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

[BTinSF]

Nice. I think the Four Seasons, behind (and partially obscured by) the Mariott, is new too.

It was built in the late 90's so not new enough if what is represented was "built since 2000".

[WonderlandPark]

Four Seasons was done like '98 or '99.

[ACSF]

Has any work been done on 680 folsom lately? It seems as though the project is stalled perhaps?

Looks like there has been progress. The sidewalk is now open, the lobby is being built out, and plantings are going in.

[peanut gallery]

^ Are you talking about Blu? That's at 631. This is 680 Folsom:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3162/2678963182_afcb1bb8bf_b.jpg

And it doesn't look like anyone has touched it in months.

[peanut gallery]

Four Seasons was done like '98 or '99.

FWIW, SSP's database says it was completed in 2001.

Whatever the case, that's a great shot and very enlightening as well. Thanks for putting it together.

[Reminiscence]

I also agree, that's a great picture, thanks for posting it! Its nice to see so much progress over the last 9 years, but this next coming decade will be twice as better is all goes according to schedule. Lets just hope we can recover from this crisis as fast as possible, then we'll be back in the show.

[viewguysf]

I also agree, that's a great picture, thanks for posting it! Its nice to see so much progress over the last 9 years, but this next coming decade will be twice as better is all goes according to schedule. Lets just hope we can recover from this crisis as fast as possible, then we'll be back in the show.

Don't hold your breath. IMO, we are going to go through a longer period of slow or no growth than many people realize. There is absolutely no demand for office space and the vacancy rate keeps climbing steadily. Likewise, there is a glut of unsold condos, there will be no hotel construction, retail is contracting, real estate prices are still decreasing in most areas and credit will not return to anything resembling normal for quite some time.

I'm a realist, not a doomsayer, but realize that there basically is no "schedule" now for many projects. Some of them may never materialize and will eventually be replaced by something else.

[viewguysf]

More evidence that sales for all levels and prices of San Francisco condo developments are suffering: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/22/BUCT15FAG1.DTL&tsp=1

[BTinSF]

Friday, January 23, 2009
PUC to clear site for new headquarters
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

The Public Utilities Commission will start demolition on the abandoned state office building at 525 Golden Gate Ave. in San Francisco, a signal that the agency is optimistic it will score funding to construct its planned super-sustainable $188 million new headquarters on the site.

PUC General Manager Ed Harrington said the agency has requested federal funding in the pending stimulus package to help foot the bill for the 12-story Civic Center building. He said he expects to hear in less than a month.

“If we get the funds, we are ready to begin construction of a (LEED) platinum building as soon as demolition is complete,” Harrington stated in an email. “If we don’t get the funding, we will have to consider other options.”

The utilities headquarters has been a pet project for Mayor Gavin Newsom, who has said the structure would “lead the way” in sustainable building and “demonstrate state-of-the-art green building technology.” But with wind turbines on the roof and photovoltaic panels embedded in portions of the facade, the 221,000-square-foot building will not be cheap. And with the city facing a budget shortfall and the cost of leasing office space declining in the Civic Center district, Harrington put the project on hold last June, just before construction was slated to start.

Webcor, the contractor on the project, is “mobilizing” to knock down the existing structure, according to Vice President Shelley Doran.

“We are pleased we have authorization to start demolition because it keeps people working — it creates jobs,” said Doran.

The site, at Polk Street and Golden Gate Avenue, is home to a state office building that closed because of damage from the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. The city bought it for $1 and originally planned to build a City Hall annex there, but that project was scrapped in 2002 after the dot-com crash.


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


Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2009/01/26/story15.html?t=printable

:thankyouthankyou:

[BTinSF]

Curbed SF
FRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 2009
Back From the Grave: SF PUC Eco-Palace

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2009_01_sfpuc.jpg

The on-again, off-again glass palace SFPUC building is now on again. Why the change of heart? Could have something to do with the promise of a cash influx in the form of one very green-friendly stimulus package. The groundbreaking of the $188 million, platinum-LEED certified building stacked from top to bottom with wind turbines and solar panels was planned for a March 2008 groundbreaking— until the mayor's new PUC director woke up in a cold sweat one night with visions of angry utility payers shaking their pitchforks at PUC's new eco-Versailles. Let them eat cake and all that. So the project was put on hold, with the possibility of being simply downsized to only "modestly" green. Apparently so confident of a stimulus check is PUC that contractor Webcor is already "mobilizing" to tear down the current structure at 525 Golden Gate. And if the money doesn't rain down from heaven? "We will have to consider other options."
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/

[peanut gallery]

Keeping my fingers crossed on the PUC building. What an improvement that would be.

[Reminiscence]

"Yesss" indeed. I'm glad to hear this is back as it was one of my favorite projects. Maybe now with the Obama administration, projects like these will come by more often.

[AndrewK]

does anyone have any info on 77 van ness? they are finally taking down the scaffolding on the van ness side, but aside from that i havent seen any progress in the last month or two.

[BTinSF]

PUC site a 'poster child for stimulus package
John King
Monday, January 26, 2009

Here's a hoped-for local ripple from the economic package being shaped on Capitol Hill: San Francisco's super-green office building might finally break ground.

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/09/15/dd-place16_ph1_0497911288.jpghttp://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/09/15/dd-place16_ph2_0497911287.jpg

At the very least, demolition is set to begin next month at 525 Golden Gate Ave., where an earthquake-damaged state office building has sat empty since 1989. It's also the site where the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission has permits in hand to erect a 12-story headquarters that emphasizes sustainable design and resource conservation.

The catch: PUC General Manager Ed Harrington put the project on hold last summer because of budget and image issues. But with President Obama and Congress looking for politically correct projects that can break ground quickly, 525 Golden Gate's virtues are being touted inside the Beltway.

"We are completely ready to go," Harrington says. "It seems like a poster child for the stimulus package - it's energy efficient, it will create jobs, and it can become a government showcase."

That's been the idea all along; under prior General Manager Susan Leal and her deputy, Anthony Irons, plans were completed for a tower incorporating wind turbines, aggressive water recycling, reused building materials and the like. But when Harrington assumed the post last year, he took a bottom-line look at the design by Kaplan McLaughlin Diaz Architects - and then set the project aside while the agency concentrated on a larger task, the final round of approvals for a $4.4 billion overhaul of the city's water supply system.

"I personally didn't feel good about saying I could build our offices but not a pipeline," Harrington explains.

Whatever the rationale, Harrington's goal now is to secure a federal commitment of up to $75 million for the $188 million project (a total "I'm hoping will come down a bit" given the drop in construction prices, Harrington says). Part of the strategy: spend $4 million right now to remove the homely hulk at the corner of Polk Street and Golden Gate Avenue, one-half block from City Hall.

Current plans aren't as revolutionary as what was unveiled in 2007. Solar panels are now proposed for the roof instead of wind turbines, for instance, though turbines are still likely to run up the front of the tower, a nice bit of environmental sculpture.

Even in modified form, 525 Golden Gate has the potential to be a role model. If it gives us an economic boost as well, all the better.
Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/26/DDIC15F8PO.DTL&type=printable

[BTinSF]

does anyone have any info on 77 van ness? they are finally taking down the scaffolding on the van ness side, but aside from that i havent seen any progress in the last month or two.

Given that their other project up Van Ness pretty much gave up any effort at sales and went rental about as soon as it was finished, they may be in no hurry at 77. I've been out of town since October so I don't know what it looks like now (actually, I've been wondering) but surely it's too close to completion not to complete at least the exterior (they might delay the interior finishes).

