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

[tech12]

The heights are a little awkward. The two supertalls make the others look small in comparison. Is that the final skyline or is there still space for more?


I kind of agree. Of course there is room for more, including another site zoned for 700' (to the roof, not including crown/spire), which has no proposal yet, so isn't included in the rendering. It would be directly south of the transbay terminal. Unfortunately, every spot zoned above 600' is right next to the transbay terminal, which is cool in terms of density, but does make the overall skyline a bit more awkward than if those taller buildings were spread out more, IMO.

The reason it was planned like that was to appease NIMBYs who may have otherwise flipped out about blocked views of the bay/east bay hills, and/or shadow impact on nearby plazas, no matter how minimal. To risk really pissing of the wealthy NIMBYs who care about that is to risk some stupid height limit/construction limit stuff getting passed, as has been proven multiple times in the past...most recently just a year ago, when said NIMBYs ran a giant anti-development propaganda campaign in order to get a tiny 11 story building killed at the ballot, because it would have blocked some of their views and would have replaced their precious tennis club (never mind that half the NIMBY view-complainers live in highrises themselves, or in the case of Boston Properties, own multiple highrises in SF, including the city's new tallest tower...it was mostly about preserving a few views and some property value). They got their way through a combination of voter apathy, and by confusing many of those who did vote with claims of fighting evil developers and saving our parks and waterfront or whatever, and now any waterfront height increase needs a city-wide vote (so it's never going to happen). SF is in a situation where NIMBYism is way less strong than it was 20 or 30 years ago, as is proven by all the new highrise construction that hasn't been opposed as horrible "manhattanization", but there are still plenty of NIMBYs who are just waiting to go apeshit the second the shadow allowance on Union Square gets exceeded by 0.00001%.

edit: though it still is an awesome skyline. 10 years ago, I never would have thought all of that would get built.

[Jerry of San Fran]

101 Polk is at the halfway point of construction. Most of the mural is now hidden. A black shroud is covering what will be left to seen. Tenants will have a nice piece of art work to view from their apartments and the patio.
The view is from the 14th floor of the Essex Fox Plaza.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7476/15176577914_4fbe01be8c_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/p86VSs)101 Polk Street (https://flic.kr/p/p86VSs)

[mt_climber13]

man, SF's urbanism is an LA wet dream. it's so hard to get excited about LA's gentrification "boom" when I put into perspective how far behind it is relative to so many cities much smaller than LA. not to mention the quality of LA's gentrification falls way short. we're easily several decades behind in urbanism. it's mind boggling how many quality projects going up in SF.

You have the beaches, the weather, the world status, the gorgeous people, the money, the media and cultural capital of the country.. what more do you want?? :P

[fflint]

http://i.imgur.com/jDz3Vnv.png

#Boomtown
This rendering is epic. Love it.

[botoxic]

181 Fremont looks underrepresented in that render. It's going to be the second tallest in the city for a few years months until 50 First Salesforce Tower is built.

Corrected! ;)

As for additions to the amazingly detailed rendering above, for some reason, 340 Fremont (440', under construction) isn't shown (you can see the dirt lot and equipment). And the extremely preliminary renderings for the complex at Fifth and Howard (three buildings 470', 430', and 380') aren't represented behind the Intercontinental. We've also seen a rough sketch for 555 Howard, which would be on the South side of Howard near the elevated roadway ("mini Bay Bridge") leading to Transbay. I believe that side of the street is zoned for 350', so the narrow 555 could climb to 385' including mechanical. The potential 510' (and currently tied up in litigation) Mexican Museum and condo tower at Third and Mission is not shown.

There are four significant Transbay height upgrades for which the City has not yet sought/received proposals.

The most exciting is the space behind 524 Howard and before the mini Bay Bridge. Zoned for 750', whatever is built here will be allowed to soar to 825' with mechanical and crown and has definite potential to become one of the jewels of the Transbay plan.

On the north side of Mission, across from 535, is an area rezoned to 700' (770' to crown). It may take some work for a developer to put this site together, so it might be one of the last to be filled.

Just south of Transbay Block 5 (and north of the future park) is a block zoned for 450' (495' to crown). It is currently part of the temporary Transbay Terminal, and the Block 5 rendering shows it filled with low-rises, possibly because they didn't want to distract from Block 5.

Lastly (and somewhat randomly), the City Planning Department used the Transbay plan to up the height limits just off Market between Second and Third. This accommodated the plans of the Palace Hotel to add a tower at the intersection of Jessie and Annie alleys. The proposal has been quiet for quite a while but could be resurrected with the current building boom. The tower at this location can go up to 600', or 660' with mechanical and crown.

[mdsayh1]

It just blows my mind how massive 50 First looks even in this render. I really hope this gets built. For me it is by far one of the most exciting proposals in the entire US at this moment. Such an ambitious and inspiring project.

[AndrewK]

On the north side of Mission, across from 535, is an area rezoned to 700' (770' to crown). It may take some work for a developer to put this site together, so it might be one of the last to be filled.
Are you referring to the Golden Gate University site? I haven't heard anything about that plan to tear it down and build a skyscraper for quite some time. If you are referring to the current parking lot diagonally across from 535 Mission, that is already slated as the location of tower two of the 50 First St. project (at 605').

[timbad]

I feel almost sheepish putting these two on here after that epic (great word for it) rendering and related discussion, but here goes, couple little guys...

this is what they're doing with the corner of 3rd and Folsom. underneath the bird's-nest-pattern cover, it does look like the ground floor is pulled back a little to ease up the constraint on sidewalk that had been there. can't put my finger on why I'm underwhelmed by this though

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7474/15808017152_01edbd9fa7_b.jpg

here is Dropbox on Brannan, taken from the back (Stanford Alley)

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7509/15808010682_8daabacaf0_b.jpg

[timbad]

I think pics of this were already posted, but here is the newest project on upper Market, address I forget, think it's the intersection with 15th and Sanchez? in context. looks good to me, so nice to have the infill

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7525/15622779887_e9f9d7b788_b.jpg

and here is 55 Laguna, the massive rebuild of the former UC Berkeley Extension campus just west of Octavia/Hayes Valley. looking up Laguna

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7478/15809415382_8f13bfb75c_b.jpg

and looking west into what will be a sort of grand stair passage (no cars) mid-block where Waller would be if it were allowed

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5609/15622454928_925d02ccfd_b.jpg

[simms3_redux]

It doesn't look like they've added any of those mid-Market proposals from the King article to their model. I do see Market Street Place though.

Here are a couple other pieces of infill they may be able to add in the near future. From the San Francisco Action Housing Coalition (http://www.sfhac.org/project/351-turk-street-145-leavenworth-street/):



The two surface lots mentioned are at 351 Turk and 145 Leavenworth. The front will be covered with copper panels that will patina over time (much like the DeYoung in Golden Gate Park). The rendering is for 145 Leavenworth but I assume they both will look the same. Both lots are extremely thin, yet deep. The perspective of this rendering makes it look much wider than I think it will actually look.

Edit: Curbed has more details (http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2014/11/12/new_housing_planned_for_longvacant_tenderloin_lots.php):

Lots of renderings compiled on that site. Some we haven't necessarily seen, such as the below:

1301 16th in Potrero Hill:

http://www.sfhac.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/1301-16th-Street-1160x607.jpg
Source (http://www.sfhac.org/project/1301-16th-street/)

The proposed development includes 234 homes, with a mix of units ranging from studios to three-bedrooms. The project is targeted at the growing workforce in the neighborhood and students.


or this interesting one at 1700 Market by Paragon (designed by Forum):

http://www.sfhac.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/1700-Market.jpg
Source (http://www.sfhac.org/project/1700-market-street/)

This proposed development includes 43 homes, with a unit mix of 30 studios and 13 one-bedrooms. The project would be car-free and is within close proximity to transit, job centers and neighborhood amenities.

[a very long weekend]

^ is that a change (1700 market)? last i remember, it was supposed to be "microlofts" or whatever, like with communal kitchen and the rest. i'm pleased either way, especially because of the zero parking aspect, but i wonder if the shift represents some sort of shift in the market or whatever, ie. if the developer has found that the sro track isn't so viable.

thanks for pulling the renderings out, btw. will be cool if that one moves quickly because zero parking wood frame upper levels means it'll go up in no time at all.

[simms3_redux]

^^^I don't see that one being wood frame. 7 stories and a glass heavy facade. Market St corridor - going to be mostly market rate (and a high PSF given the 1 BR / Studio mix).

[Jerry of San Fran]

^ is that a change (1700 market)? last i remember, it was supposed to be "microlofts" or whatever, like with communal kitchen and the rest. i'm pleased either way, especially because of the zero parking aspect, but i wonder if the shift represents some sort of shift in the market or whatever, ie. if the developer has found that the sro track isn't so viable..

a very long weekend - you are thinking of 1600 Market St. which is a corner building and has already been built recently.

[RST500]

This rendering is epic. Love it.

What's the deal with those short stumpy buildings south of the transbay terminal? Ate they new? They need to be replaced by 50 to 70 story towers.

[fflint]

There was a recent legal change that (if I recall correctly) would indeed allow the top five or six floors of that building to be wood frame.

In any case, that rendering is pretty slick!

[Jerry of San Fran]

I was surprised to see a lot of the foundation work has been done at 8th & Harrison Streets. My photo only shows half of the property. Those not familiar with this very large project can to this link for some drawings of the complex. 4terrainvestments.com/project/the-depot/


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7545/15629318558_7d75c9a695_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pP7kTC)350 8th Street Apartments (https://flic.kr/p/pP7kTC)

[a very long weekend]

simms and jerry - yeah, it's definitely this project i was thinking of. and woodframe i think it will be. it's just that when it was first proposed, i'm sure that i remember that it was meant to be a market sro - that is, shared kitchen and that.

edit: found it on socketsite. http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2013/12/the_floor_plans_for_modern_group_housing_on_market_stre.html

[Jerry of San Fran]

Today I took a picture from the 23rd floor of the Essex Fox Plaza of the scaffolding going up at the back of 150 Van Ness Avenue in preparation for the demotion of the old automobile association building. You can the see the scaffolding on the right side. An apartment building 7 stories high will be built from Van Ness Ave. to Polk St. on Hayes St.

The Spanish revival building on Fell St., on the left, is being restored to it's original condition (with alterations) and will house a private school for children.


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7532/15629644087_6a847a1a66_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pP91Ec)150 Van Ness (https://flic.kr/p/pP91Ec)

[1977]

Today I took a picture from the 23rd floor of the Essex Fox Plaza of the scaffolding going up at the back of 150 Van Ness Avenue in preparation for the demotion of the old automobile association building. You can the see the scaffolding on the right side. An apartment building 7 stories high will be built from Van Ness Ave. to Polk St. on Hayes St.

The Spanish revival building on Fell St., on the left, is being restored to it's original condition (with alterations) and will house a private school for children.


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7532/15629644087_6a847a1a66_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pP91Ec)150 Van Ness (https://flic.kr/p/pP91Ec)

Stretching a full city block, this should have a pretty big impact on the area. Thanks, Jerry.

And just to refresh:

http://natadvisors.com/propertyimages/60.png
Source: www.natadvisors.com

[mt_climber13]

^ Why is it shorter than the building it is replacing?? :shrug:

Well maybe not, if each window counts as 2 stories. The design is a little ambiguous.

[jbm]

very long weekend, you are correct. 1700 market, where frame shop is currently was first proposed to be market rate SRO, with communal kitchens. I'm not sure when/why the plan changed. There is a market rate SRO project still in discussion in SOMA on Folsom at Dore I believe.

[lz131313]

Today I took a picture from the 23rd floor of the Essex Fox Plaza of the scaffolding going up at the back of 150 Van Ness Avenue in preparation for the demotion of the old automobile association building. You can the see the scaffolding on the right side. An apartment building 7 stories high will be built from Van Ness Ave. to Polk St. on Hayes St.

The Spanish revival building on Fell St., on the left, is being restored to it's original condition (with alterations) and will house a private school for children.


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7532/15629644087_6a847a1a66_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pP91Ec)150 Van Ness (https://flic.kr/p/pP91Ec)

lol really guys where did you get 7 stories?!!! this project is 12 stories.....

[Jerry of San Fran]

lz131313 - thanks for pointing out the error. The building design makes the building look shorter than it really is in the drawing. Twelve stories it is! This will be a project much longer to build than I had realized. That means that the folks on about the 14th floor of the Essex Fox Plaza will be looking at a crane outside of their window for about 12 months and will get a wake up call at 7:00 a.m.

[simms3_redux]

^^^To be fair, the current ugly building blocks a good portion of the new tower, and the new building will open that up with more space between the two buildings. I think it's a necessary move if Emerald wants to lease ~5-10% of its building at 100 Van Ness (currently un-leasable with that behemoth encroaching on the windows/views).

[citizensf]

What's the deal with those short stumpy buildings south of the transbay terminal? Ate they new? They need to be replaced by 50 to 70 story towers.

I assume you are referring to Foundry Square. Built during the 2000s, before the current boom and Transbay Tower.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundry_Square

[tall/awkward]

I think 340 Fremont is in that big, beautiful rendering of the City, it's just mostly blocked by...399 Fremont?

But I do think Block 5 has one too many decks showing based on the new design...

[fimiak]

I think 2013 and 2014 have just been warm up years for the boom of 2015-2017...and if Mayor Lee loses against Leno in 2015 (an anti-development progressive) we could see a lot of these proposals sunk.

[mt_climber13]

Progressives tend to do pretty poorly in SF mayoral elections. I think the last real progressive was Agnos. Matt Gonzales came closest in '03.

I know, I know, people are angry, this time will be different, progressives unite, etc. We hear it every 4 years :haha:

Other than the supervisors elections, which are NEIGHBORHOOD votes, not city wide, progressives have no real power in SF.

[coyotetrickster]

Progressives tend to do pretty poorly in SF mayoral elections. I think the last real progressive was Agnos. Matt Gonzales came closest in '03.

I know, I know, people are angry, this time will be different, progressives unite, etc. We hear it every 4 years :haha:

Other than the supervisors elections, which are NEIGHBORHOOD votes, not city wide, progressives have no real power in SF.

I think the developer for 8 Washington and the Warriors would disagree with that last statement.

[a very long weekend]

i don't think that it's at all clear that leno would be anti-develoment. nor that he's the sane genre of progressive as peskin and the gang. i'd definitely consider voting for him over lee (in fact, already plan to) but i'll be looking for clarification on development policy before that. if he's looking to take the city backward, oy.

[simms3_redux]

^^^If you don't mind me asking, what don't you like about Lee that you feel Leno would address, or do a better job of?

So far I think Lee has been great for business and real estate in this city. I'd equate him to the late Mayor Menino in Boston, or Bloomberg in New York (in this regard). He's definitely more of a "business community" oriented mayor, which would seem favorable to anyone who's not a progressive. Is Leno considered "good for business", or is he solely a "man of the people"? I tend to get a little worried about politicians who proclaim themselves "men of the people" as that tends to lead to policy making with good intentions and lots of unintended consequences (historically). We aren't talking the feds here, where super pro-business interest politicians can often have the same effect of major unintended consequences, but I think you need a business friendly mayor, especially in generally business unfriendly cities such as San Francisco.

[mt_climber13]

Mayor Lee has led one of the biggest job creation booms in the country and SF now has historically low unemployment. It is the strongest office market in the U.S. Every time I go back, vacant storefronts are being filled. Streets look better than before (Cesar Chavez, Castro, Divisadero, Guerrero). Parklets everywhere. The parks even look much better. The city is slowly becoming much more cleaner and upscale looking. Construction activity EVERYWHERE. A lot of it at least LEED Silver. Construction usually means progress. Right, "progress"ives?

But yeah, let's vote him out, cause Techies!!

Sent from my iPhone.

[a very long weekend]

menino and bloomberg? both of those men oversaw visionary changes to their cities, i don't think i need even to list them. our guy here is in way over his head. he sees his main job as being basically not to break things and mostly to preside.

a few things for me stick out:

- very annoyed at his ambivalence on the importance of nightlife in sf, along with his caving to virtually any nimby opposition along the way (his refusal to champion anything even remotely controversial, including his named "legacy" which was the basketball arena under the bay bridge, just jettisoned because he's a coward, especially compared with a wiener or, yes, a leno).
- the disastrous state of muni at this point, even though it has been twice infused with "save muni" cash, and his relationship with the sfmta - not just the sunday parking or polk street or whatever but his management of the file generally, just disinterested and over his head, listening to the wrong people, misinterpreting the data, failing to familiarize himself with state/national/global trends in transit, living in the past. nothing compelling comes out of the mayor's office, it's basically always out of the sfmta itself, planning/parks or the board of supervisors. this guy is a placeholder, a presider during what could be the time for the most innovation here in sf in a hundred years;
- his complete disinterest in several things i care a lot about, including the jettisoned road diet on the great highway, the ridiculous fight for the waterfront for which any mayor worth anything would have fought tooth and nail in the face of the village people, a disinterest in extending the central subway, his ambivalence in the face of virtually any big idea for real transit expansion (where is the fort mason f-line extension? where is the urgency on geary rapid transit?), etc.;
- still annoyed about his refusal to support the public power initiative, which was all set to go but for his blocking it because of pg+e's goons getting their talons in;
- that all major roads stuff not proposed by bureaucrats is coming out of the offices of supervisors because the mayor's office only ever opposes things and doesn't even really consider the file until some high level type puts in on their desk;
- how he refused even to try to get the back taxes from airbnb that they basically admitted they'd be willing to pay in order to get the legislation that they got without the extra penalty;
- just airbnb generally, i'm in the feinstein (she's a u.s. senator here) camp where like rezoning of a whole city seems a bit crazy to me and seems pretty experimental, i'd have preferred mayoral leadership on it instead of leaving chiu to it, seemed utterly botched...

bah, the list goes on. we just have a mayor who doesn't have any vision. in the political science circles, they call it 'institutional capture' or 'bureaucratic capture', where the elected office holder comes to abandon his views as he adopts those of the entrenched interests and bureaucrats. except that lee came out of the bureaucracy and thus is working to bring the lethargy, empire-building, lack of imagination and straight rent-seeking appeals to the mayor's office. i'd vote for wiener in a heartbeat because he'd take the hammer to that with all the management prowess of a lee, leno too if proves right on the issues. we have this lame presider-type mayor who's blowing this boom time economic bonanza now and it drives me crazy.

edit to add: wakame, sf way going to boom no matter what. just like nyc and other cities riding the wave.

[fflint]

Let's get back on topic, folks.

[fimiak]

Mayor Lee has led one of the biggest job creation booms in the country and SF now has historically low unemployment. It is the strongest office market in the U.S. Every time I go back, vacant storefronts are being filled. Streets look better than before (Cesar Chavez, Castro, Divisadero, Guerrero). Parklets everywhere. The parks even look much better. The city is slowly becoming much more cleaner and upscale looking. Construction activity EVERYWHERE. A lot of it at least LEED Silver. Construction usually means progress. Right, "progress"ives?

But yeah, let's vote him out, cause Techies!!

Sent from my iPhone.

I agree with wakamesalad for once! The city has only been getting better, even since I first came in 2011 the changes are obvious. There are twice as many people walking on Market St from 5th-Van Ness as there were just those few years ago.

[simms3_redux]

menino and bloomberg? both of those men oversaw visionary changes to their cities, i don't think i need even to list them. our guy here is in way over his head. he sees his main job as being basically not to break things and mostly to preside.

a few things for me stick out:

- very annoyed at his ambivalence on the importance of nightlife in sf, along with his caving to virtually any nimby opposition along the way (his refusal to champion anything even remotely controversial, including his named "legacy" which was the basketball arena under the bay bridge, just jettisoned because he's a coward, especially compared with a wiener or, yes, a leno).
- the disastrous state of muni at this point, even though it has been twice infused with "save muni" cash, and his relationship with the sfmta - not just the sunday parking or polk street or whatever but his management of the file generally, just disinterested and over his head, listening to the wrong people, misinterpreting the data, failing to familiarize himself with state/national/global trends in transit, living in the past. nothing compelling comes out of the mayor's office, it's basically always out of the sfmta itself, planning/parks or the board of supervisors. this guy is a placeholder, a presider during what could be the time for the most innovation here in sf in a hundred years;
- his complete disinterest in several things i care a lot about, including the jettisoned road diet on the great highway, the ridiculous fight for the waterfront for which any mayor worth anything would have fought tooth and nail in the face of the village people, a disinterest in extending the central subway, his ambivalence in the face of virtually any big idea for real transit expansion (where is the fort mason f-line extension? where is the urgency on geary rapid transit?), etc.;
- still annoyed about his refusal to support the public power initiative, which was all set to go but for his blocking it because of pg+e's goons getting their talons in;
- that all major roads stuff not proposed by bureaucrats is coming out of the offices of supervisors because the mayor's office only ever opposes things and doesn't even really consider the file until some high level type puts in on their desk;
- how he refused even to try to get the back taxes from airbnb that they basically admitted they'd be willing to pay in order to get the legislation that they got without the extra penalty;
- just airbnb generally, i'm in the feinstein (she's a u.s. senator here) camp where like rezoning of a whole city seems a bit crazy to me and seems pretty experimental, i'd have preferred mayoral leadership on it instead of leaving chiu to it, seemed utterly botched...

bah, the list goes on. we just have a mayor who doesn't have any vision. in the political science circles, they call it 'institutional capture' or 'bureaucratic capture', where the elected office holder comes to abandon his views as he adopts those of the entrenched interests and bureaucrats. except that lee came out of the bureaucracy and thus is working to bring the lethargy, empire-building, lack of imagination and straight rent-seeking appeals to the mayor's office. i'd vote for wiener in a heartbeat because he'd take the hammer to that with all the management prowess of a lee, leno too if proves right on the issues. we have this lame presider-type mayor who's blowing this boom time economic bonanza now and it drives me crazy.

edit to add: wakame, sf way going to boom no matter what. just like nyc and other cities riding the wave.


I know it's "off topic", but considering mayoral elections and policy (widely known as part and parcel with SF) impacts real estate in big ways, I do think it's all relevant to occasionally discuss and bring up. That being said, I agree with most of your comments above, but what in God's name makes you think Leno will address your concerns better? Also, while no visionary, and with limited backbone, Lee is pretty hamstrung, politically. He was appointed after all, not elected by the people. We're also in fairly "touchy" times where most politicians who oversee larger, more diverse populations (e.g. mayor, at large supervisors, etc) walk on egg shells in the current climate of change. Perhaps Lee will break out of his cage and stand for stuff and enforce other stuff if he is elected to a 2nd term and doesn't have to worry about reelection.

Just a thought. And maybe Leno is better for business, and for real estate, and for all of your poignant concerns addressed above, but that's not what's been conveyed to me thus far. I was really just asking for your opinion on why Leno's better, not where you think Lee's shortfalls have been. Also, keep in mind that before Menino left office, every developer in Boston rushed to get their projects permitted. I feel that a departing Lee would have the same effect (to the extent regulations such as Prop M don't put the kibosh on things). That's where I got my analogy for Menino.

[mt_climber13]

^Except that he was elected. I remember voting. There were about 8 total candidates on the ballot.

It will be very hard to unseat an incumbent in a great economy.

And 8 Washington was struck down during an off season vote. I don't even know if 10% of the population voted. So, again, the progressives have no real power, and they know it. The soda tax, which should have easily won, didn't even pass.

Even Berkeley voted for high rise development, Berkeley! Lol. Going forward SF is never going to be anti-development.

[simms3_redux]

Ah, ok so there were only a few months left in Gavin's term and then he was elected in general vote. Gotcha.

I thought at one point you said it had been a while since you lived in the city, but that you had grown up here? So you were here as recently as late 2011. And I would imagine far more people turn up for a mayoral election than these 2x a year votes we have (even though the November vote was "big", it wasn't as big as voting for mayor). I wouldn't be so quick to presume we've seen the effect of a full voter turnout, though I agree, throughout the Bay Area we've turned a corner. Things can always change, though (and the soda tax needed something like 2/3 or 3/4 of the vote in SF and I recall it came fairly close...it was definitely well over 50%).

[simms3_redux]

The Schwab building at the corner of Market and Front had its scaffolding come down today. The transformation turned out to be worth it, actually (I think I originally had misgivings, but I see the light now).

What was at one point a pink, plasticky white trash wedding cake of a building is now "above average", with neutral tones and decent stone work. If anyone is in the area, go check it out.

[fflint]

State high court OKs Parkmerced development plan (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/State-high-court-OKs-Parkmerced-development-plan-5904754.php)

Bob Egelko
sfgate.com
Wednesday, November 19, 2014

The state Supreme Court gave the go-ahead Wednesday to a 20-year development plan at Parkmerced that will add 5,700 rental housing units, along with retail and office construction, at the 152-acre complex near Lake Merced and San Francisco State University.
....

[tech12]

State high court OKs Parkmerced development plan (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/State-high-court-OKs-Parkmerced-development-plan-5904754.php)

Bob Egelko
sfgate.com
Wednesday, November 19, 2014

The state Supreme Court gave the go-ahead Wednesday to a 20-year development plan at Parkmerced that will add 5,700 rental housing units, along with retail and office construction, at the 152-acre complex near Lake Merced and San Francisco State University.
....

Nice!

I just wish it wouldn't take 20 years to build it. 5,700 units sounds like a lot, until you realize how long it'll take to finish them all.

[fflint]

Agreed. I wish it could happen faster, but remember, this plan involves tearing down existing buildings and then rebuilding (taller and denser), re-routing roads, and the likely construction of two Muni Metro subway stations. It's a lot more complicated than usual.

[edwards]

11/18/14
200 California St. remodeling.

http://i.imgur.com/4VHSO0Ul.jpg?1 (http://imgur.com/4VHSO0U)

[Jerry of San Fran]

edwards - thanks for the picture of 500 California. It was quite a radical remodel!

[fimiak]

http://i.imgur.com/IXCHl19l.jpg (http://imgur.com/IXCHl19)
http://i.imgur.com/02VV96tl.jpg (http://imgur.com/02VV96t)

From 555 Mission

[fflint]

Cool snapshots, guys.

[chris08876]

Renderings land for Trumark Urban’s 1554 Market Street

http://d3exkutavo4sli.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/1554-Market-Street-1.jpg

Located along the north side of Market Street, between South Van Ness Avenue and 12th Street, the building will rise 12 stories tall. Permits for the $41 million project were filed in November 2013.

The developer’s site indicates that the mixed-use building will have approximately 120 new residential units and up to 4,500 square feet of ground-floor retail. The project will be designed by Handel Architects, according to the site of The San Francisco Housing Action Coalition.
==================================
http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/2014/09/1554-market-street-trumark.html

[viewguysf]

[QUOTE=chris08876;6818208]Renderings land for Trumark Urban’s 1554 Market Street

It should say Van Ness, not South Van Ness (which starts on the other side of Market Street).

[edwards]

Lumina 11/23/14

http://i.imgur.com/bzLKWxul.jpg?1 (http://imgur.com/bzLKWxu)

[fflint]

The glass looks really nice on Lumina.

