As we first reported earlier this year:
The façade of the F. Lofrano & Son auto body garage at 1355 Fulton Street is currently slated to be saved. But plans to level the bulk of the 14,000-square-foot building are in the works. And as envisioned and newly rendered by SIA Consulting below, a 72,000-square-foot development could rise up to nine stories in height upon the NoPa infill site.
While the 12,000-square-foot parcel is currently only zoned for building up to 65 feet in height, the project team is planning to leverage the State’s Density Bonus Program to achieve the additional 20 feet.
And as such, the development would yield a total of 75 apartments, with a garage for 36 cars, a storage room for 75 bikes and a 2,100-square-foot retail space fronting Fulton Street.
The formal application to entitle the 8-story addition, while preserving the garage’s potentially historic façade, has just been submitted to Planning. We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.
This project has triggered quite a bit of neighbor pushback early on in the form of flyering, especially when compared to the Alouis Radiator project or the 400 Divis @ Oak project.
Over what? Too bad these neighborhood groups can’t be more empathetic, let alone constructive, to the need for housing throughout the entire city.
Absolutely agree. Our leaders need to make a clearer case for housing development as a social cause. Opposing housing in your neighborhood and fighting development that would lower housing prices is a racist stance in impact, if not always in intent, and we need to be clear about that.
Supporting this type and any type of luxury housing actually raises the price point in the City, it doesn’t lower housing prices. Few, if any, of the new developments are ‘starter’ housing for working class and middle class folks (household income $200,000 and below). More mid and high-rise development of this type makes a richer city – Manhattan has actually become much more expensive after 30 years of luxury high-rise development. The lack of even basic economics by Socketsite commenters is monotonous, probably because most commenters on this site are realtors or Yimby developers.
You have to hand it to the real estate agents and the developers, though. Rhetorically, “opposing housing…that would lower housing prices is a racist stance in impact” seems like it’d be a hell of a lot more effective in cowing your opponents into silence than yelling “Oh my Gawd! Haven’t you taken Econ 101! Increasing supply of housing reduces prices everybody knows that!” over and over again.
If someone was building a 10 story building in your backyard I’d like to see how you react
I’d be really happy to have a backyard to begin with.
Isn’t it much harder for the city to deny projects who utilize the State Density Bonus vs local incentives? This is a fantastic project IMO.
Housing on this site – YES. But a reasonable project. The previous Lofrano site sale, next door to 1355, yielded a good housing project, one very neighborly and in context with the scale of the blocks branching out from the Alamo Square Historic District, less than a full block away.
This project is TOO dense, and TOO tall. If we ruin the character of the neighborhood, what are we left with – Las Vegas? Build ’em tall in SOMA, not NOPA.
9 stories equals Las Vegas? What world are you living in?
Jim, there is a six or seven story building on Fulton and Scott, Scott and Hayes, Hayes and Pierce, Hayes and Steiner, and Grove and Divis. Given their presence for many decades on or near the Alamo Square Historic District, can you explain why this proposed building doesn’t fit in like they do?
From good urban planning perspective those buildings ‘work’ because they are on corners and not mid-block. The new projects on Divisadero at Oak and at Grove are on corners have negotiated setbacks, and work.
1355 Fulton offends in design (Las Vegas reference), and height – midblock high rise. SF Planning Dept PPA notes the need to fit in with neighbor properties, using set backs and rear open space. Materials are out of character with neighboring 3-4 stores Victorians.
Since when are facades of auto body shops such prized historical treasures?!
Since 2010.
It’s one thing to preserve a grand showroom but repair shop schlock? This building doesn’t appear too annoying tho.
We’re glad to see this proposed development in our neighborhood and want to see more bonus density heights going forward.
As before, NOPA is surrounded by thousands of low-income housing units in every direction; let’s get market housing built.
421 Arguello happened. 1335 Larkin Street did not. This probably won’t be built either way.
Building looks great, just get rid of that horrible looking facade that Planning wants developer to preserve!
Developers are blowing through height restrictions. Keep this at 6 or 7 stories. Period.
This is a mid block high rise not fitting with the historic presence of the neighborhood. You think people travel all over the world to come see a version of the Ramanda Inn? The developers didn’t even try to design a building fitting with the neighborhood. This building is too big and please people recognize these developers are not SOLVING the housing problem – they are PROFITING from this project. Its money on the mind not affordable housing. SF doesn’t even require for them to decide if these will be condos or rentals until the very end. We want housing – but not a big UGLY building with no shared backyard. The neighbors want to welcome development but in the scale and design fitting with this wonderfully histroic neighborhood.
Jill, the vast majority of housing construction in this country is done by private businesses, not government built and owned housing. Businesses make a profit. There’s no shame in profiting.
People need places to live. This building provides a lot of them. We need that.
There are 7-9 story buildings nearby at Fulton and Scott, Scott and Hayes, Hayes and Pierce, Hayes and Steiner, and Grove and Divis. This size isn’t out of character for the neighborhood.
Let me guess, you live in one of the houses that would have shadows cast on your backyard?