2070 Folsom Street Site

While currently only zoned for building up to 55-feet in height, the two players picked by the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development to redevelop the Mission District parking lot at 2060 Folsom Street were planning to invoke the City’s proposed density bonus to build up to 101 units of affordable housing in a 75-foot-tall building on the site.

But instead, the Chinatown Community Development Center and Mission Economic Development Agency are now planning to seek a formal rezoning of the site to allow the construction of a nine-story building, rising up to 85-feet in height, with 134 units of affordable housing, 10,000 square feet of space for supportive services, a 4,400 square foot child development center, a 600-square-foot cafe fronting Folsom, and a promenade to abut the future Folsom and 17th Street park on the southern half of the parking lot parcel.

2060 Folsom Street Rendering

And while the proposed development will now require San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors to approve a legislative amendment for the rezoning, and for the City’s Planning Commission to then approve the plans, the 2060 Folsom Street project has just been granted an infill-based exemption from having to complete a lengthy Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Dave

    Its a bit hard to tell, but the rendering does not look bad for an affordable housing project. Of course the shrubs out front won me over.

    The art on the building is nice as is the green wall and set backs at the ground floor. The lower floor “baffles” are an interesting touch. I hope this is close to what finally gets built here.

    • Posted by Chris

      I think of many of the affordable housing projects built in SF in the last 15 years or so look better than most recent market-rate projects

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      the shrubs out front will be a homeless toilet

  2. Posted by anon2

    Yay, I think this project looks like a good scale for that location.

    Great way to make use of the density bonus.

    [Editor’s Note: Except as reported above, the density bonus is no longer the primary play.]

    • Posted by Shannon

      As the project manager I can tell you that the density bonus was never the primary play, since the site has to be rezoned from P-Public to allow housing. I think the SocketSite writer from the Sept. article came up with the density bonus idea!

  3. Posted by Bobby Mucho

    David Baker Architects?

  4. Posted by Bobby Mucho

    Not sure there’s anything specific about the snapshot / rendering that points to it being DBA, but he definitely tends to turn out solid BMR work on the regular.

  5. Posted by Elitist Pig

    I’m sure Peskin will find a way to kill the additional height and community groups will slow the process to a crawl if not kill it. Opening 2026!

  6. Posted by 94116

    Will be interested in seeing the price for the Tax funded project. In the past, Market rate developments come in way less to build than nonprofits and city involved projects.

  7. Posted by Paul

    I only want it if it is 100% market rate. And gets rid of the 20-something drug-crazed homeless (homeless by lifestyle choice folks! or by criminal intent. That too) that line Folsom there (and somehow create a trash heap every god damn day.)

    Oh, and nine floors will cast shadows on the entire neighborhood. #not_happening_ever

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      it would be better if it were 15 floors and 100% market rate. this is the best way to make housing more affordable for masses instead of lottery winners

    • Posted by gentrified is a dirty word for clean

      And then those homeless will migrate over to join their 100 or so friends in the Potrero Flats.

      Actually they’re not “friends” – in the last 2 weeks I’ve seen physical altercations between vagrants on 3 separate occasions in the 7th-16th-Irwin triangle. At least one incident involved assault with what looked like bike parts. These are not your friendly cartoon hobos, folks. No matter what their so-called “advocates” would have you believe.

      • Posted by cfb

        No they aren’t friendly “cartoon hobos”. And they also aren’t all violent criminals like you would have us believe.

  8. Posted by alberto rossi

    The only way this is not happening is if Chinatown Community Development Center or Mission Economic Development Agency or PODER (weren’t they going to have office space in this building?) says something critical of the mayor.

  9. Posted by unlivable city

    I very much doubt the actual bldg will look even remotely like the rendering. More likely akin to the stucco monstrosities sprinkled along Cezar Chaves east of Mission.

    • Posted by cfb

      Why would it look like public housing townhomes that were built nearly two decades ago? Seriously, think about it.

  10. Posted by Greg

    Build it high! You definitely don’t want to be ground floor in this location. It floods every 5 years or so.

  11. Posted by folderpete

    So, no parking (private or ride-share) and no bike racks?

    Being at the intersection of the 12-Folsom (the bus to nowhere) and 22-Fillmore (slower than walking) is the game plan then?

    • Posted by Elitist Pig

      Good call! They really should have placed this project within four blocks of a major transit hub, like a BART station, if they aren’t going to provide parking.

      • Posted by Local Marina guy

        Err, isn’t the 16th and Mission Bart Station 3 or 4 blocks away?

      • Posted by Jake

        A lone BART station is not in any way a “major transit hub”. Calling it such exemplifies the non seriousness SFers have with transit. The nearest locale with even those pretensions would be at Market/Powell when the Central begins operation. Not much of a Grand Central, though.

        BTW, the Balboa BART station has about as many passengers as the 16th Station even though it is in a lower density area because it actually does serve as a transit “hub” for the surrounding neighborhoods.

        The 16th St BART station is a much used pissoir with a rather antiquated embedded subway.

        • Posted by alberto rossi

          Not to worry, Jake. With the Mayor’s Office planning to build very low income and homeless housing and “supportive services” next to Balboa station, it will soon catch up to 16th Street.

          • Posted by Jimmy The House Flipper

            I have a sort of hypothetical question about homeless housing. Suppose we were to house every homeless person in San Francisco tomorrow. Just give them a private room, bath, three square meals a day, everything. What would happen? Would homelessness be cured overnight, or would more homeless move in to fill the void?

            Is there some fixed net number of homeless people that must always exist in San Francisco? Just a question…

          • Posted by alberto rossi

            Interesting question, Jimmy. I’d rephrase it. Assume a few thousand people a year become homeless each year and we build housing for them. Do they ever graduate out this housing or do they stay there until they die and we keep building a couple thousand units a year for the next several decades?

Add a Comment

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