[AndrewK]

heres a curbed post from october, nothing has changed except the scaffolding in the pic has come down (all three street-facing sides look like the one visible in the pic):

http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2008/10/10/construction_watch_77_van_ness_gets_meat_on_its_bones.php

the first two floors on all sides are still unfinished.

[Gordo]

At least they're clearing the site for the PUC building. A vacant lot is much better than what is there now. I'm still crossing my fingers that the new building will find the funding and get built soon.

[BTinSF]

:previous: I absolutely hate that big, blank pink wall. I'd even rather have a surface parking lot.

[Gordo]

:previous: Agreed. That thing is horrible.

[BTinSF]

Progress on the little infill project at 231 Franklin:

Rendering
http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3329/3236921620_cc093d12c6_o.jpg

Street level retail space
http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3374/3236078125_1f914c8a34_o.jpg

As of now
http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3399/3236921586_2f461f263a_o.jpg
Source all images: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/01/29/a_little_more_on_hayes_valleys_fat_cat.php?o=1

32 units, occupancy-ready in the fall

[BTinSF]

Friday, January 30, 2009
Replacement for St. Luke’s coming fast
San Francisco Business Times - by Chris Rauber

Despite the California budget crisis and worldwide credit crunch, San Francisco’s California Pacific Medical Center is making rapid progress on designing a replacement for St. Luke’s Hospital and is also moving forward with its proposed new $1.7 billion Cathedral Hill campus near downtown.

“St. Luke’s is moving faster, since the time frame is so compressed,” said CPMC spokesman Kevin McCormack. CPMC filed initial designs for a rebuilt St. Luke’s Dec. 19, he said, just three months after its board agreed to preserve the campus as part of a broader compromise with San Francisco officials, labor unions and community groups that appears to have rescued the Cathedral Hill project from potentially devastating political crossfire.

Plans currently call for a $200 million to $250 million replacement for 143-bed St. Luke’s, a significant jump from earlier estimates starting at $120 million.

CPMC will focus this year on designs and other documentation required for the Cathedral Hill and St. Luke’s projects, according to Geoffrey Nelson, CPMC’s director of enterprise development. It hopes to gain entitlements by early 2010, Nelson said, and start construction on both by mid-2010.

CPMC saved St. Luke’s from potential closure early in the decade but last year started taking steps to shutter it as an acute-care facility before a storm of protest caused CEO Martin Brotman, M.D., to backtrack.

Now that initial plans for the new St. Luke’s have been filed at the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, “We can focus on (more detailed) design of the hospital, obviously as quickly as we can,” McCormack said.

As part of that process, CPMC is working to refine Cathedral Hill’s environmental impact report, and talking to neighborhood and community groups about its plans for the $1.7 billion, 555-bed hospital and medical office complex at Geary Boulevard and Van Ness Avenue.

Even so, officials at CPMC and its Sacramento-based Sutter Health parent acknowledge that little is certain in the current economic environment. Nor will they yet provide details on where the $2 billion needed for the two hospitals is coming from, and if it has those funding commitments in place.

“People think that health care is immune to a recession, but clearly it’s going to take a hit just like everything else,” said McCormack. “We haven’t heard anything from Sutter saying, ‘Sorry, the money’s not going to be there,’ but obviously that could change.”

Sutter spokesman Bill Gleeson said the 26-hospital system is in the midst of a “formal capital reassessment, given the current economic slump and our concern about its duration and ultimate enormity,” the first such reassessment in three years.


crauber@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4946
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2009/02/02/story12.html?t=printable

[BTinSF]

77 Van Ness

http://www.socketsite.com/77%20Van%20Ness%202-2-09.jpg
Source: http://www.socketsite.com/

[Gordo]

:previous: I really like that building. Simple, classic, great scale, etc. I think taller would be ok on Van Ness, but I'd love to see this type of building lining Mission from 14th through 30th and Geary from at least Masonic to the Ocean (Geary should have highrises from Van Ness to Divis, IMO).

[BTinSF]

I agree with you, Gordo, but I do think that where it is it looks a little peculiar because the next-door Masonic building kind of towers over it. If it had been another couple of stories taller so they were about the same height I think the effect would have been more pleasant.

Meanwhile, I've been wondering if there's any chance any of the "stimulus" money for fixing up schools might be used for fixing up the potentially gorgeous but presently depressing SF schools administrative HQ on the next block. Anybody heard anything?

[viewguysf]

I agree with you, Gordo, but I do think that where it is it looks a little peculiar because the next-door Masonic building kind of towers over it. If it had been another couple of stories taller so they were about the same height I think the effect would have been more pleasant.

Meanwhile, I've been wondering if there's any chance any of the "stimulus" money for fixing up schools might be used for fixing up the potentially gorgeous but presently depressing SF schools administrative HQ on the next block. Anybody heard anything?

It's the school district's former administrative headquarters since they moved into the former CA State Bar Association headquarters just up the block on Franklin at McAllister. The old Commerce High School was supposed to become the City's High School of the Arts, but the $25 million bond issue that we passed years ago is now wholly inadequate. As usual, some planning!

At least that's the way I understand all of this to be. It's a stunning complex though and richly deserves to be restored.

[BTinSF]

The old Commerce High School was supposed to become the City's High School of the Arts, but the $25 million bond issue that we passed years ago is now wholly inadequate. As usual, some planning!

At least that's the way I understand all of this to be. It's a stunning complex though and richly deserves to be restored.

I thought the High School of the Arts was in that building on Oak between Franklin and Gough (a block from the new Conservatory of Music). They built a new gymnasium across Oak for whatever school that is a few years ago (could be many years ago now--time flies).

[viewguysf]

I thought the High School of the Arts was in that building on Oak between Franklin and Gough (a block from the new Conservatory of Music). They built a new gymnasium across Oak for whatever school that is a few years ago (could be many years ago now--time flies).

No, that's the a former CalTrans building that became the shared campus of the French-American International School and the Chinese-American International School which opened in 1997. They just completed a major renovation of the facility in time for this academic year.

The old Commerce High School (on Van Ness and across Hayes from Davies Symphony Hall) eventually became the Board of Education headquarters for many years prior to their moving into their new headquarters behind the Veteran's Building in Civic Center. You can find old pictures of the CHS athletic field which was behind it across Franklin Street, where the new little condo building is rising.

The current SOTA (School of the Arts) is closer to me at 555 Portola on the former McAteer High School campus. Prior to their relocating there for the 2002-2003 school year, SOTA was on its original campus on Font Boulevard, which is completely surrounded by San Francisco State University. That parcel has been in the middle of a squabble between the Board of Education and the University for quite some time.

[Gordo]

This is pretty funny. I haven't seen any renderings for this site, but 85 feet is certainly more appropriate than 65, so I'm not too concerned, regardless of the "goof".

Goof gives Newsom donor 20 more feet

Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

(02-03) 20:14 PST -- San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom used a clerical error to ensure that one of his major political donors would get a chance to build a taller condominium project than is otherwise allowed, members of the Board of Supervisors alleged Tuesday.

The clerical error, which boosted the allowed building height of a parcel on Mission Street to 85 feet among many blocks that are limited to a uniform 65 feet, stands to benefit restaurateur Gus Murad.

Murad, who owns a popular restaurant and lounge in the area, has submitted a proposal for the condo project at 2550 Mission on a site occupied by the shuttered New Mission Theater.

Over the past several years, Murad has contributed thousands of dollars to Newsom campaigns and ballot measures. He also sits on the city's Small Business Commission.

On Jan. 6, as part of a major rezoning effort, the board approved legislation limiting building heights on Mission Street to 65 feet. Prior to the vote, there had been discussions about giving an exception to the Murad project because it had been under city review before the zoning plan was finalized and would add needed housing and other community facilities to the neighborhood.

The board declined to make the exception, but a city planner who wrote the final legislation inadvertently inserted the 85 foot height for the Murad property. The board later approved another ordinance restoring the 65 foot limit. Newsom then vetoed that legislation, placing the Murad property back at the accidental 85-foot height.

Supervisor Chris Daly said at the Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday that Newsom's actions gave the appearance of, "impropriety and malfeasance."

"And here we are with four votes, a clerical error, and a mayor who has gained politically from the property owner," Daly said. "And that's how it's going to go down. This is disgusting."

Daly was referring to the four votes that Newsom needed to sustain his veto. Newsom got those votes from his allies on the board - Sean Elsbernd, Carmen Chu, Michela Alioto-Pier and Bevan Dufty.

Newsom spokesman Nathan Ballard said the mayor rejected Daly's "false accusations."

"During this fiscal crisis, the people of San Francisco need to work together not attack each other," Ballard said.

Supervisor David Campos expressed concern that a clerical error was essentially redirecting the decision of the city's legislative body.

"Isn't there a legal problem here? Campos asked. "The intent was to vote a certain way and here we are not going along with the will of the board."

Deputy City Attorney Cheryl Adams said that there was no recourse to change legislation that had already been filed and made public.

Gus Murad could not be reached for comment.

E-mail Robert Selna at rselna@sfchronicle.com.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/04/BAO915MO0L.DTL

[peanut gallery]

Too funny!

[AndrewK]

I agree with you, Gordo, but I do think that where it is it looks a little peculiar because the next-door Masonic building kind of towers over it. If it had been another couple of stories taller so they were about the same height I think the effect would have been more pleasant.

Meanwhile, I've been wondering if there's any chance any of the "stimulus" money for fixing up schools might be used for fixing up the potentially gorgeous but presently depressing SF schools administrative HQ on the next block. Anybody heard anything?

i walk by this all the time and its really sad because it is such a nice building. there was even a fire inside recently and it doesnt look like much was done to fix any of the damage.

[peanut gallery]

One Kearny update from today. The seismic addition is coming along, but I really want to see the work being done on the historic building under the scaffolding. Hopefully that will come off before too long.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3484/3254038985_7f256fcea3_b.jpg

[BTinSF]

:previous: I wonder why they didn't try to match the color of the brick on the old building better on the new fake brick or whatever it is on the addition.

[peanut gallery]

From the renderings, it looks to me like they're trying to make it look like a separate building from the outside, even though it is all one space inside.

Also, I posted a few shots of the new Diesel spac (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=4068618&postcount=985)e in the SF Retail thread.

[viewguysf]

:previous: I wonder why they didn't try to match the color of the brick on the old building better on the new fake brick or whatever it is on the addition.

It seems to match the restored old Chronicle building across the street.

[peanut gallery]

OK, so this isn't really even a proposal yet (AFAIK). But in the absence of much else to look at, check out this rendering for 48 Tehama, from CurbedSF (http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/02/05/rumblings_bumblings_centennial_towers_soma_funk.php#comment-269124):
http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2009_02_48tehama.jpg

This would fill a tiny space opposite the 500-foot proposal at 41 Tehama, which is also largely a fantasy at this point. It's supposed to be 19 floors with a hotel, offices and residences. We all know this is unlikely to see the light of day in the foreseeable future for a lot of reasons. But wouldn't it be a nice addition to this little piece of SOMA?

[Reminiscence]

That is one radical looking building. In a strange way, I like it. Too bad it'll probably be a while until we hear about it, if at all.

[Jerry of San Fran]

[QUOTE=peanut gallery;4068596]One Kearny update from today. The seismic addition is coming along, but I really want to see the work being done on the historic building under the scaffolding. Hopefully that will come off before too long.


Peanut Gallery - I've walked by the structure lately. I think the "brick" is metal with a baked on finish. Not my style, but o.k.

[nequidnimis]

Too funny!
A blatant case of corruption. It is responsible for poverty in most of the world. I don't see what's funny about it.

[peanut gallery]

That's because you have no sense of humor. Others of us can get a chuckle out of the series of events that created this situation. Especially here where height (and development in general) are so stymied by the process.

But don't let that stop you from thinking this building being 20 feet higher than zoned is in any way related to the amount of poverty in the world.

[coyotetrickster]

A blatant case of corruption. It is responsible for poverty in most of the world. I don't see what's funny about it.

Is the it to which you refer corruption in general or the typo that allowed the extra 20 feet for the New Mission development. Either way, attributing that much global heft to corruption is simplistic and naive. But most of the 'progressives' in this town are rich with both attitudes. We all know lack of money is the real cause of poverty in the world:P

[colemonkee]

77 Van Ness looks great. I'd love to see a few more of those in downtown LA. Mind if we borrow it for awhile? ;)

[viewguysf]

77 Van Ness looks great. I'd love to see a few more of those in downtown LA. Mind if we borrow it for awhile? ;)

Might as well borrow it 'cause we don't have any use for it now, unfortunately. I don't think that you're exactly booming economically either though.

[BTinSF]

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2009

Rendering Reveal: The Future Home of a Tenderloin Grocer

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3445/3266145113_d1a5d17d7a_o.jpg

http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3378/3266145135_293be3fcdf_o.jpghttp://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3460/3266972042_95085f3684_o.jpghttp://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3473/3266972008_7bf2f9dd16_o.jpghttp://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3519/3266972108_2b0fb9f996_o.jpghttp://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3454/3266972088_198c54b01c_o.jpghttp://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3496/3266145201_dacbe6e19d_o.jpghttp://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3528/3266145253_396d3d57cc_o.jpg


Transbay Blog calls them the "Tenderloin Trio," three just-finished or upcoming projects geared toward low-income or chronically homeless families. At the pace Tenderloin Neighborhood Development's going though, they won't be just a trio for long. The three: 125 Mason, its recently covered neighbor at 149 Mason, and a further off mixed-use project at Eddy and Taylor that should bring a much-needed grocer to the Tenderloin's liquor-store heaven (last we heard, Grocery Outlet was in talks, after British grocer Fresh & Easy took one look and bailed). The plan is for 143 units, split between one-, two-, and three-bedrooms, plus bicycle parking. The chipper design you're looking at is courtesy architects David Baker + Partners, the guys responsible for the award-winning Curran House Apartments just a few yards down. Looks like the three musketeers will have to wait for the third though— ETA is 2012.
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/02/09/rendering_reveal_the_future_home_of_a_tenderloin_grocer.php

[nequidnimis]

Great building. I wish David Baker built more.

[Gordo]

That is a gorgeous building.

[peanut gallery]

More quality architecture for the Tenderloin, and it's all geared to low income housing. It seems counterintuitive. You would think they would be more inclined to pursue value engineering and cut costs by eliminating anything "extraneous" like good design. Instead, they are more willing to push the limits. Not having to market these to anyone, I guess they don't succumb to lowest common denominator thinking that results from fear of offending potential buyers.

[markermiller]

An interesting thought. That may be part of it… but I have a tendency to think the main reason we’re seeing more innovative design in the ‘subsidized’ projects is that the numerous parties involved in “THE PROCESS” (everybody from the neighborhood groups to the developers, city planners and micro-managing Supervisors) are simply more politically invested in seeing these projects through. An architect, if truly left to his own devices, is going to innovate... but if he knows (from experience) that whatever he comes up with is just going to get dumbed-down to utter mediocity in the end, then there's not going to be much design effort thrown on the project in the first place. If an interesting looking building like this were proposed in almost any other neighborhood in the City, you know who’d be the first-line of defense against it: NIMBY Neighborhood Groups (NNGs)! God save our ever-so-precious City.

