SkyscraperPage Forum
Viewing Page 5 of 31
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   City Compilations (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=87)
-   -   THE BAY AREA | Projects from San Francisco's Surrounding 8 Counties (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=136313)

AndrewK Jun 6, 2009 6:25 PM
the old brennans was demolished, along with celia's at 4th and addison. this new project takes up the entirety of that block on 4th. brennans is now located in the old train station, (which used to be behind brennans).

i was actually planning on driving around today and taking shots of all the current berkeley projects, so its quite fortuitous that this article was just posted.

peanut gallery Jun 6, 2009 8:22 PM
Thanks Andrew! I look forward to your photo update. I haven't seen most of that stuff in quite awhile.

AndrewK Jun 6, 2009 11:49 PM
heres the downtown stuff:

the arpeggio:
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0136.jpg
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0137.jpg

and the rendering from curbed:
http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2008_08_arpeggio.jpg

and the new freight & salvage mentioned in the article (thats the arpeggio in the background):
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0139.jpghttp://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0140.jpg

heres whats come up so far of the new trader joe's building at university and mlk:
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0141.jpg
the rendering from the same angle (from their website):
http://berkeleytraderjoes.com/images/tj.jpg

thought id put these up now, im about to drive down university to catch all the stuff not in walking distance of my place.

peanut gallery Jun 7, 2009 12:57 AM
Wow, Arpeggio went up fast. It doesn't seem like that long ago that I read about it being approved. Also, I didn't realize it would have a barrel-shaped roof. Thanks for the update.

AndrewK Jun 7, 2009 1:36 AM
yeah you cant tell at all from the rendering, given the only angle supplied.

other berkeley updates...

the fourth and university project:
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0150.jpg
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0151.jpg
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0152.jpg
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0153.jpg
couldnt find any renderings unfortunately.

and the new brennans i mentioned earlier:
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0154.jpg

condo project at san pablo and delaware (two blocks up from university):
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0156.jpg
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d3...k/IMGP0155.jpg

theres also a project going up on university just above san pablo, but i couldnt get any good shots (not much to see yet, they just finished the underground garage and poured the ground floor).

leftopolis Jun 7, 2009 2:28 AM
Wow, great pics, AndrewK! Berkeley is one of those places I've always felt that I'd enjoy living in but never have. I'll have to make it out there soon and check out some of those vibrant projects in person. There's some great density evolving there.

peanut gallery Jun 7, 2009 5:10 PM
Excellent! Thanks for including the new Brennan's too.

San Frangelino Jun 21, 2009 7:07 PM
Emeryville Marketplace, Emeryville, CA

Click Link for images. http://www.hellermanus.com/portfolio...%22%248L%20%0A

Site:
14 Acres
Total Size: 1,225,000 GSF
New Retail: 180,000 GSF
New Office: 120,000 GSF
New Residential: 700,000 GSF
New Res. Units: 674
Parking stalls: 2,300
New Construction: 1 million GSF
Existing Construction: 225,000 GSF

Mor information here: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/kb...certified.html

AndrewK Jun 22, 2009 3:36 AM
that is pretty awesome. looks like the second phase involves building where the movie theater is now. anyone know the scoop on that?

BTinSF Jun 26, 2009 5:06 PM
Quote:
Friday, June 26, 2009
Housing lands near East Bay BART
San Francisco Business Times - by Blanca Torres

Right now, property next to the Pleasant Hill BART station is overrun with exposed plywood and construction crews. A year from now, it will be home to hundreds of new residents.

The site, a $149 million project developed by AvalonBay, will include 422 apartments and is among several projects sprouting up in East Bay cities once dominated by single-family homes. With space tight, residents want to be close to transit and amenities.

“Cities are looking to maintain their viability and increase attractiveness over time,” said Jeff White, senior development director with AvalonBay. “It’s being driven both by what customers want as well as environmental constraints ... that make it difficult to grow.”

Many cities are running out of fresh land for vast tracts of homes. The Greenbelt Alliance, a planning advocacy group, estimates that the Bay Area’s population will grow by 2 million by 2035 and the growth can be accommodated in existing cities.

“The foreclosure crisis really hit the hardest around the edges, where there was thoughtless development,” said Elizabeth Stampe, a spokeswoman for the alliance. “It makes sense to focus more resources where people are going to be and where people already are.”

Cities also want a broader mix of housing, said Chris Foss, Dublin’s assistant city manager. Dublin has added affordable rentals, market-rate rentals and for-sale units.

Earlier this year, AvalonBay opened a 439-unit project in Union City and last year leased up a 305-unit project in Dublin, both near BART stations. BART also has plans to develop property near stations in Walnut Creek, El Cerrito and Richmond.

In Concord, city officials envision a mixed-use development on the 12,800-acre former Naval Weapons Station, anchored by the nearby North Concord BART station.

Another element of the trend is demographics, said Bruce Dorfman of Thomson Dorfman, a San Rafael firm that has developed about transit-oriented 7,000 units in the Bay Area. One of the firm’s recent projects is 555YVR in Walnut Creek, an 87-unit project that is two blocks from a BART station.

“The target resident is a younger professional that wants different lifestyle choices,” Dorfman said.

btorres@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4960
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...9/story14.html

leftopolis Jun 29, 2009 5:51 AM
(LEED Gold) Riverpark II completed in DTSJ
 
http://assets.bizjournals.com/story_...2126-0-0-1.jpg

Riverpark Tower II in San Jose hits the market - bizjournals.com

Quote:
Twenty years after pouring the foundation for the second Riverpark Tower in downtown San Jose, Swinerton Builders finished the job on the twin tower using building materials stored for almost two decades in a Newark warehouse.

And because of Swinerton’s thriftiness, Legacy Partners’ Riverpark Tower II is on track to receive the coveted Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Gold award from the U.S. Green Building Council.

Melanie Lapointe, Swinerton’s assistant project manager, said building the tower almost 20 years after its former owner Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. pulled the plug because of a poor real estate market was very rewarding.

And earning the environmental award largely by recycling all the old material is another feather in the builder’s cap. Lapointe said Swinerton managed to reuse almost every scrap of construction debris — an astounding 97 percent — with the help of GreenWaste Commercial Services and SIMS Metal Management.

Much time was spent determining what materials already in the ground had to be ripped up and what could remain. Lapointe said roughly 1,500 tons of previously poured concrete had to be demolished and recycled into aggregates because it failed to meet today’s building codes. But 3,000 tons already poured into the grade beams and pile caps did meet code.

While the steel stored in the warehouse by MetLife had to be recycled, the so-called curtain wall, which is the exterior aluminum and glass frame, was up to code and was used.

“These buildings were built 20 years apart,” she said, referring to Riverpark Tower I, “but they are identical.”

Riverpark II hits the commercial real estate market at a particularly low point. Vacancies across Silicon Valley are well into the double digits, and rents are low and still falling. It’s the same scenario that convinced MetLife to wait in the early 1990s and put construction plans on hold again in 1998.

In 2005, Legacy Partners bought the development site as well as the adjoining Riverpark Tower. Legacy started construction on the second tower in late 2007 just as the real estate office market was picking up steam only to crash in 2008. Consequently, no tenant has yet signed up for space inside the 16-story, 318,000-square-foot tower.

BTinSF Jul 10, 2009 6:52 PM
Quote:
Friday, July 10, 2009
Tagami group endorsed for Oakland Army base
San Francisco Business Times - by Blanca Torres

The selection of a master developer to redevelop a 135-acre portion of the former Oakland Army Base has reached a crucial point, but could take weeks or months for the Oakland City Council to finalize a decision.

After several rounds of vetting, an 11-member committee appointed by Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums picked a proposal from California Capital Group and AMB Property Corp., led by longtime Oakland developer Phil Tagami, over one that came in from Federal Development and Em. Johnson Interest.

The City Council will review the recommendation next week and could vote by the end of the month. Otherwise, it will take up the issue in September.

California Capital Group and AMB Property Corp. proposed a $572 million logistics, office and transportation project. The other proposal involves a $687 million mixed retail, office, research and development and hospitality complex.

““Our priority was to choose a proposal that complements and supports the (Port of Oakland’s) operations and the competitiveness of the port,” said Karen Engel, economic development director for the Oakland Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, who served on the review panel. “It is very important that the infrastructure built on the site would be able to house and support companies that could create high-wage jobs.”

The committee included representatives from various business groups, labor unions, citizens groups, the mayor’s staff and the city’s Community and Economic Development Agency.

Engel said the committee came to a consensus early on in its discussions that retail was not the best use for the site.

“The city was very fortunate to have two excellent proposals given what has happened in the economy during the time it’s taken us to go though this process,” Engel said. “The fact that the variety of different stakeholder groups came to the same conclusion is the strongest endorsement.”

Michael Johnson, president of San Francisco-based Em. Johnson Interest, said his group plans to continuing making the case for its proposal at upcoming City Council and community meetings.

“We disagreed with a considerable amount of the conclusions that were in the staff report,” on the review committee’s recommendation, Johnson said. “We felt the report was written in a biased fashion to support our opponent’s proposal.”

Tagami’s team is also the top contender to redevelop the Port of Oakland’s 168-acre portion of the former Army base. His plan has been to combine the city and port’s parcels into one.

“We still have negotiate the deal,” Tagami said. “We’re very encouraged by the staff recommendation … . But, we still have a lot work to do.”

Proposals

Two groups pitched ideas in January for redeveloping the Oakland Army base.

CCG/AMB
Major elements: 506,000 square feet of industrial, loading and logistics space, 397,000 square feet of R&D space, 34,000 square feet of retail, 133,000 square feet for the Oakland Film Center, 205,000 square foot produce market, 1.15 million square feet of Class A office space, 16.5 acres of open space.
Jobs created: 3,288.
Cost: $572 million.

Federal Development/Em Johnson Interest
Major elements: 600,000 square feet of large format and outlet retail, 85,000 square foot entertainment facility, 700,000 square feet of R&D and office, 136,000 for the Oakland Film Center, 215,000-square-foot produce market, 25,000-square-foot art studio and gallery, 12,000-square-foot ferry landing, 30 acres of open space.
Jobs created: 4,266.
Cost: $687 million.
SOURCE: City of Oakland.

btorres@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4960
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...13/story5.html

BTinSF Jul 10, 2009 6:57 PM
Quote:
East Oakland Sports Center on track for 2011 arrival

The City of Oakland began construction on the $24 million East Oakland Sports Center. The 25,000-square-foot, two-level center is expected to open in early 2011 and will feature an indoor swimming pool, fitness center and dance studio.

“This project has been a long-time dream for the community,” said Oakland Councilmember Larry Reid, who spent close to 20 years on the project. “The new sports center will be a gathering place where Oakland residents have a great time and enjoy themselves.”

The property was formerly used for softball and soccer fields. Turner Construction is the contractor on the project, which was designed by Berkeley-based ELS Architecture and Urban Design. The building is expected to earn LEED Silver certification.
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...wscolumn1.html

leftopolis Jul 11, 2009 10:23 PM
Cash for straightening Julian Street boosts downtown S.J. project
 
A relatively small road project in DTSJ, may end up being the needed catalyst for numerous nearby projects:

http://www.mercurynews.com

Quote:
One of the last islands of blight in downtown San Jose could soon become the city's next luxury neighborhood. And that future could hinge on bringing back a large part of the area's past.
As soon as this fall, crews will take apart the high-speed swoop of Julian Street as it heads southwest toward Highway 87. They'll then begin restoring a pedestrian-friendly street grid that was erased 31 years ago to help shuttle cars to and from the freeway.

Money for the project — $24 million in expected state bond proceeds — was awarded to the San Jose Redevelopment Agency late last month. It will help kick-start plans for three residential high-rises, 100-plus townhomes and two new parks that otherwise may have languished amid the dismal economy.
In turn, those new homes could become a vital complement for an ambitious plan, led by former Mayor Tom McEnery and his family, to remake nearby San Pedro Square into an urban market akin to Seattle's Pike Place. The market, scheduled to open next summer, even has a development partner in common with the housing plan: Barry Swenson....
(cont'd @ link)

peanut gallery Jul 12, 2009 3:52 AM
I remember when that was a pretty well-used stretch of road. I guess traffic patterns have changed to the point that this is no longer the case. I'm a little nervous the funding is coming from the state. Hope it materializes.

The article says they'll widen St. James. I assume they'll be making it two-way up to at least San Pedro and maybe to Market to give people coming west on Julian a way to go.

BTinSF Jul 12, 2009 4:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut gallery (Post 4353277)
I'm a little nervous the funding is coming from the state. Hope it materializes.
His quote says the money is bond proceeds. Bond money can only be spent in accordance with the bond indenture. That is, if they are (just as an example ;) ) high speed rail bonds, the money can only be used for high speed rail as defined by the documents with the bonds. So I assume this money is coming from highway or other bonds for a specific purpose and the state can't divert the money to fix its general fund problems.

Incidentally, the main impact the state's budget issues would have on infrastructure bonds if they are revenue bonds with defined revenue stream is that, due to the rating agencies pretty much trashing all CA bonds, the interest would be higher than it would have been and also it's possible the demand could be less (though, in fact, I keep reading the smart money understands that CA's constitution gives debt service second priority after school funding for whatever income the state gets and, by one analysis, the state has $54 billion available to cover about $6.5 billion of annual debt service--that is, $54 billion not pledged to school funding K through university).

peanut gallery Jul 12, 2009 5:22 PM
I read the part about being funded through bonds and untouchable by the general fund, but I don't know much about the bond process. I just have a general sense of unease with anything related to budget and the state. But from what you said, it sounds like my fear is not totally unfounded. If the state felt that they would have to pay too high an interest rate on the bonds, couldn't it decide not to proceed at this time?

BTinSF Jul 12, 2009 6:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut gallery (Post 4353805)
I read the part about being funded through bonds and untouchable by the general fund, but I don't know much about the bond process. I just have a general sense of unease with anything related to budget and the state. But from what you said, it sounds like my fear is not totally unfounded. If the state felt that they would have to pay too high an interest rate on the bonds, couldn't it decide not to proceed at this time?

Yes, but it's more complicated. First of all, it's part of the job of the State Treasurer to try to issue the bonds at the most advantageous time. In CA, that clearly would not be until the budget mess is patched and, hopefully, the rating agencies have boosted us back to at least an A rating (currently, we are BBB). Secondly, for a large project like HSR, they almost never issue all the bond at once. Usually, they issue them as money is needed so there's plenty of time to sell those billions.

Finally, there's a new wrinkle--things called "Build America Bonds" that most people have never heard of but states and bond investors know well. These are part of the Obama "stimulus" program and are transforming the municipal bond market: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124023363063234893.html

Exerpt:

Quote:
BABs (Build America Bonds) are part of the federal stimulus plan and provide a 35% rebate on interest costs to issuers or a tax credit to investors, at the issuer's discretion. While a BAB could draw a higher taxable financing cost to the issuer than a tax-exempt bond, the 35% federal government giveback turns it into a lower borrowing rate.

"By placing a large issuer's paper in the taxable market, BABs can free up capacity for the [same issuer] in the tax-exempt buyer base," Bank of America's Merrill Lynch muni analysts said in a report on Monday. "In addition, in the short run, BABs reduce the supply of bonds in the tax-exempt area."

When issued in large amounts and structured differently than the typical municipal bond, these securities could attract nontraditional muni investors, such as pension funds and foreign governments.
I'd love to get ahold of some of these for my IRA, actually. And the reduction in the supply of traditional tax exempt munis is having a significant effect by increasing the price of regular muni bonds (and thereby lower the interest rates).

San Frangelino Jul 12, 2009 10:40 PM
Here is a website that goes along with this story: http://www.sanjosepublicmarket.com/

Quote:
Originally Posted by leftopolis (Post 4353003)
A relatively small road project in DTSJ, may end up being the needed catalyst for numerous nearby projects:

One of the last islands of blight in downtown San Jose could soon become the city's next luxury neighborhood. And that future could hinge on bringing back a large part of the area's past.

As soon as this fall, crews will take apart the high-speed swoop of Julian Street as it heads southwest toward Highway 87. They'll then begin restoring a pedestrian-friendly street grid that was erased 31 years ago to help shuttle cars to and from the freeway.

Money for the project — $24 million in expected state bond proceeds — was awarded to the San Jose Redevelopment Agency late last month. It will help kick-start plans for three residential high-rises, 100-plus townhomes and two new parks that otherwise may have languished amid the dismal economy.
In turn, those new homes could become a vital complement for an ambitious plan, led by former Mayor Tom McEnery and his family, to remake nearby San Pedro Square into an urban market akin to Seattle's Pike Place. The market, scheduled to open next summer, even has a development partner in common with the housing plan: Barry Swenson....
(cont'd @ link)

http://www.mercurynews.com

peanut gallery Jul 13, 2009 5:28 PM
Thanks for all the background info, BT. I appreciate you taking the time to explain this to a novice like me.

Gordo Jul 13, 2009 5:39 PM
To one of our South Bay posters - is SJ looking at altering the traffic flow on St. James or Julian? Converting one or both to two way? I'm a little confused on how traffic is going to work after taking out that stretch of Julian.

peanut gallery Jul 13, 2009 6:53 PM
I'm not a South Bay poster, but that's why I was thinking St James would be made 2-way for a block or two. That would allow traffic coming west on Julian to take San Pedro or Market over to St James and continue west.

leftopolis Jul 13, 2009 7:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordo (Post 4355368)
To one of our South Bay posters - is SJ looking at altering the traffic flow on St. James or Julian? Converting one or both to two way? I'm a little confused on how traffic is going to work after taking out that stretch of Julian.
I dunno if this helps--from the article a few posts up:
Quote:
Work on the street grid could take six months to a year, said Black, the city's consultant. He predicted the impact on traffic will be minimal, as workers will widen St. James St. before shutting Julian.
Also, this may help visualize the plan(be sure to click on 1 & 2):
San Pedro Square Master Plan - from JRDV Architects

Gordo Jul 13, 2009 7:53 PM
^It sounds like pg is probably right. If they're widening St. James, I would assume that's to convert it to two-way.

leftopolis Jul 14, 2009 1:29 AM
BTW, here's one of the high-rises planned for the general area: The Carlysle

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2647/...090c711034.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2647/...090c711034.jpg

I'm pleasantly surprised that it's not the usual tan/beige motif associated with Swenson buildings--it's a step in the right direction(away from boring), is what I'm trying to say.

leftopolis Jul 14, 2009 2:24 AM
A couple of SJC construction pics....
 
...a bit dated, from May--but I friend just flew in who travels here a couple times/year, and said he was impressed with the changes:
http://www.sjc.org/about/improve/upd...%203AE_JPG.jpg
http://www.sjc.org/about/improve/upd...%203AE_JPG.jpg
http://www.sjc.org/about/improve/upd.../termB_jpg.jpg
http://www.sjc.org/about/improve/upd.../termB_jpg.jpg

peanut gallery Jul 14, 2009 4:06 PM
The Carlysle will be pretty close to the new condos behind the De Anza (I forget the name), correct? How are those selling?

Love the airport pix! I was reading an article about the new terminal and it sounds nice. The article only had one rendering from an extreme angle and it frankly didn't look that great. But from these shots, I'm much happier with how it's shaping up. Is that a parking garage to the left in the first shot?

rocketman_95046 Jul 14, 2009 5:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut gallery (Post 4357218)
The Carlysle will be pretty close to the new condos behind the De Anza (I forget the name), correct? How are those selling?

Love the airport pix! I was reading an article about the new terminal and it sounds nice. The article only had one rendering from an extreme angle and it frankly didn't look that great. But from these shots, I'm much happier with how it's shaping up. Is that a parking garage to the left in the first shot?
Close, that is the new rental car terminal. the old one was a bus ride away. Now it will be connected/across the street from the main terminal.

leftopolis Jul 14, 2009 6:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut gallery (Post 4357218)
The Carlysle will be pretty close to the new condos behind the De Anza (I forget the name), correct? How are those selling?

Love the airport pix! I was reading an article about the new terminal and it sounds nice. The article only had one rendering from an extreme angle and it frankly didn't look that great. But from these shots, I'm much happier with how it's shaping up. Is that a parking garage to the left in the first shot?
The Carlysle will be on Notre Dame. City Hights is the new high-rise in that part of town and it kind of sticks out like a sore thumb at the moment. Not sure if that's the one you're thinking of, but in general, recent condo sales in DT have not been stellar. On the other hand, they've matched what can be expected, based on the general slowness of real estate in all categories.

Here's a new SJC airport article(including a couple of good pics):
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local...e-Airport.html

Finally, one more bit of info...I believe it's scheculed for across the srtreet from The Carlysle:A "Little Italy San Jose" Cultural Center!

peanut gallery Jul 14, 2009 7:22 PM
Thanks rocketman and leftopolis.

Actually, Axis is the one I was thinking about and it's on the opposite corner of Notre Dame and Carlysle according to this post from Yakumoto.

Wow, the interior of the airport looks really nice. I have to admit I'll miss the old terminal though. It was like a walk back through time.

BTinSF Jul 14, 2009 7:37 PM
More on the San Jose Airport:

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/galle...8d832814_o.jpg

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/galle...21432a5e_o.jpg
Source both: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/0...course.php?o=1

krudmonk Jul 14, 2009 11:27 PM
- The Carlysle is not one of the "three" residential towers planned for North San Pedro. It is from the same developer, though.

- From my understanding, Julian and St James will become two-way entirely. This would constitute changes all the way back to 17th Street.

- Aforementioned Italian Cultural Center won't be in the new Little Italy revival, which is in the historic district over by Henry's Hi-Life (former Torino Hotel). It will be right across from the Carlysle, though, a location which I happen to like better:
http://www.littleitalysj.com/images/cultural_ctr_19.gif

leftopolis Jul 15, 2009 6:16 AM
More Carlysle Renders from:
http://www.barryswensonbuilder.com/p...rlysle/photos/

http://www.barryswensonbuilder.com/p...rlysle_big.jpg

http://www.barryswensonbuilder.com/p...sle_nw_big.jpg

http://www.barryswensonbuilder.com/p...sle_sw_big.jpg

I haven't found anything yet on the site about the "3 high-rises" mentioned in The Merc article, but they are also swenson projects.

krudmonk: Thanks for the clarification wrt "Little Italy" location and the cultural center--I just assumed they'd be more or less adjacent.

Anyway, I'm glad development hasn't come to a complete standstill and that solid proposals are coming forth. BTW, I drove by the edge of DT the other day on 280, and 360 residences looked sweet from that angle!

krudmonk Jul 15, 2009 3:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by leftopolis (Post 4358647)
krudmonk: Thanks for the clarification wrt "Little Italy" location and the cultural center--I just assumed they'd be more or less adjacent.
They will be fairly close still and the video on the site discusses how they hope to link the two areas under 87.

BTinSF Jul 24, 2009 5:27 PM
Quote:
Friday, July 24, 2009
Developer closes in on Oakland project
San Francisco Business Times - by Eric Young

A joint venture that includes developer Phil Tagami moved closer to its goal of building on 168 acres of the former Army base near the Oakland port.

The Port of Oakland this week voted to start a six month negotiating period with California Capital Group, led by longtime Oakland developer Tagami, and AMB Property Corp. of San Francisco.

That group also is competing to develop about 130 acres of the former Army base owned by the city of Oakland. The Oakland City Council is expected to select a development team July 28.

The two parcels are being bid separately because the Army divided the property when it turned it over to the city and the port seven years ago. The combined 298 acres are south of the Bay Bridge near the Port of Oakland. The U-shaped property was part of the Oakland Army base until 1999.

The port commission development brings the AMB-California Capital vision of a logistics, office and transportation hub into sharper focus. The project could employ thousands of people and help the Port of Oakland expand its business.

The Port Commissioners selected AMB-California Capital over two other applicants who submitted proposals for the design and construction of port-related facilities at the former base. The team got high marks from a selection committee because of AMB’s development experience at ports like Hamberg, Rotterdam, Osaka and Savannah, Ga. The selection committee cited California Capital’s experience developing Oakland’s historic Fox Theater and historic Rotunda as reasons for favoring that group.

Representatives for AMB and California Capital declined comment.

The Port of Oakland gave its hopes for development of its portion of the land a boost a few months ago. At that time, the port decided to give a developer a few years to take over operation of the land — rather than immediately as was originally envisioned.

A number of developers interested in the land balked at taking immediate control of the land because of the recession and drop in container traffic at the port.

Any developer that wins rights to the former Army base land will face millions of dollars in cleanup and infrastructure costs. For its part, the Oakland port can tap up to $285 million in state bond money to improve infrastructure on the land as long as development begins by 2013.

eyoung@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4969
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...27/story6.html

As senility sets in, I can't recall for sure, but isn't Phil Tagami the guy who still owns the 1st & Mission site with the Renzo Piano design?

leftopolis Jul 25, 2009 9:37 AM
Midtown SJ Residential/Retail Project: 3 buildings 160 feet, 14 stories
 
It's nice to see some hight/decent density coming to non-downtown/TOD neighborhoods...the only bummer is the wait--they are looking to start it at the end of 2010!

mercurynews.com - Developers seek maximum height in housing project on West San Carlos

Quote:
Despite some neighbors' concerns about traffic and parking problems around West San Carlos and Sunol Streets, the developers of a proposed housing project there are moving forward with plans to build three 14-story housing complexes with shops on the ground floor.
On July 7, Green Republic LLLP released eight pages of answers to residents' questions about the development known as the Ohlone Mixed Use Project. In meetings in the spring in the Rose Garden and Willow Glen areas, neighbors asked about many issues, including its proximity to a light-rail station and details about a new park to be built near the site. The project is billed as a transit-oriented development.
Michael Van Every, a spokesman for Green Republic, said in an interview this month the firm wants to construct three buildings up to 160 feet, or roughly 14 stories, and it has applied for amendments to the city's General Plan 2020 and Midtown Specific Plan.
"We're going to maximize density at every chance," Van Every said. "We've made mistakes downtown, and now we have four-story buildings where there should have been 20-story buildings. We're not going to make those same mistakes ... and that's not just me saying that, that's the [San Jose] director of planning saying it. San Jose is going to grow.
Do we want to build in Almaden or Coyote Valley, or do we want to build in urban locations?" Van Every asked....cont'd at link above...
http://www.greenrepublicsj.com/

Gordo Jul 25, 2009 6:21 PM
:previous: It'd be nice if VTA would drop their fascination with all things BART and put light rail on San Carlos/Stevens Creek (I think it's technically still in their long-term plans, though those plans have been gutted with pretty much every VTA penny being plowed into BART). That entire corridor would have excellent initial ridership and is just about as prime as you can get for morphing into a medium to high density corridor relatively quickly.

I like the idea of the infill light rail station near the development. I was always a little confused as to why one wasn't originally built near San Carlos to link up with the bus lines. Seems like an obvious spot for a station.

Regardless, I very much like this development and hope it moves forward on schedule (end of 2010 is awhile yet, but still).

leftopolis Jul 25, 2009 9:54 PM
^I agree wrt light-rail up San Carlos/Stevens Creek, and i believe it is still a long range goal. That whole corridor is more or less designated a TOD-type-density area. In fact, the line ought to go all the way to De Anza College in Cupertino--which has it's own downtown along that route. It would also tie in DTSJ, The Shark Tank, and Santana Row area(which does include alot of residential. There's also a potential A's ballpark in that midtown area, although that's kind of big question mark still.