[timbad]

noticed today a low, nondescript warehouse-y building was being demolished at 144 King, across the street from the ballpark. here (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Hotel-developer-gobbles-up-McDonald-s-site-near-5637623.php) it says

At 144 King St., a block from the McDonald's site, Bay Area developer David O'Keefe has pulled permits to build a $26.4 million, 12-story, 130-room hotel. The project has been in the works since before the economy crashed in 2008, but financing was unavailable until recently. Stanton, who is the architect on this project also, said demolition of the existing building at 144 King St. (most recently the King Art Cafe) will start at the end of baseball season.

"It is (O'Keefe's) intent to start construction right after the last pitch of the Giants' final home game," Stanton said. "We think we can complete the demolition, dig the hole and have the framing substantially finished by the time next season begins."

[chris08876]

CIM Group acquires two-acre Mission Bay site approved for 350 condos

http://d3exkutavo4sli.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/1000-Channel.png

CIM Group has scooped up a Mission Bay site with approved plans for 350 condominiums.

Located at 1000 Channel Street, the two-acre parcel is slated for two apartment buildings with 14,000 square feet of retail space and parking, the San Francisco Business Times reported. The seller was Strada Investment Group.

The site, currently a parking lot, is perched along Mission Creek with nearly 650 feet of frontage along the waterfront, according to a news release. It will also contain an entitled 250-room hotel developed by SOMA Hotels, which purchased part of the land earlier this year. The groundbreaking for the hotel is scheduled for the end of 2014.
=============================
http://news.buzzbuzzhome.com/2014/11/cim-group-mission-bay-1000-channel.html

[fimiak]

They had better use that waterfront wisely...or else.

[cmak]

I feel almost sheepish putting these two on here after that epic (great word for it) rendering and related discussion, but here goes, couple little guys...

this is what they're doing with the corner of 3rd and Folsom. underneath the bird's-nest-pattern cover, it does look like the ground floor is pulled back a little to ease up the constraint on sidewalk that had been there. can't put my finger on why I'm underwhelmed by this though

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7474/15808017152_01edbd9fa7_b.jpg


yeah this seems underbuilt, I wish it had a few more stories to at least match the parking garage next door. That said, it does look better lit up at night

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B3K2TvoCYAA2aeV.jpg:large
source (https://twitter.com/7x7/status/536691763772006400)

[colemonkee]

^ Does SF zoning allow for the transfer of air rights to other properties? Perhaps the underused portion of this property can be used by another development nearby.

[chris08876]

Project: 870 Harrison Street (Recently Finished)

http://870harrison.com/wp-content/themes/870-harrison/images/870_web_1.jpg
http://870harrison.com/wp-content/themes/870-harrison/images/870_web_6.jpg

Featuring 22 smartly designed one- and two-bedroom condominium residences, 870 Harrison is a newly constructed building in a quiet niche of the SoMa neighborhood.
==============================
http://870harrison.com/

[simms3_redux]

^^^A dime a dozen here; honestly, not enough time in the day to keep track of infill like that.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Project: 870 Harrison Street (Recently Finished)

http://870harrison.com/wp-content/themes/870-harrison/images/870_web_1.jpg
http://870harrison.com/wp-content/themes/870-harrison/images/870_web_6.jpg


==============================
http://870harrison.com/

Thanks for the update - I am going to have to take a long walk soon - so much new construction that I have not seen yet! Interesting frames around the windows - I will have to see them in person to see how effective they are.

[Jerry of San Fran]

I was startled today to see how fast the old California State Automobile Association building is being dismantled.

View from the Essex Fox Plaza

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7479/15257293674_f54d506732_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pfeBRu)The Old California State Automobile Association Building (https://flic.kr/p/pfeBRu)

[timbad]

^^^A dime a dozen here; honestly, not enough time in the day to keep track of infill like that.

altho I do like that one more than many, and wish it were in a more prominent location - that block of Harrison bookended with freeway ramps feels like a black hole to me, who walks the area fairly frequently

[POLA]

^ Does SF zoning allow for the transfer of air rights to other properties? Perhaps the underused portion of this property can be used by another development nearby.

No, we don't do that here.

[1977]

5M - I'm digging this project - Some additional information,renderings, and presentation (https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/248360108?access_key=key-CsD69UBLbopHcX8wiUON&allow_share=false&escape=false&show_recommendations=false&view_mode=scroll) were posted on SocketSite today:

Spanning a 4-acre South of Market site bounded by Mission, Fifth, Howard and Mary, Forest City’s latest designs for the 5M Project include roughly 700 new residences (down from 1,200); 760,000 square feet of net new office space; 152,000 square feet of new ground floor retail, educational and cultural uses; and 34,000 square feet of open space, not including the proposed conversion of Mary Street, between Mission and Minna, into a pedestrian-only alley.
Source/Post (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/11/stunning-new-5m-project-renderings-overview-context.html)

http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/5M-Project-Rendering-Skyline1.jpg
Source (http://www.socketsite.com)

Happy Thanksgiving!

[simms3_redux]

^^^I created a separate thread for that, as well as two other projects that are moving along.

SAN FRANCISCO | 5M DEVELOPMENT | 470, 400, 200, AND 174 FT | 40 FLOORS (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=214483)

SAN FRANCISCO | 10 S VAN NESS | 400 FT | 40 FLOORS (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=214481)

SAN FRANCISCO | 1500-1580 MISSION STREET | 400 + 258 FT | 40 AND 17 FLOORS (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=214479)


I have asked mods to retitle them to all caps and sticky them to the San Francisco page for us to have easy access.



Additionally, I want to call attention to a few other developments in the Mid-Market/Van Ness corridor area.

1. Tower Car Wash Site

http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/1601-Mission-Street-Site.jpg
source (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/10/tower-car-wash-redevelopment-plans-take-two-three.html)

Trumark working through plans to raze and build condos.

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/10/tower-car-wash-redevelopment-plans-take-two-three.html

As referenced by J.K. Dineen a few weeks ago, Trumark Urban has been working on plans to raze the Tower Car Wash and gas station on the southwest corner of Mission and South Van Ness and build around 200 condos over retail on the triangular site, with a building reaching up to 120 feet in height.

Plans to construct a high-rise residential building on the corner date back over 25 years, when a proposal to develop a 500-unit building across the 1601 Mission Street site and its adjacent parcels was floated. Instead, the then Firestone tire shop on the corner was converted into the car wash and 140 South (Van Ness) was eventually constructed on the parcel next door, with 212 condos over a bit of retail space.


2. A&M Carpets site

http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/98-12th-Street-Site1.jpg
source (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/11/carpets-condos-offices-perhaps-new-mid-market-hotel.html)

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/11/carpets-condos-offices-perhaps-new-mid-market-hotel.html

Zoned for a tower to rise up to 250 feet in height and the development of high-density residential, offices, retail or a hotel, the three corner parcels at the intersection of Otis and 12th Streets, including the two-story A&M Carpets building at 98 12th Street and the three-story building at 14 Otis next door, have just hit the market.

Plans for developing the site have yet to be drafted or filed with the city, but with plans to develop the Tower Car Wash site to the south, the Goodwill site to the east, and the Honda site to the north in the works, the offering touts opportunity and a rapidly expanding “Mid-Market” local.


3. Franklin and Page development

http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/1-Franklin-Rendering-20141.jpg
source (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/11/franklin-page-development-plan-dusted-auto-parking-nixed.html)

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/11/franklin-page-development-plan-dusted-auto-parking-nixed.html

Originally approved for development in 2010 but never having broken ground, the variance needed for the proposed 8-story development to rise as designed on the current parking lot parcel at 1 Franklin Street has since expired but the plans have been dusted off and the developer, JS Sullivan, will likely be granted a new variance next week.

The Market-Octavia development includes 35 condos over 2,700 square feet of ground floor retail space at the intersection of Franklin and Page.

And while originally proposed to be built with 18 parking spaces for auots in an underground garage, Forum Design’s design has been refined to include a storage room for 35 bikes, and a little more retail, but not a single car.


Honestly, I'm all for little to no parking. However, I AM worried that more and more issues will arise. SF doesn't have truly excellent transportation. Also, to own costs $1M+++. As other posters have mentioned, if I had a million(s) to spend on a home, I would like to own and be able to conveniently and safely store a car.

Perhaps there is a phantom market that exists where people are able to sell or rent out their parking spots, but I do know that many HOAs and virtually all apartment building owners do not like non-residents parking vehicles in their buildings. The City has been getting rid of or meterizing street parking. Meanwhile, transportation has arguably deteriorated as the strain of additional people without additional improvements to transit have made riding buses and trains a hassle - a hassle that doesn't run cross town (i.e. N-S) very effectively if at all, and a hassle that doesn't run 24 hour or late night.

Meanwhile, where is the market for garage operators? At some point, as in Manhattan, there will come a demand for garages to store vehicles. But will SF allow it? Will it even be feasible considering current pricing and fees? The only stackers I see in the city are in SOMA, however, there really should be mechanized garages to store people's cars.

Thoughts? Am I way off base in my thinking? (FTR, I live in the city, carless - I don't own one).



In other interesting news, back in August the CA 1st District Court of Appeals overturned an appeal of 3 years (after the SF Board of Supes already approved the plan) (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/08/approved-parkmerced-redevelopment-plans-prevail.html)/

Designed by SOM, 20 year development scheme. 5,700 new housing units.

Current
http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Parkmerced-pre-plan.jpg
source (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/08/approved-parkmerced-redevelopment-plans-prevail.html)

Redeveloped
http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Parkmerced-Plan-2014.jpg
source (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/08/approved-parkmerced-redevelopment-plans-prevail.html)

Not surprisingly, back in 2011, Supes Kim, Alvaros, and Campos were among the 5 dissenting votes. [Now Kim wants more housing in the Sunset so I wonder if she has changed her tunes]


RECENTLY, a group of New York investors has purchased a majority stake in Parkmerced, the sprawling housing complex on San Francisco's West Side that is slated for a multibillion-dollar revitalization, in a deal that values the property at more than $1.3 billion, the Wall Street Journal reported. (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2014/11/parkmerced-san-francisco-redevelopment-purchased.html)

Eastdil sold FIG and Rockpoint Group's interest stakes in a deal that values the entire existing complex at $1.3Bn. The new development group is being led by Mark Karasick of 601w (http://www.601wcompanies.com/).

From the Chron:

A group of New York investors has given it a big vote of confidence by acquiring a majority stake in a deal said to value the 152-acre residential complex at more than $1.35 billion.

The deal, reported in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal, comes one week after the California Supreme Court gave the go-ahead to build 5,679 rentals alongside the existing 3,221 rent-controlled units, capping off an often-bitter three-year legal fight against critics of the plan.

“It means (the project) has successfully recapitalized and now is poised for an incredible future,” said Parkmerced spokesman P.J. Johnston.

The development, bordering Lake Merced and San Francisco State University, is now clear to break ground next fall in the first phase of what is expected to be a 20-year project.

So, while it’s been a long time coming, it still has a ways to go.

“The speed won’t be impacted — we’re still set for a series of four phases. But with the finances in order and the legal challenges behind us, the path is clear,” said Johnston.
Biz & Tech

Heading the team of investors is Mark Karasick, managing partner of 601w, a New York real estate investment and development firm that has bought and sold residential and office buildings throughout the country. That includes the former Bank of America tower at 555 California St. in San Francisco, which Karasick acquired for $813 million in 2004 and sold 18 months later for $1.06 billion, according to the firm’s website.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Karasick’s group invested nearly $200 million for “more than a 70 percent stake” in Parkmerced’s owner, Parkmerced Investors Properties, a group led by New York real estate investor Robert Rosania, and including San Francisco’s Fortress and Boston’s Rockport Group.
source (http://www.sfchronicle.com/business/bottomline/article/Troubled-Parkmerced-development-gets-new-5920452.php#/1)


I personally think that Pier 70, Park Merced, Hunter's Point, and Candlestick Point each deserve their own thread. These are some of the largest redevelopment projects in the country, and all are progressing.

[viewguysf]

Good job all the way around Simms! It's great to have separate threads too. :tup:

[minesweeper]

3. Franklin and Page development

http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/1-Franklin-Rendering-20141.jpg
source (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/11/franklin-page-development-plan-dusted-auto-parking-nixed.html)

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/11/franklin-page-development-plan-dusted-auto-parking-nixed.html

Honestly, I'm all for little to no parking. However, I AM worried that more and more issues will arise. SF doesn't have truly excellent transportation. Also, to own costs $1M+++. As other posters have mentioned, if I had a million(s) to spend on a home, I would like to own and be able to conveniently and safely store a car.

Perhaps there is a phantom market that exists where people are able to sell or rent out their parking spots, but I do know that many HOAs and virtually all apartment building owners do not like non-residents parking vehicles in their buildings. The City has been getting rid of or meterizing street parking. Meanwhile, transportation has arguably deteriorated as the strain of additional people without additional improvements to transit have made riding buses and trains a hassle - a hassle that doesn't run cross town (i.e. N-S) very effectively if at all, and a hassle that doesn't run 24 hour or late night.

Even though it's a relatively small project, I'm really glad to see this one moving forward. Every time I'd pass that parking lot while riding the 6 or 71, it just seemed so out of place and underutilized. The parking lot frequently has garbage on it and the neighboring building walls are a graffiti magnet. Knowing that there were stalled plans for the site just made it more frustrating to look at the current parking crater.

I was amused to see so much griping on SocketSite about the lack of parking. People will complain regardless of how much parking is provided in new developments. I'm personally not worried about it too much since potential owners there will self-select for the lack of parking. It's only a block from Van Ness and Market, and living without a car is so much easier today than just a couple of years ago given the rise of Uber, Sidecar, etc.

