As we first reported earlier this year:

Having sat vacant since the former meat market on the site was demolished three decades ago, plans to develop the Bayview parcel at 5012 Third Street have been drafted.

Zoned for development up to 40 feet in height, with standard density limits in place, initial discussions with Planning had envisioned a four-story building, with 9 condos over a ground floor commercial space and 8-car garage, to rise on the 5,554-square-foot lot.

But plans for a six-story building to rise up to 65 feet in height upon the site, with 30 smaller condos over a 755 square foot retail space fronting Third Street, and no garage, have since been drawn, with plans to leverage San Francisco’s HOME-SF program for the additional height and density.

And as newly rendered by the Alan Tse and Charles Chan Architectural Studio below, the application to secure approval for the now 29-unit, six-story bonus building has officially been submitted to Planning for processing.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by RW

    As a Bayview resident i have long sought a re-imagining of the Third Street corridor hoping for something akin to Valencia St., 24th Street, Union St, Divisadero, Polk St….at bare minimum San Bruno Ave. For a while I thought that it lay in the influx of businesses to the empty storefronts, but one thing i have come to realize over the last decade or more is that the population of the Bayview is simply not overwhelmingly disposed to the development of a walkable/shopable Bayview (mostly for socio-economic reasons) and that any kind of corporate retail remains afraid of investing in the community.

    Third St. from Jamestown Ave. to Evans is dead past 8PM aside from a few corner liquor stores, which are problematic, and only serves as a thoroughfare between freeway entrances/exits for most. Too many of the empty storefronts are simply not viable for new business to set up shop due to buildings being too rundown, or not to code, things all highlighted in the recent SF Chronicle story regarding lack of prosperity along Third Street. At this point i think a re-imagined Third Street corridor is going to follow the demands of a population shift, and businesses opening into new spaces to serve that new influx, all beginning with proposed developments like this and at 5210 Third, 4720 Third, 4300 Third.

    Of course much like those other proposed projects i think it is still very much a wait and see game as to what actually gets built, but at this point I’d be happy to see any of these projects break ground and see if it triggers a wave of development to jumpstart the Neighborhood.

    • Posted by irvineco

      If the price growth of single family homes in the Bayview (now apparently averaging 1 million) is any indication then there definitely is some sort of population shift underway.

    • Posted by jenofla

      Alternatively, with people buying everything online, entertaining themselves online, and ordering food home as the cost of eating out goes up and up as cost of doing business goes up and up, perhaps the idea of a walkable/shoppable anything is slowly disappearing. Soon everything will be residential, some parks and cafes/bars/gyms/”third-spaces” here and there, any increasing inequality means more of the class geographic stratification you see in developing countries (encampments outside vs luxury inside), and essentially public life IRL will be dead.

      Taking it to the extreme…but just seeing a pattern from when I was young pre-internet (malls, multiplexes) to now…

      Went to Asia (Taipei) recently, was happy to see vibrant street markets, busy retail/food corridors, frequent and heavily used public transport. Cost of living, however, is much lower, so costs of everything is much lower. Density is higher. Also, for good or bad, less regulations. Not sure how the economics (private or publilc) willl have to play out to support a vibrant public life in the future.

      • Posted by Anonymous

        I see what you’re getting at here, but I think it’s really (and I think intentionally for the sake of making a point) overstated. Anecdotally, I’d argue that we’ve seen a swing back towards a desire for vibrant and welcoming public and community spaces and retail corridors. There’s a reason suburban malls (and most malls in general) are dying and why downtowns are being rebuilt and upzoned. Of course, this applies almost exclusively to urban areas and close in suburbs, but then again, those are the places where almost all population and economic growth are occurring.

        Either way, interesting issue to consider.

        • Posted by curmudgeon

          And yet, retail is STILL dead in our urban zones as well. Take a walk through the Castro, for instance, where what used to be a vibrant retail corridor is now plagued by vacancies. Or Union Square for that matter where there are MANY more vacant storefront than I ever remember, and where retailers are RUNNING away from upper story space as their footprints contract. I agree, basically, that we are pointing towards a cafe/bar/gym reality for neighborhood commercial spaces, and that we have vastly more traditional retail space than we need. And I honestly find that very sad.

          • Posted by mary_jane_jacobs

            We clearly need more housing. It’s past time to start re-imagining retail spaces as live/work or pure residential for planning/zoning purposes. All the rules about ADU permit streamlining but for the conversion of Retail to Residential.

            Active overnight occupancy also helps keep neighborhoods safe with eyes and ears on the street.

            “But what if we lose all our retail?” We pretty much already have.

    • Posted by aerl

      More multiunit projects like this should help, since most of the people moving into Bayview (which is a very active real estate market) are young families looking for more space than you can get in a SOMA condo. That demographic doesn’t translate well to a vibrant street scene. Having smaller, denser units will lead to more singles who want street life.

      • Posted by SocketSite

        Keep in mind that home sales in Bayview have actually been on the decline over the past two years.

        • Posted by John Wagner

          Socketsite, can you link any stats to that? I would think you’re correct in condos but incorrect in single family homes. Thanks!

          • Posted by SocketSite

            The downward trend holds for single-family homes as well, the transaction volume of which is currently down over 20 percent versus 2017.

    • Posted by Bayview_Rising

      All great points. There was an effort afoot a year or two ago for a land trust in Bayview focused on the 3rd street corridor and denser, mixed use, cooperative housing that I think had a lot of good ideas — and they also got an Opportunity Zone in the middle of the corridor. Hopefully this plan will come to fruition, but I think it stalled for lack of being able to find a viable ED.

  2. Posted by Here-since-1849

    Retail is down City wide due to higher taxes, tough to get employees, online competition, the Poop factor. The Mayor asked us to shop local, but it gets a little old dodging the poop and the sleepers across the City

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles