SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed [Archive] - Page 12

BTinSF

Dec 7, 2007, 5:52 PM

New SoMa Grand fuels property rush
Condo tower signals neighborhood's shift from beat to sweet
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

The opening of the SoMa Grand condo complex, coupled with the influx of 3,000 workers from San Francisco's new federal building, is creating a land rush for investors and restaurateurs looking to get a foothold on and around the long-downtrodden stretch of Mission Street between Sixth and Ninth streets.

A neglected building that long housed a garment factory and car stereo business, 1161 Mission St. sold in 2005 for just over $100 a square foot. Now two years later, impresario Jon Mayeda said he can't keep up with the offers he gets on the five-story, 75,000-square-foot property across from the SoMa Grand, which he now values at $300 square foot, or $22.5 million.

"We are getting letters every other week and three or four calls a week," said Mayeda, a partner in Circolo Restaurant & Ultra Lounge. "People are always asking me about it."

The 260-unit SoMa Grand is springing to life this week, with the first closings executed Dec. 5. Moving trucks scheduled to arrive this weekend. Sales have been modest thus far with about 90 units under contract.

While some condo buyers have been hesitant to invest in an area long overrun by drug peddlers and vagrants, the project has caught on among people willing to take a chance that the gritty corridor has the potential to become an exciting and eclectic enclave. In addition to the Thom Mayne-designed federal building, the area will benefit from the beginning of construction at Trinity Plaza, which will eventually include 1,900 rental apartments at Eighth and Market streets.

Adam Chall, a partner with TMG Partners, which developed the SoMa Grand with AGI Capital, said the rate of change has been mind-boggling.

"This neighborhood story is happening faster than we can explain it to people," said Chall.

Plenty to eat

But even before the new wave of residents move in, the dollars have been pouring in. At 138 Sixth St., an organic restaurant and catering business, Split Pea Seduction and Jersey Tomatoes, has opened. At 121 Seventh St. is Custom Burger/Lounge, a gourmet burger spot and bar. Around the corner from the SoMa Grand, at 139 Eighth St., Chez Papa owner Jocelyn Bulow has created Bossa Nova, a Brazilian tapas spot and nightclub.

On Sixth Street, renovations are under way for two cafes, a Vietnamese restaurant, an optometrist and large produce/grocery market, according to Jenny McNulty, executive director of Urban Solutions, which works with small businesses in depressed areas. Most of the available retail spaces along Sixth Street are now spoken for.

"You don't see it yet -- a lot of these retail spaces are leased and in the midst of tenant improvements," she said. "By March, you are going to see a really different landscape."

In addition, Joie De Vivre's Chip Conley has invested heavily in the area, signing on to provide services at the SoMa Grand and taking over management of four nearby hotels. One of those, the Hotel Britton on the corner of Seventh and Mission streets, will be reinvented as the Good Hotel and will feature an eatery called the Good Restaurant. Slanted Door owner Charles Phan plans a bistro on the ground floor of SoMa Grand, as well.

Economists see good times ahead

Among the new SoMa Grand owners are land use economists Claude and Nina Gruen of Gruen & Gruen Associates. Empty-nesters who are still cleaning out their 3,500-square-foot hilltop house in El Cerrito, the Gruens looked at some of San Francisco's fanciest new buildings. They considered the Four Seasons, the Ritz-Carlton and the St. Regis.

But ultimately the Gruens were drawn to the dynamics of a changing district. The Gruens bought two penthouses on the 22nd floor for a 2,400-square-foot unit with a 350-square-foot deck. Depending on size and views, penthouses in the building are priced between $1,000 and $1,200 a square foot.

"We think it's going to be a short time period before this area is transformed rather dramatically," said Nina Gruen.

The Gruens compare the neighborhood to the 500 block of Howard Street, where they moved their business in 1974. At the time, it was desolate and suffering from the flight of industry and warehousing. Now it's the heart of Foundry Square and the transbay district.

"That took 15 years -- this will take five years or less," said Nina Gruen. "I don't have 15 years."

Nina Gruen, who attends opera, symphony and ballet and is on the board of several arts organizations, said the neighborhood has everything she needs.

"It's flat. I can walk to my office in 18 minutes. I can walk to the opera in 12 minutes. I can walk to Yerba Buena in 12 minutes and Bloomingdale's in five minutes. I can walk to everything I do."

In the Mid-Market, she said she sees a potential for a truly mixed building with a mix of ages. Gruen said she was also turned off by the fact that many buyers in the super-deluxe projects are globe-trotters with two or three other residences.

"I don't want to live in a building where 60 percent of the owners are sporadic visitors," she said. "And it may sound funny, but I don't want to be with just people my own age."

Adam Koval, publisher of the real estate web site Socketsite, said sales at the SoMa Grand are probably behind pro formas. He said property is competing with the Potrero, Symphony Towers and Van Ness with some smaller units starting in the $500,000s.

He said the area of SoMa in unique in the amount of capital being simultaneously dumped in a small area without much existing housing. In a real estate downturn, that can make a big difference.

"People are saying if the market isn't appreciating as much, my return is going to come from neighborhood appreciation," Koval said.

Dealing with crime

Still, petty crime remains an issue on and around Sixth Street, where addicts continue to openly smoke crack and vagrants persist in relieving themselves in doorways. San Francisco Police Lt. Steve Mannina said the quality-of-life crimes continue, but there have been improvements.

"Crime has diminished somewhat, partly because of the federal building," he said. "Officers who patrol down there are seeing improvements."

Christian Noto, whose Split Pea Seduction serves about 100 lunches a day, sees about 30 percent of trade coming from the federal building. Noto is hoping that SoMa Grand and Trinity Plaza will bring a new crop of customers.

"Some people are scared of Sixth Street, but it hasn't been so bad," he said.

Meanwhile, the days of bargain development sites in the neighborhood may be fading, according to Phil Chen of Sybarite Investments, an investor in 1161 Mission St. He said a developer has bought the property next to 1161 Mission St. and plans to build lofts there.

"Everyone is holding out for more money," Chen said. "We have canvassed the three blocks around our building. Either it's already been sold or people are asking for too much."

jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2007/12/10/story1.html?t=printable

tech12

Dec 10, 2007, 4:46 AM

I would love to see a render with all the approved and proposed towers inserted into the skyline. I would give it a go, but don't have my photoshop CD right now, so I can't do it (not that it would even be anything special)...I would love to see a general idea of what it would look like though...

Also, any news on the Place Hotel tower? That one looks like it's gonna be really nice.

peanut gallery

Dec 10, 2007, 4:39 PM

CityKid brought up a topic in the 555 Mission (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=117021&page=17) thread that I wanted to expand on here so as to not take that thread too far off topic.

Something else has to start soon otherwise our building boom is going to come to a crashing halt.

^^^Well I think the new PUC building on Golden Gate is a pretty sure bet for the spring. It's not that tall, but it's very green. And of course the second ORH tower is a lock, probably for next month (or it might slip to February but sometime in late winter).

I'm pretty confident 45 Lansing will start around the same time as well. Transbay will happen, although much later. I'm really curious about 350 Bush. The latest I could find on sfgov was its mention in a discussion about entitlements and if they should expire. I remember some posts about that several pages back in this thread too. In the planning commission meeting notes (http://www.sfgov.org/site/planning_page.asp?id=65676), Robert Herr mentions that they have started some of the historic rehab, but there is no mention of the new construction at that site. I thought this one was a slam-dunk to start soon, but now I'm not so sure.

rocketman_95046

Dec 10, 2007, 5:58 PM

Construction will always be cyclical, so I wouldn’t worry about things slowing down.

However, this cycle did do something that many other cycles failed to do. Many neighborhood plans were approved or moved forward, notably Rincon Hill and Transbay.

Now that the Rincon Hill plan is approved and property owners have entitlements, we will see the skyline grow. The economy may slow and projects may be placed on hold, but one day they will get built!

This slowdown is much different than last time, when nothing was approved and roadblocks were placed to ensure that when the economy turned around nothing would be built.

peanut gallery

Dec 11, 2007, 4:48 AM

One of the lesser profile projects: the horizontal addition to One Kearny.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2031/2102755200_2ba37f1f94_b.jpg

They are prepping its neighbor and its own back wall (under the covered scaffolding):
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2032/2102755198_1ecd80abba_b.jpg

A look down in the hole shows that they have a lot of work to do before we see anything rise above street level:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2126/2102755210_8701b3c387_b.jpg

fflint

Dec 11, 2007, 6:12 AM

Any renderings of the addition?

BTinSF

Dec 11, 2007, 8:31 AM

:previous:

http://www.dunderball.com/skyscraperpage/mktstreetrender.jpg
Source: http://www.archengine.com/index.html
Credit to citizensf for originally finding it.

San Frangelino

Dec 11, 2007, 7:20 PM

Thought it wouldn't hurt to copy this here as well:

Here are renderings of 1285 Sutter Street via: http://www.suttervanness.com/news_20070727.htm

http://www.suttervanness.com/img/dn1ProposedDesign.jpg

http://www.suttervanness.com/img/dn2VanNessHemlock.jpg

http://www.suttervanness.com/img/dn4SutterView.jpg

http://www.suttervanness.com/img/dn5VanNessView.jpg

Also here is another rendering of the Market street addition from http://www.archengine.com/Project/12.html

http://www.archengine.com/resources//gen/w404-1207-11.26-1Kearny-Primary-a.jpg

BTinSF

Dec 11, 2007, 7:32 PM

^^^And may as well note the new addition isn't just an addition. It's a "seismic bookend".

An amalgam of three buildings, one new and two existing (from different eras), will form a new single office building with retail uses on lower floors. The new building on one side plus an existing Annex on the other side function as "seismic bookends", supporting the original 1902 structure without intrusive intervention
Source: http://www.archengine.com/Project/12.html

But it's also intended to eliminate the "gap-tooth" look of the Market st. streetwall from 3rd St.

peanut gallery

Dec 11, 2007, 8:59 PM

I'm glad they're going with a completely different look that reads as a separate building. Rarely, is trying to make it look like part of the original structure a success.

Downtown Dave

Dec 13, 2007, 12:02 AM

And now, for some low rise action, we have the embarcadero restaurants nearing completion:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/EmbarcRest-3059.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/EmbarcRest-3061.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/EmbarcRest-3064.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/EmbarcRest-3066.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/EmbarcRest-3071.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/EmbarcRest-3074.jpg

BTinSF

Dec 13, 2007, 1:48 AM

A lot of restaurants in SF don't last all that long. Given the cost of these buildings and the eyesores they could become if sitting abandoned, I wonder what assurances we have that Pat Kuleto will keep them open for a long time, regardless of business.

roadwarrior

Dec 13, 2007, 4:03 AM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^True, there is no guarantee that these restaurants will last. However, you're kidding yourself if you think these buildings (if vacated) would remain so for long. This area is becoming more of a destination. There really aren't too many restaurants this close to the water with these types of views. Keep in mind that this will attract many tourists as well who come to the Ferry Building and want a nice meal. In addition, it will draw on the crowds who already frequent the nearby upscale restaurants such as Boulevard, Chaya and Mexico DF.