BART's certainly important--although if it's at the cost of sooner L-R expansion as you say, that's too bad. It's been in the works for decades(BART), and it would be a shame to drop the ball on that when it's finally within site. L-R certainly becomes more attractive and viable once there's density.

yakumoto Aug 3, 2009 1:54 AM
http://s99.photobucket.com/albums/l3...thSanPedro.jpg

San Jose engaging in road straightening, lest our transportation infrastructure become homosexual...

peanut gallery Aug 25, 2009 8:40 PM
Didn't Yakumoto post photos of this area in his TODs of San Jose thread? From today's Mercury News:

Quote:
http://extras.mnginteractive.com/liv...4_proposal.jpghttp://extras.mnginteractive.com/liv...rs_GALLERY.jpg

Plans for 15-story towers a key step in San Jose push to move high-rises beyond downtown
By Denis C. Theriault
Posted: 08/25/2009 12:00:00 AM PDT

What would San Jose look like if gleaming high-rises suddenly sprouted all across the city?

A proposal that would place three 15-story towers, plus traditional townhouses and storefronts, on San Carlos Street just west of downtown could provide some early answers.

Shovels are still a few years from hitting the ground. But already, planners say, the Ohlone mixed-use project has become a test case for an evolving effort to spread dense residential development along San Jose's public-transit corridors.

And the development has added to the debate about the future character of a city that's traditionally embraced tract housing, smaller condo projects and scattered bungalows.

"It's the first," said Joe Horwedel, San Jose's planning director. While there have been a small number of high-rises outside downtown and other "villages" combining housing and retail, such as Santana Row, no projects besides Ohlone have emerged that offer that mix of diversity and density — and certainly none near a transit line.

"There are things in this project we'll see elsewhere," Horwedel said.

Right now, the site — formerly the Valley Transportation Authority's bus lot — is another mostly empty expanse in a gritty, industrial part of town.

But the local developers pushing the project, Michael Van Every and Barry Swenson, see something else when they survey the 8.25-acre parcel spreading southwest from San Carlos and Sunol streets: a new neighborhood.

All around the towers, they envision shops and restaurants, live/work lofts and hundreds of commuters hustling toward a new light-rail station just across Sunol.

The ambitious, $300 million development took another step forward Monday when the city's planning department released a preliminary report highlighting its impact on neighbors. Among the concerns — traffic.

Already, because of its size and scope, the development has attracted a fair amount of questions.

"My fear is we're going to have this extremely high-density project with very little commercial space," said Terri Balandra, a nearby resident who has kept close tabs on the project. "It's not that we're against high-density; we want it done really well."
So-called "infill" development, especially tied to bus and train lines, has been increasingly embraced around the Bay Area and nationwide. But it amounts to a dramatic shift for San Jose, which for years encouraged the construction of single-family homes.

Only in the past decade has the city added significant high-rise housing downtown and laid the groundwork for growth in places like North San Jose.

The Ohlone site is located just west of Highway 87 in Midtown, which has been among the neighborhoods on the vanguard of that change. Home to the Diridon train station and close to The Alameda and a light-rail line, the area has seen hundreds of new low-rise condos and townhomes constructed in recent years. It's also where San Jose hopes to one day erect a baseball stadium.

That growth has left some neighbors, like Balandra, wary. She says many of those developments, notably along San Carlos Street, have brought in plenty of people but not enough of the other amenities that make up a neighborhood.

Van Every, however, said such amenities are precisely his goal — lending a touch of what he called "lifestyle."

The developers say they will contribute $1 million toward a new light-rail station near Auzerais and Sunol streets and transit passes for new residents. The project will add a four-acre park off Auzerais, plus plazas within the development. And Van Every envisions lively storefronts in new retail space along San Carlos.

"A lot of the concerns are the fear of the unknown," said Van Every, who's met with several neighborhood groups to discuss the project. "'What will San Jose look like in 25 years, and will my home still be as nice tomorrow?'"

There are plenty of neighbors looking forward to the towers — even to the crush of people they promise to bring.

"Right now, we don't even have sidewalks in front of that area, much less lighting and landscaping," said Norma Ruiz, a neighborhood activist who lives near the site. "But the biggest thing I'll be advocating for is the light-rail station."

Van Every still has hurdles beyond the environmental report. He and his partners will have to wait out the tough economy; they don't plan to break ground until 2011, with construction on the towers and other units expected in phases.

They also need city permission to exceed Midtown's 90-foot height limit.

Although height hasn't been too much of a lightning rod for the Ohlone project's neighbors — all but a handful of whom live a third of a mile away — it could become an issue for other so-called transit villages. Horwedel said the issue bears close study as planners and city leaders examine which areas to focus on.

Whereas he said an eight-story building might not look out of place near the dense intersection of Capitol Avenue and McKee Road, for instance, one would stick out starkly less than a mile away at Capitol and Mabury Road.

Even as San Jose changes, Horwedel said, the reality is most of the city's housing stock is still made up of bungalows and ranch homes.

"We don't need to go and build 10-story, 20-story buildings everywhere" he said. "We want to be very clear about where the growth is going to happen — and more importantly, where it's not going to happen."
160' isn't giant or anything, but for this part of town it's a big step up. And who can argue with the idea of more density near transit? (That's rhetorical. We all know lots of people can argue with anything.) ;)

krudmonk Aug 26, 2009 12:57 AM
It's good to see all those community outreach meetings paid off. Someone at city hall knows how to seduce the NIMBYs.

San Frangelino Aug 26, 2009 3:21 PM
oops

BTinSF Aug 28, 2009 3:46 PM
Quote:
Friday, August 28, 2009
Redwood City may spark office boom
Pacific Shores complex could double in size under new plan
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

Owners of sprawling Pacific Shores would be allowed to double the waterfront office complex to more than 3.4 million square feet under Redwood City’s new general plan.

“Even right now there is capacity for more development there — surface parking lots can provide area for new buildings as well as decked parking structures while maintaining the integrity of the campus,” said Redwood City Planning Director Jill Ekas.

The current proposed plan, which is slated for completion this fall, would boost Pacific Shores’ allowable floor-area-ratio, or FAR, to 75 percent, meaning that for every square foot of ground there could be .75 square foot of building. The current campus has a FAR of about 34 percent.

In anticipation of the new zoning, Starwood has hired Sares Regis Group of Northern California to manage the entitlements for the new construction on the 106-acre waterfront campus. Redwood City planning officials say they have met with Jeffrey Birdwell, president of Sares Regis’ commercial division, to begin general discussions on future expansion. Birdwell said no application has been filed and no decision has been made about when they may seek formal entitlements.

“We are in the preliminary stages of discussions with the city,” said Birdwell. “We will do some land planning to look at what is an appropriate allocation of density. There is the potential to double the density.”

Pacific Shores is one of three office campuses that Redwood City is looking at expanding as a way to grow tax revenue and create jobs in the city.

The others are the 46-acre Midpoint Technology Park, where Stanford University has proposed to build 1.5 million square feet of office space; and the 623,000-square-foot Seaport Center, where Abbott Labs entitled a 500,000-square-foot expansion, but allowed the entitlements to expire. All three projects feature vast surface parking lots that could be replaced with office buildings and decked parking garages. The Stanford proposal at Midpoint also calls for decked parking.

“We are considering a higher build-out in the future for those kinds of low- to mid-rise research and development and life science office parks,” said Ekas.

Conceived during the turn-of-the-century dot-com boom, the massive waterfront office complex was 90 percent preleased before developer Jay Paul broke ground in 2000. By 2002, the bubble had burst, emptying roughly half the project.

Recent years have been kinder. Pacific Shores gradually filled back up with tech and biotech tenants like PDI/DreamWorks and Eidos. Starwood bought the 10 steel and glass buildings for $800 million in 2006, later selling two to Shorenstein Properties for $250 million.

While this recession has increased vacancies in the Redwood Shores submarket to 13.3 percent from 9 percent, Pacific Shores is holding up fairly well with about a 10 percent vacancy rate, according to Mike Moran of NAI BT Commercial, who is on the property leasing team. Moran said Pacific Shores has been forced to take a pass on three large leasing requirements this year because it lacked the space to accommodate the tenants.

“The fact that this project has weathered this significant downturn with 90 percent occupancy proves that the product works,” said Moran.

Ekas emphasized that major traffic issues would need to be addressed, particularly the interchange of U.S. 101 and Route 84. She said that one of the more exciting aspects of the new general plan is a proposed street car system that could shuttle workers along Seaport Boulevard between downtown and Pacific Shores and also along Broadway between Midpoint Technology Park. A freight rail spur already runs along Seaport Boulevard, which could make it easier to build a street car line there. The city is also looking at running ferry service to Pacific Shores as part of the existing Bay Area Water Transit Authority service.

Ekas said Starwood and Sares Regis could either file an application after the general plan is complete or file it now based on the existing draft. She said the city has been expecting the Pacific Shores owner to seek an expansion, but “was a little intrigued they are coming forward now when we would not expect office expansion.”

While the possibility of building housing at Pacific Shores has been discussed in the past, the current general plan does not envision any residential development there, said Ekas. Instead, planning officials are pushing housing downtown, where as many as 3,700 units could be built, as well as on transit corridors like El Camino Real and Woodside Road.

“We have a real focus on building a new kind of vibrant downtown,” Ekas said.

Email J.K. Dineen at jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...31/story1.html

BTinSF Oct 23, 2009 3:14 PM
Quote:
Friday, October 23, 2009
Shorenstein, SKS near $1B project
Bio opportunity in South S.F.
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

Shorenstein Properties and SKS Investments have a preliminary agreement with the city of South San Francisco to build 2.3 million square feet of waterfront biotech research and development space at Oyster Point.

The developers have a memorandum of understanding recently approved by the City Council, and the city’s planning department has started the environmental review, according to Marty Van Duyn, the city’s director of economic development. The project would include about 20 percent more space than the earlier conceptual plans.

“It’s a $1 billion project,” said Van Duyn. “It’s a lot of good R&D and office, and they are helping us out quite a bit in realizing our long-term goals for the harbor in terms of recreation and retail and open space. It presents a unique opportunity to marry some of the city’s goals with a major development. This area has languished for a long period of time. It has not been as popular as it should be.”

The project comes as the Water Emergency Transportation Authority — an entity created to expand Bay Area ferry service — starts work this week on a $50 million ferry terminal at Oyster Point. The new ferry service, which will shuttle workers from Oyster Point to Oakland’s Jack London Square, would be connected to the Shorenstein/SKS buildings by a network of trails, recreation fields and waterfront plazas. The service is expected to average 900 passenger trips a day when it begins and will be complete by summer of 2011.

The agreement with the city comes 18 months after Shorenstein and SKS paid $85 million for 375-389 Oyster Point Blvd., now home to 400,000 square feet of single-story industrial buildings and a 235-berth marina. While the Shorenstein/SKS property itself is zoned for 1 million square feet of biotech, South San Francisco planners saw the investment as an opportunity to jump-start a larger development by including an adjoining 50 acres of under-used city-owned property, some of it leased to Southern California real estate investment firm King Ventures. The Shorenstein/SKS group has since negotiated an option to buy out King Ventures’ lease for $7.5 million, according to public records. Shorenstein and SKS have agreed to make $17.8 million in infrastructure and public improvements and pay the city $4.5 million.

