July 20, 2011
Target Prepares For Planning Vote On Geary Store Next Week
The request for authorization which would allow Target to develop and open a 120,000 square foot "formula retail" store in the City Center development at the corner of Geary and Masonic has been scheduled to be heard by Planning next week.
The proposed project, to occupy a portion of the former Mervyn’s and Good Guys stores, will consist of approximately 106,000 square feet of retail space, with a potential to add an additional 14,000 square feet if vacant space becomes available within the shopping center, for a project total of approximately 120,000 square feet.
The proposal involves interior remodeling work as well as exterior improvements including signage, which would require the creation of a Special Sign District. The existing City Center shopping mall has approximately 601 off-street parking spaces and five loading spaces; no additional parking or loading spaces are required or proposed.
As always, we’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.
∙ YIMBY's Set Their Sights On A Target At Geary And Masonic [SocketSite]
∙ One Word: Target. Okay, Five: Target At Geary And Masonic? [SocketSite]
First Published: July 20, 2011 10:45 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Ideally they would tear down the entire City Center mall and start over from scratch, horrible utilization of a prime site.
If that's not going to happen, however, please approve and open this Target ASAP!
Posted by: CH at July 20, 2011 11:13 AM
I'm looking at the planning department website but the agenda isn't up yet for the Planning Commission hearing next Thursday. Is that the right one to attend? If they hear public comments I'd love to be another YIMBY for this one.
Posted by: Ted at July 20, 2011 11:31 AM
Haha, CH. I was just thinking how unusual it was to see them renovating the existing stuff rather than the narcissistic crybaby crap that developers usually pull in these situations. There are existing buildings, use them. No need to make a bigger deal than it is, Target is a simple concept. What, do you think they should have 1/5 the parking spaces and push the problem out into public space like Trader Joe's and Whole Foods do?
Posted by: EH at July 20, 2011 11:32 AM
Yeah, I said this before in the previous thread but this is a great site and deserving of more than just a handful of big box stores. I'd like to see the whole structure demolished and a mixed-use high-rise, or two, go up in its place. Sort of like the so-called New Urban Centres in Tokyo. Units there would have fantastic 360 degree views of the Pacific, the inner bay, downtown, and the Peninsula. A Target just seems like such a waste of an incredibly prime, central spot.
Posted by: Denis at July 20, 2011 11:42 AM
@EH - I can't speak for CH, but I'd love to see at least a few thousand housing units built here on top of a new Target, Office Depot, Best Buy, etc.
But a Target is better than nothing, so of course I'm supporting this.
Posted by: anon at July 20, 2011 11:53 AM
As a homeowner in this neighborhood, I would love to see a Target. Trader Joes provides a great alternative in terms of food vs. the boutique and expensive markets. It would be nice to have a source for all the other stuff we buy as a family without driving to Daly City. We never visit the stores in that center now, it's under served. If anyone figures out when the PC meeting is I would go speak in favor.
Posted by: developer at July 20, 2011 12:15 PM
The terraced parking lots there are the greatest wasted view in the city. Mixed-use would have been a better use of space here rather than 3 or 4 big-bix tenants. But that's water under the bridge. At least it should be an easy process given that it was already chain retail.
Posted by: James at July 20, 2011 12:31 PM
The planning commission hearing Thursday July 28 at noon.
Posted by: Go Go Go at July 20, 2011 2:46 PM
They should be able to reuse the Mervyn's space but they HAVE to do something about the parking lot, access to the parking lot and the extremely narrow corridor to the seemingly small and slow elevators.
The Trader Joe's boondoggle of blocking traffic on Masonic is bad enough, a Target's flow will kill the other side if they don't figure out a way to get people off city streets and in to the parking as quickly as possible and we all know that people are going to create all kinds of havoc trying to park in the lower lot right by the doors.
Posted by: Sam Foster at July 20, 2011 7:21 PM
I think Trader Joe's run's a tight ship moving the cars through pretty fast, Given the few spaces provided (so au currant and tres stupid) I can't say its a boondoggle.
I just wish Target would restore the core mid-century modern building in some fab way, instead of re-skinning the bad Mervyn's re-skin.
Posted by: Stucco-sux at July 20, 2011 7:42 PM
And how much money have Target's employees given to Michelle Bachman's campaign?
Sorry to bring this up, but aren't all decisions in this city, ultimately, politically based?
Posted by: tj at July 20, 2011 11:57 PM
I know people love to hate on the Trader Joe's parking line, but has anyone proposed any ideas? I think the city wanted them to meter parking at the proposed Market St. location, which apparently helped kill the project. I guess that might work. Is there a better idea? Apparently the roof is used for parking, but only by the neighbors, in some sort of sweetheart deal. It seems like there's always a stupid amount of free parking at the "City Center", but people don't want to cross the street-- and to be fair, it's not a fun walk.
Posted by: Alai at July 21, 2011 2:04 AM
"And how much money have Target's employees given to Michelle Bachman's campaign?"
You can't be serious. Target has thousands of employees all over the country, and there's no good reason to single out any particular political candidate with respect to individual employees other than being one of those obnoxious people who wants political "purity" rather than thinking for yourself and being pragmatic. (think Tea Party-types, only at the other end of the spectrum) This is a non-issue and should always be a non-issue.
Focusing on individuals' political donations is dangerously close to political persecution. We grant asylum to immigrants from other countries for that.
Posted by: sfrenegade at July 21, 2011 10:03 AM
and to be fair, it's not a fun walk.
It's not that big a challenge. I have done it a few times. Then you're gonna waste 15 minutes at 9AM in the line at Starbuck's or Peet's. Time is very relative.
Posted by: lol at July 21, 2011 10:50 AM
SF is not a place for people stuck to their cars. If you can't handle walking, move to Daily City.
If you can't handle walking across the street, you have some serious issues.
Posted by: bringit at July 21, 2011 1:17 PM
"SF is not a place for people stuck to their cars. If you can't handle walking, move to Daily City."
Yes, I have noticed that all of the cars in SF are solely owned by residents of Daly City and other non-resident invaders.
In the real world, Daly City can be far more walkable than certain parts of SF. Think BART.
Posted by: sfrenegade at July 21, 2011 1:25 PM
Sure, if you go to the deep end of Hunter's Point you'll get a walking score of 50 or so. Go to "downtown" Daly (or whatever you want to call this) in the busiest of the busiest Mission blocks and you get to the 70s. But it's the highest I know of.
A big hint: the Daly City Bart is indeed practical. It has a huge parking structure across. That tells it all.
My walk score is 100. Many places in SF are 90+.
Posted by: lol at July 21, 2011 1:58 PM
"A big hint: the Daly City Bart is indeed practical. It has a huge parking structure across."
It was also end of line for over 20 years and still sort of is.
You made an interesting point. I'd rather live in Daly City than D10, just to say I lived in SF. Walk score isn't the end-all, by the way. Sometimes that just means there are 7-11s nearby.
Anyway, the point of the comment was not to describe the virtues of Daly City (which is denser than certain parts of SF), but rather to describe how ridiculous the original comment was as a whole. Most "if you don't like X about SF, you should go live in [suburb]" comments are silly. If the status quo has a negative aspect, why shouldn't you criticize that aspect?
Posted by: sfrenegade at July 21, 2011 2:10 PM
Trader Joe's on Masonic does the best they can with what they have but any situation where a lane of traffic is often blocked during the commute is an unacceptable boondoggle.
I ride the bus by there every day and it has a negative impact on traffic flow. Without proper consideration, the Target will be even worse as people queue up to get in to the lower lot.
And as strong of a proponent of public transit as I am, the hard truth is that shopping at Target is not conducive to taking public transit, people are going to drive and try to park and that needs to be recognized now in the planning stages.
Posted by: Sam Foster at July 23, 2011 11:27 AM