ACSF

Dec 13, 2007, 7:21 PM

viewguysf

Dec 16, 2007, 9:04 PM

690 Market update. I took these today (9/24).

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1234/1436441362_54faea8232_b.jpg

I didn't realize the overhangs would wrap around to the back:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1246/1436441368_163bbe0d10_b.jpg

After looking at this project again yesterday, I still think that the new tower is a real dog. Those "overhangs" that are supposed to be the cornices in the original renderings are ridiculous. The tower looks like an overgrown mediocre condo development stuffed on top of a nice old building/facade. I find it to be almost hideous.

Although it definitely improves the street scape with the return of a historic brick building that was lovingly restored, even the residence lobby looks trite to me--like a place for the rich who don't have very good taste to live.

Overall, it benefits the City, but it could have been so much better. IMO, Ritz-Carlton's image has been diminished by allowing their name to be attached to this developer's misguided architectural adventure. It looks more like the influence of Marriott, Ritz-Carlton's owner. :eek:

Frisco_Zig

Dec 17, 2007, 5:52 AM

After looking at this project again yesterday, I still think that the new tower is a real dog. Those "overhangs" that are supposed to be the cornices in the original renderings are ridiculous. The tower looks like an overgrown mediocre condo development stuffed on top of a nice old building/facade. I find it to be almost hideous.

Although it definitely improves the street scape with the return of a historic brick building that was lovingly restored, even the residence lobby looks trite to me--like a place for the rich who don't have very good taste to live.

Overall, it benefits the City, but it could have been so much better. IMO, Ritz-Carlton's image has been diminished by allowing their name to be attached to this developer's misguided architectural adventure. It looks more like the influence of Marriott, Ritz-Carlton's owner. :eek:

I agree this is a really ugly mediocre building. Rather than trying to blend with such a bland design I would prefer the new condo tower to be unabashedly modern because, hello, its a condo tower on top of an old building. If ever there is a time to create a great contrast this is it. The Hearst building New York really pulls this idea off IMO. I love to look at that building. This just looks like it was trying to not offend anyone.

markermiller

Dec 17, 2007, 10:17 PM

I agree this is a really ugly mediocre building. Rather than trying to blend with such a bland design I would prefer the new condo tower to be unabashedly modern because, hello, its a condo tower on top of an old building. If ever there is a time to create a great contrast this is it. The Hearst building New York really pulls this idea off IMO. I love to look at that building. This just looks like it was trying to not offend anyone.

I completely agree. The reason it LOOKS like it's trying not to offend anyone is because that's exactly what comes out of San Francisco's overly-democratized planning process. Over the years I've come to realize that the worst-of-the-worst designs that get wrung through our 'process' are those with a 'mandate' to 'fit-in' with an old beloved classic. Witness the piece of trash immediately behind the Sentinel Building at Columbus & Kearny, which breaks my heart every time I pass by and imagine the alternatives that could have been built on this great, front-row property. Or the Market Street frontage of 33 New Montgomery - the infamous Boudin’s Café frame (which, speaking of modern ‘cornices’, boasts one of the most ridiculous ‘solutions’ imaginable). Look at 456 Montgomery (the silver box Wells Fargo built in ’83, which blocked the great street wall view up Montgomery to the TA Pyramid), or the Citicorp highrise at Sutter & Sansome, or the (now) old Bank of California building at California & Sansome.

All these –and many more- saved a much loved original structure (or at least some of it!), but at what cost? They could have been fantastic, innovative and inspiring projects –if only the city would have allowed them the ‘air space’, and then more-or-less stayed out of the way! Our ‘mandate’ should simply be: “save the old beauty; then dazzle us!”

Yikes... my first post here turned into quite a little rant!

northbay

Dec 18, 2007, 2:28 AM

^ a good one tho. i agree that the planning process provides for very bland designs

welcome markermiller to ssp!

markermiller

Dec 18, 2007, 3:30 AM

^ a good one tho. i agree that the planning process provides for very bland designs

welcome markermiller to ssp!

Yeah, 690 Market doesn't bother me much at all... probably because the renovation is so extraordinary, and the overall shape of the addition works well. Compared to many other such projects in SF, it's a beauty. It's only when I stare at buildings like this, and imagine what COULD have been, that I get critical.

Speaking of which, I've gotta say that I LOVE this thread! I discovered it about a year ago, and it's been great reading the comments of so many guys, most of whom seem to share my sensibilites about urban planning and architecture.

viewguysf

Dec 18, 2007, 3:31 AM

I completely agree. The reason it LOOKS like it's trying not to offend anyone is because that's exactly what comes out of San Francisco's overly-democratized planning process. Over the years I've come to realize that the worst-of-the-worst designs that get wrung through our 'process' are those with a 'mandate' to 'fit-in' with an old beloved classic. Witness the piece of trash immediately behind the Sentinel Building at Columbus & Kearny, which breaks my heart every time I pass by and imagine the alternatives that could have been built on this great, front-row property. Or the Market Street frontage of 33 New Montgomery - the infamous Boudin’s Café frame (which, speaking of modern ‘cornices’, boasts one of the most ridiculous ‘solutions’ imaginable). Look at 456 Montgomery (the silver box Wells Fargo built in ’83, which blocked the great street wall view up Montgomery to the TA Pyramid), or the Citicorp highrise at Sutter & Sansome, or the (now) old Bank of California building at California & Sansome.

All these –and many more- saved a much loved original structure (or at least some of it!), but at what cost? They could have been fantastic, innovative and inspiring projects –if only the city would have allowed them the ‘air space’, and then more-or-less stayed out of the way! Our ‘mandate’ should simply be: “save the old beauty; then dazzle us!”

Yikes... my first post here turned into quite a little rant!

I second northbay420's welcoming you to SSP and thank you for a well reasoned and documented first post!

I unexpectedly happened to end up on the 12th floor of a building downtown today that afforded an excellent view of this project and had time to reflect upon what Frisco_Zig had written in response to my post, which I agreed with completely. You carried it several steps further and listed numerous examples, both "ancient" and recent that have bothered me. In short, you succinctly stated the problem and the solution. "Save the old beauty--then dazzle us" is a most appropriate slogan for San Francisco. We have only to look at the recent Transbay tower competition to see yet again that the least offensive design was selected; it's so ironic that it was the one to have the big bucks behind it. Perhaps that's why I like the new Federal Building, despite its flaws.

I think that we have to be careful not to prostitute ourselves just for the sake of wanting to see new construction or a higher skyline. I've seen many posts on SSP that seemed to do just that, attempting to justify mundane projects. Thankfully, we do have several good ones going up now, but we can never afford to forget our past mistakes such as ones that you have mentioned.

There's my little diatribe to respond to your first rant! :laugh:

LWR

Dec 18, 2007, 5:57 AM

To my eye... the overhangs don't seem completed (finished). It appears as though it was something just added as a last touch, hopefully, to tie-in to what was there years ago.:previous:

peanut gallery

Dec 18, 2007, 7:54 AM

Foundry Square I is nearing completion. The outside of the structure is pretty much done:
http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/1939/img9906tf5.jpg

Inside, work continues:
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/6628/img9910eu0.jpg

Lately, most of the exterior action has been focused on the entrance tilework and landscaping (ok, planting a dozen or so trees):
http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/5371/img9908fg3.jpg

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/4520/img9907oq9.jpg

BTinSF

Dec 18, 2007, 8:01 AM

Kuleto is by far the most successful restauranteur in the area, if no the state, and maybe beyond. Great location given that it is right next to Gap headquarters, Google, and close to Infinity, Rincon, Watermark, and the Ferry building. So I predict big success.

But I wish the red brick building's exterior was more inspired. So far I am unimpressed and hoping the interior makes up for the exterior. All in all the neighborhood is coming along nicely.

All fine but I still hope they have a plan B for the buildings. I've never before seen such specialized structures in such a prominent place (well, maybe Tavern on the Green in NYC).

Maybe a homeless shelter? ;)

BTinSF

Dec 18, 2007, 8:04 AM

To my eye... the overhangs don't seem completed (finished). It appears as though it was something just added as a last touch, hopefully, to tie-in to what was there years ago.:previous:

They look like their function is to stop people from jumping out the windows. The stock market is bad, but . . . . :shrug:

markermiller

Dec 18, 2007, 11:50 PM

http://www.flickr.com/photos/42955906@N00/2121630226/

This is my first test of posting a photo; hopefully, my photo of Market / Embarcadero will display: Does anyone know what's happening (or going to happen) with the precious piece of land, just south of Market at the Embarcadero? For lack of something better, I'm currently calling it "Dog Poo Annex". It's an absolutely hideous space right now... and as such, it DOES fit in with what I call "Median-Strip Plaza" in front of the Ferry Building (which looks fantastic from the air... and NOWHERE else.

I wonder if BTinSF would object if I chose "Curmudgeon Jr." as my moniker? (Even though I'm pretty old, I like the ring of it...)

roadwarrior

Dec 19, 2007, 12:31 AM

BTinSF

Dec 19, 2007, 12:42 AM

http://www.flickr.com/photos/42955906@N00/2121630226/

Does anyone know what's happening (or going to happen) with the precious piece of land, just south of Market at the Embarcadero? For lack of something better, I'm currently calling it "Dog Poo Annex". It's an absolutely hideous space right now... and as such, it DOES fit in with what I call "Median-Strip Plaza" in front of the Ferry Building (which looks fantastic from the air... and NOWHERE else.

That has long been, and as far as far as I know still is, intended as a place to install the Panama Pacific Exposition Organ:

Pipe Up!

Waterfront Pavilion to Feature Historic Pipe Organ

http://www.baycrossings.com/Archives/2001/04_May/ARTIST.jpg

A new and exciting project, that will bring music and magic to the people of San Francisco, is brewing at the foot of Market Street and Embarcadero, in front of the historic Ferry building. The Waterfront Pavilion will be a cultural facility that will become the permanent home of the 1915 Exposition Organ. The 7,500 pipe organ was originally built for the 1915 Panama Pacific Exposition, in celebration of the completion of the Panama Canal and a testament to the city’s tenacity to rise from the ashes of the 1906 earthquake.

The initiative to bring the historic pipe organ to the waterfront is thanks to a collaboration between the San Francisco Department of Recreation and Park and the Committee for the Waterfront Pavilion, a volunteer group of San Francisco residents representing a wide spectrum of the community, under the fiscal sponsorship of the Friends of the Rec and Park. Its task is to raise funds to build the pavilion and install the historic organ. Upon completion of this task, a non-profit organization to be called "Friends of the Waterfront Pavilion" will be organized to preserve, maintain and administer the Waterfront Pavilion and the historic organ as well as to develop and produce free outdoor concerts.

The Waterfront Pavilion will become the center of a burgeoning renaissance taking place at the Embarcadero Waterfront since the dismantling of the Embarcadero freeway in 1991. Its idyllic location and accessibility will make it as one of the city’s premier attractions, becoming the biggest outdoor organ pavilion in the country. Free yearlong organ concerts and collaborative performances reflecting the city’s multicultural heritage will be presented.

The Exposition organ enjoyed tremendous popularity from 1915 till the late 1950’s. With the advent of big bands and rock and roll music, the organ’s popularity waned and it fell into disrepair. Various efforts were made to maintain the instrument but the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake severely damaged it. A Citizens’ Committee to Preserve the Organ secured funds from FEMA to repair the instrument. Subsequently, the San Francisco Chapter of the American Guild of Organists, together with the Committee for a Safe Embarcadero, sought assistance from the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor to secure a permanent home for the organ.

For more information, see www.sfpavilion.org, e-mail watpavl@aol.com. Or call (510) 898-8523.

Source: http://www.baycrossings.com/Archives/2001/04_May/waterfront_organ.htm

I wonder if BTinSF would object if I chose "Curmudgeon Jr." as my moniker? (Even though I'm pretty old, I like the ring of it...)

I'd be flattered but I don't deserve the honor.

markermiller

Dec 19, 2007, 1:27 AM

That has long been, and as far as far as I know still is, intended as a place to install the Panama Pacific Exposition Organ:

Source: http://www.baycrossings.com/Archives/2001/04_May/waterfront_organ.htm

I'd be flattered but I don't deserve the honor.

I'm sure you're as honorable as the next curmudgeon. Regarding the plans, again (in the drawing), it looks great from the air. I wonder how it's going to feel going to an organ recital next to a freeway? It'll be nice to see this space spruced up though. Anyway, thanks for the good info...

BTinSF

Dec 19, 2007, 1:31 AM

^^^I've been wondering if the people in that hotel next to it will appreciate it. But the organ plans came before the hotel.

viewguysf

Dec 19, 2007, 2:26 AM

^^^I've been wondering if the people in that hotel next to it will appreciate it. But the organ plans came before the hotel.

From what I've been hearing over the past year or more, the organ pavilion project is almost dead. A bond issue to funding the biggest piece of it was defeated (the catch-all bond contained numerous projects) and some of the Bay Area's most prominent organists are not in favor of the pavilion. San Diego's Spreckels Organ Pavilion notwithstanding, organs are meant to in enclosed spaces designed for them or vice versa. In addition, our climate would be very harsh for the historic Austin organ.

San Frangelino

Dec 22, 2007, 5:00 PM

via http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2007/12/planning_for_5700_new_homes_in_san_franciscos_parkmerce.html#comments

Planning For 5,700 New Homes In San Francisco’s Parkmerced

From J.K. Dineen at the San Francisco Business Times: “Parkmerced's owners want to add 5,700 housing units to San Francisco's largest apartment complex in a dramatic redesign that would cost billions of dollars and nearly triple the west side community to 9,000 units.

Stellar Management and Rockpoint Group's aggressive plan calls for the construction of between 200 and 300 units a year over the next 15 to 20 years. The owners plan to file an application for environmental review with the city before the end of the year, according to spokesman P.J. Johnston.

The proposal, as envisioned by architects Skidmore Owings Merrill, would reinvent the automobile-centric World War II-era community as a denser, more pedestrian-oriented neighborhood with a new transit stop, parks, and grocery shopping. Ten of the 11 existing 13-story towers would be preserved. Approximately 70 percent of the 5,700 new units would be in townhouses of three or four stories. Others would be in new towers up to 13 stories. The housing will include a mixture of rental apartments and for-sale condos.”

viewguysf

Dec 24, 2007, 5:43 PM

POLA's pic #22 from his great "San Francisco by Pola (big)" thread shows just how unsightly the Ritz-Carlton Residences project is when viewed from above. Not only is it painfully obvious how the two sections do not fit together and how cheap looking the new structure is, but it also shows that they made no attempt to hide the mechanical penthouse and equipment on the roof. From this angle, the project rates a big F in my book.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1351/1004704667_79f8cc1fdd_b.jpg

krudmonk

Dec 25, 2007, 2:04 AM

After looking at this project again yesterday, I still think that the new tower is a real dog. Those "overhangs" that are supposed to be the cornices in the original renderings are ridiculous. The tower looks like an overgrown mediocre condo development stuffed on top of a nice old building/facade. I find it to be almost hideous.

Although it definitely improves the street scape with the return of a historic brick building that was lovingly restored, even the residence lobby looks trite to me--like a place for the rich who don't have very good taste to live.

Overall, it benefits the City, but it could have been so much better. IMO, Ritz-Carlton's image has been diminished by allowing their name to be attached to this developer's misguided architectural adventure. It looks more like the influence of Marriott, Ritz-Carlton's owner. :eek:
The angle shown is obviously not the most flattering. The conceptuals were much more so. I haven't seen it in person yet, but I hope not to be disappointed. It looked to be one of the best designs around and I was a little jealous not to have something like that down here (it might even fit at that height). The overhangs aren't lovely, but the bold tones and asymmetry make it stand out amongst other current projects. Maybe once they get some greenery up on it, things will be more like promised.

CityKid

Dec 28, 2007, 7:32 PM

markermiller

Dec 28, 2007, 11:42 PM

Because, you know, a project's worth is based entirely on the way its roof looks from above. Give me a break.

I think viewguysf has mentioned MANY ways that the Ritz Carlton Residences project falls short. But actually, how buildings look from ALL directions (including from above) is more important in San Francisco than in many other cities. With the city's many hills and highrises, (and also because we're photographed SO much) we see the butt-end of buildings more.

This is why I've always been a bit baffled that so many property developers and owners in the City do such a poor job of designing and maintaining their building's butt-ends (the sides, backs and tops).

viewguysf

Dec 29, 2007, 7:16 AM

I think viewguysf has mentioned MANY ways that the Ritz Carlton Residences project falls short. But actually, how buildings look from ALL directions (including from above) is more important in San Francisco than in many other cities. With the city's many hills and highrises, (and also because we're photographed SO much) we see the butt-end of buildings more.

This is why I've always been a bit baffled that so many property developers and owners in the City do such a poor job of designing and maintaining their building's butt-ends (the sides, backs and tops).

So true, this is a city that offers many perspectives of its structures.

As to the previous posting, even when coming down Market Street from Castro or Church towards downtown, it's easy to see the ugly gray boxes on top of the Ritz-Carlton Residences' plain brown box and, obviously, impossible to see the impressive lower facade at that point.

botoxic

Dec 30, 2007, 6:14 PM

He doesn't say much that hasn't already been discussed here.

S.F.'s restored de Young building stunning at street level

John King, Chronicle Staff Writer
Thursday, December 27, 2007

As long as you don't look up, the restoration of San Francisco's de Young Building is the architectural feel-good story of the year.

Eleven stories of ruddy sandstone and brick command the corner of Kearny and Market streets every bit as robustly as they did in 1890, when the building that then housed The Chronicle opened as the tallest tower on the West Coast. You'd never guess that for 40 years the walls were hidden behind drab metal panels with a pseudo-modern look.

Unfortunately, the story doesn't end with a dowager's face-lift. To finance the rebirth, city officials let the developer put a tower in back. And that addition is so uninspired it almost undoes the good work below.

What's been salvaged is such a treasure that the trade-off is justified. But it's a close call.

The masonry facade is virtually all that's left of the original, designed by Chicago firm Burnham and Root for Chronicle publisher M. H. de Young. The client wanted an edifice that would outshine his rivals; Burnham and Root delivered the goods with a fortress-like temple of commerce, the walls so hefty they seem as though they were carved from a cliff.

That air of brawny grandeur remains, even though the interior was gutted long ago and the facade was scarred by a skin of metal and glass tattooed into place in 1962, when the owner at the time tried to make it more attractive to potential tenants.

But now the red bricks conceal something much different from a newspaper plant: Behind and above them sit the Ritz-Carlton Club and Residences, a 24-story stack of condominiums and time shares (sorry, "fractional ownerships") aimed at affluent people who want a downtown perch.

For the original building, Burnham and Root rolled out a design that looks more like their hometown than San Francisco. An enormous, intricately carved entry arch in the style of H.H. Richardson emerges from a sandstone base so thick the windowsills framing the residential entry are 30 inches deep. Above the base, paired stacks of windows march up to eighth-floor arches.

There's such depth, such force, that you can sense what a spell the building cast on opening day, when nothing nearby was even half as tall. This is how the heart of a city should be: powerful and poised, tactile and proud.

The addition, by contrast, is wrapped in thin panels of lightweight concrete, with a tan color to differentiate them from the brickwork below. The tower is set back a bit from Market - enough for a nifty residents-only terrace - and not at all along Kearny.

The only accents to the upper facade come from flat bands of metal at various setbacks. There also were to be sunshades and recessed windows that would add a bit of depth, but they disappeared from the design as preservation costs soared.

According to architect Charles Bloszies, the look of the addition comes in part from necessity - a heavier facade wouldn't work with the structural columns - but also from a desire to make the new tower keep a low profile.

"We want the new building to look like a building in the background," said Bloszies, who was assisted on the preservation work by another local firm, Page & Turnbull. "The idea was to do a quiet addition that was respectful to the original design, but also distinct."

That's about the best that can be said for the new piece: It's a pale shadow of the past. The real justification is economic. Developer Jim Hunter was allowed extra height and bulk in return for a seismic upgrade and full restoration of the original building's skin.

It's a dangerous sort of compromise, as we too plainly see. On the other hand, the top is so forgettable it blurs into the background. The real show is at sidewalk level - where the project is an absolute winner.

Most of the credit goes to Burnham and Root, but give credit as well to Bloszies and Page & Turnbull. This isn't just a case of uncovering an old beauty and dusting her off. The team seized a once-in-a-career opportunity to make things right on a historic corner of San Francisco across from Lotta's Fountain, where Union Square meets the Financial District.

Indeed, the caring attention to detail makes it easy to miss the extent to which the "historic" skin is vintage 2007.

Some of the repair work is obvious, such as new bricks patching ruptures where the supports for the metal skin had been hammered into place. But the shallow bay that extends up from the original arched entry was sheared off in 1962, so what we see is molded lightweight concrete.

As for the rusticated stonework along Market, only the upper portion is original; the sandstone from the sidewalk to a height of 12 feet was installed last year, cut from boulders found at the long-closed original quarry in Southern California.

In a perfect world, the addition would be a fitting sequel to the original - one more part of a collage that already included two extra floors on Market and a 16-story wing on Kearny from 1905 designed in part by local luminary Willis Polk.

Instead, we have an ordinary finale to an extraordinary tale. Enjoy what's been uncovered anyway. It's a long-lost treasure, and it looks almost as good as new.

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/12/27/ba_oldchronx.jpg
The stunningly restored de Young building is topped off with a ordinary-looking new tower. Chronicle photo by Kurt Rogers

De Young building over the decades

1887 - Chronicle publisher Michael de Young hires the Chicago firm Burnham and Root to design a new home for the newspaper at Kearny and Market streets.

1890 - On June 22, The Chronicle devotes seven pages of the paper to a thorough examination of "the safest, strongest and in every way one of the finest office buildings in the world." Special detail is lavished on the four-story clock tower rising from the center of the building, "the only bronze one in the United States."

1905 - A raucous parade celebrating the re-election of Mayor Eugene Schmitz stops outside the paper, which had opposed him. Skyrockets are launched. The tower goes up in flames. De Young responds by adding two floors to the original building and a 16-story annex on Kearny Street. No clock tower, though.

1906 - The Chronicle building rides out the earthquake - until the interior of the top floor catches fire and the typesetting equipment stored there plunges to the ground. Much of the building follows. The annex, though, survives and opens the next spring.

1924 - Chronicle moves to its current home at Fifth and Mission streets, and its former headquarters becomes a conventional for-rent office building.

1962 - The stretch of Market Street has faded, and so has the building. To spiff things up and catch the eye of potential tenants, owner Home Mutual Savings & Loan shaves back the masonry details to create a canvas for a modern facade of aluminum, glass and porcelain panels.

2004 - New owner Jim Hunter receives city approvals to strip off the modern cladding and restore the facade to its original appearance. The plan includes a vertical addition and a conversion to residential use. Construction begins in 2005.

2007 - In November, residents move into the Ritz-Carlton Club and Residences. A marketing brochure touts their new home as "a historic skyscraper reincarnated."

StevenW

Dec 30, 2007, 7:08 PM

:previous: Very nice. :) :yes:

HarryBarbierSRPD

Jan 2, 2008, 8:27 AM

After quite a few drinks on new year's eve, I decided to take a few dark and blurry pics of our SoMa projects on the way home. I hope they help give an idea of what SF looks like from a dirty cell phone camera at 4am...:haha:

http://aycu21.webshots.com/image/38300/2001713699867906700_rs.jpg
http://aycu17.webshots.com/image/37696/2001759892867365009_rs.jpg
http://aycu17.webshots.com/image/36896/2001796604808843274_rs.jpg
http://aycu34.webshots.com/image/37033/2001768653469010863_rs.jpg
http://aycu11.webshots.com/image/36930/2001739124823439100_rs.jpg
http://aycu34.webshots.com/image/40473/2001723976233867996_rs.jpg

Reminiscence

Jan 2, 2008, 11:51 AM

^^^

Too much to drink? ;) :haha:

botoxic

Jan 4, 2008, 1:37 AM

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2363/2154309704_2e466d48e5_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2363/2154309704_2e466d48e5_b.jpg

mdsayh1

Jan 4, 2008, 2:17 AM

Great photo! I used to live in SF until 3 weeks ago and I also worked at Gap on Spear and Harrison. I was wondering how those building were coming along.

botoxic

Jan 4, 2008, 6:23 AM

High-rises are a sign of the times in changing San Francisco
Carl Nolte, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 2, 2008

The new year marks the beginning of something big in San Francisco. One Rincon Hill, the tallest residential tower west of the Mississippi, opens this year. So does a luxury hotel at the once-bleak corner of Fifth and Howard streets. A condo development at Seventh and Mission, only a block from Skid Row, is described in the newspaper as trendy.

Wine bars and fine restaurants crop up in Dogpatch, a district no one had ever heard of a few years ago. They are building new neighborhoods at Mission Bay and talking about them on Treasure Island.

San Francisco is changing so rapidly some say the San Franciscans of 2007 won't recognize the place in five years.

It's part of a trend that began after the city picked itself up after the dot-com bust of a few years ago. There are plans for more condos, bigger high-rises, so many fine restaurants that more San Franciscans will recognize the name of a celebrity chef than the quarterback of the 49ers.

"Some people say change is bad," said Meagan Levitan, a real estate broker who is also on the Recreation and Park Commission. "I want my old city, but at the same time, change is exciting."

But change is also sobering - some experts worry that a new San Francisco of high-rises and fine living will be a city of the very rich and very poor, a boutique city and not a real one.

"It will be economically less diverse and to some extent less racially and ethnically diverse," said Richard DeLeon, emeritus professor of political science at San Francisco State University. DeLeon literally wrote the book on San Francisco's politics with his "Left Coast City," a study of the rise of the city's cutting-edge leftist progressive movements.

DeLeon notes the sharp decline in San Francisco's African American population, which has dropped from 16 percent of the residents to 6 percent in 30 years.

He said the city may also lose much of its Latino population, driven out by high home prices. It could become a city with fewer children and fewer families - a city without a middle class.

If present trends continue, DeLeon thinks San Francisco might become a city that is white and Asian, with marked declines in the number of black and Latino residents.

The changes are driven by economics and politics, he said. "The issue is who gets to live in San Francisco and who can afford to live in San Francisco.

"Who is going to sweep the streets and serve the lattes, and where are they going to live?"

What the future will look like is an old debate in San Francisco, which featured a citizens revolt against freeways in the 1960s, and worries about tall buildings and arguments about "Manhattanization" in the '70s.

But the high-rises came anyway in the pro-business '80s, and now a new wave of buildings and development has accelerated the trends.

"Living in the city, you can feel all that," said Corey Cook, assistant professor of politics at the University of San Francisco.

When San Francisco lost its industrial base a generation ago, it became a headquarters city, a city of office workers and managers. When the economy shifted again, Cook said, San Francisco began to pursue trends - stem cell research, biotechnology, green technology.

"We keep looking for the next big thing, riding at the peak of the big booms," he said. It is almost as if the city were riding the economy like a surfer.

The downside to this, Cook thinks, is in shifting demographics. He sees San Francisco attracting 25-year-olds, "fresh out of MIT, who want to come to San Francisco because it is the coolest place in the world."

It could become a city of the young - and you can see that trend now in the clubs, in the hip restaurants. Ten years later, this scenario goes, these San Franciscans want to raise families, but the housing stock now going up is one- and two-bedroom condos, and the older houses, their prices driven up by scarcity, are unaffordable. Even now, even in a mortgage crisis, single-family homes in desirable neighborhoods like Noe Valley sell for well over $1 million.

So, Cook said, these San Franciscans move to the suburbs. It's an old story in cities: It happenedin North Beach, the Sunset, the Richmond and other places.

But in the new scenario, after years go by and their family is grown, these ex-San Franciscans move back - a movement planners call "new urbanism."

But now there are places for them like One Rincon Hill, the Millennium Towers and Soma Grand, which advertises itself as "a boutique condominium development."

The new, older San Franciscans who live in them support the opera, the theater, the symphony. All three were booming in 2007, a year in which the San Francisco Opera even showed a profit.

In this scenario, not long in the future, what has developed is a city of the young and the old. "If this happens," Corey said, "you definitely have a different kind of a city."

Housing and change run together. Where the city needs affordable housing, it is getting condos, though some of the building fees the condo projects generate are earmarked for affordable housing. One Rincon, which cost $290 million to build, generated $20 million toward low-cost housing.

DeLeon thinks the next frontier is Bayview-Hunters Point (where, he said, African Americans are cashing in by selling their homes and moving out of San Francisco), the Mission, the areas around UCSF, and Candlestick Point around a proposed football stadium complex.

The rising tide does not lift all boats; there are also pockets of extreme poverty.

Jim Ross is a political consultant, with offices at 20th and Shotwell streets in the Inner Mission. At one time, the neighborhood was where low-cost housing and an industrial area met. It was always a bit rough around the corners, but a few years ago the area slid over the edge.

"If you came to this area not long ago, you'd be looking for hookers and heroin," Ross said. "Now there's high-end condos on every corner. There's latte, and a fancy wine bar at 16th street and South Van Ness Avenue."

The housing in the neighborhood, he said, is one- and two-bedroom condos with parking over retail shops.

"It's not the kind of housing to raise a family in," he said. "If you had kids, would you want to live in a two-bedroom condo?"

The solution, some say, is political, and that could change, too. San Francisco has a moderate mayor in Gavin Newsom, but the Board of Supervisors has a so-called progressive majority that leans left. But the progressives have allowed much of the new high-rise and condo development. On the one hand, the tall buildings have a small footprint; they do not sprawl all over the streets. On the other, they have changed the city skyline.

The shape of the board could change with elections in November, when a number of seats are up for grabs.

For one thing, said political consultant David Latterman, San Francisco might have three Asian Americans on the Board of Supervisors instead of one. For another, he thinks it likely that a Latino will replace Supervisor Tom Ammiano in District Nine, which represents the Mission and Bernal Heights.

USF's Cook thinks the new board could have a decisive influence. "The city has a monopoly on land use," he said. "The city is actually in a position to make real decisions on how it looks."

Latterman is not so sure. "A lot depends on the business cycles, not the political cycles," he said. "A lot depends on jobs, on how good the Muni is, and how well BART works moving people in and out. The forces are economic and not political.

"It's bigger than a few tin-pot supervisors," he said. "It's like a river. The supervisors can dip their hands into the river, but they can't control the current."

Latterman is not so sure a new board will make that much of a difference. "Where's the voice for real change?" he asks. "Who's going to step up and go beyond their identity base and represent the whole city?"

No matter who lives here, it is clear that the new San Francisco will have a different look.

"I think the waterfront will get more and more beautiful," said Anne Halsted, vice chair of the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, who has been active in political issues for years.

She thinks the trend toward high-rises and condos will level off. "We won't allow big buildings on the waterfront," she said, and the city will be able to control the new skyline.

San Francisco won't change that much, because, she said, "San Franciscans love their city too much" to see it damaged.

"It's a great city," she said, "one of the best in the world."

San Francisco does have one unique quality: It's always changing, but it opposes change. "We think we are progressive and open-minded," said Levitan, who was born and raised in the city, "but we say, 'Don't change a thing.' "

krudmonk

Jan 4, 2008, 9:25 PM

I drove by the Ritz Carlton building the other day and I still don't buy the complaints.

roadwarrior

Jan 5, 2008, 2:21 AM

BTinSF

Jan 5, 2008, 5:23 AM

Friday, January 4, 2008
S.F. condos looking solid in 'dog-eat-dog' year
But some buyers expected to walk away from deposits
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

If 2007 was the year of the crane and the sales center, 2008 will bring punch lists and reality checks.

More than 2,500 new condominiums across the city will be move-in ready this year. On Rincon Hill some 700 new homeowners will take occupancy in Tishman Speyer's Infinity and Michael Kriozere's One Rincon Hill. In Mission Bay, Intracorp's green Arterra will take root, and the first phase of Nat Bosa's Radiance should open. On the other side of Market Street will be the Hayes, Symphony Towers and the Argenta.

Since most of these projects opened sales offices a year to 18 months ago, at the peak of the condo boom, industry observers will be watching closely for defectors. What percentage of buyers will walk away from the 3 percent deposit put down when the unit went into contract? With the days of 5 percent down payments gone, how many entry-level buyers will be unable or unwilling to cough up the 20 percent equity needed to close deals? And with the housing market depressed in many parts of the country, some San Francisco condo buyers may be counting on handsome returns from the sale of a current property -- profits that now may be unrealistic.

One project that observers will be watching more closely than the rest is One Rincon Hill. With a its signature "One Gincon cocktails" served at a series of parties, and buyers lined up until 2 a.m. to reserve units, the frenzy around One Rincon represented perhaps the peak of the condo boom. But because the project was perceived as a bargain, priced slightly below what was seen as market rate, the project may have drawn a higher percentage of investors than other developments. Some 90 percent of the units are in contract.

Gregg Lynn, a broker at Sotheby's, said all six of the buyers he represents at One Rincon are preparing to close, but some buyers will walk away.

"It won't be 90 percent closing -- the credit environments have changed so much," he said. "It's going to be a stretch for some people, which will free up some inventory."

Alan Mark of the Mark Co., one of the city's leading new homes sales and marketing firms, said most San Francisco buyers put down at least 10 percent. When the credit crunch hit last summer, Mark looked at all the units under contract in buildings he is selling, including the Hayes, the Arterra, and the Infinity.

"We didn't have a lot of 5 percenters," said Mark.

Developer Joe Cassidy, who built the Palms and has started construction on a 113-unit project at 1844 Market St. in the Castro district, expects the condo market to drag into 2009. He characterized the suburban markets as a "blood bath," with highrise and midrise projects in San Francisco somewhat insulated from the national meltdown.

"It's going to be dog-eat-dog for a year," he said.

With roughly an 18-month construction schedule for most mid-sized projects, June will be a good time to break ground on new condos in the city, Cassidy said.

"It's got to be good quality and a good location with good financing and good marketing," he said, adding: "There is no confidence right now."

Cassidy said he sees prices dropping another 1 percent to 2 percent, with a total decrease of 6 percent to 7 percent from the peak seen a year ago. Cassidy said the slight downturn won't be enough to prompt fire sales, but is a good reminder that real estate is a cyclical business and there is risk in housing development as well as reward.

"It's a dangerous game to be a builder and a developer," he said.

New sales offices opening up in 2008 will include the 113-unit Blu at 631 Folsom St., the 179-unit Argenta at 1 Polk St., the 319-unit Radiance West in Mission Bay. In addition, the marketing for phase two of One Rincon and the Infinity will start up. And Millennium Tower on Mission Street, the city's most high-end project with $2,150-per-square-foot penthouses, opened its sales office Nov. 8 and will be the most coveted deluxe offering of 2008.

Mark of the Mark Co. said he sees continued softness in the condo-rich South of Market enclave, but modest increases in other areas. While the city has a dozen projects for sales, many of them are 40 percent to 60 percent sold out.

"There are a lot of projects, but not a lot of units," said Mark. "If absorption stays as it has been, by June most of these projects should have closed. There won't be a lot of sales offices to go to, and the ones that are open will be skewed toward the higher end."

Lynn of Sotheby's said demand for single-family homes in family-friendly neighborhoods like Noe Valley will continue to be high.

"I have a dozen families like that, just waiting for the right houses," he said. "There isn't much inventory and there hasn't been."

Things that mattered in 2007:

Crunched: The credit crunch and real estate downturn has slowed down construction schedules as several anticipated projects have not broken ground, including Crescent Heights condos at 10th and Market streets, and Turnberry's Rincon Hill project. Also, Fifield is selling its entitled Rincon Hill development, and developer Don Peebles scrapped a plan to develop 250 Brannan St., selling it as an office building instead.
Grand slam: The SoMa Grand: TMG Partners and AGI Capital Partners took a huge gamble with the 246-unit SoMa Grand. Sixth Street is still dicey and the front of the new federal building next door can look like a homeless encampment on weekends. Even so, this exciting project is attracting investors and restaurateurs to the transitional area.
ParkMerced goes green: The owners of the 3,200-unit Parkmerced unveiled a 15- to 20-year plan to build another 5,700 units and create a Muni-centered transit community with ample green space and grocery stores.
Rentals rule: Apartments are back. AvalonBay and Urban Housing Group broke ground on another apartment complex in Mission Bay as rentals become more attractive than condos for some investors.
Trinity Plaza: At long last, Angelo Sangiacomo broke ground on his legacy project: the 1,900-unit Trinity Plaza. The first phase will include about 400 units and will house all current residents.
jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4950

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2008/01/07/story6.html?t=printable

Posted by BT from his hotel room in NYC, having finally got net access once again. :D

viewguysf

Jan 5, 2008, 4:37 PM

I drove by the Ritz Carlton building the other day and I still don't buy the complaints.

Perhaps if you got out of your car and looked at the building from different angles you might form a different opinion. At any rate, you're welcome to take the top back to San Jose--just leave the bottom restored Chronicle Building for us. :haha:

viewguysf

Jan 5, 2008, 4:41 PM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Too many elitests in the city who expect every single building constructed to be "world class".

Take Soma Grand for example. Its not a "world class" building, but it is fairly attractive. It gets blasted on this forum, on socketsite, etc. I was recently viewing the San Diego forum and saw some similar looking buildings that everyone called quite striking. I guess its is all relative.

SOMA Grand isn't a bad building in my opinion either--I just can't stand it when viewed from the new Federal Building plaza or even from the freeway. From those angles, it's a definite clash of the mediocre versus the innovative. From Twin Peaks, the building actually blends in quite well and I think that it looks fine from Civic Center Plaza also.

BTinSF

Jan 6, 2008, 1:39 AM

Perhaps if you got out of your car and looked at the building from different angles you might form a different opinion. At any rate, you're welcome to take the top back to San Jose--just leave the bottom restored Chronicle Building for us. :haha:

I'm going to agree with John King. The top is mediocre at best--and weird at worst--but the bottom restoration is so glorious that net/net it's a win for the city.

As for SOMA Grand, I don't think you can blame it for sitting next to the Federal Building. That extremist creation was meant to contrast, even clash, with everything around it including the historic Federal Appeals Court across the street.

fflint

Jan 6, 2008, 8:40 AM

I don't care for the crappy new tower atop the restored Chron building, but I actually like SOMA Grand given its context. My only concern is that it will age poorly like some other concrete buildings (I'm really thankful that the TAP was recently cleaned--it was really dingy for a while there).

SFView

Jan 10, 2008, 11:36 PM

From the Sierra Club Yodeler (November - December 2007) Newspaper of the San Francisco Bay Chapter
http://sanfranciscobay.sierraclub.org/yodeler/html/2007/11/conservation6.htm
CONSERVATION NEWS

How high San Francisco? Treasure Island tower raises important questions
How high is too high?

The "Sun Tower" proposed for Treasure Island, now planned to be "somewhere between 450 and 650 feet", could dramatically change the San Francisco skyline. For comparison, the Transamerica Building is 853 feet tall, the Western Bay Bridge Towers 526, and One Rincon Hill 605, and the proposed Transbay Terminal tower could possibly exceed 1,200 feet.

The Sierra Club has not in the past taken positions about the heights of these buildings, but it is now considering the Sun Tower in the context of redevelopment plans for currently underutilized Treasure Island.

High-density housing is a cornerstone of smart and sustainable development. The Treasure Island proposal calls for a core residential area of 60 - 80 homes per acre - roughly as dense as the Marina District. Remarkably, 90% of these homes will be within a 12-minute walk of the island's transit hub; strike a blow for energy conservation. The residential buildings will include mid-rises and high-rises; the Sun Tower, named for the 400-foot Tower of the Sun that dominated the 1939 - 40 Golden Gate Exposition, will be the highest. Situated on the San Francisco side of the island near the waterfront, the tower will be conspicuous in Bay views from all directions, inviting judgments that are sure to be diverse.

In a city of severely limited acreage, constructing hundreds of homes within the space of a handful of single-family homes has some obvious benefits. Today we have the technology to reach higher into the sky. The question then becomes, would 80 stories be even better? How about 100? How do participants in the public planning process decide how far to go?

Jack Sylvan, of the Mayor's Office of Base Reuse and Real Estate Development, points out that "the Western U.S. has been much slower to embrace tall buildings than many other cities," citing the recently approved Chicago Spire: a residential condo building that will be the tallest in the US at 2,000 feet and more than twice as tall as the tallest building in San Francisco.

The most obvious benefits of high- and mid-rises are a reduction in sprawl, increase in access to public transit, walkable distances to shopping and restaurants, decreased dependence on the private automobile, and preservation of open space. The current plan for roughly 6,000 residences will leave far more open space than the original plan for only 2,000 residential units.

There could be social benefits as well. The plan is to encourage residents to interact with each other and create community. Inviting public spaces and common meeting places for transportation access have been included in the plan. Cafes and other retail will be strategically placed within residential buildings to create a more "permeable" ground floor, as an alternative to having a parking structure on the pedestrian level. The island's townhouse-style 3 - 4-story buildings will have actual stoops facing the street or sidewalk. The intention is to create many of the same neighborhood benefits that homeowners and renters seek and find in a more traditional neighborhood.

Aesthetics will also need to be considered. Will the building enhance or overwhelm the Bay Area landscape? Architect Craig Hartman of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, lead architect for the project, explains how desire for visual appeal has shaped the latest development plan. The skyline is designed to be highly symbolic, with the Sun Tower as almost a kind of campanile, marking the port of arrival at the ferry terminal much as does the Ferry Building clock tower across the channel. "It's important that we make a statement with this building. It is meant to be a graceful presence in the skyline; a marker for San Francisco's urban and environmental intentions." He sees the tower as a testament to sustainable development and a way to emphasize some of the ecological goals of the island plan. There will be several other "mini-neighborhoods" within the residential area, each represented in the skyline by a mid-rise tower.

So how do you make a high-rise seem graceful? According to Hartman, the aspect ratio, or ratio of width to height, has a lot to do with achieving that effect. Ideally, he says, the height should be at least 6 - 7 times the width. Otherwise, the building will look squat and unattractive. But at what point do you stop? When asked about the pending 2,000-foot Chicago Spire, Hartman replied, "A building of that size would just be totally inappropriate in that setting. It would take away some of the symbolic power of the city of San Francisco itself."

As currently planned, the tower could be considerably higher than the neighboring 338-foot-high Yerba Buena Island, which will probably play a part in determining an appropriate height scale for the location.

The comparison to One Rincon Hill is almost unavoidable. At 60 stories, that is by far the tallest building in the immediate area and one of the tallest residential buildings west of the Mississippi. It's difficult to miss when you look towards downtown. Newspaper reports suggest that the public response to it is pretty negative. Its stature may be softened eventually, however, when, as planned, additional similarly scaled buildings are added to the area. On Treasure Island also, there are plans to "mound" buildings of varying size to create an aesthetically pleasing skyline. Still, the Sun Tower is designed to be conspicuous, and the designers will face a challenge to create a design that the public can embrace.

In the coming months, as public consideration continues on plans for Treasure Island, the Sierra Club's San Francisco Group will be weighing the above concerns - along with questions about seismic stability, emergency evacuation, and affordability - and considering whether to take a position regarding the height of the Sun Tower. If you have thoughts to contribute to the process, contact Steven Chapman, chair of the San Francisco Group Conservation Committee, at steven -at- sfwild.net or call conservation organizer Brad Johnson at (415) 200-8975.

Amy Clemens

peanut gallery

Jan 11, 2008, 12:24 AM

hi123

Jan 12, 2008, 7:50 AM

Have they started doing exterior work on the renderingless 77 van ness or 799 harrison? If so are there any new pics of those two developments?

HarryBarbierSRPD

Jan 12, 2008, 7:54 AM

Sounds like the Sierra Club is laying the foundation for coming out in full support of taller buildings in the Bay Area's core. The higher density of taller buildings definitely fits with the organizational beliefs. Not a bad idea to build the case slowly; to keep some of the reactionary-types at bay and to keep those on the fence nodding along with their viewpoint.

I certainly am glad to see that the environmentalists are (rightly) more on our side than on the side of the NIMBYs...

The NIMBYs should really think of which they would prefer more of in the next decade; a higher skyline and density in the existing city, or hideous urban/suburban sprawl encroaching upon and eventually covering their precious backyards all over the rest of the bay area... :cool:

hi123

Jan 12, 2008, 7:06 PM

What is the blue crane in this pic for?

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2271/1537848362_98ac916451_b.jpg

krudmonk

Jan 13, 2008, 12:03 AM

Perhaps if you got out of your car and looked at the building from different angles you might form a different opinion. At any rate, you're welcome to take the top back to San Jose--just leave the bottom restored Chronicle Building for us. :haha:
Hopefully those overhangs would blow off on the trip down 101.

I never saw the original building before the redevelopment so I'm capable of seeing it only as is. The top doesn't strike me as an ill-fit addition, just as "the top." Maybe that's why I'm not so opposed to it.

peanut gallery

Jan 14, 2008, 11:45 PM

I have a question about permit timing. It's related to 45 Lansing, but it could be applicable to any SF project so I thought I'd post it here. Plus, I didn't want to get anyone's hopes up by posting a non-update on that thread.

Cannon was issued a permit for excavation and shoring at 45 Lansing on Oct 10 that is good for 3 years. Does this really tell us anything in terms of timing? Does a 10/10/10 (interesting date) deadline mean they have to be done by that date or start by that date, or is it really meaningful at all? Say they have to be done by then, would that give an indication of when they might get started?

BTW: on the same day, they were issued a permit that expires one year earlier ('09) for underpinning the building next door (81 Lansing) for the excavation work. I didn't see anything newer than this on the city's planning website.

I'm probably grasping at straws here, but in strolling around these various sites I'm always hoping for some tiny sign that something will happen soon. There's lots of smoke, but I want fire dammit!

BTinSF

Jan 14, 2008, 11:53 PM

^^^I believe the 3 year expiration date on the permit means they have to be done with the work by then--or get a new permit. Excavation/shoring takes about 6 months or so, so I wouldn't say it tells us much about when the building will start except that I doubt they would bother applying for the permit now unless they had some idea that the work would begin reasonably soon. And I still do think it will. Turnberry has given no indication they have any thoughts of abandoning the project--quite the opposite in that they are still hiring for it. But I suspect (and have read) that the present real estate situation has made them take the view that they can afford to proceed with "deliberate speed" (meaning there's no rush since the sales market can only be better the further down the road the building goes on the market).

peanut gallery

Jan 15, 2008, 3:51 PM

Thanks for the insight, BT. I trust your judgement that it will get started soon and look forward to it.

peanut gallery

Jan 15, 2008, 8:45 PM

Today's Chronicle has a John King article (http://www.sfgate.com/flat/archive/2008/01/15/chronicle/archive/2008/01/15/DDHSUCILF.html?tsp=1) on the new PUC building and sustainability in general. He mentions that the Board of Supervisors approved it in December, and the PUC approved the construction contract last week. Demolition should begin this spring and the target opening is 2010. I was hoping for new renderings, but this looks like the same one that has already been posted here.

I just want to say one word to you: sustainability
John King
Tuesday, January 15, 2008

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/01/15/dd_place1502.jpg

During six years writing about architecture for The Chronicle, I've seen trends come and go. Glass is the new stucco. Towers are taller and some of them twist. Celebrity architects spend as much time on self-promotion as serious design.

But here's the trend that sticks, the one lasting change: Visual drama is no longer enough. Environmental sustainability counts for more than curb appeal.

That's why San Francisco's planned Public Utilities Commission building is so much a sign of the times. It's conceived to be a showcase of "green" design, a departure from the bureaucratic norm. But by the time it opens in 2010, I'll wager that even more adventurous buildings are close behind - because the world has changed, and architecture has to change with it.

The 12-story structure will rise a block from City Hall at 525 Golden Gate Ave., and instead of a stylish dome it will be topped by solar panels and wind turbines. The south-facing walls will include a formal grid of white Sierra granite to fit the Beaux Arts look of the Civic Center, but there also will be horizontal strips of finlike panels placed to deflect harsh sunlight while bouncing light toward the building's innards.

Fittingly for the agency that operates San Francisco's water system, the new building is also designed to emphasize water conservation. There will be sensors to turn restroom faucets on and off as needed, for instance, and water will be recycled within the building for use in toilets and the cooling system.

The most visual proof that this isn't business as usual? While the glassy wall facing Golden Gate Avenue will pull back as the floors ascend, a 20-foot-wide stairwell will rise straight up along the sidewalk. Attached to the outside of the stairs, behind a wall of clear glass, you'll see a 190-foot-high stack of swirling wind turbines. These turbines are part of a system that will generate 40 percent of the building's annual power needs. They'll also be a kinetic sculpture that never stops. And yes, it's a bird-friendly design: Think corkscrews that twist, rather than fan blades that chop.

All these touches are costly, adding an estimated $16 million to the $178 million budget. The payoff comes from consolidating 1,000 employees now scattered in various rented spaces. And, less quantifiably, stirring the pot.

"What we've been given by the PUC is a big open window," says David Hobstetter of KMD Architects, the building's designer. "The city's starting point is, 'We want to show the world.' They're willing to take risks."

The Board of Supervisors gave an 11-0 blessing in December, and the Public Utilities Commission signed off on the construction contract last week. Demolition of what's now on the site, a grim bureaucratic box closed since the 1989 earthquake, should begin this spring. The target opening date is 2010.

To me, what's exciting isn't the gee-whiz factor of those turbines, or tidbits such as how marble from the existing building's lobby might be recycled for use as restroom-stall partitions. The hook is that the PUC building, though aggressive, isn't unique. It's part of a much larger trend.

San Francisco alone has enough examples to make the case. On the public front, the supervisors are about to review an ordinance from Mayor Gavin Newsom requiring that by 2012 all new commercial buildings in San Francisco larger than 25,000 square feet must qualify for a Gold rating under the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards established by the U.S. Green Building Council. Once this dictate would have caused a fuss; now, it's endorsed by groups such as the Building Owners and Managers Association.

In the private world, developers and large landowners are embracing sustainability as a bid to win public support.

Down in the city's southwest corner, for example, the homely Parkmerced complex was purchased in 2005 by a developer who eventually wants to double the 3,221 housing units now scattered through the 113-acre site. So what is being proposed? Try this marketing phrase: an "international model of urban sustainability" - heated by geothermal energy, with a rainwater runoff system that would flow into nearby Lake Merced, better mass transit and all the rest.

"It's a whole new world," Hobstetter says of the changes since 2001, when he started work on what now will be the PUC building. "Global warming and climate change are twin engines coming down the track. You're going to see an evolution in architecture to buildings like this, because it's what you have to do."

I don't pretend for a moment that all our problems are solved or that solar panels and waterless urinals will stop the Arctic ice pack from shrinking. You can also bet that when it comes to being green, many developers will do just enough to get by.

"With a building for private developers, everything still has to be cost-justified," Hobstetter says. "It's marketing and payback. Can they attract buyers or tenants with these (environmental) features, and do they justify the cost?"

And make no mistake, the starchitects of the world will still do their best to turn heads. We'll see odd shapes and contorted silhouettes and, yes, exhilarating bursts of three-dimensional art.

Still, an architect today who designs a high-profile building has to take the environment into account - consuming as few materials as possible, paying attention to a structure's carbon footprint. Not just because it's the right thing to do but also because other architects and clients are making the effort.

If you don't, you're behind the times. And that's the last place a cutting-edge architect wants to be.

peanut gallery

Jan 15, 2008, 8:54 PM

I looked on the architect's site (http://www.kmdarchitects.com) and there are other renderings that show the Civic Center (south) facing side and a street view along Polk. Unfortunately, they're all in Flash and I'm not sure how to capture and post them here.

CityKid

Jan 16, 2008, 12:25 AM

^^ I don't know how legal this is, but if you hit print screen and paste into paint, you'll get the renderings along with the rest of your screen. I'd do it myself, but it won't work at the office.

peanut gallery

Jan 16, 2008, 5:17 PM

I have the same problem, being at work. Hopefully, anyone interested can just see them on the architect's site.

BTinSF

Jan 18, 2008, 6:16 PM

"Lincoln Property Co. plans to break ground this winter on the 350,000-square-foot 350 Bush St."
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2008/01/21/story2.html?t=printable

Does this project have a thread?

peanut gallery

Jan 18, 2008, 8:17 PM

Finally! I've read bits and pieces about that one, but nothing definite. I don't recall a thread for it. BTW, the link you posted is to news about 555 Mission getting an anchor tenant. Also great news, but I think you meant to post a different URL here.

BTinSF

Jan 18, 2008, 10:50 PM

BTW, the link you posted is to news about 555 Mission getting an anchor tenant. Also great news, but I think you meant to post a different URL here.

No--that sentence was just a small clip out of the article on 555 Mission but I didn't want it overlooked and if this building is about to start construction, it deserves more attention.

peanut gallery

Jan 18, 2008, 11:45 PM

Oh, yes I see now. When I look at the link I only get the first couple of lines as I'm not a subscriber. But I see the complete article in the other thread where it's mentioned. Thanks for posting that.

peanut gallery

Jan 19, 2008, 7:33 AM

I walked past one of the many minor projects around town. This is 766 Harrison (http://www.tbcproperties.com/properties/766_harrison.html), a new eight-story, 98-unit, single-room-occupancy ("SRO") residential project. It includes 4,500 square feet of retail (website says it's a cafe), five parking spaces for the residential units, a 581-square-foot side yard, and 4,370 square feet of common resident open space on a roof deck. It's supposed to be completed in June, but I think it will be longer than that.

From the east (easy access to Whole Foods):
http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/6729/img0255lo3.jpg

From the west:
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/3888/img0254zv5.jpg

Here's a rendering:
http://www.tbcproperties.com/images/NErendering.JPG

HarryBarbierSRPD

Jan 19, 2008, 11:07 AM

While I was watching TV on my computer I realized just how much I like the way this looks:

http://aycu35.webshots.com/image/41794/2005033643733111125_rs.jpg
copyright KTVU

:tup:

Downtown Dave

Jan 19, 2008, 10:44 PM

Heres a view of our favorite projects from Mission Bay:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/MissionBay/MissionBaySkyline-5723.jpg

See those blue cement parking bumpers at right? I don't have any more photos as I tripped over one of them when viewing the skyline, landing on my nose. Since I now look like I'd spent Friday night getting hit in the face with a chair in a bar room brawl, I think there won't be more photos till next week.

SFView

Jan 20, 2008, 12:52 AM

:previous: ...See those blue cement parking bumpers at right? I don't have any more photos as I tripped over one of them when viewing the skyline, landing on my nose. Since I now look like I'd spent Friday night getting hit in the face with a chair in a bar room brawl, I think there won't be more photos till next week.

Downtown Dave, thanks for adding some more distant field photos to the collection. I hope you heal up fast and feel better soon. BTW, I sent you a PM that may be of special interest to you, especially after you recover. Take a look. Take care.

HarryBarbierSRPD

Jan 20, 2008, 2:58 AM

From sf.curbed.com:

2108: Architects Envision SF

Local firm Pfau Architecture has been busy lately. First we heard about the new SPUR building, then The Friends School, and now on this Sunday they'll be competing to redesign the San Francisco...wait for it...OF THE FUTURE. "City of the Future: A Design and Engineering Challenge" is a competition organized by the History Channel with the goal of expressing how new technologies and clever architecture could save our city in the face of the looming apocalypse. In a no-holds-barred, winner take all, architectural battle royale, six teams will be asked to build a 3.5-by-7-foot model of their proposal for a new San Francisco. It's an often lamented fact that San Francisco's contemporary architecture falls short of astounding, so stop by the Ferry Building this Sunday to get a glimpse of what the city could be if creative minds were given free reign. Anderson Anderson Architecure, Iwamoto Scott, Kuth Ranieri Architects, Fougeron Architecture, SLOMobility, IF architecture, and Gelfand Partners Architects will also participate. The winning entry will be built in 100 years. (Ok, we might've made that last part up.)

It should be interesting to see what comes out of this project... :cool:

northbay

Jan 20, 2008, 4:06 AM

See those blue cement parking bumpers at right? I don't have any more photos as I tripped over one of them when viewing the skyline, landing on my nose. Since I now look like I'd spent Friday night getting hit in the face with a chair in a bar room brawl, I think there won't be more photos till next week.

hope u get better soon

BTinSF

Jan 20, 2008, 4:15 AM

^^^I'm not holding my breath because I'm not a huge fan of Pfau. They did the SFGLBT Community Center on upper Market and I think that building has a few shortcomings. But we'll see.

BTinSF

Jan 20, 2008, 4:19 AM

a new eight-story, 98-unit, single-room-occupancy ("SRO") residential project.

Well that's great! I didn't realize they were actually building new SROs but I've long thought they should build lots of them--that it was the best solution to the homeless problem, especially if they could provide mental and other health services in some of them for the really hard core folks. We are told, and I think there's something to it, that the destruction of so many SROs in SF was a major contributor to the homeless situation.

BTinSF

Jan 21, 2008, 7:02 AM

Imagining San Francisco 100 years from now
John King, Chronicle Staff Writer
Sunday, January 20, 2008

(01-20) 21:05 PST San Francisco -- The jury has spoken - and it wants San Francisco in 2108 to be a place where forests of towers grow algae as well as house people, and where geothermal steam baths sprout atop Twin Peaks.

Those elements are part of the proposal by IwamotoScott Architecture, selected today as the winner of an eight-team competition to imagine how San Francisco could change during a century likely to be defined by global warming and the search for new forms of energy.

In addition to a $10,000 prize, architects Lisa Iwamoto and Craig Scott received the satisfaction of triumphing over rivals who offered such visions as an offshore island housing 250,000 people and 40-story towers used for commercial farming.

The selection was made by a six-member jury that placed more emphasis on originality than practicality. Nonetheless, the winners said a city that produces its own energy - such as the hydrogen that would be generated by vast vertical fields of algae - and moves most travel underground shouldn't be all that far-fetched.

"We were thinking of the city as an evolutionary beast," said Iwamoto, a design lecturer at UC Berkeley as well as the operator, with Scott, her husband, of a four-person firm based in the couple's Mission District loft. "You create certain conditions, and that allows other things to happen."

Festivities kicked off at 10 a.m. on the second floor of the Ferry Building with each team having three hours to assemble their model of the city to be. Milling among them were design junkies and their families, augmented by Ferry Building visitors drawn upstairs by banners and announcements.

Often, the different visions overlapped. Most consigned private cars to the dustbin of history. At least four incorporated fog-harvesting machines to pull water from air and put it to use.

But if the details were similar, the designs were all over the map. Fougeron Architecture focused on self-reliant sustainability by lining the bay with agricultural towers that would grow the region's food - "we checked, and they could also be used to raise chickens and pigs," said architect Anne Fougeron. "Cows would still need to graze somewhere else."

Fougeron's comment came during a 15-minute presentation that, like the model assembly, played up visual drama for the camera crews from the History Channel, the competition sponsor. There were 10 minutes to talk and five minutes to answer questions before the buzzer sounded.

The jury, however, took more than its allotted 30 minutes to select the winner.

Three favorites quickly emerged. In addition to the proposals by Fougeron and IwamotoScott, the jurors were intrigued by Pfau Architecture's scheme that matched futuristic touches - such as a system delivering supplies to neighborhoods through underground tubes - with a green terrain where every third street is converted to pedestrian parks or gardens.

The jury's first vote was split between Pfau's fine-grain urbanity and the sinuous appeal of IwamotoScott's imagined city that transformed the aquifer into a cultural gathering place and used dozens of tunnels bored by robots. "If this was San Francisco 2308, I'd go with IwamotoScott," said one juror. "Pfau Architecture, I can imagine the city evolving there in 100 years."

Ultimately, UC Berkeley landscape Professor Walter Hood swayed his fellow jurors - arguing for IwamotoScott because the winner should "inspire outside thought and debates. It should be dense with ideas." Pfau and Fougeron were named runners-up.

All eight models will be on display Monday at the Ferry Building. Next, IwamotoScott will face off with winners of similar contests in Atlanta and Washington, D.C., in an online vote at history.com/cityofthefuture.

E-mail John King at jking@sfchronicle.com.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/20/BAHSUIO5C.DTL

LWR

Jan 22, 2008, 6:00 AM

BTinSF,

I saw what I assume to be the same thing announced last evening (Sunday) on local TV stations. They also said that there would be a series of cities spotlighted. I was in the kitchen making magic (well... ok, attempting to cook) at the time, so I didn't get down the hall until it was over.

As far as algae... I'm there already. (What is the best way to keep it growing in my bathroom? :yuck:)

Just kidding. I've looked online today, but with limited time, didn't find exactly which channel, or when. I'm sure it will announcements will come around again.

CityKid

Jan 23, 2008, 1:09 AM

It looks like the construction that took place in 2007 is rather noticeable when compared with the skyline photo on the first page of the thread. Take by swayne hill on flickr, uploaded 12/31/2007:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2022/2153053932_346400aecc_o.jpg

botoxic

Jan 23, 2008, 6:27 AM

From John King's article in Tuesday's Chronicle:
There's a new architect in San Francisco, and guess what? He's the planning director.

That's John Rahaim, who this month moved into the post most recently held by Dean Macris. He arrived from Seattle, where he was that city's top planner, but both his bachelor's and master's degrees are in architecture.

As you might expect, this reference brought applause Jan. 15 when Rahaim introduced himself to an informal crowd that was knocking down wine and cheese at the local office of the American Institute of Architects. The group also cheered Rahaim's affirmation of the idea that new buildings needn't look as if they were transported here in a time machine.

"I'm a great fan of contemporary architecture - I believe architecture has to be of its time," said Rahaim, 52. But he added a caveat: "The challenge of contemporary architecture is to design and develop contemporary architecture that works within a city."

By way of comparison, Rahaim described some of the tower proposals brought into his office as "architectural gymnastics" with contorted shapes. No, he didn't mean that as a compliment. And no, he didn't name names.

As for his new job - one of the most wearying in San Francisco, given the trench warfare between interest groups that all have their own absolutist view about how things should be - Rahaim says he looks forward to plunging into the fray.

"We're in a place where people care passionately about their city, and that's a good thing," he said. At the same time, "we need a slightly elevated dialogue that talks about what the city wants to be in 20 years. ... There's an implicit assumption that this is the greatest city on earth, but it's going to change. Whether we like it or not."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/a/2008/01/22/DD2JUHAFL.DTL

Complex01

Jan 23, 2008, 3:44 PM

peanut gallery

Jan 24, 2008, 4:17 PM

That's a nice shot. It will look even better when ORH has some similarly-scaled neighbors.

coyotetrickster

Jan 26, 2008, 6:54 PM

^^^I'm not holding my breath because I'm not a huge fan of Pfau. They did the SFGLBT Community Center on upper Market and I think that building has a few shortcomings. But we'll see.

BT, not that I'm a big defender of Pfau partners et al, but the Lesbian Gay Bi, Transgender, Identity politics community center did come with it set of fairly absurd change orders due to the edwardian manse on the corner and it connection to the rancheria history of General Castro (in the south bay, east bay). Pfau was also blindsided by a crappy engineering report that failed to accurately identify the sand/loam issues of the soil. The final design does have a faint, 60s mod berlin feel, and it has to integrate structurally with the old building. It's sort of the design result when applying the old if you have lemons make lemonade slogan.

viewguysf

Jan 27, 2008, 5:55 AM

BT, not that I'm a big defender of Pfau partners et al, but the Lesbian Gay Bi, Transgender, Identity politics community center did come with it set of fairly absurd change orders due to the edwardian manse on the corner and it connection to the rancheria history of General Castro (in the south bay, east bay). Pfau was also blindsided by a crappy engineering report that failed to accurately identify the sand/loam issues of the soil. The final design does have a faint, 60s mod berlin feel, and it has to integrate structurally with the old building. It's sort of the design result when applying the old if you have lemons make lemonade slogan.

Nice to see you around again coyotetrickster! It's a Victorian, not an Edwardian, and it's the oldest building on all of Market Street. The repainting that they'll be starting soon will definitely improve its appearance. I remember some parties in that place from years ago when friends were living there... ;)

coyotetrickster

Jan 29, 2008, 4:32 AM

Nice to see you around again coyotetrickster! It's a Victorian, not an Edwardian, and it's the oldest building on all of Market Street. The repainting that they'll be starting soon will definitely improve its appearance. I remember some parties in that place from years ago when friends were living there... ;)

Hey Viewguy. Been busy with my new job. Your are right, the building is a victorian. Saving it was not my quibble, it was the way the requirement to save the building and 'integrate' it into the center's design that played havoc with the final design... nothing more...:rolleyes:

SFView

Feb 1, 2008, 7:05 PM

From:
Arthur Bruzzone/Comcast
www.SFunscripted.com:

San Francisco's Leading Slow Growth Advocate -- Sue Hestor (Two Part Video)

San Francisco is experiencing massive construction of new residential towers, new neighborhoods, and life science industrial development. Sue Hestor has fought destruction of traditional neighborhood and the construction of office towers. She help put a annual cap on office construction. A first in the nation. What's her take the many towers arising while on her watch.

Part 1 - Oct. 9, 2007 (13 min. 55 sec.)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-917090260835878946

Part 2 - Oct. 9, 2007 (13 min. 19 sec.)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1870142648169411033

HarryBarbierSRPD

Feb 1, 2008, 9:13 PM

From:
Arthur Bruzzone/Comcast
www.SFunscripted.com:

Part 1 - Oct. 9, 2007 (13 min. 55 sec.)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-917090260835878946

Part 2 - Oct. 9, 2007 (13 min. 19 sec.)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1870142648169411033

Uh, Sue, The earthquake was in '89, not '79.

"People build buildings not necessarily because they are needed, but because they make money"
-Yeah Sue, there isn't a high demand in SF for housing or anything, rent prices are SUPER low here.

