Plans to raze the one-and-a-half-story building at 3565 Geary Boulevard, which is currently home to Grand Hot Pot Lounge, are in the works. And as envisioned, a seven-story building will rise up to 65 feet in height upon the Lone Mountain site which is actually zoned for development up to 80 feet.

And while the site is only zoned for the development of around 20 residential units, in terms of density, the project team is planning to leverage California’s Density Bonus program to build up to 54 units of “student housing,” with a mix of 48 one-bedrooms and 6 twos, over 3,100 square feet of new ground floor retail space and a 26 car garage.

We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Kraus

    The maximum bonus achievable via the CA State Density Bonus Law is 35% — not 170%.
    As reported, this development proposal makes no sense.

    • Posted by SocketSite

      Our mention of “student housing” shouldn’t be ignored.

      • Posted by Homer

        Explain please

        • Posted by SocketSite

          Density limits for “group housing” developments on this parcel are roughly three times higher than for standard residential units. And while the preliminary application for the proposed project includes some contradictory information, aiming for a group housing designation would allow the number of units above.

          There’s also the possibility the development would be 100 percent below market rate/affordable.

          • Posted by Kraus

            OK, I kind of get it now. It’ll be interesting to see how Planning reacts to this one — it’ll be a good one to follow.

            The “student housing” designation gets rid of the local inclusionary requirements, yet the application of the State Density Bonus Law still requires them to provide a certain number of below-market-rate units on site.

            However, the really clever ( and, I must say, suspect) aspect of this proposal is the “disguising” of standard/conventional “dwelling units” (i.e. 1-Bedroom and 2-Bedrooms Units) as “group housing” in order to increase density.

          • Posted by Boher

            it seems like more projects are opting for the State bonus program over San Francisco’s HOME SF program. Why so?

  2. Posted by bachman_erlich_overdrive

    Students can overlook the columbarium and ponder eternity.

    Plus have delicious Round Table [pizza].

  3. Posted by Homer

    If it’s student housing, why does it need parking for 26 cars? Do USF students really need cars

    • Posted by Rational Thinker

      Considering the fact that half of the USF student body hails from the likes of Shanghai and Tianjin, those Maseratis and Bimmers need a comfortable home. But then again…why would they stay in such a cramped space when they can occupy those spacious towers around Fillmore.

      • Posted by Chris

        Considering that only 20.6% of USF’s freshman class of 2017 was Asian and 34% of the class received Pell Grants, it makes it quite unlikely that half their student body comes from China and drives Maseratis.

        Your comment not only comes across as low-key racism, it is also factually incorrect. You are anything but a rational thinker.

    • Posted by pal

      It’s not about whether they need them, it’s about whether they’ll *have* them, and whether that will impact the surrounding area greatly (it will).

  4. Posted by Homer

    54 units of student housing next to an assisted living retirement home. What could go wrong?

    • Posted by bachman_erlich_overdrive

      Keg stands + walkers.

    • Posted by Adam

      At least the neighbors at the Columbarium won’t mind the noise.

  5. Posted by Jonathan Isaack

    Wow! It’s unbelievable how many NIMBYs are out there and have posted on this forum. WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE? Why not instead of complaining and disapproving the project come up with a different proposal for sake of argument. Or are you saying you really love the current building with ZERO housing? No one loves hot pot that much! Stop your NIMBYsm and support this and all other housing projects on Geary.

    • Posted by Sierrajeff

      Um, what? I see a small handful of comments above you, mostly snarky not “disapproving”.

  6. Posted by BuildHighAndDense

    The parking seems excessive considering the 38 has some major upgrades coming with BRT, maybe they meant 26 bike parking spots? I doubt students can afford or even need a car in this area, or does the retail need it? Otherwise, a good re-use of space and student housing helps with the rental inventory crunch. Look forward to the renderings!

  7. Posted by TropicalRichmond

    Do it. The current building is an eyesore and has cycled through more businesses than I can name. This is actually a great spot for housing. I do think there needs to be parking. Of course students have cars, people in the city have cars. I say this as someone who has never owned or driven a car but I watch the daily dance for parking in the neighborhood and you can’t expect everyone to be car-less.

  8. Posted by Sabbie

    Sweet, I’m just going to enroll my grandma in some college courses and get her that cheap discount housing! The only bummer will be when the 38 Geary flies by- four buses in a row, every twenty minutes, all completely full.

    • Posted by Pablito

      I can always manage to find space to squeeze aboard that fourth bus….

  9. Posted by ghostwriter

    That’s a great site, I wish they could include the Round Table Pizza, the gift shop, and ATT in the project.

    Build housing on Geary!

  10. Posted by Miraloma Man

    I am hardly a YIMBY, but if there is any corridor that could be redeveloped at a much higher density, it’s Geary Boulevard. Most of the stuff that is there now is junk and higher buildings would make such a wide street much more attractive. Only thing is, you need a subway, heavy rail preferably. Failing that, real BRT where the buses pull up every two or three minutes, prempt the traffic signals, and do not have to share their lanes with cars. Unfortunately, this is America, where we can’t seem to do infrastructure anymore, because, you know, Freedumb. Tax cuts. Endless wars.

    • Posted by Sabbie

      Geary Bl. is not the problem for the Geary bus. They get bunched up at the other end, in the gridlock around Union Square and Market Street.

      • Posted by zig

        That is where we need the subway. Sadly the central subway was not built with this in mind

  11. Posted by Sculpy

    In this specific case—assuming student housing—but also in many cases on this board that get the same general comment: “There is too much parking” I have to point out that there might be a third of it devoted to carshare spots. More as time goes on. Pinching parking down to the point where carshare spots are not available would have to be a negative, no? Sure, it’s still cars on the road, but at least they are being used to maximum efficiency.

    • Posted by SocketSite

      As preliminarily proposed, none of the parking spaces would be designated as car sharing spots.

    • Posted by Patrick

      I read this as “…none of the spaces would be designated as car shaming spots.”

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles