Plans to demolish the existing “Stop & Stor” self-storage facility at 2285 Jerrold Avenue, which is primarily composed of re-purposed shipping containers set on a 68,000-square-foot corner lot in the Production, Distribution and Repair (PDR) zone of western Bayview, are in the works.

 

As proposed, a new 6-story Stop & Stor facility will rise up to 65 feet in height upon the lot, yielding 315,000 square feet of permanent storage space, a 2,500-square-foot café on the corner, a commercial grade loading dock in the back, and parking for 15 vans, trucks or cars.

And as envisioned, the new building would be topped with a 66,000-square-foot collective “WeFarm” garden and agricultural space spread across its tiered roof.

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Hunter

    How about a huge homeless shelter? Has anyone in the city thought about using the roof of storage facilities (and parking garages) for Navigation Centers??

  2. Posted by c_q

    what’s going to happen to all the shipping containers?

    • Posted by Anti-Sun

      We are going to shoot them into outer space to counteract global warming. Atmospheric sunshades are the future!

      • Posted by Your friendly neighborhood historic resource

        Nah, once they’ve been deemed a historic resource, they’re not going anywhere!

        • Posted by SFMichael

          Don’t be silly. They’re going to go live on a nice farm, surrounded by pretty girl containers.

  3. Posted by PartOfTheSolution

    Love love love this. I even love the idea of using the roof for a Navigation Center. I don’t understand why more property owners of facilities such as this don’t get more creative with maximizing the function of their property. Yes, there is the upfront cost, but assuming that the added square footage will bring in enough revenue to recoup the investment rather quickly it seems like a no brainer. Add in something that the city would like (a Navigation Center, affordable housing units [which may not work in this specific case, but in general]) to ease permitting and expedite speed of approval and it seems like a huge win. Is there any obvious reason I’m missing why this isn’t happening more often?

    • Posted by Bayview_Rising

      The obvious part you’re missing is that zoning in this area is for PDR facilities (not housing) — something that is in gross under-supply in SF as most of the PDR facilities in SoMA have already been converted. Aside from that, putting people in this location in inhumane — there is NOTHING within walking distance for people. I’m sure the cafe on the corner is only going to be open for lunch (maybe breakfast) and is for all the workers in the area during the day. The only people in this area at night are homeless.

      • Posted by PartOfTheSolution

        Excluding the housing part, why wouldn’t more owners of PDR facilities maximize the amount of P, D & R they can get out of their property by building up? Yes, it’s costlier, but given the revenue that could be generated by additional levels it seems like a no brainer.

        Regarding the homeless, if they’re already in the area at night is it really inhumane to have them in shelter in the area as opposed to on the streets?

        • Posted by al

          And what business owner would want to rent in a building where hundreds of homeless, drunk or drug addicts are congregating?

          I’m all for navigation centers, but for profit businesses are, well, for profit. Or else they go out of business and fire everyone.

      • Posted by Scott F

        If PDR is in gross undersupply, why have the spaces along 16th & 17th around Florida been vacant for so long, and why does so much of the PDR zoned area in the Mission consist of surface parking lots?

        Re: nobody being here at night, someone should tell that to the 24-hour Jack in the Box, McDonald’s, and Burger King, the Domino’s Pizza open until 2am, the taqueria open til 9pm, the seafood restaurant open til 10pm, and the 24/7 Silvercrest diner, all within half a mile.

  4. Posted by PartOfTheSolution

    Again, let’s exclude the housing/Navigation Center aspect – why wouldn’t more owners of PDR facilities maximize the amount of P, D & R they can get out of their property by building up?

    • Posted by Outoftown

      From what I have seen the cost of going vertical for Production and Distributions outweighs the benefit of being located in close proximity to city center – if the land costs get that high it makes more sense to relocate to the suburbs. New distribution centers get build in places like Stockton, Fresno, Moreno Valley etc.

      You may be able to build some research facilities where employees are required to have more education.

      • Posted by curmudgeon

        Agreed. Most PDR uses I can think of benefit from ground floor access. Going up is not so easy. Self Storage is one use (as here) that can pencil out, because all it needs is some decent sized elevators for the kind of household storage that most San Franciscans need. But given that we don’t exactly have lots of demand for sweatshops, or other small scale manufacturing that can easily use multi-level space, that leaves things like car repair, warehousing, catering….all uses that require garage and truck access, and would be MUCH more expensive to serve in a multi level setting.

    • Posted by S

      there’s a navigation center across the street currently.

  5. Posted by CcmmdD

    As I understand it in SF like many other major cities it is mandated for new structures to have something “green” on the roof. It’s required in order to be approved

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles