CFAH

As we outlined early last year, plans to raze the shuttered China Dance School & Theater building on the southeast corner of Clement and 32nd Avenue are in the works. And as envisioned, a six-story building could rise up to 64 feet in height upon the 3055 Clement Street site as rendered below:

The project as proposed would yield seven condos, a mix of four two-bedrooms and three fours, over 614 square feet of ground floor commercial space and a storage room for eight bikes, leveraging San Francisco’s “HOME-SF” program to build higher than the 40 foot height limit for the site as zoned, with two of the units to be sold at below market rates (BMR).

And if approved this week as recommended by Planning, the project team is positioning to break ground in January of next year but permits for the project have yet to be requested and at least one neighbor is in opposition to the height, mass and lack of off-street parking for the building’s future residents as proposed.

We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Rob D

    Yay! Excited to see some BMR apartments added to this community. It’s a nice looking design.

  2. Posted by Paulish

    I’m excited too, but I’m not really feeling the materiality of that bay window on the corner.

  3. Posted by Sutro_Tower

    I know this is located in the foggy Richmond and not the sunny climes of the Mission but I hope that the property line facade can get a playful mural or some vegetation to liven up that blank wall.

  4. Posted by jenofla

    No parking for 4-bedroom units? Are those for roommate situations? I can’t imagine a family not needing at least one vehicle. Cue the people who have lived in SF with their family without vehicle. Question, what if your kid doesn’t get into Lafayette and Alamo (all several blocks away)? Have you gone thru the school lottery recently? How are you going to get your kindergartener to a school a couple miles away?

    • Posted by Paulish

      I imagine residents will either bring their kid on a bike, take transit, or buy a car and park it on the street.

    • Posted by soccermom

      Leaving a car in the golf course parking lot across the street would likely be another move.

      The similar project on Clement between 24th and 25th has struggled to get sold or rented. Terrible market timing.

      I doubt this tall project gets built. What’s the value add in density if you only break even on your BMR units? Does this “pencil”?

    • Posted by Rob

      Very familiar with the school lottery system (I went through it). Unless off-street parking is added there’s no way any family would live here.

      A car is a necessity in SF and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Probably will be a tech brother roommate situation in reality if it ever happens but that doesn’t sound as normal from an advertising perspective.

      Just one more example of how out of touch SF is with real people. Pathetic

      • Posted by Curious

        So much drama! There are, in fact, two ways that families would live here… #1 a family could decide that they do not need the luxurious feature of off-street car parking, or, if no such family exists, a family that does need a car could pay less to live here than a similar unit that included on-site parking and park their car elsewhere. Either way, it’s their choice to make.

        • Posted by Dan

          Totally agree. I’ve lived as a single person for years without a car in a city and country that had amazing public transit. Fast-forward to today with kids in the SFUSD system, it’s a whole new world. We walk, bike, take MUNI, and (gasp) yes drive. For our experience, getting to-and-from school is not great but do-able with MUNI, but as the kids get older and start to do after-school activities, MUNI becomes less of an option. We do carpool with other parents, so that helps, but as of today, IMO a car is nearly a must for families in San Francisco.

          All that being said, this is an opportunity to shape our City for the better for the future, I agree with less parking and/or higher costs of parking coupled with improved MUNI, Slow Streets, more bike lanes, etc.

          I would love to see actual data on families in San Francisco who do or do not have cars (or when they use one). All we really get are online anecdotes, including this one.

      • Posted by Runnz

        Rob, couldn’t agree more. The utopists imagining that SF is convenient for families without vehicles are wholly out of touch with reality. The effort SF makes to make life inconvenient for families with children is breathtaking.

        • Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

          Families lived in SF long before cars arrived. Certainly the city could do better to support families, but enabling a car-dependent lifestyle is not required.

          • Posted by Rob

            A tech bus is the only transportation options this project offers… We should just be honest and stop pretending this project is marketing to families with children.

            Yuppies who smoke 500 bucks of weed before taking an Uber is what this place will be for.

          • Posted by Jeffrey W. Baker

            Honestly “Rob” get a grip. See all those wires in the photograph? The 1-California runs right past this corner. The “1” is – dare I say? – the primary bus line in SF.

        • Posted by busrider

          As a member of a family of four that’s spent most of our years here without a car, I couldn’t disagree more.

  5. Posted by Karl

    I think it needs to be a little more lumpy.

  6. Posted by unlivablecity

    Wouldn’t it be nice if everywhere the “developer” of this thing went for the rest of their life, somebody would stand in their light holding a huge blackout curtain? Since that is basically what they are doing to the vintage dwellings next door.

    • Posted by not sure why this is all caps

      There’s a four-story building across the street and two others on this block.

    • Posted by Freeloader

      Maybe the building next door will follow suit and create nearly 30% BMR units.

  7. Posted by Klaus

    This building is totally out of context for this neighborhood. Does this neighborhood need a six story wall?

    • Posted by Butros

      You’re right that is unsightly. I guess we need to tear down the adjacent buildings and make them six story as well.

      • Posted by Sierrajeff

        har har. The fact is it’s a sore thumb, and out of character, period.

        • Posted by Curious

          “Character” evolves over time. Go live in a cul-de-sac with an HOA if you are so concerned about nothing changing ever.

    • Posted by Codysf

      I think this neighborhood needs housing. The wall is an added benefit to encourage new development next door and all around. So glad to see new homes for people coming online.

  8. Posted by FLL

    That thing is a joke.

  9. Posted by TropicalRichmond

    I find this style so unattractive. The finish will get ruined by the weather pretty quickly. And yes, you can pretend people don’t have cars, but they do. At least have 1 space per unit. Silly. (I’m a non-driver who takes the bus, but I’m realistic).

    • Posted by SocketSite

      In fact, car ownership in San Francisco is more highly correlated with income than access to an off-street parking spot.

  10. Posted by Joel S.

    Seven families added to the neighborhood, that will bring: increased sales to local business, more eyes on the street to increase safety, higher utilization of public transport, and more social and professional interaction and collaboration. The new construction also means that seven existing homes will not be claimed by these residents, which may help keep long-time residents in their homes. Sounds pretty good!

  11. Posted by Alai

    Are those lightwells without windows? Where’s the sense in that?

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles