SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed

[nequidnimis]

I've been planning to say this for a while: If I were Planning Czar, I'd ban stucco on anything over 4 stories. Personally I think it looks cheap and I can't recall seeing it in large buildings back east--seems like a purely CA thing and not the best feature of the architecture here IMHO.

You wrote earlier:

I couldn't disagree more. Great architecture comes from allowing great architects and the developers who hire them to build as they want to build without running the plans through committee after committee of bureaucrats, NIMBYs, political appointees and politicians themselves.

So which one would it be if you were Planning Czar?

As an aside, those Legoretta buildings you like so much are stucco.

[BTinSF]

Not running every design through a gauntlet of committees doesn't mean you can't have rules. It does mean you shouldn't have ad hoc rules or rules applied arbitrarily (a good policy both for planning departments and web sites), by the way. San Francisco's procedure creates new rules for virtually every major building.

As to the Legorreta (I'm not sure who Legoretta is) buildings, they generally are not awfully tall. They may exceed 4 stories but not by much and when they do, they usually are not tall in proportion to their other dimensions. Also, stucco is a traditional material for Hispanic/Mediterranean/Southwestern buildings of modest height such as most of those Legorreta designs.

What I don't like is the use of stucco as an exterior not because it's appropriate but because it's cheap. Legorreta uses it because it's appropriate. All over San Francisco you'll see buildings that use it because it's cheap and you can tell.

[nequidnimis]

We agree there has to be rules, at the minimum, as not all developers can be counted to come up with beautiful designs, specially during a downturn. That being said, it still is possible to design bad buildings that meet all the rules. The the old State Office building that will be replaced by the new PUC building, the Philip Burton Federal Building which you dislike, the new Main Public Library, the new InterContinental Hotel all have good materials. And conversely, the Post International which I like is stucco...http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/housing/post/post.htm

[AndrewK]

:previous: Andrew, that is the site of what was to be the Mexican Museum. There is a beautiful building (I just love it!) designed by Ricardo Legoretta that was intended for that spot

ah yes i had totally forgotten that that was supposed to be there. well luckily there is going to be a cafe in the lobby of the jewish museum, so that plaza will be fully utilized im sure.

[BTinSF]

:previous: There is, indeed, a cafe. I checked out the place today. Incidentally, I wasn't expecting much as far as the art was concerned and was pleasantly surprised--it's really quite an interesting installation. And the building is much larger and nicer inside than I had expected. All in all a really worthy addition to the SF museum scene. And there is a second floor window that looks directly down on the food prep area of the cafe--I watched some guy making a Caesar Salad. I'm not sure if that's Libeskind's idea of living art or just an interesting design quirk, but it's fun to watch.

As for the plaza, a lot of it is taken up by a water feature (infinity pool, low waterfalls etc). But there are nice benches and some outdoor tables directly in front of the cafe area.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Jewish Museum, SF - I walked through the museum lobby and book store. The museum is quite dramatic from the north end. The plaza is kind of dull, but the effect of the open space combined with the next door hotel's outdoor dining area is quite nice. I found the lobby of the museum to be stark - too much white. I did not expect much and was quite surprised as to how much I liked the finished product. Have yet to enter the paid area.

[San Frangelino]

55 Ninth St. via http://www.ankaproperty.com/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3055/2568105562_aa337722f5_o.jpg

[nequidnimis]

That's a wow!

[AndrewK]

this is going in on the west side of the street on the corner at jessie right? pretty sure I saw prep work going on for that site a while ago, but i rarely go down ninth street so im not sure what it looks like right now.

unless of course i was just seeing the back side of the mercy project.

[Jerry of San Fran]

55th Ninth Street is located on the east side of the street. This was the lot that the State Fund was to build a new office tower but decided the market was not good and the property has been a sand lot for a long time.

Another neat building to watch being built from my window!

[Jerry of San Fran]

The Argenta This is a view from the 14th floor of the Archstone Fox Plaza where our laundry room is located. Of course the building looks even better in person.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3262/2568330191_4d68c256f0_b.jpg

[AndrewK]

55th Ninth Street is located on the east side of the street. This was the lot that the State Fund was to build a new office tower but decided the market was not good and the property has been a sand lot for a long time.

Another neat building to watch being built from my window!

ah nice, thats been a vacant lot for as long as i can remember.

[hi123]

WOW! 55 ninth looks great! When will construction start?

[c1tyguy]

Wow Argenta looks MUCH better than I had expected!

And 55 Ninth looks amazing as well.. I wonder how tall it is? I'm sure there will be more information shortly. The sloping design is kind of refreshing.

[Jerry of San Fran]

A picture I took June 11th from my balcony, 27th Floor of the Archstone Fox Plaza. The green arrow shows the sand lot presently at 55 9th St. where the proposed condo highrise would be. It look small in the picture but is actually a substantial lot. You can see a cool view at the Microsoft Virtual Earth site.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3170/2571351242_8ea66e6547_b.jpg

[Downtown Dave]

Mercy housing, today. I presume they are using unstrained construction:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/MercyHousing-3875.jpg

A few more angles on Argenta:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/Argenta-3616.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/Argenta-3623.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/Argenta-3896.jpg

As I was taking these photos, a man came up to me and started screaming at the top of his lungs:


AAAAAAAHH!! Barry Bonds is a cheater! AAAAHHHH!!! The home run king is going to jail!!! AAAAHHH!!! Put THAT in the paper!! AAAAHHH!!!


So at least residents of Argenta will not need to go far for the latest in sports news.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Downtown Dave - nice pictures of the Argenta.

I live across the street from the Argenta, so I well know about the crazies in the neighborhood. All we have to do is open our patio door to see what the pychyactric forecast is for the day. One reason we are happy to get a lot more neighbors in the neighborhood - it might cause a decline of the undesireables!

[c1tyguy]

http://www.socketsite.com/300%20Grant%20Rendering.jpg

It was sixteen months ago that we first plugged you in to the proposed design for a ten-story mixed use development at 300 Grant (corner of Grant and Sutter). At the time the design called for 66 units, two floors of retail, two levels of below grade parking, and a “landscaped terrace, clubhouse and solarium on 3rd floor for residents.”

And while we haven’t heard much about the project over the past year or so, it’s in front of the planning commission today. The proposal still calls for ten-stories with two floors of retail and up to 40 parking spaces, but the application cites “up to 45 units.”

No word on whether or not the proposed design (by MBH Architects) has evolved as well.

Source: SocketSite (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2007/02/the_proposed_sixtysix_condos_and_parking_of_300_grant.html)

I love the design for this building! Its kind of old school meets new school. Also, GREAT location! And with parking, I'd call this place home in a second.

[WonderlandPark]

The grand new SF skyline from Potrero Hill on Wednesday:

original is 10,000 pixels wide as a 7 image stitch.

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Nav/pano_sf_skyline_11.jpg

I still haven't got over the Intercontinental color, but it sure makes its mark. Its probably fine.

[BTinSF]

Friday, June 13, 2008
Deal struck on S.F. site for 1,200 homes
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

Longtime Schlage Lock owner Ingersoll Rand and developer Universal Paragon Corp. have reached an environmental cleanup agreement that paves the way for $450 million, 1,200-unit project on a tract of former industrial land near the San Francisco/Brisbane border.

Under the agreement, Ingersoll Rand has agreed to transfer the 12.3-acre Schlage Lock property to Universal Paragon. In exchange, UPC will pay for most of the $25 million cleanup of the property, which contains hazardous volatile organic compounds and chlorinated hydrocarbons used for decades in the manufacturing of metal locks at the site.

UPC, which owns a six-acre former Southern Pacific rail yard next to the Schlage land, has also dropped a 10-year-old groundwater contamination lawsuit against Ingersoll Rand. UPC has spent more than $10 million on Department of Toxic Substances Control-mandated cleanup on the Southern Pacific land. The DTSC will oversee the cleanup of the Schlage property.

"Our company has been cleaning up a mess we didn't create for many years, and at great cost," said Jonathan Scharfman, development director for UPC.

The entire cleanup is slated to last 30 months, according to Universal Paragon General Manager Steven Hanson.

The agreement comes a week after the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency published an environmental impact report on the Schlage site. The plan for the site includes 100,000 square feet of retail in addition to the 1,200 homes. It also includes a large park and the restoration of the historic Schlage Lock headquarters. The cleanup will start as soon as the city approves the EIR, Hanson said.

With two T-Third Muni stops on the site, and a Caltrain station within walking distance, the Schlage site is ideal for the sort of transit-oriented housing that city planners have been pushing for years, Hanson said.

"This project will be a great economic rebound for Visitacion Valley and a catalyst for further economic vitality in an area that really needs it," said Hanson. "It's not going to be necessarily easy, but it will be a very positive opportunity for the neighborhood."

But after a $25 million investment to prepare the land for development, it will be a tough business proposition, he said.

"This is a challenging project economically, especially given the economic issues with housing development at this point," said Hanson.

In 2000, neighbors beat back a proposal for a Home Depot on the site, arguing that the land was more suitable for housing and open space.


jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2008/06/16/story9.html?t=printable

[BTinSF]

Friday, June 13, 2008
Billion-dollar push on public housing
TMG, Related join nonprofit builders to overhaul S.F. projects
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

In a potential $1 billion investment into some of San Francisco's most downtrodden neighborhoods, developers -- including TMG Partners and the Related Cos. -- are teaming up with nonprofit builders to rebuild and expand three public housing projects.

The program, dubbed Hope SF, calls for replacing some 1,500 units of existing public housing at three developments: Sunnydale, Westside Court in Western Addition and Potrero Hill. In addition to replacing the existing housing, densities at the three projects would be doubled with another 1,500 market-rate condos and affordable rental units.

In the largest of the proposed redevelopments, Related of California, an affiliate of New York-based Related Cos., would team up with Mercy Housing to build 1,498 units in Visitation Valley's distressed Sunnydale development. Under the $400 million proposal, Related and Mercy would build 1,070 public housing and affordable rental units, as well as 428 affordable and market-rate condos. In Potrero Hill, Bridge Housing Corp., together with its for-profit arm Bridge Infill Land Development, would construct 805 public housing and affordable rental units, as well as 446 affordable and market-rate condos, also about a $400 million investment. At the 136-unit Westside Court in Western Addition, EM Johnson Interest and TMG Partners are proposing to replace 136 units of public housing and add another 80 to 100.

A fourth project, John Stewart Co.'s $350 million redevelopment of the Hunters View project in Hunters Point, was proposed two years ago and is currently before the Planning Commission.

Bridge Housing CEO Carol Galante said "one of these projects alone would be unprecedented, to have three at once is really unprecedented. In the case of Sunnydale and Potrero Hill, you're changing the whole landscape."

Son of Hope VI

Hope SF is San Francisco's answer to drastic cuts to the federal Hope VI program. Over the past five years the budget of Hope VI, which provided funds to rebuild public housing in North Beach, Hayes Valley and the Mission, was slashed from $600 million to $90 million. With the federal financing dried up, the city and development partners are looking to subsidize the public housing rebuild with a mix of revenue from market-rate condos, as well state money, city funds, tax-exempt bond financing and low-income tax credits.

In addition to providing financing, mixing market-rate units into a public housing project creates a healthier, economically diverse neighborhood. Bill Witte, president of Related's West Coast operation, said the goal is to "create a more balanced mixed-income area while not losing any low-income housing." In Potrero Hill, Bridge is in the process of acquiring neighboring parcels to allow room for more market-rate housing, Galante said.

"Our job is to try to expand the footprint to some adjacent property so we can do more mixed income," said Galante. "You need to have some diversity there."

Starting from scratch

By razing the existing projects and starting from scratch, the developers have the opportunity to create housing that looks and feels like part of its San Francisco neighborhood, rather than drab, concrete warehousing for the poor. The public housing projects in Sunnydale, Potrero Hill, and Hunters Point are disconnected from the neighborhood street grid.

"Sunnydale is about as physically isolated from the neighborhood as you can get," said Witte. "Physically and emotionally, it's always been a bit of an orphan."

Michael Johnson, who worked on rebuilding the North Beach development with Bridge Housing and John Stewart Co., said he would work with the neighborhood and current residents to create a design that feels and looks like part of the Western Addition. Unlike the other three Hope SF projects, tenants would have to be moved out of the Westside Court while the project is being rebuilt.

"Clearly one of the goals is to have the appearance of the new housing be compatible with the surrounding buildings, (and) the Westside Court buildings do not," said Johnson. "They stand out as 50-year-old concrete block buildings."

While all the buildings involved in the program have vast experience in market rate and affordable housing, John Stewart Co. will in a sense be leading the way with the Hunters View development. This month that project is before the Planning Commission for certification of its environmental impact report.

John Stewart Co. President Jack Gardner said the approvals will allow his company to apply for $40 million in state funds in the fall. Thus far the Mayor's Office on Housing has dedicated $5.5 million for the Hunters View development and John Stewart Co. has raised another $2.5 million privately. They hope to break ground on the $350 million project by the end of 2009 using tax-exempt bond financing and low-income tax credits.

"We are tackling some of the tough issues around doing this kind of work without federal Hope VI money," said Gardner.

Mercy Housing project manager Ramie Dare said the Hope SF proposal is being closely watched in other cities.

"The city is really in the forefront, taking a leadership on how to build these projects within the federal funding constraints," she said.

jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2008/06/16/story1.html?t=printable

[livin' in the city]

Downtown Dave what is going on with the demo. site to the left of your 2nd Argenta shot?

[BTinSF]

Broadway Partners has designs for a new tip of the Spear

A new address. A new lobby. And 67,000 square feet of sparkling new bay view office space. That is what Broadway Partners is offering at the former 120 Howard St.

A year after acquiring the eight-story south financial district brick structure from Beacon Capital Partners as part of a national portfolio, Broadway says it will rename the property 188 Spear St. and move the lobby from Howard Street around the corner to Spear Street.

In addition, Broadway has received entitlements to add four floors -- some 67,000 square feet -- at the top of the building. Christopher Roeder of Jones Lang LaSalle, who is leasing the property with Wes Powell, said the reinvigorated, expanded building would offer a more affordable alternative to new construction projects like 555 Mission St. The top floors will lease in the $60s, the middle floors in the $50s, and the lower floors in the $40s.

With the addition, the building will be able to accommodate a 150,000-square-foot user. Broadway Partners has decided not to do the addition on a speculative basis, but anticipates a 12-month construction time frame once a tenant is snagged. The addition will have nine-foot ceilings, floor-to-ceiling glass, and is being designed by Brereton Architects.

Roeder said the building is a great position to pull in one of the large tenants with a 2010 lease expiration date. He compared it with the Landmark at One Market.

"It's perfect for a big company looking for something a little different," said Roeder "It's not a typical Class A ivory tower office building."
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2008/06/16/newscolumn1.html

[BTinSF]

Downtown Dave what is going on with the demo. site to the left of your 2nd Argenta shot?

I walk by there several times a week. The answer is, "Not much." They posted the building permit (below) several weeks ago now, but no activity has yet begun.

PS: I assume you are familiar with the plans for the site which has a thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=128011

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0026-1.jpg?t=1213389940
Taken by me.

[Gordo]

Good to hear that things are moving forward on demolishing some more projects with re-builds, but I really wish that the new units would just become part of the new "affordable housing" programs of the past few years, rather than remain under the jurisdiction of the SFHA. Make some units sub-20% AMI or something.

Also, none of those projects seem to be dense enough. Only 80-100 more units at Westside Court? That's an entire block that is less dense than most suburban apartment complexes now. There's no reason that it couldn't accomodate 300 - 400 more units, and not look out of place in the neighborhood. I would assume that that block is the least dense for several blocks in any direction right now.

The other places, especially Sunnydale, aren't even connected to the neighborhood surrounding and don't need to "blend in", so significant density could and should be added (probably even more than Westside Court).

[BTinSF]

:previous: I'm hesitant to debate this issue here--if people want, maybe we should start something in the Bay Area section--but I'll give it just one response.

Let's be clear that "public housing" is a very different thing from "affordable housing". "Public Housing" is very low rent housing for the poorest, often unemployed and/or unemployable, among us. And it is only rental. Because of that and because the people it serves often have massive problems aside from the need for housing, intense and effective management is a must.

"Affordable housing" is housing that can supposedly be afforded by people up to well above the area's median income level. By and large, these are not "poor" people and they are rarely unemployed. They are what would be considered the solid middle class almost anywhere else in America--they just can't afford $700K for a condo or $2500/month rent for a 2-bedroom. "Affordable housing" is not exclusively rental--some of it is for sale. And what is rented is managed by non-profits in much the same way that other rental units are managed with few special requirements.

As far as density goes, with respect to "affordable" units, they can and should be as dense as the zoning allows in the same way and to the same degree as market rate housing because there are no special "issues" with regard to the people living there.

But "public housing" is different. We have all seen how the dense developments of the 1950s and 60s--Google "Cabrini-Green" or "Pruitt-Igoe" if you have any question what I mean--were a disaster. Nobody wants to recreate anything like that again. Public housing has to be carefully designed and minimization of features that enable criminal or gang activity and that allow some residents to prey on others are of paramount importance--much more important than any of the issues we talk about so much here.

[Gordo]

BT - I 100% agree. What I was talking about was taking the "public housing" portion and making it a smaller portion of the overall development.

Right now they are talking about making the Potrero Hill development be 805 "public housing" and "affordable" rental units and 446 "affordable" and market-rate condos. I was simply saying that we should look at increasing the number of affordable rentals or condos, as well as increasing the number of affordable or market rate condos. Market rate rentals could also be an addition. In other words - "dilute" the public housing further by increasing the density of the other uses on site.

[BTinSF]

More on the Schlage Lock site courtesy of Socketsite ( http://www.socketsite.com/ ):

Here's the site.

http://www.socketsite.com/Visitacion%20Valley%20Redevelopment%20Boundary.jpg

And here's the plan for the site.

http://www.socketsite.com/Visitacion%20Valley%20Redevelopment%20Urban%20Concept%20Plan.jpg

"The plan for the site includes 100,000 square feet of retail in addition to the 1,200 homes. It also includes a large park and the restoration of the historic Schlage Lock headquarters. The cleanup [which is slated to last 30 months] will start as soon as the city approves the EIR, [Paragon General Manager Steven Hanson] said."

[peanut gallery]

55 Ninth - hubba, hubba!

300 Grant - I guess we'll know this is going to happen when the demo notices go up on the 3-story that sits there now. It's not a bad little building, but the new one will make better use of the footprint.

[peanut gallery]

This shot is wonderful, Wonderland, and needs to be posted on every page of this thread until something significant changes the skyline. :)

The grand new SF skyline from Potrero Hill on Wednesday:
http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Nav/pano_sf_skyline_11.jpg

[WonderlandPark]

Thanks, besides ORH 2, what else is going to start this year? I don't mean Transbay, that is further in the future.

This view would not see 10th & Market, but how close is, say 45 Lansing or 535 mission to launch this year? *corrected and added 535 Mission, I see the other thread. :)

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Nav/skyline_01.jpg

[BTinSF]

Thanks, besides ORH 2, what else is going to start this year? I don't mean Transbay, that is further in the future.

This view would not see 10th & Market, but how close is, say 45 Lansing or 535 mission to launch this year? *corrected and added 535 Mission, I see the other thread. :)



If you read through the 45 Lansing thread, you'll see the uncertainty AND the hope that it gets going this summer--based on periodic SF Business Times articles suggesting as much. The second ORH tower is much more of a certainty with the choice of a contractor imminent. 350 Bush is also a possibility and would be in your shot but pretty much lost in the skyline. One Hawthorne is in there too but I don't think it'll matter much (at 240 ft, too short).

[peanut gallery]

^^^ Yeah, other than ORH2, the most prominent changes this year will be the north Mission Bay projects, not because of size but because they are so much closer to the camera from this angle. And now that I think about it, ORH2 won't even be visible from here until sometime next year.

[Jobohimself]

It's not such a bad little skyline...


It just needs some love, is all. :tongue4:

[peanut gallery]

Quick rundown from my lunchtime walk:

535 Mission – all fenced off with evidence of test drilling, but no crews onsite while I was there. Somehow the space looks even smaller without all the cars parked in it.

555 Mission - they've removed the construction barrier over the temporary sidewalk (and the temporary sidewalk itself) and returned foot traffic to the original sidewalk giving a much better view of the building where it meets the ground. The large clear glass wall abutting the sidewalk will make this a very nice space along Mission. Much better than the way 560 Mission across the street sets back the glass behind large pillars. They are also installing the hardscape in the public plaza. It's a dark stone and looks very similar to the stone used in front of the Foundry Square buildings.

New SPUR building on Mission – being steel-framed and a small footprint, this one is rising rapidly. Vertical beams on the second floor (from street level; the building also goes down at least one level) rise above the construction fencing out front.

One Hawthorne – Not sure what's going on here, but a backhoe was scooping out a large puddle of what looks like (but I doubt is) wet cement. Otherwise, nothing obvious has changed in the past week.

ORH – landscaping is going full tilt. A bunch of trees now line the driveway and today they are adding shrubbery around the trees. You also now notice civilian foot traffic going in and out of the building with all the new residents moving in..

Foundry Square III update – there are signs posted onsite giving notice about a Planning Department public hearing scheduled for the 26th on the proposal to demolish Club NV and the parking lot. Baby steps, but something is happening at least.

No pictures at 11, as your trusty reporter left his camera at home plugged into his Mac.

[fflint]

535 Mish: I saw a crew drilling there yesterday around lunchtime.

[CityKid]

Just moved to the neighborhood and look who I saw:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3226/2593667651_ed0b1dc08d_b.jpg


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3139/2594507546_0ca9eae3f1_b.jpg

[BTinSF]

:previous: I thought that was going to be a pretty good-looking project and it is. I see it mostly from the other end as a sometimes customer of the "Bread & Butter Market" on the corner. I posted some pics earlier but now they've removed more of the drapery and I hadn't walked up to the corner to see it. Glad you're in the 'hood and did.

[BTinSF]

535 Mish: I saw a crew drilling there yesterday around lunchtime.

See the 535 thread--I took their portrait yesterday. ;) One even smiled at me.

[Downtown Dave]

The scaffolding around Argenta continues to come down; perhaps by next weekend we shall see the building fully exposed. Nothing continues to happen at 10th and Market:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/Argenta-4265.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/Argenta-4272.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/Argenta-4280.jpg

Bonus view of Mercy housing:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/Argenta-4261.jpg

[viewguysf]

Argenta (formerly known as Bovet Place and 1 Polk)

function: residential, retail
height: 200'
floors: 17
architect: Donald Macdonald Architects
completion: 2007

Renderings:
new
http://static.flickr.com/70/202228755_ea5d794066_o.jpg
old:
http://www.donaldmacdonaldarchitects.com/bldg_images/bovet/bov_north_lg.jpg



I couldn't help going back in time to remind everyone what the "Old" and "New" renderings for Argenta originally looked like compared to the value engineered building that San Francisco has now been gifted.

[WonderlandPark]

I agree, too bad, this looks to be the worst of the recent boom. Doesn't even look as "good" as the new rendering.

[BTinSF]

I'll differ with the statement that it's the worst of the "current boom". Since it's not officially a highrise, compare it with the schlock going up in Mission Bay. It's better than much of that, but clearly not as nice as it could and should have been. In that location, it should also have been a highrise.

But, hey, glass is expensive, you know? :shrug:

[viewguysf]

I'll differ with the statement that it's the worst of the "current boom". Since it's not officially a highrise, compare it with the schlock going up in Mission Bay. It's better than much of that, but clearly not as nice as it could and should have been. In that location, it should also have been a highrise.

But, hey, glass is expensive, you know? :shrug:

Two-tone blue stucco??! I think not. I'm going to disagree with you on that one BT. The City missed a golden opportunity to finally upgrade the immediate Civic Center area, much like the new PUC building will do on the other side. We shouldn't compare it to the AAA box or Fox Plaza but judge it on its own merits, which aren't many. It's plebeian architecture when it was presented as being so much more, even in the "new" rendering.

[nequidnimis]

Renderings are artistic creations, and are bound to include some creative liceense, such as vivid blue skies, magical reflections, a degree of ambiguity on materials and architectural treatment. Their purpose is to assist developers secure the necessary permits and they are not contract documents. Anyone who believes renderings are accurate depictions of projects might as well accept defendant lawyers' claims to their clients' innocence. As to the Argenta being the worst of the current boom, there sure is a lot of competition for the title. Renderings may be artistic creations, but buildings are business.

[viewguysf]

Renderings are artistic creations, and are bound to include some creative liceense, such as vivid blue skies, magical reflections, a degree of ambiguity on materials and architectural treatment. Their purpose is to assist developers secure the necessary permits and they are not contract documents. Anyone who believes renderings are accurate depictions of projects might as well accept defendant lawyers' claims to their clients' innocence. As to the Argenta being the worst of the current boom, there sure is a lot of competition for the title. Renderings may be artistic creations, but buildings are business.

Which to me is when cities need to step in to enforce architectural standards. The old Le Meridien/ANA/Argent, now Westin Market Street Hotel, is a good example of that. Mayor Feinstein was very displeased at the time and vowed to not let streets be visually blocked by ugly walls of concrete again (so far, that hasn't been repeated). The SF Marriott is another example of the City selling itself extremely short; any company wanting to build the main hotel at our convention center should have been forced to utilize quality materials at the very least.

Gavin Newsom has discussed raising the City's architectural bar. He needs to put action where his talk is, especially since he is literally in the shadow of Argenta. I know that everything can't be expensive and stunning, but come on people, let's get with it. Argenta would be scorned in such a prominent location in cities with higher standards, such as Chicago.

[BTinSF]

Two-tone blue stucco??! I think not. I'm going to disagree with you on that one BT. The City missed a golden opportunity to finally upgrade the immediate Civic Center area, much like the new PUC building will do on the other side. We shouldn't compare it to the AAA box or Fox Plaza but judge it on its own merits, which aren't many. It's plebeian architecture when it was presented as being so much more, even in the "new" rendering.

I agree that the city missed an opportunity to upgrade Civic Center and I'm not praising Argenta. What I'm doing comes closer to trashing Mission Bay. IMHO, it's two-tone blue stucco vs orange and beige stucco. I prefer two-tone blue. But it's not the colors. The overall form of the building is more pleasing to my eye than some of those in MB or, say, Symphony Towers (two-tone green stucco). Still, I am NOT praising it. It's too short. It would have looked much better with blueish glass as in the rendering as well as having some of the architectural detailing that seems to be missing.

It IS plebeian architecture, but I didn't say it wasn't. I just said it wasn't the worst example of plebeian architecture in the current crop of new buildings around town.

[BTinSF]

any company wanting to build the main hotel at our convention center should have been forced to utilize quality materials at the very least.



Hey, what you got against plastic? ;)

[nequidnimis]

In all fairness, there are also some great looking buildings in the new crop: 535 and 555 Mission, the Infinity, Trinity Plaza...

[BTinSF]

:previous: I think I'll wait on 535 and Trinity to see the reality. I liked the rendering of the Argenta a whole lot too. Another upcomer with a good-looking rendering is the PUC Building at Polk and Golden Gate (at 12 stories, not a highrise but very, very green and nice).

[San Frangelino]

from:http://www.examiner.com/a-1454228~Fourth_Street_s_future_lined_with_tall_stories.html


Fourth Street’s future lined with tall stories

SAN FRANCISCO -
A wall of high-rise office towers will stretch southeast from San Francisco’s downtown along Fourth Street to the emerging Mission Bay business and biotechnology research hub under a new long-term plan by city officials.

The Mayor’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development recently directed the Planning Department to scale back modest rezoning proposals for the low-rise Fourth Street corridor between Folsom and Townsend streets. Instead, high-rises may eventually be allowed to crowd the planned Fourth Street path of the Central Subway, a multibillion dollar rail project.

The Central Subway will link the Caltrain station at Fourth and Townsend streets with the multi-modal Transbay Transit Center planned at First and Mission streets, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency documents show. Some of the route will be above-ground. Full funding has not been secured for the subway, which is planned for construction between 2010 and 2016.

Under current zoning rules, building heights along Fourth Street are limited to 65 feet, said Planning Department official Ken Rich, who is leading the Eastern Neighborhoods Plan — a sweeping rezoning effort covering 2,200 acres of the Central Waterfront, Potrero Hill, Mission and South of Market neighborhoods.

Fourth Street rezoning efforts will effectively be put into a “holding pattern” until the Eastern Neighborhoods Plan is finished and approved, which is expected later this year, Rich said.

It’s unclear how high the new Fourth Street buildings will rise, but the Planning Department is pushing a separate plan to allow a landmark tower above the new transit center to reach 1,000 feet, while most other towers in The City would be capped at 800 feet or less. The Transamerica Pyramid is roughly 850 feet.

Mayoral development adviser Michael Yarne said the new Fourth Street proposal makes economic and environmental sense.

If built, the corridor’s office buildings will fill with workers who ride trains through the new subway, said Yarne, who added that concentrating high-rise towers along a transit route will help protect the environment from car emissions.

“If we’re going to be supporting a billion-plus dollar investment in a new subway, the least we could is to plan for transit-oriented development along the line,” Yarne said.

jupton@sfexaminer.com

Examiner

[BTinSF]

:previous:

http://www.socketsite.com/Fourth%20Street%20Map.jpg
Source: http://www.socketsite.com/

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2008_06_4th-street.jpg
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/

[peanut gallery]

Interesting plan. I can't think of a lot of vacant lots along that stretch, so it will be a long slow process of replacing existing buildings one-by-one. I'm trying to picture the effect a corridor of tall buildings emanating out in this direction would have on the overall skyline. As blasphemous as it might be on this site, I'm not sure I'd like it aesthetically.

[Jerry of San Fran]

I saw the Argenta almost completely revealed today (I was out of town for the week) and am very pleased with the result. When I consider what could have been placed there I shudder and am thankful!

[Reminiscence]

I'm a tad confused on this 4th Street plan, as it seems to be the first I've heard of it. If I'm not mistaken, this is to be the corridor for the Caltrain extention to Transbay, no? I imagine they are going to bulldoze at least some of the buildings that are on the route. Are they talking about replacing them with these tall towers?

[BTinSF]

Interesting plan. I can't think of a lot of vacant lots along that stretch, so it will be a long slow process of replacing existing buildings one-by-one. I'm trying to picture the effect a corridor of tall buildings emanating out in this direction would have on the overall skyline. As blasphemous as it might be on this site, I'm not sure I'd like it aesthetically.

That's what I thought at first too, but the reality isn't so dramatic I don't think. For one thing, we aren't sure how tall "tall" would be in this case. I'd be very surprised if it meant 800 ft. On the other hand, with buildings like One Hawthorne going up a block and a half away, there's certainly room to go up from 65 ft., the current limit, without creating a "great wall" of tall buildings effect.

If the change even happens, I'd look for an upzoning to somewhere in the 120-400 ft range (more likely the lower end of that) and it would then just be a westward extension of the highrise neighborhood now developing to the east rather than a wall.

[quashlo]

If I'm not mistaken, this is to be the corridor for the Caltrain extention to Transbay, no? I imagine they are going to bulldoze at least some of the buildings that are on the route. Are they talking about replacing them with these tall towers?

The Caltrain extension will be under Second Street. The guy here is talking about the Central Subway.

It sounds like a great idea, as it's a natural extension of the Union Square-Moscone Center corridor and will connect with Mission Bay area... I've always been unimpressed with Fourth Street south of Howard, as it's somewhat of a wasteland, especially with the freeway and all the traffic directed to and from the the ramps. Hopefully this will bring more street life and activity to this stretch.

[San Frangelino]

Rember this article: http://www.spur.org/documents/070701_article_01.shtm

http://www.spur.org/documents/policy0707_images/9.jpg

My only wish is that they would consider 5th street as well, which has some great under/ undeveloped plots to build on.

[CityKid]

from:http://www.examiner.com/a-1454228~Fourth_Street_s_future_lined_with_tall_stories.html


When they say not fully funded, they're refering to the Caltrain extension, right? The last I heard, BT posted an article stating that the Central Subway was fully funded.

[SFView]

With the current plan to place a 300' landmark tower at 4th and King Streets, other towers north of King along 4th Street may be shorter. That is my guess until we get more reliable zoning information from Planning, etc.

[Downtown Dave]

Not sure where this goes. 505-525 Howard St.:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v106/NelsonAndBronte/SanFrancisco/Random/505525Howard-4309.jpg

[AndrewK]

foundry square 3. the demolition would be referring then to club nv/goat hill pizza. 11 stories doesnt sound close to the 500 ft tower that people have been mentioning about it though.

[BTinSF]

:previous: I don't know where the idea of a tower came from. 11 stories is exactly what you'd expect for a building to match the other three corners there which is what has been planned for a decade or more. What's newish, but we already knew it was coming, was a slight enlargement of the floor plate after the developer bought the property next door (Club NV/Goat Hill Pizza). The surprise would be if they had found a tenant or decided to proceed with building it on spec, but I don't think anything here implies that.

A 500 ft tower at this site would be particularly problematic, even if anyone seriously contemplated it, because it would probably shadow the park-to-be on top of the TransBay Terminal. I can recall when the Planning Dept. expressed considerable satisfaction that the developer of Foundry Square chose not to propose any highrises on the site because of shadowing of the terminal.

[peanut gallery]

That's what I thought at first too, but the reality isn't so dramatic I don't think. For one thing, we aren't sure how tall "tall" would be in this case. I'd be very surprised if it meant 800 ft. On the other hand, with buildings like One Hawthorne going up a block and a half away, there's certainly room to go up from 65 ft., the current limit, without creating a "great wall" of tall buildings effect.

If the change even happens, I'd look for an upzoning to somewhere in the 120-400 ft range (more likely the lower end of that) and it would then just be a westward extension of the highrise neighborhood now developing to the east rather than a wall.

Good point, BT. I was definitely envisioning a string of say 400-600ft highrises. What ever made me think such a thing is possible is beyond me. The more realistic outcome would likely be something that would fit nicely, height-wise.

[peanut gallery]

foundry square 3. the demolition would be referring then to club nv/goat hill pizza. 11 stories doesnt sound close to the 500 ft tower that people have been mentioning about it though.

Correct all the way around. They're sticking with the original plan, which is another building to the scale of the other three. I think that's a fine approach, actually. The modification they reference is that the Club NV plot is now part of the project, which will give this building the same footprint as IV (across Howard).

FYI: that's the sign I mentioned a couple of pages back in my project summary.

[peanut gallery]

I can recall when the Planning Dept. expressed considerable satisfaction that the developer of Foundry Square chose not to propose any highrises on the site because of shadowing of the terminal.

What about the proposed tower next to FS-IV? It's not a 500 footer, but it would be taller than the Foundry Square buildings and easily shadow that end of the park.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Argenta - view from the 24th floor of the Archstone Fox Plaza I took 6-24-08.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3095/2609533872_72f446ae6a_b.jpg

[peanut gallery]

Nice shot, Jerry. It's not as glassy as depicted in the rendering, but it's not bad IMO.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Thanks, Peanut Gallery - so far I have not met anyone in the Fox Plaza who dislikes the building - and believe me that is very unsual for this group of people! Of couse those on the 14th through 17th floor are not happy to lose their views of Twin Peaks.

[peanut gallery]

A couple of updates from Mission Bay North. First Arterra is getting closer to completion on the outside:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3073/2612803390_16d04d121c_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3037/2612801870_d623605c30_b.jpg

And right next door, the Arquitectonica-designed Avalon Bay ase III (Thanks WildCowboy!):
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3032/2611970053_e6a59cbb89_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3083/2612805754_85f0212f7b_b.jpg

[WonderlandPark]

^^ Who designed the tower in the top photo that looks almost done?

[WildCowboy]

^^^ Kwan Henmi did Arterra.

[POLA]

Arterra looks great!

[peanut gallery]

I agree. And I think Avalon Bay Phase III (Arquitectonica) will look even better.

[SFView]

Arterra and Argenta - hmmmm...similar names - are both looking pretty good. I think they both are the nicest looking buildings in their respective surroundings so far. Yes, well shall see if Avalon Bay Phase III turns out even better. That would be great!

[BTinSF]

Friday, June 27, 2008
University of San Francisco to break ground on $60M science center
San Francisco Business Times - by Ron Leuty

The University of San Francisco plans to build a 60,000-square-foot science center on its main campus, the latest upgrade of the school's aging facilities.

The $60 million Center for Science and Innovation would be built at the south end of the 42-year-old Harney Science Building, near the school's War Memorial Gymnasium off Golden Gate Avenue.

Construction of the building, designed by the architectural firm NBBJ, is slated to begin in May 2010.

USF has raised $18.5 million for the project but still is trying to line up naming rights for the building, which could bring in another $20 million or more, said David Macmillan, vice president for university advancement. It also is promoting naming rights deals for individual floors (about $2 million), general-use classrooms (about $600,000), biology, environmental science, physics and chemistry labs (about $750,000), and public spaces (about $125,000).

The cost of the project has escalated from an initial $30 million in 2003 to $60 million today due to higher materials costs and other construction costs, Macmillan said. "Science labs are among the most expensive facilities," he said.

The center's fundraising drive follows a successful $178 million, five-year USF campaign that wrapped up last year that funded the expansion and renovation of several projects on the school's main and Lone Mountain campuses. That included the estimated $30 million renovation of the former Campion Hall, renamed Kalmanovitz Hall with a $10 million gift from the Paul and Lydia Kalmanovitz Foundation.

In recent years, USF also has expanded its School of Business & Management with the construction of the four-story Malloy Hall and remodeled Kendrick Hall for the Koret Law Center.

The Center for Science and Innovation would integrate lectures and laboratory work with 20 classroom labs designed for 30 to 50 students each, Macmillan said.

USF has 8,500 students and all undergraduate students are required to take science courses.

"The building, combined with the opening of Kalmanovitz Hall (in September), will raise people's view of where we are academically," Macmillan said.


Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2008/06/30/story6.html?t=printable

[BTinSF]

http://www.socketsite.com/900%20Folsom%20Design.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/900%20Folsom%20Site.jpg
Source both images: http://www.socketsite.com/

The two adjacent parcels at 900 Folsom Street and 260 Fifth Street are the locations of a new mixed-use development project. What is currently a large surface parking lot, office building and adjoining small parking lot, will be transformed into a transit oriented, green, residential project. Airy 19 foot high, neighborhood-serving retail will be located at the ground level . . . .
Overarching design direction is to convey the transitional nature of the site, straddling the divide of West Soma’s light Industrial
history, and the development, height, and density of the Yerba Buena Neighborhood’s entertainment district to the East. Main design & massing themes include:
● Breakdown of a single, monolithic structure along Folsom Street into three separate buildings.
● Reduction of density along Clementina Alleyway.
● Representation of light industrial history of West Soma along Folsom Street through materials and window lines evocative of
warehouses.
● Interface with the development and modern aesthetic of the Yerba Buena Neighborhood through use of color and varying building skin materials / bolder gestures along 5
th Street.
● Experiment with the concept of a bridge linking 26thalleyways in Soma’s former industrial buildings.
Source: http://900folsom.com/index.php

[peanut gallery]

Nice piece of infill. Do you know if those will be condos or rentals?

[BTinSF]

:previous: Condos it seems.

For a great view of SF nimbyism (i.e. developer sucking up to nimbys as part of the approval process), go to http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2008/06/the_socketsite_scoop_on_900_folsom260_fifth_condo_idol.html and read the comments.

[AndrewK]

i cant stand people like "tehama" and "soapbox derby" who probably complain when developers don't ask for their opinion, but then complain when they do that they aren't "really" listening. if you are so ardent about having it done your way and to please only you (with no thought to the hundreds of people who will be able to have housing due to the creation of the project), just build the f*cking thing yourself. or just let your current neighborhood, which you love just as it is so very much, remain the drug-infested blight that it has been described as.

[nequidnimis]

:previous: Condos it seems.

For a great view of SF nimbyism (i.e. developer sucking up to nimbys as part of the approval process), go to http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2008/06/the_socketsite_scoop_on_900_folsom260_fifth_condo_idol.html and read the comments.

Don't worry. As a Supervisor told me on an unrelated matter, there will be concertation but it will get done.

[BTinSF]

Here's an intriguing tidbit:

"Millennium . . . has one last parcel in the area (Yerba Buena), 706 Mission St., that it and JMA hope to recreate . . . . the final result will include the Mexican Museum . . . . Neches of the (Redevelopment) agency said officials hope a Mexican Museum project is underway by Jan 1, 2010 . . . . Victor Marquez, chairman of the Mexican Museum, said it will go before the agency with a new plan on July 1 that will allow the museum to enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement with Millennium and JMA."

Recall that 706 Mission is the building on the northwest corner of 3rd and Mission where Rochester Big & Tall occupies the ground floor. Millennium has previously indicated a desire to add a tower, not unlike the St. Regis on the opposite corner.

I didn't realize it could happen this quickly--be under construction in 18 months.

[peanut gallery]

What additional hoops does the Millennium proposal need to jump through? Depending how far along they are, starting in 18 months might be realistic.

[peanut gallery]

A one-shot update of two other Mission projects, both of which are approaching completion:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3184/2616625419_31679290e0_b.jpg

[BTinSF]

What additional hoops does the Millennium proposal need to jump through? Depending how far along they are, starting in 18 months might be realistic.

It's very realistic if they've got the financing and the desire. As a Redevelopment Agency project, I believe it's exempt from most of the planning hurdles.

[BTinSF]

Here's the "full reveal" of an infill "affordable housing" project for seniors I really like on the southeast corner of Polk & Geary. I not only like it for what it is but also for what it replaced--a decaying gutted laundromat that was a haven for junkies and street people:

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0130.jpg?t=1214952552

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0131.jpg?t=1214952577

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0134.jpg?t=1214952634

By the way, while my camera's resolution isn't good enough to make it clear, the reddish brown surface is faux brick, not stucco.

[viewguysf]

Here's the "full reveal" of an infill "affordable housing" project for seniors I really like on the southeast corner of Polk & Geary. By the way, while my camera's resolution isn't good enough to make it clear, the reddish brown surface is faux brick, not stucco.

Very nice! As you have pointed out before, there are numerous good small projects in the Tenderloin that have or are being built. I saw a number of them last weekend and some are actually quite impressive. :tup:

[BTinSF]

More infill

This project is adjacent to the Mercy Housing project at 10th & Mission. It may even be some kind of extension or "phase 2" of that project--I'm not sure. Anyway, it takes up the rest of the Jessie St. alley frontage between 9th and 10th Sts. with frontage also on 9th St (and, I assume, a 9th St. address). If anyone can come up with renderings, it would be appreciated:

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0137.jpg?t=1215126788

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0142.jpg?t=1215126815

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0140.jpg?t=1215126854

This project is at Larkin & Golden Gate and will be mostly a parking structure for UC's Hastings Law School, but it will have ground floor retail:

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0155.jpg?t=1215126952

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0153.jpg?t=1215126984

[AndrewK]

rendering of the parking garage plus retail from socketsite (I believe this was posted somewhere earlier):

http://www.socketsite.com/Hastings%20Parking%20Garage%20At%20GGA%20and%20Larkin.jpg

[BTinSF]

:previous:

Thanks!

[BTinSF]

I found out a little more about the project at 9th & Jessie I photographed above:

Mercy Housing Receives Grants for SF Homes

Mercy Housing California (MHC) has received two grants to help finance a family housing project on 10th Street and Mission Street and a senior housing project on Ninth Street and Jessie Street, in San Francisco.

The 10th Street and Mission Street development will consist of 136 one-, two- and three-bedroom homes for families earning 15 percent to 45 percent of the area’s median income. The Ninth Street and Jessie Street project is for seniors and will comprise 107 units.
Source: http://www.imakenews.com/focusonhousing/e_article000601443.cfm?x=b11,0,w

and

9th & Jessie Senior Housing
107 apartments for very low income elderly (ages 62 or better). New 11-story building fronting 9th & Jessie. 20% for occupancy by homeless seniors. Affordable to seniors at incomes of 50% of City areamedian income or below. HUD 202 funding will subsidize 95 units so that residents pay only 30% of their income. 20 studio apartments and 86 one-bedroom apartments and a manager’s unit. Construction estimated tostart in Spring 2008, occupancy Winter 2010.
Source: http://www.marketstreetassociation.org/index.php?p=newsletter

Still seeking a rendering. The address will apparently be 66 9th St.

[PBuchman]

Still seeking a rendering. The address will apparently be 66 9th St.

Ask and ye shall receive...

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u33/PBuchman1729/9th_and_Jessie.png

The image is taken from the architect's website, linked here: http://kodamadiseno.com/

[BTinSF]

:previous: Nice! Thanks.

Now the bad news:

After phase two of One Rincon and the Infinity are closed out, (Mark Co. President Alan) Mark expects "a long lag time" before San Francisco sees another wave of luxury towers. Besides Jackson Pacific's 180-unit One Hawthorne, which is under construction, few developers are bullish enough to put a shovel in the ground. While Turnberry has leased a sales office for its 227-unit tower at 45 Lansing, it shows no sign of actually building out the sales office, which is likely to take nine months. The only other significant sales office likely to open this year is Argenta, Anka Development's project at 1 Polk Street.
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2008/07/07/newscolumn1.html

[livin' in the city]

Is 2RH going to happen?

[BTinSF]

Yes, but the suggestion is that 45 Lansing is in the slow lane--not dead, but not charging rapidly toward reality.

[BTinSF]

818 Van Ness (is that the right address?) shows a little ankle:

http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x128/BSTJr/IMG_0159.jpg?t=1215293789

[hi123]

I think 818 will look very nice. The design is solid and what's been revealed so far looks nice. Are they 'unwrapping' 77 van ness yet? That project is still a total mystery. I hope it's not TOO ugly!

[nequidnimis]

I wouldn't worry. 77 and 818 Van Ness were both designed by Forum Architect, and the renderings have similarities.

[hi123]

^ Does 77 have a rendering? I thought that there wasn't one...

[BTinSF]

:previous:

We have this:

77 Van Ness
http://www.forumdesign.com/current/77VanNess.jpg

818 Van Ness
http://www.forumdesign.com/residential/818VanNess.jpg

Source of both: http://www.forumdesign.com/