At a ground breaking Oct. 19 for the ferry terminal, Shorenstein and SKS executives looked on as U.S. Rep. Jackie Speier (D.-San Mateo) and other San Mateo officials celebrated the start of construction. Todd Sklar, Shorenstein’s director of development, said the ferry was an important part of what drew them to the property. “The defining characteristic is the waterfront location and the views. We are trying to find a way to take most advantage of it,” he said.

Dan Kingsley, a managing partner with SKS, said the entitlement process has been surprisingly pleasant.

“It’s a very refreshing experience down here,” said Kingsley. “People are responsive, they tell you exactly what is on their mind, and the political issues are outlined up front.”

Sklar said the buildings would be build to a minimum of Gold certification under the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design system and the project offered a chance to “maybe do things a little better than has been done before in South San Francisco.”

“The opportunity to plan such a large parcel and orchestrate open space, transportation and sustainability in a comprehensive way is a unique opportunity for both the city and us,” said Sklar.

San Mateo County Harbor District General Manager Peter Grenell said the ferry would help relieve traffic for a future generation of South San Francisco biotech workers. When fully built out, the campus could house some 8,000 workers.

South San Francisco, like the rest of the Bay Area, is currently suffering from higher than usual office vacancy. The submarket is looking at a vacancy rate of 19.7 percent with another 7.2 percent of sublease space available. Some 800,000 square feet of space is available.

“I think we are looking at a blip in the market,” said Van Duyn. “Shorenstein would not be as invested as they are out here unless they thought there was a future out here.”

jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...26/story3.html

San Frangelino Nov 8, 2009 8:07 PM
Here is something I found while aimlessly surfing the net.

MILPITAS SQUARE
Barber Lane at Bellew
Mixed use
900 dwelling units in multiple buildings
175, 000 sq. ft. commercial
click here for bigger image and more info:http://www.vmwp.com/projects/milpitas-midrise.php

http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_image...tas_square.jpg

Nearby:
LANDMARK TOWERS
600 Barber Lane
18 story tower Mixed use
375 dwelling units
Retail - 3 floors 100,465 sq.ft.
Office - 1 floor
36,530 sq.ft.
http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/govern...esidential.asp
http://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/_image...s_landmark.jpg

pesto Nov 9, 2009 3:20 AM
I just had lunch there today (at a very good Vegan place named Loving Hut). For those not familiar with the place, it is a true cross between a strip mall and a bustling DT area. It is a large broad “U” of buildings with outdoor sidewalks and a huge parking lot in the center. There are roughly 50 Asian restaurants and maybe 30 other shops around the U. At lunch M-F and most of the day on weekends, it is absolutely packed with workers, families and whoever. Parking is unavailable for blocks and pedestrian traffic on the walkways is as dense as lower NY. Amazing for a strip-mall.

What it looks like they are proposing is another Rivermark (just down the road in Santa Clara). This strikes me as about a break-even. It’s in the middle of a low-rise, low-density office area, with wide empty avenues and freeways. They plan to put up higher density housing and less retail, but there is still no way to get anywhere without a car.

My first thought is that it creates a “place” but it is a crowded, gate-controlled place with parking difficult to find and no mass transit that goes to anywhere you would want to go to. A little island not connected to anything. But it does create some housing in an area where housing is either old or non-existant.

San Frangelino Nov 9, 2009 3:45 PM
Even in this economy, it seems redeveloping shopping centers is all the rage in the South Bay
via:http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjo...09/story2.html

Quote:
Friday, November 6, 2009
San Antonio Shopping Center in Mountain View gets multi-use revamp
Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal - by Katherine Conrad

New ownership at the aging San Antonio Shopping Center offers the city a long-awaited opportunity to bring a retail relic into the 21st century.

Developer Merlone Geier Partners of San Francisco plans to redevelop the aging 16-acre site at the corner of San Antonio Road and El Camino Real that has been home to a Sears store for five decades. The dated building, surrounded by a massive parking lot, would be developed as a mixed-use, multistory project of 300 to 400 apartments and 430,000 square feet of new retail, restaurant and office space.


Greg Geertsen, project manager for Merlone Geier, would not disclose the price he is paying Thoits Brothers for the parcel, but he said his company plans to spend $160 million developing the project. The frozen credit markets are not a deterrent, he said, because, “We don’t finance anything. We are cash developers.”

Construction on the multimillion-dollar project is expected to start in July or August and take from 12 to 18 months to complete. Geertsen said the project should generate 700 construction jobs and 800 permanent jobs. Plans are already winding their way through Mountain View’s planning department as the developer waits to close escrow on the site.
Here is a VIRTUAL TOUR: http://www.SanAntoniocenterproject.com/tour.html

Gordo Nov 9, 2009 5:19 PM
^Interesting virtual tour. I assumed by the article that they were talking about housing over retail, but it looks like it's five to six story housing on one end and retail on the other. Looks like mostly underground parking, which surprises me.

That shopping center has been in need of a major makeover for a loooong time.

San Frangelino Nov 9, 2009 9:24 PM
Brisbane Baylands Info

Discovered a website dedicated to the revitalization of the brisbane baylands. Not much on it except a video showing some images of the proposed developments.

http://brisbanebaylands.com/

For a visual reference, here is an image i picked off from http://brisbaneca.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_yB7lCwob8X...s%2Baerial.bmp

peanut gallery Nov 9, 2009 10:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by San Frangelino (Post 4548856)
Even in this economy, it seems redeveloping shopping centers is all the rage in the South Bay
Not just the South Bay -- Northgate Mall in Terra Linda (San Rafael) is nearing completion on a massive overhaul of the place. They've been working on it for over a year.

I was looking at Google maps to check out those Milpitas proposals and was floored by the amount of parking lot that exists between Tasman and 237 to the west of 880. The traffic in that area must be insane around 5:00pm.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:11 PM.
Viewing Page 5 of 31
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.