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

[fimiak]

The future Twitter Park. Those walls are coming down. As of Sunday night two large holes have been formed.

http://i.imgur.com/vNw8vpg.jpg (http://imgur.com/vNw8vpg)

[DIESELPOLO]

@fimiak, what's Twitter Park? They're doing groud-level private amenities for their employees?

[Jerry of San Fran]

fimiak - nice view of the hole in the wall - from your apartment in NEMA? The hole in the wall is where the new supermarket is to be located according to blueprints I saw a few months ago. There will be 1 or 2 cafes in Market Square looking out onto Stevenson Street & probably with tables & chairs.

Here is a link that shows what the alley might look like in a very cool video (I'm sure it has been posted before here) with Market Square on one side and 1 Tenth St. on the other.

http://www.marketsquaresf.com/

[simms3_redux]

Major San Francisco Construction Photo Update

Photos taken October 13, 2013.

1. Marlow SF - 98 condos being marketed by Polaris Pacific (also marketing Linea, Blanc, Saitowitz's Dogpatch creation, and Axis in SJ

LEAST EXPENSIVE UNIT: 746 SF 1BR for $725K

http://themarlow.com/

http://www.sfnewdevelopments.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/1800-Van-Ness-Marlow.jpg

http://blog.sfgate.com/ontheblock/wp-content/blogs.dir/2283/files/marlow/marlow_courtyard_2.jpg

http://www.highrises.com/images/sites/headers/MarlowCondosSF.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/01TheMarlow1_zps0dddafab.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/02TheMarlow2_zps8730c0c2.jpg


100 Van Ness

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/03100VanNess1_zps651ef106.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/04100VanNess2_zps8bcb7d27.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/05100VanNess3_zps2fff24eb.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/06100VanNess4_zps7a5e3be7.jpg


NEMA

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/07NEMA1_zps9ecad010.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/08NEMA2_zps6666275e.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/08NEMA2_zps6666275e.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/09NEMA3_zpsbef2e3de.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/09NEMA3_zpsbef2e3de.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/10NEMA4_zps768ba936.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/10NEMA4_zps768ba936.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/11NEMA5_zps5ef8e399.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/11NEMA5_zps5ef8e399.jpg.html)


Market Square - where Twitter is already leasing 200,000 SF and rumored to take 320,000 more - 2 buildings totaling 890,000 SF office and 200,000 SF retail

I love the Twitter signage - this Market Square is really going to transform this area!!!

http://shorenstein.com/portfolio/investments/property?id=4284

fimiak - nice view of the hole in the wall - from your apartment in NEMA? The hole in the wall is where the new supermarket is to be located according to blueprints I saw a few months ago. There will be 1 or 2 cafes in Market Square looking out onto Stevenson Street & probably with tables & chairs.

Here is a link that shows what the alley might look like in a very cool video (I'm sure it has been posted before here) with Market Square on one side and 1 Tenth St. on the other.

http://www.marketsquaresf.com/

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/12MarketSquareSouth1_zps5d73f740.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/12MarketSquareSouth1_zps5d73f740.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/13MarketSquareSouth2_zps7684bc12.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/13MarketSquareSouth2_zps7684bc12.jpg.html)


1400 Mission - 190 units of affordable housing over 4,350 SF retail and 42 parking spots; 10 and 15 floors

1400 Mission
http://imageshack.us/a/img401/8461/1400k.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img825/8637/14001v.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/141400Mission_zpse46f68de.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/141400Mission_zpse46f68de.jpg.html)


1415 Mission - 14 stories, Heller Manus designed, 165 units, 2,800 SF retail, 101 valet parking spaces

http://www.socketsite.com/1415%20Mission%20Rendering%20Revised.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/151415Mission_zps73b61453.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/151415Mission_zps73b61453.jpg.html)


AVA 55 Ninth

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/16AVA55Ninth1_zpsfa2bffc4.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/16AVA55Ninth1_zpsfa2bffc4.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/17AVA55Ninth2_zps0bf9fe4a.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/17AVA55Ninth2_zps0bf9fe4a.jpg.html)


Mercy Housing project in the Tenderloin - 121 Golden Gate, 10 stories, 90 BMR units for seniors

http://www.stanthonysf.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/121_golden_gate.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/18MercyHousing1_zps25d6ebcb.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/18MercyHousing1_zps25d6ebcb.jpg.html)


15 story Hampton Inn on Mission between 5th and 6th

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/20HamptonInn_zps31351654.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/20HamptonInn_zps31351654.jpg.html)


Market Street Place - damn nothing happening yet :(

http://marketstreetplace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/market-street-stackable-leasing.png

http://sfcitizen.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/resized-again-120810day-view0-MR1-copy.jpg

http://marketstreetplace.com/?page_id=10


http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/19MarketStreetPlace_zpsdd58518f.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/19MarketStreetPlace_zpsdd58518f.jpg.html)


5th and Folsom (Mosso SF) - $250M 463 unit 2-component development majority owned by Essex

Formerly known as 260 Fifth (181 units) and 900 Folsom (282 units), JV between Avant and Essex.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/21MossSF1_zps0c881f89.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/21MossSF1_zps0c881f89.jpg.html)

Looks like each building will have a pool/amenity deck that faces the other across the alley.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/22MossoSF2_zps9b5760fe.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/22MossoSF2_zps9b5760fe.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/23MossoSF3_zpsd7ac390e.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/23MossoSF3_zpsd7ac390e.jpg.html)


SFMOMA's $610M expansion/transformation to add 78,000 SF gallery space and 70,000 SF public/support space

http://sfcitizen.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/SFMOMA_Snohetta_Aerial_facadestyle-copy.jpg

http://www.sfmoma.org/our_expansion/expansion_project/expansion_project_faq

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/24SFMOMA1_zps20f5ed7f.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/24SFMOMA1_zps20f5ed7f.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/25SFMOMA2_zpsa9adb62f.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/25SFMOMA2_zpsa9adb62f.jpg.html)


140 New Montgomery!!! - This building is so awesome. 295,000 SF renovation by Wilson Meany and Stockbridge.

Yelp already taking 110,000 SF starting at $54. Building is now 2/3 leased (295,000 SF total). a high-end restaurant is supposed to take one of the retail spaces. 26 floors and only 435 ft. Call it 390 ft less decorative top and it's 15 ft floors, easily!

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/2644NewMontgomery1_zps285516c8.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/2644NewMontgomery1_zps285516c8.jpg.html)

INTERIOR!!

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/2844NewMontgomery3_zpsba9dc169.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/2844NewMontgomery3_zpsba9dc169.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/2944NewMontgomery4_zps22a8f432.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/2944NewMontgomery4_zps22a8f432.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3244NewMontgomery7_zpsb6c32fa8.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3244NewMontgomery7_zpsb6c32fa8.jpg.html)

Look at the polished stonework on the exterior - so beautiful!

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3344NewMontgomery8_zps55564c08.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3344NewMontgomery8_zps55564c08.jpg.html)

The back.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3044NewMontgomery5_zps36fe4e9f.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3044NewMontgomery5_zps36fe4e9f.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3144NewMontgomery6_zps35a2c4b4.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3144NewMontgomery6_zps35a2c4b4.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3544NewMontgomery10_zps58c44731.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3544NewMontgomery10_zps58c44731.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3444NewMontgomery9_zpsa0c771f2.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/3444NewMontgomery9_zpsa0c771f2.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/2744NewMontgomery2_zps8f160f9e.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/2744NewMontgomery2_zps8f160f9e.jpg.html)


222 Second Street - Tishman Speyer, 26 stories, 447,336 RSF

http://www.socketsite.com/222%202nd%20Street%20Rendering%20South%20on%202nd.jpg

http://www.tishmanspeyer.com/properties/222-second-street

They are digging more quickly now, with several escavators on-site, a retaining wall being built, and Malcom Cement mixer still on-site.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/36222Second1_zps6c9bff2e.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/36222Second1_zps6c9bff2e.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/37222Second2_zps9df5124a.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/37222Second2_zps9df5124a.jpg.html)


Foundry III

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/40FoundryIII1_zps696d9a9b.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/40FoundryIII1_zps696d9a9b.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/41FoundryIII2_zps0e83b85c.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/41FoundryIII2_zps0e83b85c.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/42FoundryIII3_zpse47f051c.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/42FoundryIII3_zpse47f051c.jpg.html)


Transbay Block 6/7

I think this equipment including derrick crane is on that block? Or at least next door.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/43TBBlock6amp7_zps7e5c3273.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/43TBBlock6amp7_zps7e5c3273.jpg.html)


45 Lansing Street

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/4445Lansing1_zps4afcaf1c.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/4445Lansing1_zps4afcaf1c.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/4545Lansing2_zpsb2f367f6.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/4545Lansing2_zpsb2f367f6.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/4645Lansing3_zps2ac52417.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/4645Lansing3_zps2ac52417.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/4745Lansing4_zps5a498dda.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/4745Lansing4_zps5a498dda.jpg.html)


One Rincon Hill North Tower - Core topped off

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/48ORHNorth1_zps1d2e3c3f.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/48ORHNorth1_zps1d2e3c3f.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/49ORHNorth2_zps85814b71.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/49ORHNorth2_zps85814b71.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/52ORHNorth5_zps3778fcce.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/52ORHNorth5_zps3778fcce.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/50ORHNorth3_zpsa8f594be.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/50ORHNorth3_zpsa8f594be.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/51ORHNorth4_zps2000ba82.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/51ORHNorth4_zps2000ba82.jpg.html)


333 Fremont Street - the wrapping has come off and this looks mostly done - FINALLY

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/53333Fremont1_zps5c25e3de.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/53333Fremont1_zps5c25e3de.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/54333Fremont2_zpsbb77f7ea.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/54333Fremont2_zpsbb77f7ea.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/55333Fremont3_zps35290f6c.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/55333Fremont3_zps35290f6c.jpg.html)


Lumina - the hole is 2 floors deep and largely cleared - will they go 3 floors deep or are we within ~1-2 months of crane installation and matte pour?

