not no. And yes, I do believe that a healthy mix of formula retail and local businesses is critical to making it all work.

          1. I don’t think Wal-Mart’s major concern is opening a store in San Francisco. It is how are they going to compete with Amazon and other on-line retailers. Do SF residents want to go to WalMart to get Tupperware, or do they want to order it on line and get same day delivery?

          2. In reply to “Another Anon” one could argue that this preference is very logical given the optics, the politics, worker treatment and employee policies. Walmart is a miserable place to work. Costco…less so.

      2. Bit of an overreaction from JMO. Logistically, it’s a relevant question. I don’t believe the formula retail ban applies to Cow Hollow as there are already many chain stores on Union.

        1. Perhaps.But I do think that anon 2.5 point was that his/her starting point was “no” because there were multiple units of Shake Shacks. I think that is the wrong starting point.

    2. I agree, total overreaction. My initial reaction to this story was also to wonder about a formula retail ban, not because I’m in favor of those but because they are prevalent in “enlightened” SF neighborhoods.

  1. Luxury fine casual restaurant? It’s a burger joint. Tried it twice in Boston and it’s a burger joint. Maybe it is the East Coast version of an In and Out burger.

      1. Five Guys is better than In-N-Out by miles, but that’s still a burger joint and certainly neither “luxury” nor “fine”.

  2. Just do something useful with it! A Shake Shack (with low rise condos on top) would bring in lots of traffic for other businesses in that area. It would also make parking worse but many people just walk or uber/lyft already.

  3. “luxury fine casual restaurant and fitness studio.”

    I’m assuming these will be two separate businesses, but still, isn’t “oxymoronity” grounds for refusing an application ??

    1. Actually the lines at Shake Shack will be so long that it will help you achieve your “standing” goal for the day.

  4. I’m not a personal fan of Shake Shack, and certainly it is a NATIONAL chain, but this would be the first REGIONAL location of an incredibly beloved and hyped restaurant and it would draw a huge crowd. I think this would be a great fit and a big hit, especially if it was open late enough to cater to the bar crowds as well.

    1. I gathered from the article that the current owners are abandoning plans to sell to a developer and now wish to rent the property for the stated purpose in lieu of the former proposed residential expansion of the building.

  5. i dunno…shake shack would be a better fit in SoMa or downtown IMO. Just based on where its at in other cities. i’m sure they would get a lot of great business there and marina people would eat there, but i definitely get more of a big city, downtown neighborhood vibe from all the other shake shacks i’ve been to

  6. The problem is SF has always been home to homegrown restaurants, hardware stores and the like. This mass produced garbage and big box stores are killing the aesthetic of a once unique city.

  7. Awesome. Shake shack started as a hot dog cart to raise money to rebuild Madison square park where they still exist. The company pays better and offers more benefits than others of its size and also partners with local purveyors in its menu. It’s a great addition to the neighborhood.

    Re: formula retail. Yes there are zoning overlays here but formula retail is permitted under a certain size with a conditional use permit “CUP”. Only hayes, north beach and parts of Chinatown have an outright ban on formul retail. Oh and by the way – that had great effect at keeping rents down in hayes valley which doubled since it took effect.

    Shack is a great company and exactly what the neighborhood needs here which frankly is a larger expensive space very few restaurants can afford.

  8. Oh hell no, don’t bring some crappy generic chain store to this prime spot. Building is way too big for it anyways and we have Umami just around the corner.

    1. The plan is not to turn the whole building into a restaurant. It would primarily be a fitness studio (although there are no shortage of places to work out nearby). It will probably be approved.

      Yes, the developer will need conditional use approval, but they will likely get it. What else is really going to go there? Who cares if it is a chain or not?

      I live in the neighborhood, and I know the residents ultimately decide what lasts and what doesn’t. If people don’t like it, they will not patronize it, and it will quickly close. So, let people decide for themselves. The neighborhood already has enough salons, gyms, overpriced boutiques, and “locally owned” pricey places to eat. Umami is overrated, and it is a chain, too. I’m not into the overpriced burger joint, but I would rather eat at Roam if I wanted to spend too much on a burger.

      So, let’s give Shack Shack a go, and the people will decide for themselves.

