Speaking of previously approved projects that have yet to break ground, the entitlements for the 230-unit development to rise at 667 Folsom Street are slated to expire in two months time and building permits for the project have yet to be requested.

With that in mind, Equity Residential is now seeking a three-year extension to the performance period for the project which had been granted by Planning back in January of 2017.

And while the ground for the 14-story building to rise on the Canton Seafood & Dim Sum restaurant site on the corner, which the 667 Folsom street development is slated to wrap around, has yet to broken, building permits for the 89-unit development were recently issued and demolition permits have been secured as well.

655 Folsom Street Rendering 2016

11 thoughts on “One of Two Folsom Street Projects Positioned to Break Ground”
  1. Finally; was getting worried these two projects would miss this cycle entirely. One down, 1K more SoMa parking lots and one-story warehouses to go.

    Anyone know what the holdup is at Shipley & 5th? Demolition is complete but the lot has been vacant for a couple months now…

      1. Yeah there was some issue with the remediation there, I vaguely remember reading that it would not get moving for a long time. Hoping the developer is applying for a state density bonus to get that one over 5 stories…Western SoMa is a joke.

        1. Western soma zoning is a total joke. Should be at least 12 stories. Right between Hub and central Sima, walkable to anywhere downtown, next to BART and freeway, yet 5 floor max zoning

  2. Another project on hold/abandoned. As to demolition permits being pulled for the other one of these projects, there are holes downtown where demo permits were pulled and demo occurred but the project was not built. Don’t be surprised if the Canton site turns into another empty hole. It is hard to see the economics being there to move forward with the Canton project. What is it with the people standing on the decks of the adjacent existing building? Were they photoshopped in?

    1. Can all agree that we’re done being concerned about people being ‘photoshopped’ into renderings and/or utility lines being taken out? It’s pretty of obnoxious.

    2. It’s a rendering, not a photograph . . . even the adjacent buildings look drawn albeit with “photorealism”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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