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/56Lumina1_zps84c1942e.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/56Lumina1_zps84c1942e.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/58Lumina3_zps0ec36707.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/58Lumina3_zps0ec36707.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/57Lumina2_zpsa2ac6b99.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/57Lumina2_zpsa2ac6b99.jpg.html)



BONUS - 140 New Montgomery Lighting Scheme - WHOA!

Disclaimer: Not currently green, my camera just did that. It's white light.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/Bonuslights1_zps6055dedd.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/Bonuslights1_zps6055dedd.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/Bonuslights2_zpsc3195cb1.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/Bonuslights2_zpsc3195cb1.jpg.html)

[fimiak]

Yes that's my new view. Not as good as yours thats for sure. I called it Twitter Park because they (obviously) are leasing Market Sq Bldg, but are now also looking into 300k sq ft of One Tenth St (the remodeled glass bldg), which would make Twitter by far the biggest tenant of these buildings. Officially I don't know if its even going to be considered a park, but it will be open to the public.

[simms3_redux]

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/nevius/article/Scare-tactics-rule-in-debate-over-8-Washington-4889257.php

This is an excellent column about the wealthy couple who's views will be blocked by the development. Prop C has nothing to do with a Wall on the Waterfront. 8 Washington went through all the appropriate approvals, including the board of supervisors.
City Planning should not be done by ballot box. Voting yes on C will allow the project to proceed. Vote yes on C and B.


OMG I was reading some of the comments. Typically I hold residents of this city to be ideological and politically motivated, but at least responsible, sound, and intelligent. Are SFGate commenters normally ignorant, purely emotional, and illogical? I'm super worried reading these comments that this city is still ruled by complete fools who don't care to base any of their views on sound fact or logic.

I live next door to where the 8 Washington development is supposed to go up. LoL My view will literally be gone, yet I'm a renter. Even if I were an owner, who am I to decide that a private lot can't be bought and built on? The opponents of 8 Wash/proponents of Prop B/C are rich rich rich - who the FUCK has $392,000 spare change lying around to throw at a ballot measure to decide the fate of a 92 condo development?????????

ANYONE siding with Barb and Rich Stewart of Telegraph Hill whose view will be partially obscured need to get the FUCK out of my city. God I hate idiots who REFUSE to see the ironies and all the sides and gather all the facts - again, why the FUCK are these people even allowed to vote on such a project. Not to mention that Boston Properties is the 2nd backer of the ballot measure, again to protect lower floor viewpoints of 4 Embarcadero Center, which is ironically the capstone building (all 45 floors) of a 3.5 million SF 4-floor skyscraper wall along the waterfront/edging the financial district and essentially WALLING the North FiDi from the waterfront. If the development goes down by public vote/ballot measure, every developer/equity shop is going to be thinking longer and harder at plopping money down in SF. Same thing goes for this Formula Retail Legislation - Jack Spade just run out of the Mission based on legislation that hasn't even passed yet but is already essentially being enforced?!?!?!?!?!?!

There are times I love San Francisco, and there are times I wish half the population would get a vasectomy and/or move out.

These people are also completely opposed to the Warriors Arena and are now linking the ballot measures to that. Not to mention the richies of the Four Seasons are trying to put another tower by the SAME GROUP WHO BUILT THEIR OWN CONDOS (Millennium Partners) to ballot to corral their poor minions throughout the city...getting poor/middle class people just trying to get by in expensive SF to vote down a single tower that has nothing to do with 99.9999999% of residents of the city, and all to protect partial views (the worst view direction imo as well out of the viewpoints that those residents have) of $10M condos in an adjacent building. If you live in the Richmond, Sunset, Visitacion Valley, Pacific Heights, Excelsior, Nob Hill, Marina, etc - please don't give a FUCK what happens miles away from your place of residence. Don't vote on these ballot measures that absolutely don't concern you. Many of you guys are all also now millionaires through home equity thanks to all these fancy developments, so why bite that hand that friggin feeds you? Sell you now $1M shit home to someone who thinks it's market to pay $1M for a tiny 1-2 BR thing, and get out and go to the suburbs where you don't have to deal with this. Heck, you could afford private school for your kids and college if you sell your SF home. Geebus

[Gordo]

Thanks for the overview, simms3_redux! Lots of good pictures in there.

[Jerry of San Fran]

simms3_redux - nice collection of photographs for us who don't get about as much as you do!

I stopped in the rental office of NEMA (10th/Market) and inquired as to whether the units are air conditioned - they are not. She confirmed what I saw, the windows are very limited as to how far they can be opened. As they open from the bottom I wonder how heat or smoke will exit the apartments. I have 20 sq. ft. when my balcony door is open. NEMA's windows by my estimate has about 6 sq. ft. of open space. It will be interesting to see how these windows perform in one of our winter storms as the wind can be fierce at Market and 10th Sts. - I have 42 years experience at this location.

[minesweeper]

Lumina - the hole is 2 floors deep and largely cleared - will they go 3 floors deep or are we within ~1-2 months of crane installation and matte pour?

BONUS - 140 New Montgomery Lighting Scheme - WHOA!


Thanks for all the great photos, simms3_redux. The re-lit crown of 140 New Montgomery looks spectacular after going dark for so many years.

As for Lumina, there will be five (!) levels of underground parking going 45' deep, so this is going to be a huge excavation:

http://i.imgur.com/iD34uoZ.png

[minesweeper]

J.K. Dineen has an update on how some recent condo projects are selling (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2013/10/valencia-condos-show-mission-district.html?page=all) (some aren't even finished yet!):

San Francisco has 11 new condo communities totalling about 550 units. Of these units, about 300 are either sold or in contract. Linea, Brian Spiers’ 114-unit project at 1998 Market St., currently has 33 units in contract, according to Polaris Pacific At 1800 Van Ness, Oyster Development Corp. has 56 units in contract out of a total of 98. Blanc, Sean Sullivan’s 35-unit project in Nob Hill, is about 50 percent sold. And 300 Ivy St., Pocket Development’s 61-unit complex in Hayes Valley, is down to its last unit or two.

[coyotetrickster]

OMG I was reading some of the comments. Typically I hold residents of this city to be ideological and politically motivated, but at least responsible, sound, and intelligent. Are SFGate commenters normally ignorant, purely emotional, and illogical? I'm super worried reading these comments that this city is still ruled by complete fools who don't care to base any of their views on sound fact or logic.

I live next door to where the 8 Washington development is supposed to go up. LoL My view will literally be gone, yet I'm a renter. Even if I were an owner, who am I to decide that a private lot can't be bought and built on? The opponents of 8 Wash/proponents of Prop B/C are rich rich rich - who the FUCK has $392,000 spare change lying around to throw at a ballot measure to decide the fate of a 92 condo development?????????

ANYONE siding with Barb and Rich Stewart of Telegraph Hill whose view will be partially obscured need to get the FUCK out of my city. God I hate idiots who REFUSE to see the ironies and all the sides and gather all the facts - again, why the FUCK are these people even allowed to vote on such a project. Not to mention that Boston Properties is the 2nd backer of the ballot measure, again to protect lower floor viewpoints of 4 Embarcadero Center, which is ironically the capstone building (all 45 floors) of a 3.5 million SF 4-floor skyscraper wall along the waterfront/edging the financial district and essentially WALLING the North FiDi from the waterfront. If the development goes down by public vote/ballot measure, every developer/equity shop is going to be thinking longer and harder at plopping money down in SF. Same thing goes for this Formula Retail Legislation - Jack Spade just run out of the Mission based on legislation that hasn't even passed yet but is already essentially being enforced?!?!?!?!?!?!

There are times I love San Francisco, and there are times I wish half the population would get a vasectomy and/or move out.

These people are also completely opposed to the Warriors Arena and are now linking the ballot measures to that. Not to mention the richies of the Four Seasons are trying to put another tower by the SAME GROUP WHO BUILT THEIR OWN CONDOS (Millennium Partners) to ballot to corral their poor minions throughout the city...getting poor/middle class people just trying to get by in expensive SF to vote down a single tower that has nothing to do with 99.9999999% of residents of the city, and all to protect partial views (the worst view direction imo as well out of the viewpoints that those residents have) of $10M condos in an adjacent building. If you live in the Richmond, Sunset, Visitacion Valley, Pacific Heights, Excelsior, Nob Hill, Marina, etc - please don't give a FUCK what happens miles away from your place of residence. Don't vote on these ballot measures that absolutely don't concern you. Many of you guys are all also now millionaires through home equity thanks to all these fancy developments, so why bite that hand that friggin feeds you? Sell you now $1M shit home to someone who thinks it's market to pay $1M for a tiny 1-2 BR thing, and get out and go to the suburbs where you don't have to deal with this. Heck, you could afford private school for your kids and college if you sell your SF home. Geebus

Here's the best solution. Vote yes on B & C, and when you see the signature collectors for the Four Season's ballot, stop and stand around telling people the truth about the signature collection effort. I tried that with some hapless twink in the Castro who was collecting signatures for Proposition C. It was entertaining. PS, that is not polished stone on the old pactel building, It's Terra Cotta.

[1977]

So many great projects, so many great photos. Thanks simms3_redux!

[fflint]

Yeah, yeah. You have lived here long enough now to acquire the appropriate love/hate relationship with San Francisco. Man up. It has always been like this, and it is what it is. I don't mean to dissuade you from trying to fight City Hall, but at some point you either walk down the street and genuinely like the end result of all this process, or it's time to move to San Jose.OMG I was reading some of the comments. Typically I hold residents of this city to be ideological and politically motivated, but at least responsible, sound, and intelligent. Are SFGate commenters normally ignorant, purely emotional, and illogical? I'm super worried reading these comments that this city is still ruled by complete fools who don't care to base any of their views on sound fact or logic.

I live next door to where the 8 Washington development is supposed to go up. LoL My view will literally be gone, yet I'm a renter. Even if I were an owner, who am I to decide that a private lot can't be bought and built on? The opponents of 8 Wash/proponents of Prop B/C are rich rich rich - who the FUCK has $392,000 spare change lying around to throw at a ballot measure to decide the fate of a 92 condo development?????????

ANYONE siding with Barb and Rich Stewart of Telegraph Hill whose view will be partially obscured need to get the FUCK out of my city. God I hate idiots who REFUSE to see the ironies and all the sides and gather all the facts - again, why the FUCK are these people even allowed to vote on such a project. Not to mention that Boston Properties is the 2nd backer of the ballot measure, again to protect lower floor viewpoints of 4 Embarcadero Center, which is ironically the capstone building (all 45 floors) of a 3.5 million SF 4-floor skyscraper wall along the waterfront/edging the financial district and essentially WALLING the North FiDi from the waterfront. If the development goes down by public vote/ballot measure, every developer/equity shop is going to be thinking longer and harder at plopping money down in SF. Same thing goes for this Formula Retail Legislation - Jack Spade just run out of the Mission based on legislation that hasn't even passed yet but is already essentially being enforced?!?!?!?!?!?!

There are times I love San Francisco, and there are times I wish half the population would get a vasectomy and/or move out.

These people are also completely opposed to the Warriors Arena and are now linking the ballot measures to that. Not to mention the richies of the Four Seasons are trying to put another tower by the SAME GROUP WHO BUILT THEIR OWN CONDOS (Millennium Partners) to ballot to corral their poor minions throughout the city...getting poor/middle class people just trying to get by in expensive SF to vote down a single tower that has nothing to do with 99.9999999% of residents of the city, and all to protect partial views (the worst view direction imo as well out of the viewpoints that those residents have) of $10M condos in an adjacent building. If you live in the Richmond, Sunset, Visitacion Valley, Pacific Heights, Excelsior, Nob Hill, Marina, etc - please don't give a FUCK what happens miles away from your place of residence. Don't vote on these ballot measures that absolutely don't concern you. Many of you guys are all also now millionaires through home equity thanks to all these fancy developments, so why bite that hand that friggin feeds you? Sell you now $1M shit home to someone who thinks it's market to pay $1M for a tiny 1-2 BR thing, and get out and go to the suburbs where you don't have to deal with this. Heck, you could afford private school for your kids and college if you sell your SF home. Geebus

[simms3_redux]

Thanks for all the great photos, simms3_redux. The re-lit crown of 140 New Montgomery looks spectacular after going dark for so many years.

As for Lumina, there will be five (!) levels of underground parking going 45' deep, so this is going to be a huge excavation:

http://i.imgur.com/iD34uoZ.png

Wow! It looks about 25 ft deep now, so almost twice as deep to go.

Here's the best solution. Vote yes on B & C, and when you see the signature collectors for the Four Season's ballot, stop and stand around telling people the truth about the signature collection effort. I tried that with some hapless twink in the Castro who was collecting signatures for Proposition C. It was entertaining. PS, that is not polished stone on the old pactel building, It's Terra Cotta.

See, now why is some twink in the Castro even concerned about this matter that is miles away (and literally right next door to me)? This is what baffles me about this city - no city I can think of is as political.

Thanks for the correction on Pactel building - thought it might be, glad that it really is. Absolutely beautiful building and very glad that SF has at least a few examples of relatively tall old neogothic/art deco towers from the guilded age.

Yeah, yeah. You have lived here long enough now to acquire the appropriate love/hate relationship with San Francisco. Man up. It has always been like this, and it is what it is. I don't mean to dissuade you from trying to fight City Hall, but at some point you either walk down the street and genuinely like the end result of all this process, or it's time to move to San Jose.

I suppose all the pros and the general outcome outweigh the cons ;) Between this, the new Millennium Tower debacle, and the whole formula retail debate - this has to be the most NIMBY city in the world - very frustrating for those of us who mentally thrive on new construction projects and growth :D

[tech12]

See, now why is some twink in the Castro even concerned about this matter that is miles away (and literally right next door to me)? This is what baffles me about this city - no city I can think of is as political.


Yeah, I live on the great highway, at the southern edge of the outer sunset, which is about as far away from 8 Washington as you can get...and yesterday, giant flashy "no on B&C flyers" got slipped into every doorway for blocks in every direction. And of course the flyer was full of nonsense, such as claims that it was about "taking back our city from greedy developers". Such ridiculous bullshit. And there are plenty of ignorant people who are buying that bullshit unfortunately. I can't believe there are people wealthy enough to spend half a million dollars in order to impede progress for an entire city (and just to save their views/property values), and I can't believe that we let them do it, let alone let them do it through outright lies.

[coyotetrickster]

Wow! It looks about 25 ft deep now, so almost twice as deep to go.



See, now why is some twink in the Castro even concerned about this matter that is miles away (and literally right next door to me)? This is what baffles me about this city - no city I can think of is as political.

Thanks for the correction on Pactel building - thought it might be, glad that it really is. Absolutely beautiful building and very glad that SF has at least a few examples of relatively tall old neogothic/art deco towers from the guilded age.



I suppose all the pros and the general outcome outweigh the cons ;) Between this, the new Millennium Tower debacle, and the whole formula retail debate - this has to be the most NIMBY city in the world - very frustrating for those of us who mentally thrive on new construction projects and growth :D

The twink was being paid to collect signatures. He really had no idea about the issue.

[mt_climber13]

The San Francisco Exodus- why preserving San Francisco's low density "charm" is destroying the city's fabric, pushing everybody except the uber rich out, and killing the city's soul http://www.theatlanticcities.com/housing/2013/10/san-francisco-exodus/7205/

I am definitely a statistic here :p

[BushMan]

The twink was being paid to collect signatures. He really had no idea about the issue.

Great point, I have often seen "twinks" carrying around two competing petitions and who are happy to get your signature on either side of the same issue.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Today the garage was demolished in preparation for the new highrise.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5542/10298882865_f3073219e4_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10298882865/)
1415 Mission St. Demolition (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10298882865/) by Apollo's Light (http://www.flickr.com/people/antinous/), on Flickr

[fflint]

Anybody looking for an $8,000/month apartment above Whole Foods?

That's the top rental tier (http://www.forrent.com/apartment-community-profile/1000368652.php) at 38 Dolores! But don't worry--you can get a studio for only $3,000.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Anybody looking for an $8,000/month apartment above Whole Foods?

That's the top rental tier (http://www.forrent.com/apartment-community-profile/1000368652.php) at 38 Dolores! But don't worry--you can get a studio for only $3,000.


Does it come with the gold leaf toilet paper? Insane!

[tech12]

I know it's really old news, but these housing prices are fucking ridiculous.

[mt_climber13]

Sacramento is the new Oakland. Oakland is the new San Francisco. San Francisco is the new Manhattan.

[fimiak]

I moved here from Manhattan not quite two years ago. My apt there was $1000 less than mine is here, and I lived in the upper west side and had similar sq footage. SF is seeing something unreal, and it is frustrating because residents who own and who have rent control are immune to the market.

[jaypkatl]

Rents in the city are becoming rediculous. I am looking for a 1 bedroom apt (we are outgrowing our studio) and what you get for your $$ is crap. I have modified rent control where I am now so its hard to give up a $930 apt where the rent has only gone up once in 3 years.

[hruski]

Rents in the city are becoming rediculous. I am looking for a 1 bedroom apt (we are outgrowing our studio) and what you get for your $$ is crap. I have modified rent control where I am now so its hard to give up a $930 apt where the rent has only gone up once in 3 years.

If I were you, I'd sublet or AirBnB my studio to subsidize the rent of my 1-BR. You could easily sublet that studio for $1700/mo and you'd probably get upwards of $2400/mo for AirBnB'ing it, though that would take more upkeep and management on your end.

[BushMan]

Rents in the city are becoming rediculous. I am looking for a 1 bedroom apt (we are outgrowing our studio) and what you get for your $$ is crap. I have modified rent control where I am now so its hard to give up a $930 apt where the rent has only gone up once in 3 years.

Yes, and all of the city's beloved "social engineering" schemes like "affordable housing for undocumented/formerly homeless/LGBT/senior citizens" and rent control only make the problem worse.

Life is wonderful if you happen to fit into the chosen demographic and win the insane lottery for a prized unit, on the other hand it's a real drag if you happen to be just a hard-working "regular guy" who has to do it the hard way. The funny thing is I actually own property in SF so even though I think it's a joke all of this nonsense is really just inflating my own property value.

Really, Econ 1A is very simple, if you take a very scarce commodity that is in very high demand and try to solve the problem by arbitrarily pricing that commodity well below it's market value it will not end good, regardless of how "compassionate" it makes you feel at the end of the day.

Not to mention the NIMBY B.S. (recently discussed in this forum) which further limits supply unnecessarily.

[tech12]

The city should annex part of San Mateo county (Daly city, Brisbane, Colma, Pacifica, South San Francisco, San Bruno, etc), and start building midrise and highrise apartments all over the place. There's this huge area of undeveloped land (looks like abandoned parking lots and former industrial land or something) that's part of Brisbane, and is located just south of Visitacion Valley/the SF border. It's roughly the size of Mission Bay and South Beach combined, and we could build dozens upon dozens of apartment buildings just there alone.

I can dream.

[easy as pie]

the real problem in sf isn't rent control, it's the insane anti-development environment. virtually every hood could do with a significant up-zoning, especially the outer hoods.

[hruski]

the real problem in sf isn't rent control, it's the insane anti-development environment. virtually every hood could do with a significant up-zoning, especially the outer hoods.

Agreed. NYC has rent-control, but its rental market is far more immune to fluctuations and the boom/bust cycle because its housing stock is huuuuge and there are always plenty of places available.

[jaypkatl]

We do have rent control in SF

http://www.sftu.org/rentcontrol.html

[Jerry of San Fran]

A lot of the steel beams have been removed a couple of days ago where the old mechanical room used to be. Notice the "V" supports on the north and south end of the building. There will be a rooftop garden when finished. This photo was taken from the 24th floor of the Essex Fox Plaza.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5515/10315965846_8f505563d4_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10315965846/)
100 van ness (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10315965846/) by Apollo's Light (http://www.flickr.com/people/antinous/), on Flickr

[fimiak]

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2013/10/wunderkind-architect-big-picked-for.html



http://static.squarespace.com/static/524e0133e4b05e9b2078f732/524f13e9e4b046af88934bc9/52577988e4b066932a9a72b5/1381464663622/arts.jpg?format=1500w

Following from SocketSite:

Bjarke Ingels Group (aka BIG) has been selected to design the development of 950-974 Market Street, a proposed arts, housing, hotel and retail complex that could include a 250-room hotel, 316 residential units, 15,000 square feet of retail, and a 75,000-square-foot arts building at the corner of Market and Turk.

[fflint]

Silicon Valley housing is also exorbitant--and completely unregulated. No, San Francisco's unaffordability is due to three decades of insatiable demand for housing coupled with three decades of outrageously inadequate supply, and exacerbated by the rest of the Bay Area's stubborn refusal to build a sufficient supply of truly urban housing in vibrant, walkable/transit-oriented areas.

There's a carrot and stick at play here, and San Francisco's genuine urbanity is the carrot. True, old-school urbanity is in demand from coast to coast, and nowhere more than the Bay Area. But the land area covered by that coveted old-school urbanity here is miniscule relative to places like New York and Chicago--and that's the stick in this scenario. People who want to live in an old-school city environment in these parts have lots of choices--as long as they choose San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley and some of the region's small downtowns. The rest of the Bay Area, with few excpeptions, is relatively low-density and suburban, because local governments have essentially outlawed constructing urbanity.

Bay Area governments, yoked by NIMBYs, won't zone for a sufficient supply of dense, truly urban districts that could relieve pressure on SF and provide more affordable options around the region. The region's governments still mainly zone for, and developers build, ever-more tightly packed single-family homes and low-rise apartment complexes in auto-oriented, suburban areas. None of that stuff appeals to the folks bidding up SF prices--but that's not the half of it. All those good jobs in Silicon Valley induce people to pay through the nose for whatever housing they can get nearby, and what they get is an overpriced piece of land with a middling suburban house rather than a more affordable condo or apartment in a more compact development.

It's never going to be cheap to live here, but it's possible we could build our way to more affordability than we have now if the political calculus changed. What this region really needs is a massive increase in density and height and transit infra in large swathes. Western San Francisco? Yes. Central Oakland and Berkeley? Absolutely. But I'm also talking about the entire length of El Camino Real, and up and down Mission Boulevard, and at stations along current and future SMART, Muni, Caltrain, BART, VTA, ACE and Capitol Corridor lines, and in all the region's respective downtowns, and in newly-created redevelopment zones. NIMBYism has so far stopped that from happening in most alll those places, and NIMBYism is why this is such an unaffordable region.

[fflint]

There's this huge area of undeveloped land (looks like abandoned parking lots and former industrial land or something) that's part of Brisbane, and is located just south of Visitacion Valley/the SF border. It's roughly the size of Mission Bay and South Beach combined, and we could build dozens upon dozens of apartment buildings just there alone.

I can dream.
That 659 acre brownfield is called the Brisbane Baylands (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane_Baylands_development), and while several plans to develop it have been proposed (http://www.brisbanebaylands.com/pdf/UPC%20-%20ULI%20Reprint.pdf), nothing has of yet been approved.

I don't know if there are any live proposals, but assuming it will eventually be developed, it's going to be a complicated. The open land west of the Caltrain tracks is toxic landfill from the 1906 Earthquake; east of the tracks (up to and including 101) is toxic landfill from subsequent decades.

[Eightball]

Excellent comments ya'll. El Camino Real, in particular, is a mess. Surface parking lots and one story buildings as far as the eye can see. I know streetcars/light rail has been planned for it, but that needs to happen yesterday, with a lot of housing and retail density.

Are ya'll overstating the affordability issue somewhat though? I was there two weeks ago and my cousin and her husband were just able to get a two bedroom apartment (somewhat spacious) in Glen Park for 2600. Same they were paying in Mountain View. Not amazing, but workable.

Also, aren't like 43000 units (per Socketsite) u/c or planned? still not enough, but should help mitigate future increaseshttp://www.socketsite.com/archives/2013/01/the_43580_units_in_san_franciscos_housing_pipeline.html

[fflint]

Excellent comments ya'll. El Camino Real, in particular, is a mess. Surface parking lots and one story buildings as far as the eye can see. I know streetcars/light rail has been planned for it, but that needs to happen yesterday, with a lot of housing and retail density.
There are plans for BRT-light (http://www.vta.org/brt/ecr/) on El Camino Real between Palo Alto and downtown San Jose, but it won't be true BRT and won't have the carrying capacity of light rail.

I was there two weeks ago and my cousin and her husband were just able to get a two bedroom apartment (somewhat spacious) in Glen Park for 2600.
Curbed SF (http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2013/10/15/what_2500month_can_rent_you_around_san_francisco.php) today put the average rent for a one bedroom apartment in San Francisco at $2,750. I don't know why your cousin is getting two bedrooms for the price of one, but her experience is an anecdote that fails to represent the rest of the city's new renters, who are facing total sticker shock.

[Gordo]

Silicon Valley housing is also exhorbitant--and completely unregulated. No, San Francisco's unaffordability is due to three decades of insatiable demand for housing coupled with three decades of outrageously inadequate supply, and exacerbated by the rest of the Bay Area's stubborn refusal to build a sufficient supply of truly urban housing in vibrant, walkable/transit-oriented areas.

There's a carrot and stick at play here, and San Francisco's genuine urbanity is the carrot. True, old-school urbanity is in demand from coast to coast, and nowhere more than the Bay Area. But the land area covered by that coveted old-school urbanity here is miniscule relative to places like New York and Chicago--and that's the stick in this scenario. People who want to live in an old-school city environment in these parts have lots of choices--as long as they choose San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley and some of the region's small downtowns. The rest of the Bay Area, with few excpeptions, is relatively low-density and suburban, because local governments have essentially outlawed constructing urbanity.

Bay Area governments, yoked by NIMBYs, won't zone for a sufficient supply of dense, truly urban districts that could relieve pressure on SF and provide more affordable options around the region. The region's governments still mainly zone for, and developers build, ever-more tightly packed single-family homes and low-rise apartment complexes in auto-oriented, suburban areas. None of that stuff appeals to the folks bidding up SF prices--but that's not the half of it. All those good jobs in Silicon Valley induce people to pay through the nose for whatever housing they can get nearby, and what they get is an overpriced piece of land with a middling suburban house rather than a more affordable condo or apartment in a more compact development.

It's never going to be cheap to live here, but it's possible we could build our way to more affordability than we have now if the political calculus changed. What this region really needs is a massive increase in density and height and transit infra in large swathes. Western San Francisco? Yes. Central Oakland and Berkeley? Absolutely. But I'm also talking about the entire length of El Camino Real, and up and down Mission Boulevard, and at stations along current and future SMART, Muni, Caltrain, BART, VTA, ACE and Capitol Corridor lines, and in all the region's respective downtowns, and in newly-created redevelopment zones. NIMBYism has so far stopped that from happening in most alll those places, and NIMBYism is why this is such an unaffordable region.

Excellent post, 100% agreed.

I know that we've talked about it before, but it bears repeating: Anyone who thinks that San Francisco is full of NIMBYs has never paid attention to development in Palo Alto or Cupertino or Pleasanton or <insert most other Bay Area cities here>, which collectively account for the VAST majority of potential development sites in the region.

[IMBY]

the real problem in sf isn't rent control, it's the insane anti-development environment. virtually every hood could do with a significant up-zoning, especially the outer hoods.

It puzzles me why Oakland, or Berkley, a short Bart trip across the Bay, doesn't take advantage of this, and allow more unrestrained development over there!:???:

One thing I keep noticing, in these development photo's, is how easy it is to excavate underground in SF, it looks like sandy ground to dig into. Why was I thinking it was rocky, and it required dynamiting to go underground?

There's a good reason, here in Las Vegas, why the casino hotels, and downtown office buildings, have above-ground parking ramps. Underground parking in Las Vegas? Blast away, blast way!!! :(

[BushMan]

Just pulled from SF Gate minutes ago:

http://www.sfgate.com/realestate/article/Brown-vetoes-bill-requiring-affordable-rental-4901709.php

I'm not much of a Jerry Brown fan but he's spot-on with this one.

By the way, those of you who continue to dismiss rent control and "affordable/inclusionary" housing as factors in higher housing prices are deluding yourselves. Look, a housing unit that is priced ridiculously below market is really no different than one that is not built at all, it only exacerbates the problem of too much demand/not enough supply. Is that so hard to understand??

fflint, your comment that Silicon Valley housing is "completely unregulated" is simply incorrect. Just one example, there is currently an entire "affordable housing" development under construction around the corner from my workplace in Mountain View. A brand new apartment complex in the same area contains a number of units set aside at below-market rates. Read the article I've linked, this is obviously not just a San Francisco issue, it's going on all over the peninsula and the state.

[fflint]

fflint, your comment that Silicon Valley housing is "completely unregulated" is simply incorrect.
There are no civic controls on the price of rental or purchase housing in any part of Silicon Valley. Period. New below-market developments are voluntary and marginal--what perncetage of Silly Valley homes are actually subsidized? Two percent? Three percent? Not even worthy of note. Silicon Valley is proof that Bay Area housing costs way too much--despite being totally sprawlburbian and unregulated--because of limited supply. The supply is limited by NIMBYs. NIMBYs are douchebag hogs, whether liberal or conservative. Just look at how it's so very expensive to buy or rent a home even in suburban areas like Morgan Hill.

[Gordo]

^Well, that's not entirely true. San Jose (and perhaps other cities, I'm not sure) does have an inclusionary housing policy:

http://www3.sjhousing.org/program/inclusionary.html

The percentages are buried in those links, but it's basically that 15% of for-sale units and 9% of rental units in any new development of more than 20 units must be offered for various below-market prices.

[fimiak]

I've mentioned this before, but if President Obama is able to pass his immigration plan that allows for highly skilled engineers to basically walk into the US and work, then the Bay Area is going to have an immediate critical housing problem that hasn't even been worked into any sort of SF local planning policies. Sure it seems premature to plan housing for future immigrants based off an unsigned bill, but its possible that this legislation would bring tens of thousands more to SF Bay area within a few short years, worsening the crunch. Many of them will be creating jobs in the process...etc etc.

This is all besides the fact that SF should expect 150-200k new residents over the next two decades.

[easy as pie]

It puzzles me why Oakland, or Berkley, a short Bart trip across the Bay, doesn't take advantage of this, and allow more unrestrained development over there!:???:

One thing I keep noticing, in these development photo's, is how easy it is to excavate underground in SF, it looks like sandy ground to dig into. Why was I thinking it was rocky, and it required dynamiting to go underground?

There's a good reason, here in Las Vegas, why the casino hotels, and downtown office buildings, have above-ground parking ramps. Underground parking in Las Vegas? Blast away, blast way!!! :(

oakland is sort of taking advantage of it with a significant increase in building along the bart lines, but most of oakland is either too far off (in the hills or some place) or too scary for most people to want to live there. once you get to piedmont and vast swathes of temescal and especially berkeley, you've ferocious nimbyism, with neighbors practically self-immolating to prevent densification. yet another situation where the boomers are fucking all of us over.

also, excavation for parking is far more expensive than simply putting it at grade or in a concrete structure above ground.

[fflint]

Oakland would seem a natural place to densify. Much of it is urban, the flat areas have good bones and are good for transit, walking and biking. NIMBYs don't control much of Oakland, either, although the more upscale neighborhoods like Rockridge are totally off the table.

The problem is to find areas in Oakland that can be densified properly but that aren't controlled by NIMBYS--and that are not overrun with violent crime. Because the city laid off so many hundreds of police officers in the last few years, crime rates have skyrocketed (e.g. armed robbery up 34% in the northern neighborhoods in just the past year) and that seriously depresses demand. Thus, Oakland can only leverage the spillover demand for urban housing in very specific locations, almost all of which are in or adjacent to downtown. Jack London Square and Uptown are popular and have seen a lot of new construction. West Oakland is a mix of gentrification and dysfunction, but it can definitely handle new highrise housing in all the parking lots around the station. Fruitvale is also popular, urban and not entirely yoked by radical NIMBYism--that's a really good candidate for upzoning.

[simms3_redux]

I need an education on Prop M. THIS (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2013/09/flood-of-office-proposals-again-raises.html?page=all) article was an interesting one discussing the current pipeline. It referenced "the last time Prop M cap was busted" and how developers are itching for approval now before the number of proposals/deliveries becomes an issue.

So is Prop M based on applications? Or can you apply, but you must apply for a delivery year and the planning department enforces when/if projects can deliver in a certain year? Also, with upzoning due to the Central Subway, does that mean certain areas are exempt to a degree from Prop M? Thought it was uniformly applied city-wide.

From the article above, I found information on a few more projects in the works.

An 11-story 220-room hotel at 250 Fourth Street (Fourth and Clementina)
http://sfmea.sfplanning.org/2011.0038E_PMND.pdf

Tishman Speyer wants to build a 700,000 SF office complex at 598 Brannan in two connected 160 ft buildings.

The proposal is to demolish the structures on the project site on Lot 005 of Assessor’s Block 3778 and construct an eleven-story, 160-foot-tall, 655,150 gross square feet (gsf) office development separated into one nine-story building and one 11-story building connected by pedestrian bridges at the fifth and sixth levels. The project site currently contains a two-story, 45,874 square foot (sq. ft.) retail/wholesale building and parking lot which are part of the San Francisco Flower Mart complex.

http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/files/notice/2013.0370U.pdf

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/print-edition/2012/08/03/tishman-gets-ride-on-central-subway.html?page=all

"Harrison Gardens"

The amended project proposal would demolish all existing buildings and construct one mid-rise and one high-rise office building that together total 730,940 gsf. At the corner of Fourth and Harrison streets, the proposal includes construction of a new 16-story, 404,082 gsf office building with a proposed height of 240 feet. The high-rise office building would have floor plates of approximately 25,700 gsf. The remainder of the site would include construction of a six-story, 95-foot tall office building connected to the high-rise building at the ground floor. The mid-rise office building would have floor-to-floor heights of 15 feet and two inches. The average area of the mid-rise floor plate would be 54,476 gsf, for a total of 326,858 gsf. The
amended project proposal also includes construction of a two-level subterranean parking garage with up to 575 parking spaces and 113 bicycle spaces. Six on-street loading spaces would be designated on Perry Street to serve the proposed project.

http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/files/notice/2005.0759E.pdf


The article below talks about some of these projects and offers a few details on the 610-620 Brannan proposal:

At 610-620 Brannan St., Zappettini Properties is seeking permission to construct a 567,000-square-foot office building on the southeastern corner of the San Francisco Flower Mart. The property is partially used as a surface parking lot, although the smaller building at 620 Brannan St. is occupied by a tenant of the wholesale flower market. The parcels together represent less than 10 percent of the Flower Mart facilities, according to John Zappettini, who heads Zappettini Properties.

A few blocks south on Brannan Street, developers have submitted plans to build 1.4 million square feet in three separate projects. At 501-505 Brannan St., TMG Partners is proposing a $20 million, 200,000-square-foot office building on a surface parking lot that is owned by Bank of America. Heller Manus is the architect. Amy Neches, a partner with TMG Partners, declined to comment.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/print-edition/2012/11/16/next-building-boom-looms-over-soma.html?page=all



My breakdown of known projects that are definitely under way in that specific area alone are as follows:

2010 Deliveries
100 Van Ness - (-)370,000 SF - Can we count taking office space off the market as negative SF since CSAA relocated to Walnut Creek and the building was essentially repurposed as apartments?


2011 Deliveries
Nothing


2012 Deliveries
Nothing


2013 Deliveries
140 New Montgomery - ~295,000 SF - I think all of the space is spoken for (or <10% left to lease)


2014 Deliveries
680 Folsom - 468,783 SF - spoken for with 2 major leases
50 Hawthorne - 52,827 SF including some space that can be considered retail I think - not yet developed (corner parcel of 680 Folsom)
Foundry III - 289,684 SF - about halfway to 2/3 spoken for it seems like
535 Mission - 303,780 SF - haven't heard about ANY leasing activity yet

Total - 1,115,074 SF - 40-50% left to lease it seems (450,000-560,000 SF un-leased)


2015 Deliveries
350 Mission - 432,095 SF - spoken for
222 Second - 447,336 SF - have not heard about ANY leasing activity here yet

Total - 879,431 SF with about half spoken for and 447,336 SF remaining to be leased


2016 Deliveries
181 Fremont - 404,000 SF - Have heard rumors, but nothing official about any leasing activity
333 Brannan - 170,000 SF - was just rendered and announced

Total - 574,000 SF - nothing spoken for yet


2017 Deliveries
TransBay Tower - 1,370,000 SF - no leasing activity yet


Total for 2010-2017 = 4,233,505 SF excluding potential new proposals less 370,000 SF taken off market = 482,938 SF/YR (so meets Prop M overall with a lot of room to go, right???)

Also assuming that hospital office space doesn't count? Forgot to include Mission Bay deliveries and random smaller developments - let's call it 600,000/yr, so we're about 75% of the limit in the midst of a building boom, seems like we'll do ok right?

[edwards]

Off topic but here's a nice webcam at the Transbay Temp. Terminal: https://www.dropcam.com/demo/b32ff7beb69249da9d2ffdee872d2680

[DIESELPOLO]

...The problem is to find areas in Oakland that can be densified properly but that aren't controlled by NIMBYS--and that are not overrun with violent crime...Thus, Oakland can only leverage the spillover demand for urban housing in very specific locations, almost all of which are in or adjacent to downtown. Jack London Square and Uptown are popular and have seen a lot of new construction...

Smart assessment @fflint - I agree. A conversation with my gf last night - whom is from Oakland - seemed to have tinges of NIMBY-ism, but her frame of interpreting the issue of housing affordability was a sympathetic one.

Whereas, I advocate more development because the population moving here is not presented with enough supply, her feeling is, "Why should we accommodate new residents when we ought to be concerned with housing affordability for our current residents? The people moving here are going to come regardless."


I don't think people will come here "regardless". It certainly feels that way now, but we are in a never-ending competition for talent, and talent (i.e., people) needs housing.
If the concern is about current residents, housing options for new residents should be of concern as the new will push out the old. Rent laws here in the Bay Area mitigate this, but if a landlord has the choice between a low-touch, high income, credit worthy single tenant and a higher-touch, middle income family with relatively good credit, the economics and property management implications of the former is clear for a small business property owner averse to risk.


My first time in a while trying to articulate to someone my reasoning for encouraging more development, when people assume new development creates gentrification on its own. Be kind.

PS - She also mentions there's "...no more room." I'd be preaching to the choir, but there are too many 2-story buildings and empty lots in Oakland alone to count.

[easy as pie]

Today the garage was demolished in preparation for the new highrise.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5542/10298882865_f3073219e4_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10298882865/)
1415 Mission St. Demolition (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10298882865/) by Apollo's Light (http://www.flickr.com/people/antinous/), on Flickr

http://i.imgur.com/XtDherW.jpg



Total for 2010-2017 = 4,233,505 SF excluding potential new proposals less 370,000 SF taken off market = 482,938 SF/YR (so meets Prop M overall with a lot of room to go, right???)


i don't know how stupid prop m is supposed to work of if the board of supes can exempt certain zones or projects from it, but those are some good scoops. man, brannan and harrison, wow.

also, no photos but the cathedral hill hotel demo prep is well underway.

[peanut gallery]

^Wait a minute, is that a current rendering for 1415 Mission, which means they've totally redesigned it? If so, thank goodness. That's much better looking than the previous version I've seen.

[minesweeper]

^Wait a minute, is that a current rendering for 1415 Mission, which means they've totally redesigned it? If so, thank goodness. That's much better looking than the previous version I've seen.

Woah, I didn't realize 1415 Mission had been redesigned.

It looks like Arquitectonica has saved us from Heller Manus yet again: http://www.buildgc.com/groundup/portfolio-item/1401-1415-mission/

[peanut gallery]

Outstanding. I'm much more enthusiastic about this getting underway now. What an amazing transformation this intersection will have undergone when this and the one across the street are completed (not to mention the entire neighborhood).

[Jerry of San Fran]

1415 Mission St. at 10th St. - if that is the final design it is a dramatic change from the original plan. Lot of balconies originally, now none.

[Jerry of San Fran]

edwards - nice video of the transportation station at the link you provided.

I had occasion to walk through the South of Market Street neighborhood bordered by 9th Street, Division Street and Market Street several times this week. The area was an industrial/residential neighborhood when I moved to the city in 1969 and is still full of auto sales and service businesses, light industrial and a slew of other warehouse type buildings. I think it will be a long time before the area changes dramatically soon. It may look run-down to some but that is the nature of light industrial and does not mean the area is "run-down".

[jbm]

over the last week or two it has seemed like minor work has begun on trinity 3. i've seen some equipment and it seems like some dirt has been pushed around. its nothing significant, but it definitely feels like something is going on.

[fflint]

Here's a bigger rendering of Arquitectonica's latest:

http://www.buildgc.com/groundup/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2013/08/1415-Mission_Rendering.jpg

Not their best work, but not bad and certainly better than the prior iteration.

[simms3_redux]

I think it's atrocious.

[fimiak]

I think it's atrocious.

I'm with simms on this one. The placeholder looked like boring filler but this one looks like Trinity Place which I also dislike. Of course it ultimately comes down to the quality of the glass/facade.

[cv94117]

I think it's atrocious.

I agree. Looks like a cheaped-down version of the cheaped-down second building in Trinity Place. I hate to say it but Heller Manus' boring blob would have been better here.

[biggerhigherfaster]

For those who are hating on this updated render, keep in mind, this is supposed to be housing for low-income ppl. If you were expecting the Infinity or Lumina...your expectations are unrealistic. I think this area around "Mid-Mission" is in serious need of more residents and gentrification; this project represents a vast improvement over what was there and most of what surrounds it, particularly to the East

[easy as pie]

^ wrong site, you're thinking of across the street. and honestly, i love the aggressive use of FAR on this site. bring it! hope the entire soma looks like this one day

[simms3_redux]

^i thought 1400 was BMR and 1415 was market? either way, as it stands now if both are bmr, one certainly looks much better than the other, and it's not the "starchitect" firm architectonica's.

Questions:

1) If this is BMR housing, why spend the insane architectural fees on a firm like Architectonica?

2) If this is the design that's going to come out of the expensive firm known as Architectonica, why use them at all? Anyone could have come up with a similar design.

3) If this is BMR/subsidized, regardless of the direct or indirect government subsidy involvement in the project, it seems to be a waste of taxpayer dollars (and in this case I include the fees that developers have to pay for low income housing to put market housing in) to use a big name firm.


Waste if there ever was one. I don't think 1415 Mission is BMR/subsidized. I think it's market rent and the developers just made a big mistake by eliminating the "boring" Heller Manus design, which also included balconies. This looks very "institutional". You couldn't pay me to live there - the simple Heller Manus design with its balconies and clean white look was much more "attractive" to me as a potential resident than this community-collegy/stereotypically subsidized housing look.

Looking way more forward to the BMR housing across the street at 1400 Mission. The renderings I've seen for that are promising (plain jane, but attractive). This, is...

[biggerhigherfaster]

^i thought 1400 was BMR and 1415 was market? either way, as it stands now if both are bmr, one certainly looks much better than the other, and it's not the "starchitect" firm architectonica's.

Questions:

1) If this is BMR housing, why spend the insane architectural fees on a firm like Architectonica?

2) If this is the design that's going to come out of the expensive firm known as Architectonica, why use them at all? Anyone could have come up with a similar design.

3) If this is BMR/subsidized, regardless of the direct or indirect government subsidy involvement in the project, it seems to be a waste of taxpayer dollars (and in this case I include the fees that developers have to pay for low income housing to put market housing in) to use a big name firm.


Waste if there ever was one. I don't think 1415 Mission is BMR/subsidized. I think it's market rent and the developers just made a big mistake by eliminating the "boring" Heller Manus design, which also included balconies. This looks very "institutional". You couldn't pay me to live there - the simple Heller Manus design with its balconies and clean white look was much more "attractive" to me as a potential resident than this community-collegy/stereotypically subsidized housing look.

Looking way more forward to the BMR housing across the street at 1400 Mission. The renderings I've seen for that are promising (plain jane, but attractive). This, is...

Oops! Confused it with the building across the street. Carry on then...

[sahran]

This little project in SOMA broke ground. Need many more infills

http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2013/10/22/longdelayed_870_harrison_breaks_ground_in_soma.php

[fflint]

This little project in SOMA broke ground. Need many more infills

http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2013/10/22/longdelayed_870_harrison_breaks_ground_in_soma.php
That's not bad looking at all.

While I'm a fan of the newest crop of big highrise condo and apartment towers, I also think small-ish infill projects like this are a great way to build a ton of new housing with minimal negative impact (and minimal opposition). They're also more likely to actually provide local workers with housing, as opposed to the much flashier trophy towers.

I've got a friend who works in the private restaurant in the Millennium, and he thinks that condo tower is rarely more than half full--globe trotters roll in for special events, but not for long. People who buy/rent units in small projects like this one here, on the other hand, are almost certainly part of the local workforce, and will likely live in them year-round. If built in sufficient numbers, these are the kinds of projects that have the actual potential to meet local demand and possibly stabilize rents/prices.

[hruski]

That's not bad looking at all.

While I'm a fan of the newest crop of big highrise condo and apartment towers, I also think small-ish infill projects like this are a great way to build a ton of new housing with minimal negative impact (and minimal opposition). They're also more likely to actually provide local workers with housing, as opposed to the much flashier trophy towers.

I've got a friend who works in the private restaurant in the Millennium, and he thinks that condo tower is rarely more than half full--globe trotters roll in for special events, but not for long. People who buy/rent units in small projects like this one here, on the other hand, are almost certainly part of the local workforce, and will likely live in them year-round. If built in sufficient numbers, these are the kinds of projects that have the actual potential to meet local demand and possibly stabilize rents/prices.

These places are certainly more likely to be filled year-round by people who work in San Francisco, but let's not kid ourselves about their affordability. I'm guessing apartments in these buildings are still going to rent for $2250+/BR.

[fflint]

These places are certainly more likely to be filled year-round by people who work in San Francisco, but let's not kid ourselves about their affordability. I'm guessing apartments in these buildings are still going to rent for $2250+/BR.
Oh, I didn't say units in a building like this would be affordable. I said if we build projects like these in sufficient numbers--and I think SPUR executive director Gabe Metcalf's estimate of 5,000 units per year for several years would be sufficient--there is good potential to eventually stabilize housing prices.

[cv94117]

Speaking of SPUR, there was a poster (but I can't remember if it was from Swinerton or someone else) at the Silver SPUR luncheon today showing a new clear rendering for Phase 3 of Trinity Place. Can't find it online, but all the holes are now gone. Such a disappointment.

[fflint]

Speaking of SPUR, there was a poster (but I can't remember if it was from Swinerton or someone else) at the Silver SPUR luncheon today showing a new clear rendering for Phase 3 of Trinity Place. Can't find it online, but all the holes are now gone. Such a disappointment.
Trinity had such tremendous promise. Arquitectonica's renders were truly beautiful, but Sangiacomo is a notoriously greedy turd--so it's fugly. I'm glad it's being built because we need the housing, but aesthetically it's the biggest disappointment in town.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Today I see equipment removing the asphalt at 1400 Mission. I am surprised to see both 1400 and 1415 Mission Street moving at the same time for 2 new highrise buildings! The 1400 construction project will block my view of 1415 as it rises.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3819/10462272044_387590af40_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10462272044/)
1400 and 1415 Mission Street (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10462272044/) by Apollo's Light (http://www.flickr.com/people/antinous/), on Flickr

[biggerhigherfaster]

Interesting and large proposal just noted on socketsite; a 350-unit building with lots of commercial space at the northeast corner of 16th and Mission (i.e., the 16th St. BART station).

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2013/10/proposed_development_for_16th_street_bart_station_parce.html

[hruski]

Interesting and large proposal just noted on socketsite; a 350-unit building with lots of commercial space at the northeast corner of 16th and Mission (i.e., the 16th St. BART station).

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2013/10/proposed_development_for_16th_street_bart_station_parce.html

For a relatively small project, this is a huge deal. That corner rivals parts of the Tenderloin for seediest and most dangerous places in San Francisco. A medium sized market-rate development there would have a huge impact.

[fflint]

I can't think of a better place to put 351 units and a big ground-level retail space than at that 16th Street BART entrance. It's the literal definition of transit-oriented development!

[Gordo]

Wow, that's huge news. I've always imagined how awesome it would be to have actual nice buildings around 16th and Mission (and 24th and Mission for that matter). A 351 unit building would be outstanding.

[spyguy]

To add an additional four floors and 73 units

http://imageshack.us/a/img41/4484/zpdi.jpg

[simms3_redux]

No construction equipment yet on Block 6/7, but walking by other projects today and 350 Mission is about to go "above ground", 535 Mission is still slow and quiet and they haven't raised the crane yet (looks like they need to one of these weekends in order to build more floors), 222 Second is frantically digging and they have quite a hole there now, and Lumina's digging has to be nearly done as they are quite deep with a remaining mound of dirt in the middle. 181 Fremont has definitely commenced excavation work as well. ORH North is definitely topped off - they are building the steel structure at the top that will hold the TMD.

I noticed they took the permit signs down from the fence around the lot for 375-399 Fremont (clues as to what that could mean?), and there are no permit signs yet for 340-350 Fremont. Can someone remind me if this has been financed yet?

I saw a ton of Vote Yes on Prop B - Open Up the Waterfront (sponsored by Cahill Contractors who would build 8 Washington), so maybe that's a good thing? These are signs along streets that commuters travel on (Folsom, 2nd St, etc).

[easy as pie]

small update from around my hood:

first and best, the scaffolding is down at blanc (sutter and larkin). the photo doesn't do justice to how refined this facade is, another genius saitowitz building:
http://i.imgur.com/6cBErnG.jpg?1
http://i.imgur.com/224IHw7.jpg?1
http://i.imgur.com/vHoP2IU.jpg?1

the retail spaces are being built out at this nice bit of pine street infill (between polk and larkin):
http://i.imgur.com/u2fk95A.jpg?1

the posh condos at clay and van ness is all topped out with fenestration looking complete, should have rolled down and scored a better shot, ah well:
http://i.imgur.com/disx30h.jpg?1

the pacific st project run by grosvenor is all topped out too, big changes on that street over the past year or so:
http://i.imgur.com/Vp9InA8.jpg?1

[easy as pie]

a few more from mid market, sorry for the poor photo quality, i'm a very point-and-shoot type dude.

they're finishing up interior work on the teevee station building on golden gate adjacent to hastings. looks like social housing (recall that it's market rental). can't tell yet whether i dislike it a little or a lot, it'll depend on the ground floor space, i guess, how it works with the street (right now it's a rental office but it'll eventually be a cafe).
http://i.imgur.com/wJRsvWg.jpg?1

the ava on 9th behind the dolby building is also in the interior construction phase
http://i.imgur.com/AnRoCsd.jpg?1

the market square recladding/renovation is coming along at an insane speed, didn't know that things could move this quickly in sf:
http://i.imgur.com/Vi37lxs.jpg?1
http://i.imgur.com/5URYY15.jpg?1
http://i.imgur.com/oKNFfdM.jpg?1

finally, the aaa building reno continues apace
http://i.imgur.com/iOUKEVK.jpg?1

[spyguy]

Came across these renderings for 350 Bush on The CAC Group website, can't recall ever seeing them before.

http://imageshack.us/a/img7/4374/i85u.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img4/5448/dgkq.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img593/7144/i77m.jpg

[viewguysf]

Came across these renderings for 350 Bush on The CAC Group website, can't recall ever seeing them before.

This project has been on hold for years--another version of it was approved prior to the financial meltdown. It's tied into constructing a small building on the northwest corner of Pine and Kearny that would have an extension of Saint Mary's Square on its roof. I have really wanted to see this done for years, both to extend the park (getting rid of that vacant pigeon infested lot) and to preserve the historic Mining Exchange temple, thus getting rid of the second vacant lot that extends from Bush to Pine behind the Russ Building. Demand in the north/traditional Financial District has obviously not been that great. I was wondering lately if the larger building could fly if it were converted to a residential tower.

[viewguysf]

[QUOTE=easy as pie;6317360]they're finishing up interior work on the teevee station building on golden gate adjacent to hastings. looks like social housing (recall that it's market rental). can't tell yet whether i dislike it a little or a lot, it'll depend on the ground floor space, i guess, how it works with the street (right now it's a rental office but it'll eventually be a cafe).

It definitely looks better than it did before when it way Channel 7 with a blank front wall. The Hastings bunker to the west is totally hideous!

the ava on 9th behind the dolby building is also in the interior construction phase

Like Jerry and others, I love this building, both from a distance and up close.

the market square recladding/renovation is coming along at an insane speed, didn't know that things could move this quickly in sf:

The former Mart 2 building fits the neighborhood incredibly well now--a great improvement!

finally, the aaa building reno continues apace

Everything is looking up in that neighborhood and its about time--a great change.

[timbad]

some random Market St stuff...

8 Octavia, looking east:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5514/10507205283_5413e82744_b.jpg

...and looking more north:

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3820/10507215073_2d076fabc3_b.jpg

Venn is finally visible. a little too yellow for my taste from some angles, but nice to have it there anyway:

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3787/10507228873_fbb5fa2a2e_b.jpg

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3764/10507257013_023b710741_b.jpg

here how it relates to the LGBT Center next door:

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3668/10507062784_c8cb63c5df_b.jpg

edit: bonus shot from Friday evening showing other activity further down Market:

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2850/10487978905_bd3dd39501_b.jpg

jumping over to 38 Dolores, here is the view up the Dolores sidewalk, which should provide a pleasant pedestrian experience when done. the Whole Foods has its signage up and a number of workers were on site both inside and out yesterday, getting everything ready:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5531/10507195983_4b9c8d3dd4_b.jpg

a view of some of the traffic-calming changes which significantly narrow the neck of Dolores at the intersection with Market (with Linea in the background):

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5512/10488147073_4e86ebf564_b.jpg

the former gas station at 14th and Market:

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2894/10487967694_347b820f6a_b.jpg

[fflint]

Awesome pics everybody.

^That last one is 15th and Market.

[mt_climber13]

What 38 Dolores lacks in building design is made up for in pedestrian design.

[Jerry of San Fran]

1) I agree with Timbad that Venn on Market St. has too much egg yolk yellow for my tast.
2) There is a sign in the window today, Sunday 10/27, that says the new Whole Foods in the new housing at Market/Dolores will open in 11 days.
3) 100 Van Ness - 3 more floors of concrete panels & the building will be a skeleton of steel. I will have to get to the west side of the Fox Plaza & get a picture of it soon.

[cv94117]

1) I agree with Timbad that Venn on Market St. has too much egg yolk yellow for my taste.
.

I don't get Venn. It's just a blob of random stuff. Looks like they couldn't figure out what to do with the site. It's not ugly really, just a waste imo.

[POLA]

Yeah, Venn is a real pig...

[easy as pie]

yeah, i could single-handedly have done a better design than this "venn" (pm me, please, pm me!)

btw, ppl can still sign up to get the tour for the whole foods opening. it coincides with my building manager leaving, so i'll be taking a couple days off, paint and plant a bunch of stuff before the new manager is hired (lol, might even be me) and use the intermittent time to do the tour. want to meet up, pm me. http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com/stores/2001marketstreet

[fflint]

SocketSite (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2013/10/the_early_design_for_ten_stories_at_16th_and_mission_on.html) has more details on and early conceptual renderings for the Mission/16th proposal over the BART station: 351 residential units, 32,000 square feet of retail (with 14 foot ceilings), and--stupidly enough--a 56,000 square foot garage with 161 spaces to park cars. There will also be parking for 193 bikes.

http://www.socketsite.com/1979%20Mission%20Street%20Rendering.gif

http://www.socketsite.com/1979%20Mission%20Street%20Rendering%20Close.gif

http://www.socketsite.com/1979%20Mission%20Street%20Site%20Plan.gif

[biggerhigherfaster]

The Mission/16th renderings look like something from the early Transformers cartoons shows/movies

[fflint]

Well, nobody is going to put any real money into renderings for a project that is expected to be totally chewed up by various factions during the long, torturous permitting process. It almost certainly won't look like that.

[biggerhigherfaster]

Well, nobody is going to put any real money into renderings for a project that is expected to be totally chewed up by various factions during the long, torturous permitting process. It almost certainly won't look like that.

I meant more the color scheme, etc. of the renderings, rather than the buildings themselves; I can see a 1980s Megatron popping up

[Jerry of San Fran]

October 28, 2013 - view from the 24th floor of the Essex Fox Plaza. Most tenants have never seen the complete view from the Fox Plaza before - I have as I watched it being built from the roof - and seeing it partially deconstructed!

We are getting clouds of concrete dust in the Fox Plaza.

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2828/10553928093_5aa29f47f5_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10553928093/)
100 Van Ness Ave. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10553928093/) by Apollo's Light (http://www.flickr.com/people/antinous/), on Flickr

[Jerry of San Fran]

The glass is being installed on the balconies. Not much left to do on the outside of the structure.

Will the zebra change it's stripes?

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5494/10559821674_fd324eac44_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10559821674/)
Nema, San Franicsco, 2013_10_24 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/10559821674/) by Apollo's Light (http://www.flickr.com/people/antinous/), on Flickr

[viewguysf]

I don't get Venn. It's just a blob of random stuff. Looks like they couldn't figure out what to do with the site. It's not ugly really, just a waste imo.

That's exactly how I feel about it. I kept watching the form as it was constructed (taking forever), liked the shape, and wanted to continue liking it as it was unveiled. It became WTF as it was unveiled in pieces and I tried to figure out what the overall design or style was/is. :shrug: It looks confused.

With that said, 38 Dolores had a fantastic shape on the prow end when it was veiled yet it turned out to be good, unfortunately not great.

[viewguysf]

October 28, 2013 - view from the 24th floor of the Essex Fox Plaza. Most tenants have never seen the complete view from the Fox Plaza before - I have as I watched it being built from the roof - and seeing it partially deconstructed!

I've never figured out why so much of the back/east side was opaque. There does't seem to have been a reason for it other than Fox Plaza was already there when it was built, but that doesn't make a lot of sense either.

[cwilly]

I've never figured out why so much of the back/east side was opaque. There does't seem to have been a reason for it other than Fox Plaza was already there when it was built, but that doesn't make a lot of sense either.

You have to keep the property line opaque unless you buy the air rights to the property next door. Even if nothing exists on the neighboring property, if you put in windows and the neighbor decides to build up, they have the right to block your windows. Its esier to just plan your floor plans under the assumption you eventually be blocked and put your back of house (elevators, etc) on the part of your building that is on the property line.

[Jerry of San Fran]

100 Van Ness - Partially Blank Wall on East Side

A good part of 100 Van Ness' east side were windows of the toilets. The west side tenants of the Fox Plaza found it very funny as the toilets had windows facing them. Many of the toilets had windows with the curtains open and folks could see men facing the urinals at night.

[easy as pie]

hoho, new 350 bush st. renderings revealed! curbed has it between sutter and bush, when it's actually between bush and pine, but they so have renderings from the site. it'll be 100% commercial, which is sort of surprising given the market for residential, but it's great to finally see some action on the site.

http://i.imgur.com/W23r5k5.jpg
http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2013/10/30/the_fidis_350_bush_redesigned_and_revealed_goes_glassy.php

[JWS]

hoho, new 350 bush st. renderings revealed! curbed has it between sutter and bush, when it's actually between bush and pine, but they so have renderings from the site. it'll be 100% commercial, which is sort of surprising given the market for residential, but it's great to finally see some action on the site.

http://i.imgur.com/W23r5k5.jpg
http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2013/10/30/the_fidis_350_bush_redesigned_and_revealed_goes_glassy.php

Another nice save from the original Heller Manus design!

On another note, a crane has now risen at the corner of Van Ness and Filbert for what looks to be a condo project. This is right by my girlfriend's apartment, there have been several days when the street has been closed off due to construction. There is also an empty lot across the street on the other corner that has yet to be developed/worked on.