      1. Enjoy your B&T invasion all circling the block 24/7 looking for parking. It will be like Fleet Week everyday

        1. So let’s turn it into a parking garage? God forbid anyone outside of living in the marina enjoys a neighborhood.

          Does anyone have a problem with freedom to choose where they shop and spend their money? Don’t like it. Don’t go. End of story.

    2. Hilarious. You’re opposed to Shake Shach as a chain *because* Umami is already there? The irony is staggering.

      1. Of course he is. Progressives are so regressive with their land use control ideas. If people had any idea how restrictive and difficult they City can be to get a use approved and open you would not read about the death of retail as nauseum you would be reading about how the city and nimbys create more vacancy than other ‘market’ factors!

        1. Except that retail is dying in many other areas with no such controls. Retail is dying because of “the internet” of course, but also because the vampire squids have larded up many retail companies with debt and fees and Ayn Rand nonsense (Sears).

    3. Crappy generic chain that started to raise money for a park in nyc and provided such great customer service and product that people kept coming back. That company? Sounds generic or more realistically AUTHENTIC. What’s your idea for the neighborhood?

  9. Mr. Meyer is certainly welcome in SF. They should also add another 25-stories on top of that commercial corner space. That neighborhood is prime for rezoning higher. The Mission and Castro areas also need to build bigger. btw, Danny’s burgers are good, but our I&O animal style reigns supreme. Perhaps Mrs. Curry should have considered this location instead of MT.

  10. Adam Fleishman left Umami a long time ago. Umami Burger’s food and service has rapidly declined since. It should not even be mentioned here. There are many more better burgers in town.

    1. It did decline and I had written it off, but someone dragged me there (King St. location) a few weeks ago and it was really delicious. Shake Shack is good, way better than In-N-Out but not as good as Five Guys IMO.

  11. Let me guess Sierra Jeff you want a subsidized natural nut store with a meditation room paid for by rent offsets by taxpayers. Instead of crying what is your idea?

    1. wow. just, wow. you have so many of your own issues that you’re projecting onto others. I think I can oppose a tacky greasy spoon restaurant – in an upscale shopping district – without “crying” or being some kind of “meditation room” savant. you *really* need to tone it down.

      1. Tacky? Hardly. Do you live in Ciw Hollow? I’m sure many of the young residents in this area would love a Shake Skack here.

  12. Step aside folks. I have my Honorary PhD from Burger U. Habit Burger is better than 5 Guys. The 5 guys in Tanforan Shopping Center is horrible. Never had a bad burger from In N Out.

  13. We need it on Stanyan Street to replace that McDonalds. Or even better yet, at the GG Park Haight Street entrance. I can just see the tables out front… perhaps they’d even start work programs for some of the very capable kids that beg and sleep there (instead of working).

  14. Planning Code appropriately requires conditional use authorization for a chain store like Shake Shack. That gives the neighborhood the opportunity to weigh on on whether the proposed restaurant is “necessary or desirable.” It’s clearly not necessary, but if people in the neighborhood think it’s desirable, than it should be approved. All the posturing by people here is pretty meaningless. People who actually live there are the ones who will (rightfully) most influence the decision of the Planning Commission.

      1. Yeah. I’m doubtful the Planning Commission is going to listen to the neighbors when they have supervisors like Aaron Peskin calling them up and yelling at them in the middle of the night – saying ” no chains!..”

        Our process gives the neighbors the right to weigh in – but anyone that has actually been to one of these conditional use hearings knows the deck is stacked.
        Ed Jew made a small fortune extorting chain “bubble tea” shops before he got sent up to the big house.

  15. I’m about as much of a neighbor to this place as you can get. While I’m frustrated that Real Foods shut down (because now I’m stuck walking to Mollie Stones or just using instacart to avoid Whole Foods), an upscale burger place here is fairly ideal considering there are pizza and taco places across Fillmore. After almost 15 years of living nearby, I still feel these few blocks of Fillmore are underused and underdeveloped for, what I think, is a fairly prime location so anything that brings in foot traffic is fine with me.

    But back to housing… Does the Shake Shack and fitness center then negate any potential conversion to housing? I’d rather the owners lower the price of the lot and see it developed. A 4-5 story building would have lovely views and be a welcome addition. I’d buy in in two seconds.

    Finally, I don’t know how influential the CHA would be here in opposing a development here. They used to be especially adept at stymying such projects.

Leave a Reply

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