[peanut gallery]

Good points. It's an interesting phenomenon that at least is working out well for this neighborhood. Plus, another surface lot will bite the dust.

Speaking of the area, I walked by 149 Mason today, but it hasn't changed much since the last time.

I also walked down the Geary side of One Kearny, which is further along than the Market side:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3388/3271413420_034f0acef6_b.jpg

So, we can get a much better idea of how it will look when the various elements come together:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3334/3270594713_4174cce6eb_b.jpg

[WonderlandPark]

Interesting that they used that French tile so much in the 1 Kearney project. You see it all over Toulouse, well at least in new buildings.

[viewguysf]

Speaking of the area, I walked by 149 Mason today, but it hasn't changed much since the last time. I also walked down the Geary side of One Kearny, which is further along than the Market side, so we can get a much better idea of how it will look when the various elements come together.

It doesn't look to me as if the elements will ever come together, especially on the Geary Street back side.

[peanut gallery]

You mean between the old and the new (totally agree, but also feel this is by design to make it read as a separate building) or just within the new? I've been really worried looking at the Market side that the "brick", black vent-looking stuff and glass were going to be a total mismatch with each other. I don't really like the overall look, but the three elements don't clash with each other like I thought they would.

[SFView]

...this is by design to make it read as a separate building..., but the three elements don't clash with each other...

Yes, the original building needs to read almost as a separate building, so that the original building form is more presearved. Such visible projects need to satisfy these requirements to be approved in San Francisco, especially where the original architecture is of some special or historic significance. Contrast or clear distinction between old and new while also harmonious usually by some alignment of neighboring architectural features is encouraged and intentional.

[BTinSF]

My almost least favorite San Francisco building is about to be my ex-almost least favorite:


THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2009
The Teardown Begins (Soon-ish?) at 525 Golden Gate

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2009_02_statebuilding.jpg

What's the opposite word for "shovel-ready"? For a week or two now, the old building at Golden Gate and Polk has been getting scaffolding and walkways to ready it for its impending destruction. In its place, sometime in the not very near, but not awfully distant future: a new, super-eco Public Utilities Commission building for the Civic Center, if all goes well. Let's see how fast this building comes down first.
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/02/12/the_teardown_begins_soonish_at_525_golden_gate.php#reader_comments

[viewguysf]

My almost least favorite San Francisco building is about to be my ex-almost least favorite

Congratulations to you and all of us! :notacrook:

[BTinSF]

Friday, February 13, 2009
Bay Area colleges halt major construction
Economic winter freezes state funding for projects
San Francisco Business Times - by Blanca Torres San Francisco Business Times

The State of California has frozen funding for major construction projects at Bay Area state-funded colleges after its bond revenue took a hit.

The standstill means millions in additional costs and hundreds of jobs lost associated with more than 130 projects on the 23 California State University campuses, 150 projects on California’s community college campuses and more than 70 projects on UC campuses.

San Francisco State University halted a $116 million renovation of its main student library and California State University-East Bay stalled work on a $44 million administration and student services building.

Other projects on hold include $80 million for new buildings at City College of San Francisco, $26 million in renovations on buildings at UC Berkeley, and $35 million for facilities and technology for outreach programs for underserved patients at UCSF.

Last December, the state decided to hold back funding about 2,000 projects ranging from schools and college campuses to road and park improvements.

The medical school plans to expand its class size by 10 percent and focus on training students with the most modern technology such as conducting doctor visits through video conferencing.

“Anytime you have a project of a maginitude on a campus like UCSF, the timeline has to be carefully managed,” said Doug Levy, an aide for USCF’s dean. “Our timeline is now thrown off.”

The new CSU-East Bay building was about two-thirds done when the state ordered work to stop. The project needed about $16 million to finish.

“It was enough that we could not afford to fund the rest,” said Shawn Bibb, vice president of administration and finance at CSU-East Bay. “I don’t have that kind of money lying around.”

CSU-East Bay had to pay the project’s contractor, Benicia-based Lathrop Construction, $3.5 million for work completed in November and December out of its own budget. Restarting the construction could add $1.5 million in costs.

It is unclear how long it will take to restart projects, CSU’s Bibb said. The state must first pass a budget, improve its bond rating, raise funds and give schools the green light — a process that could take several months.

SF State’s library was supposed to be complete by 2011. The project’s contractor, Barnhart Inc., had about 200 workers on the site before they had to halt work, said Leroy Morishita, vice president for administration and finance and chief financial officer at SF State.

“It’s only going to cost us more money,” he said.

Email Blanca Torres at btorres@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4960
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2009/02/16/story15.html?t=printable

So I am left wondering about the CCSF tower in Chinatown and the UCSF hospital in Mission Bay.

[peanut gallery]

I was afraid this was going to happen. I assume the $90M for CCSF was for excavation and foundation work on the new Chinatown campus. Nothing has happened onsite since the last update in the thread for those buildings (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=159669). And it sounds like it will be several months before anything does.

[Reminiscence]

This explains the slowdown at UC Davis too. A while back we has renovations of some buildings and you could see activity. Now, when I walk to and from classes across campus, I don't see anyone working anymore. Looks like these might be finished after I graduate (I hope so at least).

[LWR]

BTinSF,

My almost least favorite San Francisco building is about to be my ex-almost least favorite:

Just guessing, of course, but how about - "Money Pit" or perhaps "parking lot"?

[BTinSF]

BTinSF,
Just guessing, of course, but how about - "Money Pit" or perhaps "parking lot"?

I'm not sure what you're saying but if you're saying this lot is likely to be a parking lot for a while, I'd prefer that to the rotting homeless haven and overwhelming pink blankness that's been there since 1989.

The BizTimes did suggest that the city has some reason to think they'll corral enough "stimulus" bucks to build the building, though, and then there's the mayor's local "stimulus" effort oncoming (complete with bond issue in the fall which I can't imagine actually passing) which could include construction of some version of this building.

[LWR]

I'm not sure what you're saying...

BT, you got it right. I was thinking parking lot or (no income) money pit.

[BTinSF]

Top planner picks favorite buildings
John King, Chronicle Urban Design Writer
Monday, February 16, 2009

John Rahaim values texture in a building, the tactile qualities that reward close inspection and make a structure come alive.

And he's been studying San Francisco buildings intensely in the 13 months since leaving a high-level post in Seattle to become this city's planning director.

Prior directors have used the post to shape the skyline and protect residential neighborhoods in ways that still are debated. Rahaim so far has kept a low profile - steering several long-delayed plans to final approval and now wrestling with the budget realities of a department where income from fees has fallen 25 percent in the past year.

But a low profile doesn't mean a lack of attention. As Rahaim settles into his job, he's showing an increased confidence in mapping out where the department's resources should be aimed: toward plans focused on individual streets or small districts rather than sprawling swaths of the map, for instance.

Rahaim also has doubts about the recent spate of all-glass towers, and the planning notion that tall, thin towers automatically are preferable to midsize blocks.

This doesn't mean he's opposed to extra height in the Transbay area (he favors it) or growth in general. The question is how to evolve while enhancing the city that exists.

"We're entering an interesting phase in San Francisco's history," Rahaim says. "The challenge in the next round of growth is, how can we allow the city to grow with grace and texture?"

To illustrate how new buildings can enrich the civic landscape, Rahaim took a Chronicle writer on a tour last week of recent changes that, in his eyes, offer examples that others might follow.

Millennium tower handel partners, 2009 --

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/02/15/mn-rahaim16_phmi_0499792430.jpg

Though wary of the current vogue for glass towers, Rahaim makes an exception for the skyline presence of Millennium Tower at Fremont and Mission streets. Architect Glenn Rescalvo of Handel Partners strove for a crystalline presence, narrowing the shaft at two corners and adding thin metal fins that form diagonal stripes from certain angles.