"(after the planned development is completed) No one is going to be able to see the city from the bay bridge."
-I'm pretty sure our skyline IS the city.

"I have an old Victorian house" -But Sue, not everyone In SF wants to (or can) live in an old Victorian house

"It's environmentally dysfunctional." Sue, If more housing is developed in our congested city for those who have jobs within SF, those people will not be forced to commute from places like Tracy to work.

I love the amount of sighs and eyes-closed remarks she makes... Reminds me of the Prius drivers in the Smug Alert! episode South Park... "Thaaaaanks! Goood for yooou!" Now I know where Matt Stone and Trey Parker got their stereotype of smug San Franciscans. :yuck:

roadwarrior

Feb 1, 2008, 9:40 PM

BTinSF

Feb 1, 2008, 10:18 PM

Friday, February 1, 2008
New S.F. condo project will be a rarity in 2008
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

Jackson Pacific is set to begin construction this week on One Hawthorne St., a 165-unit building likely to be one of the few new condo projects to begin rising from downtown San Francisco this year.

The 24-story building, which will cost $150 million to build, is a joint venture with San Francisco-based MacFarlane Partners.

Ezra Mersey, the former Tishman Speyer managing director who founded Jackson Pacific in 2003, said any hesitancy to jump into the treacherous housing market is outweighed by the project's prime location near the corner of Howard and Second streets.

"We're looking beyond the present cycle and creating a unique project -- with the best location, exceptional contemporary design and very strong sponsorship," said Mersey.

Amalgamated Bank, a labor union pension fund, provided the $120 million construction loan along with the Bank of America. Webcor is the contractor.

While a dozen amenity-packed deluxe condo projects have vied for attention over the past three years, financing for new construction has dried up in recent months. Instead of the 10 to 15 percent equity common in past few years, lenders now look for developers to put in 40 percent of construction costs, and few banks are willing to lend more than $50 million for new condo projects, according to Michael Joseph of Kearny Street Capital, a commercial mortgage broker who worked with Jackson Pacific on the deal.

The only other highrise projects expected to begin building this year are phase two of One Rincon Hill and possibly Turnberry Associates' 45 Lansing St., which Jackson Pacific ushered through the city's entitlement process and sold 18 months ago for $30 million. Two major downtown residential towers are now under construction: Millennium Partners' tower at 333 Mission St. and phase two of Tishman Speyer's Infinity.

The terms of the construction loan were hammered out in September, and Joseph said it would be nearly impossible to duplicate it in the current credit environment. In addition, the involvement of the deep-pocketed MacFarlane Partners and the experienced Webcor went a long way toward assuaging lenders' fears.

"A lot of banks are licking their wounds right now and they are not interested in more speculative development," said Joseph.

While MacFarlane Partners is one of the biggest urban real estate investors in the country, with $20 billion under management, One Hawthorne is its first San Francisco project. MacFarlane Partners' Bay Area projects include the Crossing in San Bruno, Bay Street in Emeryville and Uptown in Oakland. Company founder Victor MacFarlane lives in a penthouse at the St. Regis in San Francisco.

One Hawthorne will include an unusually diverse selection of floor plates ranging from 550-square-foot "junior one bed-room" units to 2,200-square-foot three-bedroom condos. Pricing will range from $500,000 to about $3 million for 2,200-square-foot penthouses. Mersey said he wants to cater to an eclectic mix of buyers, including families who he predicts will be increasingly drawn downtown.

"Families live in downtown Paris and New York," he said, "so why wouldn't they live in a world-class city like San Francisco?"

Mersey concedes that the national housing market "may get worse before it gets better," but he calls San Francisco the "most land-constrained and supply-constrained market in the United States."

"The excesses were far less here and the recovery will be much better," he said.

The project will be an important milestone for Jackson Pacific. The firm made a major bet on downtown and Rincon Hill in 2003, during the dot-com downturn, snapping up three sites: 45 Lansing St., 340 Fremont St., and One Hawthorne St, which Mersey said was a "failed dot-com and no one else wanted it." Mersey's company took each project through the city's time-consuming and politically charged approval process. All three were approved in 2006.

Since that time, more than $2 billion has been invested within five blocks of One Hawthorne, with developments ranging from the $460 million Westfield San Francisco Centre and the $350 million Millennium Tower to the $300 million office tower at 555 Mission St.

"The amount of investment near the site is staggering," said Mersey.

The building will consist of a masonry podium and a curtain wall tower broken into two sections. Mersey, a former architect who worked with the celebrated Philip Johnson, designed the building with EHDD.

jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971[/quote]
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2008/02/04/story4.html?t=printable

BTinSF

Feb 1, 2008, 10:31 PM

I'm surprised that nobody has posted the proposal announced in the business times (yesterday or today) and on Socketsite about the 25-story tower at One Hawthorne. I would do it myself, but I've never seemed to get the picture posting right.

It being the first of the month, I was too busy to read the BizTimes until now but I went ahead and started the thread. I put it in the "proposals" section until someone can verify to the mods that construction has really and truly begun.

JAC6

Feb 4, 2008, 6:53 AM

I've been working downtown for almost ten years and the City has certainly changed a lot in that time, particularly now with the many new high rises that have been built or are under construction. But also AT&T Park , UCSF Mission Bay, and the renovation of the Ferry Building among many others. The sidewalk where Market turns into Portola hearing up to Twin Peaks provides an excellent vantage point to see the skyline and it isn't one I recall seeing in this thread, at least not recently. This was taken before the Super Bowl today (2/3/08). Many of the big projects are visible, including 301 Mission, One Rincon Hill, and the Infinity.

http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg30/jcrotty_bucket/skyscraper/panaroma02.jpg

peanut gallery

Feb 4, 2008, 5:15 PM

There's a new proposal from Hines and Pelli along the waterfront. This is, of course, considerably smaller in scale than their other current proposal down the street. But given its location, this little building will be quite noticeable when complete.

John King gives his two cents (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/04/BA57UPQVF.DTL) in today's Chronicle:

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/02/04/ba_greenbuilding04.jpg

A beautiful green building for Embarcadero
John King, Chronicle Urban Design Writer
Monday, February 4, 2008

Now that "green" buildings are all the rage, San Francisco could see the real thing sprout on the Embarcadero: a glass office building scaled by vines that change color with the seasons.

The proposed 10-story building would rise from a sliver of land next to the Audiffred Building, a three-story brick landmark from 1889 that houses Boulevard Restaurant. Unlike the Audiffred - a French-flavored confection and downtown's oldest waterfront structure - the look next door would be all clear glass and straight lines.

While some tweaks are needed, the project has the potential to be the most exquisite addition to the waterfront since the Embarcadero Freeway came down in 1991 - a poised counterpart to the Audiffred and other nearby landmarks, softened by a lacy living weave that symbolizes today's emphasis on environmental concerns.

The architect and developer of what is dubbed 110 The Embarcadero is also the team that won last year's competition to erect San Francisco's tallest tower. The target opening date for that building is 2013; however, developer Hines wants to take its Embarcadero project to the Planning Commission for approvals this spring, start construction this fall and open in late 2009.

Despite the disparity in size, this miniature isn't an afterthought. If anything, it shows a better understanding of San Francisco's landscape and the challenge of growing in a way that neither apes the past nor overwhelms it.

"This is one of the most adventurous projects we're looking at right now," said Fred Clarke of Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects, the Connecticut firm working for Hines. "At one level, it's a small building. At another, it tests all sorts of assumption about green design."

The structure would fill a 44-foot-wide site now occupied by a long-empty two-story building. There are seven other buildings on the block, including a handsome YMCA building from 1924 and forgettable filler from when the neighborhood was defined by an elevated freeway rather than a wide-open bay.

The design by Pelli Clarke Pelli keeps things simple, a tall box with glass on all sides except the south, where the floors that poke above a six-story neighbor would be clad in solar panels.

The eye-catching feature would be the outer layer of green.

Planters contained by a trellis-like mesh would be attached between each floor, and each planter would hold a mix of vines so something is in bloom each month of the year. The vines would be trained to snake around cables that would form a sort of taut net around the glass box, with vertical cables spaced every 5 feet and horizontal ones stretched waist-high across each floor.

Not only would the vines provide a sort of environmental ornamentation, they'd help cool the exterior and reduce energy needs.

The vegetation and the solar panels are the most obvious signals of 110 The Embarcadero's emphasis on sustainability. Clarke and Hines say the goal is to earn a Platinum rating from the U.S. Green Building Council. That's the top honor given by the council, and it has yet to be applied to a speculative office building.

This sort of fine-grain infill isn't what you'd associate with the design firm founded by Cesar Pelli, best known for such sky poppers as Petronas Towers in Malaysia, the world's tallest buildings from 1996 until 2003. Nor Hines, a Houston developer that makes a specialty of marquee projects by brand-name architects.

But Hines bought the site in 2006, drawn by a visibility and location that can't be duplicated. As for Pelli and Clarke, you sense they relish the shift in scale from skyline peaks to mid-block lots.

"The site is so constrained it wasn't a place for dramatic moves," Clarke said. "We saw the potential for something very crisp and elegant."

Pelli and Clarke also use the word elegant to describe their proposed obelisk-like Transbay Tower. But when you're talking about a building that could be 300 feet taller than the Transamerica Pyramid - the final design is months or years away - elegance is outweighed by sheer size.

Here, by contrast, the firm has the chance to do what Pelli does best: home in on the details that make a building memorable no matter what the shape or height might be. For instance, a narrow vine-free bay would project slightly above the retail space on the Embarcadero and proceed up the building to give the profile an extra snap.

The same creativity is applied to the sustainable design features. Cables supporting the vines would also be used to irrigate the planters, recycling filtered wastewater from the building. Douglas fir piers beneath the structure on the site would return as the decking for a publicly accessible rooftop open space.

The one clumsy piece of all this is the height.

Ten stories is hardly a skyscraper, but what's proposed is out of proportion to the Audiffred Building. Add the vine-clad rooftop mechanical system, and the building pushes past the YMCA's peaked roof.

A better approach is to show a bit of deference and come down a story or two below what's currently proposed. Hines would still have a building tall enough to stand out, but it would do so with the subtlety that characterizes the rest of the project.

That's a relatively small change for a relatively small building that, done right, could loom large in all the right ways - demonstrating that cities can evolve with grace while embodying the need for environmental responsibility.

If we're lucky, 110 The Embarcadero will teach us a lesson architecturally as well. The best way to complement historic landmarks isn't to mimic them. It's to add equally good buildings of our era to the mix.
Get involved

No hearings are scheduled on the proposed Embarcadero building, but the issue will eventually be before the Planning Commission.

Contact the Planning Department at 1650 Mission St., Suite 400, San Francisco, CA 94103 or by phone at (415) 558-6378.

Look up contact information for the members of the Planning Commission at links.sfgate.com/ZCHQ.

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/02/04/ba_greenbuilding4.jpg

FYI, here's what this block looks like today. This building would replace the smallest one on the block (second from right) and the YMCA building he mentions is on the far left:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2107/1995532199_4123a6dfeb_b.jpg