"The treatment of the skin creates a complexity you wouldn't get from glass alone," Rahaim says. "The proportions keep shifting, and the skin keeps changing in the light."

He's also taken by the crown of the 645-foot tower, which slopes up and in with origami-like folds: "I'm a big fan of tops on buildings, and here, asymmetrical works."

555 mission st. plaza, hargreaves associates, 2008 --

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/02/15/mn-rahaim16_ph55_0499385115.jpg

When it comes to meeting the city's requirement that office buildings provide public open space, Rahaim likes the plaza included with the new tower at 555 Mission St.

For starters, he appreciates the variety of "rooms" that include a raised area along a landscaped wall and a clearing where ginkgo trees rise from decomposed granite: "Within a small area you've got different things going on, different possibilities of occupation."

The icing on the cake? Ugo Rondinone's trio of abstract aluminum heads and Jonathan Borofsky's "Human Structures," a colorful pyramid of metal figures perched on each other's shoulders.

"What gives this life is the artwork. It doesn't feel corporate, and it doesn't feel 'safe,' " Rahaim says. "It's assertive and bold."

185 post st. brand + allen architects, 2008 --

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/10/24/dd-place28_ph2_0499343918.jpg

The oddest "restoration" in town is this six-story jewel box one block from Union Square: A much-altered brick structure from 1908 was gutted, painted white and then wrapped in a taut skin of glass, clear at the windows and fritted against the brick. Set amid regal neighbors of ornate stone, 185 Post is enigmatic and sleek - and to Rahaim, irresistible. "It's an appropriate building for the retail district - a shiny cube," he says. "The fascination with glass works at that scale. You can break the rules when you're small."

Fulton grove daniel solomon, 1992 --

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/02/15/mn-rahaim16_phfu_0499796559.jpg

Rahaim came upon this collection of 22 wood-shingled, three-story townhouses by chance: He almost signed a lease for one. And while he didn't close the deal, he left with an appreciation for the compact allure of the complex and, in particular, the narrow through-block "alley" with its cobbled pavement and tall eucalyptus trees that manage to make a terrain lined with garage doors feel urbane.

"The auto court is more than just a driveway because of the paving and the trees ... it's a semipublic space" offering a visual landmark and a pedestrian path, Rahaim explains. "This is a great model for South of Market."

Broderick place levy design partners, 2006 --

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/02/15/mn-rahaim17_phbr_0499792424.jpg

Rahaim is the first to admit there's no glamour to this big-boned, four-story homage to rustic bungalows that fills half a block near the Golden Gate Park Panhandle: "Look at it in strict architectural terms, and the details are odd."

What wins the planner over is something else: The success of the storefronts along Fell and Broderick streets, with their inviting windows that fold back and the festive jostle from one shop to the next. "It's not overly controlled and precious. Falletti Foods is brightly painted, the awnings all are different colors. ... I like that it's messy."

1532 cole st. fougeron architecture 2005 --

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/02/15/mn-rahaim16_ph15_0499796498.jpg

It's easy to miss this subdued two-story home on the slopes of Parnassus Heights, but to Rahaim it's one of the city's best buildings - setting a tone of balanced poise with such elegant touches as a single steel-framed square window projecting from a screened wall of wooden slats.

"It's simple, but it works on the street really well. The lattice on the upper floor has a great texture; wood can be an excellent way to provide warmth without a lot of detail."

As for the subdued contrast of solids and voids, Rahaim would love to see this sort of imaginative care from other architects: "You need to understand the scale of abstract expressionism to compose something good in the city."

201 guerrero st. kennerly strong architecture, 2004 --

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/02/15/mn-rahaim16_ph20_0499796456.jpg

One of the city's most provocative residential buildings is a three-unit complex at 14th and Guerrero streets in the Mission - in particular, the unit along Valencia that looks like a ribbed copper wedge that fell from the heavens and landed on a glass storefront. Jarring? Not to Rahaim, who lives nearby.

"There's a very interesting sophistication about this building," he says, pointing out such elements as the contrast between long thin horizontal windows and one broad vertical one. He also likes the contrast of materials, copper above aluminum, and how the units along 14th are delicate, while the side facing Guerrero has an almost iconic force: "In my mind, the composition works."

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

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/16/MNQK15SVD8.DTL

[BTinSF]

Construction Watch: Homing the Chronically Homeless
Friday, January 30, 2009, by Andy J. Wang

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2009_01_149mason.jpg

Glittering high-rises: it's been fun, but we're seeing someone else now. Yep, affordable housing is the new luxury condo. The expensive projects have all been kicked in the face and left behind, which leaves buildings meant for seniors, families down on their luck, and the chronic homeless dominating the construction scene. See: 66 9th, 1390 Mission, and subject of today's Construction Watch, 149 Mason, a Glide project featuring 56 studios for the chronic homeless. Each will go for about $300 rent, with the rest being subsidized by the city. When last we checked in November, the site was just a hole in the ground. Looks like they're making pretty solid progress. Completion's targeted for the end of the year, according to Glide's website.
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/01/30/construction_watch_homing_the_chronically_homeless.php

Affordable Housing du Jour: Diversifying in NoPa
Tuesday, February 17, 2009, by Andy J. Wang

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2009_02_zygmunt.jpg

The SF Business Times takes a look at one of the Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corp's latest projects: the Zygmunt Arendt House, 47 studio apartments for formerly homeless seniors. Location: a mildly surprising spot in North of Panhandle, at 850 Broderick St. The affordable housing nonprofit normally builds in the Tenderloin, but this is what they call "de-concentration of poverty," which sounds something like the opposite of "spreading the wealth." As we've noted before, the TNDC's on a bit of a tear with their affordable housing projects; according to the story, work begins this year on 1400 Mission St., 210 studio apartments across from the finned building at 1390 Mission. The money's got to dry up sometime, though— as money from an affordable housing bond runs out, four (!!) other TNDC projects will have to go on the backburner.
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/02/17/affordable_housing_du_jour_diversifying_in_nopa.php#reader_comments

The "finned building" is the Mercy Housing project at 10th & Mission--and I'm hoping/assuming 1400 Mission would be the "other half" of the 10th & Market project. Could that mean the whole thing--including the market rate half actually on Market St--could get going?

[BTinSF]

Friday, February 20, 2009
S.F. planners may put entitlements on hold
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen San Francisco Business Times

With residential and commercial construction stuck in a deep freeze, the San Francisco Planning Department wants to allow developers of some high-profile projects to hold off on building until the economic climate warms up — without losing their coveted city entitlements.

The extensions would apply to downtown office tower developers, who are now legally required to begin construction within 18 months of winning approvals. It would also cover Rincon Hill condo developers, who are normally given 24 months to start building. Finally, the proposed extension covers a more general group of projects across the city, including residential projects of 20 or more dwellings, 100 percent affordable projects and sustainable buildings designed to meet standards set by the U.S. Green Building Council.

The proposed extension would offer some relief to developers like Lincoln Property Co., which has fully entitled office projects ready to go at 350 Bush St. and 500 Pine St. On the residential side, the law would extend approved condo developments ranging from Crescent Heights’ two-tower, 720-unit project at 10th and Market streets to Turnberry Associates’ 227-unit deluxe skyscraper planned for 45 Lansing St. Altogether, developers of more than 12,000 units of approved housing would get a grace period under the proposal.

Planning Department Zoning Administrator Larry Badiner said preserving approvals through a protracted recession benefits the city because it gives developers the ability to rapidly start construction at the first sign of an economic upswing. If stripped of entitlements, builders could spend years winning new approvals. He said a similar policy was successfully put in place during the downturn of 2001 and 2002.

“I don’t think it’s rocket science,” said Badiner. “We are trying to set the city up to be in a good place for the recovery.”

The proposed extension faces criticism from slow-growth advocates like attorney Sue Hestor, who say the city does a poor job of forcing developers to start building within the required time frame, even during good times.

Hestor objected to the fact that the policy basically covers any substantial development in the city. She said that one of the projects on hold, a 200,000-square-foot office tower at 524 Howard St., was first approved 20 years ago.

“These are entitlements based on an environmental report that is two decades old,” said Hester. “It would make sense that something approved in 1989 would have environmental conditions that are grossly out of date.”


Email J.K. Dineen at jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2009/02/23/story4.html?t=printable

[SFView]

While 20 years may be a bit "out of date" for approved environment impact reports, I still think the entitlement extensions are a good idea. It would be foolish to loose out on the development opportunities, if in such case the economy begins recovering much sooner than 10 or even 20 years.

[peanut gallery]

It's a very sensible approach. 524 Howard is a bit wacky, but the rest of those make perfect sense. For 350 Bush, I think this will come just in time. IIRC, their entitlements for that are just about expired.

Back up to 149 Mason - it isn't exactly zipping along. I always see workers onsite, but it is rising very slowly.

[yerfdog]

BTinSF, thanks for posting that interesting article about John Rahaim's favorite buildings

[peanut gallery]

BOS president David Chiu wants to shake things loose on the waterfront. I hope he's successful. From Curbed SF: (http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/02/24/david_chiu_wants_to_know_whats_up_with_the_waterfront.php)

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2009_02_waterfront.jpg

David Chiu Wants to Know What's Up With the Waterfront
Tuesday, February 24, 2009, by Andy J. Wang

Board of Supes president David Chiu is asking for some clarity on just what kind of development we should have on the Embarcadero north of Market Street. Height, design, amount of open space, that kind of thing. The area's been home to a number of proposed developments recently, all of which have either withered under the opposition or are currently under dispute. That includes the Port's Piers 27-31, which in another lifetime were slated to be turned into a ginormous mall and water recreation area, and then more recently an office and recreation area— both projects are now dead in the water. And there's also 8 Washington, located on Seawall Lot 351, a condo development on a parking lot that's been treading water for a while now (see what we did there?!). But there's a light at the end of the tunnel. Says an aide to Chiu: the six to eight month study would clarify our goals for the waterfront, which means the project might even get green-lighted sooner rather than later. Huzzah.

[BTinSF]

Construction Watch: Awaiting Sales Pitch in Lower Nob Hill

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2009_02_1299bush.jpg

One of the few relatively big residential buildings on the construction scene these days, 1299 Bush does have a couple things going for it: 1) proximity to Polk Gulch, the favorite neighborhood of a number of our readers, and 2) no strip-mall-style asshat. The architect is Forum Design, the same folks who brought us The Artani on Van Ness and Eddy and the decidedly more conservative 77 Van Ness on Van Ness and Fell. Would there be any point in betting the 26 units go rental?
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/02/24/construction_watch_awaiting_sales_pitch_in_lower_nob_hill.php#reader_comments

[BTinSF]

942 Mission (between 5th and 6th). As proposed, a 13 (or 15 depending upon the source) story hotel with 7,840 (or 3,240) square feet of ground floor retail and 165 (or 172) rooms.

http://www.socketsite.com/942%20Mission%20Aerial.jpg


Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2009/02/hotel_at_sixth_and_jessie_a_reader_asks_perhaps_you_can.html#comments

[Gordo]

:previous: I can't imagine that being built for some time. Would be nice to have a hotel there to help out Mint Plaza.

[AndrewK]

that is a block that could be really nice but is far from it right now, given its proximity to westfield and mint plaza. hope it happens sooner rather than later.

[peanut gallery]

It's a shame it's not proposed for the surface lot across the street, or any of the other empty lots around there, instead.

[BTinSF]

It's a shame it's not proposed for the surface lot across the street, or any of the other empty lots around there, instead.

Isn't that lot part of the Chronicle's little real estate empire that will be up for grabs if they stop publishing and abandon SF?

[peanut gallery]

You might be right. I know there are one or two along 5th that are theirs.

[fflint]

Update on the proposal at Fox Plaza ("1390 Market Street"):

120 ft., 11 stories, 19,000 sq. ft. retail on the ground floor, and homes above that: 80 studios, 120 1-beds, 50 2-beds.

[peanut gallery]

You're talking about the old SF Mart? Is it a tear down and replace, or remodel?

[Gordo]

I think he's talking about the tear down and rebuild of the small building in front of Fox Plaza that currently houses a Post Office, Starbucks, and a Patrick & Co. Good to hear that project is still moving ahead in some way.

[BTinSF]

I think he's talking about the tear down and rebuild of the small building in front of Fox Plaza that currently houses a Post Office, Starbucks, and a Patrick & Co. Good to hear that project is still moving ahead in some way.

I think that is correct.

The SF Mart project across Market St. is a remodel including, I believe, some sort of enclosure of the street between the two buildings (??Jessie St??).

[fflint]

I think he's talking about the tear down and rebuild of the small building in front of Fox Plaza that currently houses a Post Office, Starbucks, and a Patrick & Co. Good to hear that project is still moving ahead in some way.
Yes, it's the small commercial building at Hayes and Market (the main tower at Fox Plaza will be unaffected). It is fair to say the proposal, at least, is "moving ahead in some way."

[BTinSF]

Update on the proposal at Fox Plaza ("1390 Market Street"):

120 ft., 11 stories, 19,000 sq. ft. retail on the ground floor, and homes above that: 80 studios, 120 1-beds, 50 2-beds.

This piece is almost 2 years old but things don't seem to have changed too much. I'd love to see a rendering:

Fox Plaza (1390 Market): 250 New Condos In The Works

http://www.socketsite.com/Fox%20Plaza.jpg

According to J.K. Dineen, “Archstone-Smith is pushing forward with plans to raze the corner retail element [of Fox Plaza] and replace it with a 250-unit flatiron-style condo building.” (Note 80 + 120 + 50 = 250)

The planned wedge-shaped terra-cotta and glass 120-foot structure, with retail, would replace the low-slung building that houses Starbucks and a stationery shop, according to Presidio Development Partners President Mark Conroe, who was retained by Archstone-Smith to obtain city approvals for the residential development and sell off the office part. The new building would cost about $150 million based on current construction costs.
HellerManus has been tapped for the design (which will "speak to the energy level of the Civic Center area”) and the current 446 renal apartments (and 550-car garage) will remain in place.
Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2007/07/fox_plaza_1390_market_250_new_condos_in_the_works.html

[Gordo]

Yes, it's the small commercial building at Hayes and Market (the main tower at Fox Plaza will be unaffected). It is fair to say the proposal, at least, is "moving ahead in some way."

Do you happen to know if the new building will help mitigate the terrible wind tunnel effect caused by Fox Plaza?

I'll second BT's hope for a rendering :)

[Jerry of San Fran]

I have lived in the Fox Plaza for 38 years and well know the fierce winds on the street. I'm not an wind expert, but suspect that a new building on the corner of Hayes/Market Sts. would not change the wind pattern too much. The summer wind comes from the west down Hayes Street and would continue as usual after a new building on the corner. The winter wind comes mostly from the southeast and that would probably be quite noticeable on the east side of the building.

The Argenta does not seem to have made a big difference in the wind here.

[peanut gallery]

Oh, that space. I didn't even realize there was a proposal for that. Good because that is hideous. The SF Mart, on the other hand, is a beautiful building worth saving IMO.

[Kingofthehill]

Hey guys, I'll be in SF in the coming days and was wondering if you had any nabe recommendations...:)

[BTinSF]

I love this one:

550 18th Street Unwrapped (And 35 New Condos Now Renting)

http://www.socketsite.com/550%2018th%20Street.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/550%2018th%20Street%20-%20Illinois.jpg

A plugged-in tipster captures the recently unwrapped 550 18th Street.

http://www.socketsite.com/550%2018th%20Street%20-%20Kitchen.jpg

That's thirty-five (35) new two and three bedroom Mission Bay condos ranging from 1,200 to 1,500 square feet, and currently seeking $3,500 to $5,500 per month in rent.

No word on the 7,000 square feet of ground floor commercial.
Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2009/03/550_18th_street_unwrapped_and_35_new_condos_now_renting.html#comments

[Gordo]

Hey guys, I'll be in SF in the coming days and was wondering if you had any nabe recommendations...:)

For what? Staying in? Visting? Eating? You've got to be more specific :) You should probably just make a thread outside of this one.

[peanut gallery]

I like it too, BT. At least the primary face. That one side (left in the first photo) is a little off, but that's a minor complaint. BTW, I posted this in the SF Misc construction thread.

[peanut gallery]

SPUR's Urban Center has its skin now:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3606/3331485139_0ac0a09217_b.jpg

It looks good within the streetscape:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3631/3332323050_57064efb31_b.jpg

[peanut gallery]

149 Mason today:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3332/3331477885_aa9860c7ae_b.jpg

This is Glide's housing for the chronically homeless.

[colemonkee]

I really like the design on 550 18th Street. Nice finishes, inside and out.

[BTinSF]

SPUR's Urban Center has its skin now:


I was actually wondering about that project yesterday. But I may as well use this opportunity to say the thing is a big disappointment to me. SPUR, of all people, should realize they have under-developed that lot. Anything on that part of Mission St. should be a lot taller. Only a non-profit would even think of such a non-economic project.

[BTinSF]

Thursday, March 5, 2009, 12:51pm PST | Modified: Thursday, March 5, 2009, 5:07pm
AF Evans Co. files Chapter 11
San Francisco Business Times - by Blanca Torres

Developer AF Evans Co. in Oakland said Thursday that it has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, citing plummeting house prices and the credit crunch.

“The total collapse of the condo market and a couple other things that happened overwhelmed this company,” said Art Evans, who started the business and is its chief executive and chairman. “We’re not happy to (file for bankruptcy). We’ve been trying to sell properties to pay off debts for two years … This gives us time, it’s all it does.”

The exact figures will be revealed in later court filings, but Evans estimated that the company has debt in excess of $50 million and has a plan for raising $35 million from selling properties and a portion of its interests in some properties.

The filing will not affect AF Evans’ property management or senior housing subsidiaries, and its development arm, AF Evans Development Inc. will keep looking for projects in the Bay Area.

The company employs about 550 and does not plan any layoffs associated with the bankruptcy, but had shed about 44 staff members from its Oakland headquarters over the last two years.

Started in 1977, the company focused on affordable and senior housing as well as apartment management for most of its history until about six years ago when it decided to add market-rate condominiums to its portfolio. It developed more than 10,000 housing units, many in the Bay Area.

Evans said the idea was to build “workforce” housing geared toward first-time home buyers and people slightly above the median income level. One of projects, Market Square in the Old Oakland neighborhood, sold well in its first phase. It’s second phase, however, lost money after a series of price reductions.

The company recently completed another would-be condo project at 901 Jefferson, which went into foreclosure with the lender.

AF Evans also has three projects going through the entitlement process in San Francisco, which has cost the company millions in fees and holding expenses.

“We saw the problem coming,” Evans said. “We would have worked our way through it had the market had not completely collapsed.”

Evans retired from leading the company’s day to day operations, but stayed on as chairman. He returned to running the firm in May of 2008.

“Going forward, we will be focused on property management, assisted living and on doing affordable housing,” Evans said. “I will stay with the company until it’s on its feet and emerges from bankruptcy healthy.”

Evans was honored in 2006 as a housing hero by the San Francisco Housing Action Coalition, a San Francisco nonprofit that advocates for smart growth.

“I’m heartbroken about the news about AF Evans,” said Tim Colen, executive director of SFHAC. “They are a remarkable company that did both market-rate and afford housing projects and did a terrific job with both. It’s stark testimony to the dire conditions we are up against.”

Architect David Baker, who worked with AF Evans on a 224-unit project at 888 Seventh St. and other projects, called Art Evans “a good guy and a great developer who really wants to do the right thing.”

“It’s a high reward and high risk business,” said Baker.


btorres@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4960 | J.K. Dineen contributed to this story.

So what of 55 Laguna??

55 Laguna . . . .

http://www.socketsite.com/55%20Laguna%20Map.jpg

Unanimously approved by the Planning Commission in January, the redevelopment of almost six acres in Hayes Valley is on appeal and the project will be heard by San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors tomorrow (3/4/08) at 4pm. (the appeal was denied)

http://www.socketsite.com/55%20Laguna%20Sketch.jpg

A former UC Berekely Extension campus, the development of 55 Laguna by A.F. Evans would raze two of the oldest existing buildings on the site but yield 413 new housing units: 328 apartments (66 affordable) and an 85-unit affordable development for seniors targeting the LGBT community (in partnership with OpenHouse).

http://www.socketsite.com/55%20Laguna%20Park.jpg

The development would also include a 25,000-square-foot park, a 10,600-square-foot community garden, and a 12,000-square-foot community center.
Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2008/03/55_laguna_approved_on_appeal_and_in_front_of_san_franci.html

Is this another example of SF's endless approval process dithering until the moment when the project could have got built is past?

[BTinSF]

Friday, March 6, 2009
Developer gets ready to build hotel in S.F.
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

A developer is planning to start construction this year on a 172-room hotel at 942 Mission St. in San Francisco, despite a faltering tourism industry and credit crunch.

South San Francisco-based Mint Developers Inc. is proposing a 75,240-square-foot building on Mission Street between Fifth and Sixth streets. The hotel would be six stories on Mission Street and five stories on Jessie Street with a 15-story mid-block central portion, which would be set back 50 feet from Mission Street, according to planning documents and project architect Michael Stanton of Stanton Architecture.

“It is anticipated this hotel will go forward at a rapid pace as soon as it is approved by the planning commission,” said Stanton. “We have been instructed to be ready to begin working drawings as soon as that happens.”

The hotel would replace an 8,000-square-foot building that was headquarters for pornographic video company Kink.com. Kink.com moved to the old armory in the Mission district in 2007. A Mint affiliate, GMS Development, paid $6.5 million for the building last year.

Stanton said the detailing along Mission Street would “blend seamlessly with the adjacent residential buildings while it is envisioned that the rest of the building will be clad in factory finished metal panels imparting a more contemporary feel.” The sixth floor along Mission Street is proposed to be a green roof planted in California native grasses and other drought-tolerant plants. The hotel will be a three-star limited service hotel with 3,200 square feet of retail space. It will cater to Moscone conventioneers and will not have a restaurant bar, or meeting space.

The developer wants to keep a low profile. It has developed and operated hotels in the Bay Area for years, said Stanton. No decision has been made on an operator for the hotel.

If Mint Developers does break ground this year, it would likely be the only new hotel developed in San Francisco for several years, according to hotel consultant Rick Swig of San Francisco-based RSBA & Associates.

“Nobody but nobody is getting financing for construction of new hotels today, and nobody but nobody is going to get financing for new hotel construction for another year or longer,” said Swig.

On the other hand, if the developer can make it work economically, there will be demand for new hotel rooms in good locations targeting more budget-conscious travelers, Swig said. Due to high land and construction costs, recent hotel construction has focused on the high-end market, with projects like the St. Regis, the Four Seasons and the Intercontinental.


Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2009/03/09/story11.html

[BTinSF]

A Rare Chance to Buy in the Tenderloin

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2009_03_180jones.jpg

This is novel: an eight-story, 37-unit market-rate development in the Tenderloin. Approved yesterday by the Planning Commission, 180 Jones will fill a long vacant parking lot with 15 1-bedroom units and 22 2-bedroom units, with two of each below market rate. As is the norm, fingers are crossed for "needed services" to fill the ground floor (translation: no liquor stores, k?). The project proposal pleased many a planning commissioner, as it was noted more than once that it would be bringing the possibility of homeownership to a neighborhood where it currently stands at less than 1 percent. Let's worry about finding those buyers later, shall we?
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/03/06/a_rare_chance_to_buy_in_the_tenderloin.php#reader_comments

[peanut gallery]

I was actually wondering about that project yesterday. But I may as well use this opportunity to say the thing is a big disappointment to me. SPUR, of all people, should realize they have under-developed that lot. Anything on that part of Mission St. should be a lot taller. Only a non-profit would even think of such a non-economic project.

My guess is they built to what they need and weren't interested in being a landlord to someone else. But certainly, anything on this stretch of Mission can be much taller than this.

I hope 55 Laguna moves forward, although that doesn't sound likely. It's a needed project and I love the central parkway. The building themselves are nothing special, but I thought the concept was a good one.

[nequidnimis]

Not totally sure they could have built taller. The second building on the right is a high-rise and there may be code requirements for separation between high-rises. I know for sure there are such restrictions on Rincon Hill.

[BTinSF]

My guess is they built to what they need and weren't interested in being a landlord to someone else.

I'm sure that's true. That's what I meant by saying only a nonprofit would have done this. Non-profits can do what they need for their own requirements and not have to worry about efficient use of capital or assets.

Nequidnimis may well be right that FAR or some other code issue would have blocked any sort of true highrise but I'd think they could have done something more than 4 stories (or whatever it is).

By the way: Bonus points to anyone who can come up with a rendering of 942 Mission. I spent over an hour looking. If we can get a rendering, I'm thinking of making a thread for it in the "General Developments" section. At 15 stories, it doesn't qualify as a highrise but if it does get going this year it could be the most significant building to start in SF in 2009--significant not only because of size but also because of effect on its neighborhood (that area around 6th & Mission needs a turnaround bigtime).

[Gordo]

By the way: Bonus points to anyone who can come up with a rendering of 942 Mission. I spent over an hour looking. If we can get a rendering, I'm thinking of making a thread for it in the "General Developments" section. At 15 stories, it doesn't qualify as a highrise but if it does get going this year it could be the most significant building to start in SF in 2009--significant not only because of size but also because of effect on its neighborhood (that area around 6th & Mission needs a turnaround bigtime).

Agreed. I'll say right now that if this is started this year, I will personally recommend this hotel to everyone I know for years, simply because the developer/hotelier is showing tremendous guts in two ways - building now AND building at that location. Bravo.

[fflint]

Re: 1390 Market--no rendering has crossed my desk, nor did I look for anything related to wind mitigation. I think the wind problem will exist as long as the main Fox Plaza tower exists.

[peanut gallery]

File this headline under "No kidding." From today's Chronicle (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/09/MN4P169IM3.DTL):

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/03/08/mn-sfbuilding09__0499875791.jpg
Developers are hoping to build a condo project on this vacant lot on the southwest corner of 10th and Market streets.

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/03/08/mn-sfbuilding09__0499875793.jpg
Condominium units in the new and empty Argenta at the foot of Polk Street, across from 10th and Market, are now being marketed as rental apartments.

S.F. construction slows to a crawl
Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, March 9, 2009

Much can be learned about the San Francisco real estate market by taking a quick look at 10th and Market streets.

A high-rise condominium tower was supposed to be built on the excavated lot on the southwest corner. Across the street, a new - and still empty - 20-story condominium tower was unsuccessfully put up for sale during the second half of 2008. The condos are now being marketed as rental apartments.

During the past few years, the city experienced a major building boom. But now it is like most places in the nation, where banks are reluctant to approve construction loans and the demand for expensive homes and office space has evaporated.

The dearth of development activity and the perception that a recovery is not imminent has meant stalled growth in neighborhoods that were expected to blossom, scores of layoffs in city departments that rely on permit applications, and a precipitous decline in construction jobs.

"There's so much uncertainty that you don't know what fence you're hitting toward," said Tim Tosta, the lawyer representing developers for the Crescent Heights housing project proposed for that empty lot at 10th and Market.

The Crescent Heights developers are pushing forward, trying to find the money necessary to build. Other city developers, from downtown to the Mission District, either can't afford their construction loans or want to wait until they think the market has hit bottom.

Yet not all is doom and gloom. Some developers are applying for building permits and others continue to hire architects, engineers and lawyers. Several large public-private projects, such as the redevelopment of the Hunters Point Shipyard, and small housing developments are still in the works.

Meanwhile, as part of Mayor Gavin Newsom's evolving stimulus plans, the city is trying to devise incentives for developers who want to break ground.

"The number of projects asking for approvals has slowed, but it hasn't dropped off a cliff," said Michael Cohen, head of the city's Office of Workforce and Economic Development. "People are spending money on the planning process with the assumption that once they get through that, things will be in a better place" financially.

For the time being, however, construction in San Francisco is only creeping along.

25% without jobs

About 25 percent of the San Francisco region's approximately 16,000 building trades workers are out of work, compared with nearly full employment last year, said Michael Theriault, secretary and treasurer of the San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council.

"I've received calls from people in other parts of the country about work here, and I tell them not to come," Theriault said.

The city received 5,600 building permit applications in July. In January, it received just over 4,000. More important, the monetary value of the permits, which often indicates the size and complexity of projects, dropped from about $240 million in July to $78 million in January. As a result, the city's Building Inspection Department laid off 48 employees earlier this month.

The Planning Department also has seen a steep drop in applications for midsize and large projects. The department expects to be $4.1 million in the red at the end of the fiscal year and recently laid off eight employees.

Areas of the city where development was expected to heat up are ice cold.

For example, many projects have been waiting - some for several years - for the city's recent completion of a major rezoning of four neighborhoods on the east side. City officials expected that new construction would flood the area as soon as the planning was done.

So far, only a handful of approximately 70 projects filed with the city's Planning Department have moved forward.

Skyscrapers stalled

The high-rise gap that has long existed between the Bay Bridge and the city's traditional downtown also was expected to start filling up with several new towers by now. But those skyscrapers appear to be stalled.

Mike Kriozere is the developer of the One Rincon project. It includes a 64-story condo tower finished last year. A second, 52-story building is now on hold.

"San Francisco typically has a better real estate market than maybe any other city in the country, but people aren't willing to pay enough for a premier building today," Kriozere said.

Downtown developments to the north also are dormant. Pile driving that had started on an office building at 535 Mission St. stopped a couple of months ago.

Permits extended

The city is trying to do its part by extending some permits that would otherwise soon expire. And city officials also are discussing deferring some development fees until construction starts.

Kelley Amdur, a city planner who overseas downtown projects, said it's a good sign that some developers continue to plan and apply for permits. Planning approvals typically expire in 18 months for office buildings and three years for residential.

"It could mean that developers will want to get moving in 18 months, but the question remains whether the lenders will be ready," Amdur said.