If nixing the underground parking makes the project more viable and speeds up the construction timeline, then I'm all for it. The building's design is nothing special, but I'm just excited to see another parking lot bite the dust.

P.S. Thanks for the new threads!

[a very long weekend]

yeah, the pro-parking radicals on socketsite are something else. it's not even very useful these days to read the comments, unlike a few years ago when you'd sometimes find little tidbits of info or whatever. that site was discovered by the sfgate set and they never looked back.

[ChipSF]

I'm personally not worried about it too much since potential owners there will self-select for the lack of parking. It's only a block from Van Ness and Market, and living without a car is so much easier today than just a couple of years ago given the rise of Uber, Sidecar, etc.

If nixing the underground parking makes the project more viable and speeds up the construction timeline, then I'm all for it. The building's design is nothing special, but I'm just excited to see another parking lot bite the dust.
[/QUOTE]

Don't forget short term vehicle use providers like CityCarShare and ZipCar. I would like to see more of the larger developers have spots for those communal services rather than private car storage.

[mt_climber13]

Cost of owning a car in SF I would guess is around $1,000 month, including car payments, insurance, garage payment, maintenance, gas. How much would city car share or uber cost? I'm guessing not nearly as much. I like seeing car-less developments. It makes those of us that drive into the city have less traffic to deal with :p

[Dale]

Back when I sold auto insurance I wrote an auto policy for a homeless guy in San Francisco. His auto premium was only $45 a month.

[timbad]

more thanks for the new threads, simms! appreciate the time and effort that went into those.

here are a couple looks at the sidewalk around 3rd and Folsom, now that the fencing there is mostly down. definitely will be a more pleasant experience with the added walking space, and I hope whatever goes in there will also help activate the street. anyway, looking south (there is a little plaza just off to the left of the shot):

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8575/15723592368_a576d0f11d_b.jpg

and north:

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7501/15288805674_721437e05a_b.jpg

jumping down to Brannan, here is future DropBox, with 345 Brannan now above sidewalk level:

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8591/15910422122_a96a5d1d38_b.jpg

72 Townsend coming along...

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8665/15723601898_df75c4c8b3_b.jpg

and a few shots of the demolition at 144 King, which will be a 12-story hotel - the lot itself:

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8589/15909093571_57232e323c_b.jpg

with its neighbors (Pedro's Cantina is on the right in the shot; T streetcar stop in foreground; AT&T Park right behind the camera, invisible. there is a little alleyway that goes through to Townsend St just to the left of the site - would be nice if this development took it into account and was able to make it more active and pleasant as a mid-block crossing):

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8614/15885290116_ab04131e71_b.jpg

and in context. will rise between the taller building in the distance and the shorter one on the right. at 12 stories, it would rise about 3 floors above the taller building, and add some nice height variation to the block

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7540/15723606308_1cdc123d9e_b.jpg

[a very long weekend]

Nice shots! Man, that whole central soma area anchored by yb/convention center is just on this awesome track. The Fischer addition at sf moma, the convention center expantion/reno, the Mexican museum Jessie square build out, 5m, the new pedestrian lane by spur/chs, the huge Folsom street redo coming up, plus at least 200 trees to be planted. Another 1960s planning failure slowly being corrected, before our eyes.

[fimiak]

11/25

http://i.imgur.com/wnYs9jyl.jpg (http://imgur.com/wnYs9jy)
http://i.imgur.com/OEkAOlal.jpg (http://imgur.com/OEkAOla)
http://i.imgur.com/cpEmtvgl.jpg (http://imgur.com/cpEmtvg)

[a very long weekend]

a small update on the cmpc medical building set to rise opposite the new hospital (on the 3/4 block between polk and van ness):

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2014/12/cpmc-sutter-health-pacific-medical-mob-vanness.html

1) to start construction 1st quarter 2015 for a late 2018 finish;
2) 6 levels for the underground carpark but only 383 spaces, is this right? this is as opposed to the nearly 1000 proposed at the outset. maybe they see employees arriving via the van ness and geary brt lines that *should* be operational by then (edit: ah, maybe the 990 or whatever spaces was over the two blocks, which would makes sense considering that this is about 250k sqft on about 40% of a city block and the hospital is a full city block, so it could be absorbing the other 600 spaces);
3) cpmc is moving on it with a couple equity partners, including some chicago group and pacific medical from sd:

Half of the medical office space is pre-leased to CPMC and the Sutter Pacific Medical Foundation for physician offices and ambulatory care medical uses. Independent private physicians practices will lease the remaining 50 percent. The new medical office space will be connected to the main hospital via a pedestrian tunnel that will run underneath Van Ness Avenue... Sutter will own and operate the six-level subterranean parking structure.

http://i.imgur.com/0Uzo15Z.jpg

[minesweeper]

100 Van Ness is nearing the finish line. They have a marketing site up: http://100vanness.com/

According to Curbed (http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2014/12/04/how_much_does_it_cost_to_live_in_a_former_cube_farm.php), the first move-ins will be in February:

Construction is still under way (crews will finish the lower units first and work their way up), but leasing kicked off just before Thanksgiving.

Studios, which will range between 439 and 484 square feet, will set renters back at minimum $2,600. One-bedrooms (628-849 square feet) start in the $3,100s. Meanwhile, more spacious two-bedrooms crack the $4,400 mark, with somewhere between 984 and 1126 square feet.

According to the developers, the model units are complete and will be open soon. First move-ins are expected to begin in February.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7559/15740788550_a5e0e21b0c_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pYXE33)
100 Van Ness (https://flic.kr/p/pYXE33) by sirgious (https://www.flickr.com/people/90214320@N00/), on Flickr

[fimiak]

100 Van Ness is nearing the finish line. They have a marketing site up: http://100vanness.com/

According to Curbed (http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2014/12/04/how_much_does_it_cost_to_live_in_a_former_cube_farm.php), the first move-ins will be in February:



https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7559/15740788550_a5e0e21b0c_c.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pYXE33)
100 Van Ness (https://flic.kr/p/pYXE33) by sirgious (https://www.flickr.com/people/90214320@N00/), on Flickr

Who among us shall be first? Why me of course. Moving in 100 van ness in Feb, moving out of NEMA. Already gave my security deposit. :tup:

[Jerry of San Fran]

Minesweeper - thanks for the update.
fimiak - congratulations - we look forward to pictures!

I watched 100 Van Ness Avenue being built from the roof of the Fox Plaza & very happy to see it remodeled & made into apartments. As nice as it is to have a rooftop garden I think it will not be too useful unless there are barriers to keep wind away.

The Fox Plaza has a small deck on the roof & it was useful as long as one was below the at chin height wall. The wind was almost always fierce above the wall. 100 Van Ness is a higher building & I would suspect the wind will be even stronger there. I look forward to hearing about the experience at 100 Van Ness Ave. The Fox Plaza deck was closed due to vandalism about 25 years ago much to my dismay. Because of the building's shadow I could go there at night and see the stars!

[hruski]

fimiak - what was your reason for moving from NEMA to 100 Market? Feel free to PM since this isn't really on topic.

[NOPA]

Cost of owning a car in SF I would guess is around $1,000 month, including car payments, insurance, garage payment, maintenance, gas. How much would city car share or uber cost? I'm guessing not nearly as much. I like seeing car-less developments. It makes those of us that drive into the city have less traffic to deal with :p

A little late, but I own a car and estimate that my monthly cost is no more than $250. I own my car, have bare bones insurance (less than $50 a month), and street parking is FREE where I live with no 2 hour limit or neighborhood pass (Ashbury Heights/Buena Vista area). It really only gets used on the weekends as I bike to work and my spouse takes Muni so gas is never more than $100 a month. The only other expenses are maintenance, which is pretty high as it is now 8 years old, and parking tickets which I get maybe once a quarter.

I get that having an under utilized car like this doesn't make me popular with some folks but muni really isn't a viable option for all my needs and zip car/uber is more expensive and less convenient.

[fimiak]

http://100vanness.com/ Really nice amenities and a great rooftop view. As NEMA is raising my rent 15% in one year, the rates are also preferable. In another year+ I will just move on to the next new development. I also considered places like Mosso and Vida. :tup:

[mt_climber13]

Is it me, or is that view on the 100 van ness page incredibly weird?

[pseudolus]

Is it me, or is that view on the 100 van ness page incredibly weird?

with the thread so slow, running out of things to troll?

[brantw]

with the thread so slow, running out of things to troll?

seriously...

[patriotizzy]

I had an interview last Friday, and decided to take a few update pictures for this thread. These pictures are from Dec 5th.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7486/15998562871_34035c7fd6_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qnJPmT)SF Construction (https://flic.kr/p/qnJPmT) by patriotizzy (https://www.flickr.com/people/60323517@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7499/15814786927_d8a960ca0a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/q6uVb8)SF Construction (https://flic.kr/p/q6uVb8) by patriotizzy (https://www.flickr.com/people/60323517@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7580/15999850202_2f718ac4d6_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qnRq3f)SF Construction (https://flic.kr/p/qnRq3f) by patriotizzy (https://www.flickr.com/people/60323517@N02/), on Flickr


This next one isn't under construction, just fairly new. Looks really nice so I decided to snap a pic.
https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8625/15814532769_aa271fbbe6_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/q6tBC6)SF Construction (https://flic.kr/p/q6tBC6) by patriotizzy (https://www.flickr.com/people/60323517@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7501/16000525785_b5b6909e4b_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qnUSSe)SF Construction (https://flic.kr/p/qnUSSe) by patriotizzy (https://www.flickr.com/people/60323517@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7477/15380909983_5125b627a3_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/prabFa)SF Construction (https://flic.kr/p/prabFa) by patriotizzy (https://www.flickr.com/people/60323517@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7482/15814533409_79e565b045_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/q6tBP8)SF Construction (https://flic.kr/p/q6tBP8) by patriotizzy (https://www.flickr.com/people/60323517@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7473/15380910433_d3c6ef1b70_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/prabNV)SF Construction (https://flic.kr/p/prabNV) by patriotizzy (https://www.flickr.com/people/60323517@N02/), on Flickr

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8652/15378277234_985bcac014_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/pqVG3W)SF Construction (https://flic.kr/p/pqVG3W) by patriotizzy (https://www.flickr.com/people/60323517@N02/), on Flickr

That's all I got.

[mt_climber13]

with the thread so slow, running out of things to troll?

LOL :haha:

go to the website and look at the view. They mashed up Cathedral Heights with the Tenderloin and Nob Hill looking north. It took me a while to figure out what angle they were trying to show, then I realized they photoshopped some stuff in for some reason.

I'm not the one trolling, dude.

[cmak]

LOL :haha:

go to the website and look at the view. They mashed up Cathedral Heights with the Tenderloin and Nob Hill looking north. It took me a while to figure out what angle they were trying to show, then I realized they photoshopped some stuff in for some reason.

I'm not the one trolling, dude.


I thought it looked weird too initially, but I think it's just because it's at an angle we don't usually see.

the google earth render from roughly the same spot:
http://i.imgur.com/6ctp7IRl.jpg (http://imgur.com/6ctp7IR)

100 van ness website:
http://i.imgur.com/Jjc7qO7l.jpg (http://imgur.com/Jjc7qO7)

[mt_climber13]

^Cathedral Hil towers behind the federal building.

[cmak]

^Cathedral Hil towers behind the federal building.

hmmm you're right, I missed those. weird.

[Jerry of San Fran]

patriotizzy - thanks for the nice collection of photos. It is good to see steel beams coming out of the hole for the Trans Bay Terminal!

[simms3_redux]

Project on Broadway between Van Ness and Franklin:

Rendering from 2009:
http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/1650-Broadway.jpg
Source (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2009/03/development_of_1650_broadway_aka_16221662_broadway_appr.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction/December%202014/IMG_7461_zpsea113efc.jpg



Our favorite little project at Van Ness and Washington:

Renderings (http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2014/01/17/whats_planned_for_the_corner_of_van_ness_and_washington.php)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction/December%202014/IMG_7468_zpsd71ee34f.jpg


Project at Pine and Franklin:

http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/1634-Pine-Rendering-Front.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/1634-Pine-Rendering-Franklin.jpg

Source (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2014/05/1634_pine_street_towers_new_rendered_ready_for_commissi.html)


http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction/December%202014/IMG_7469_zps2f9a1a36.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction/December%202014/IMG_7470_zps53559532.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction/December%202014/IMG_7471_zps4779e7be.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction/December%202014/IMG_7472_zps3cbe0e8a.jpg



That Franklin St tower - looking at this tower it doesn't look well built. Like, at all.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction/December%202014/IMG_7473_zps56edfb04.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction/December%202014/IMG_7474_zps2ee54bc1.jpg



CPMC tower, base for 2 tower cranes installed:

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction/December%202014/IMG_7475_zpsa0e99cdd.jpg

[quashlo]

Took a late afternoon stroll (12/14) through Transbay and Rincon Hill to catch up on progress.

Was walking down Beale and this caught my eye sitting on the vacant Parcel M (southwest corner of Mission / Main)... Probably samples (?) for the aluminum skin of the TTC.

http://i.imgur.com/MWup6c0.jpg

Lumina
http://i.imgur.com/iznujbm.jpg

Mid-rise along Folsom... I like :yes:
http://i.imgur.com/t7b4F1Z.jpg

Context shots with The Infinity Towers.
http://i.imgur.com/j8sYhfG.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/szI2JoN.jpg

Beale Street mid-rise. Behind is the 375 Beale retrofit and reno for regional government HQ (MTC et al.).
http://i.imgur.com/OZqFVBr.jpg

[quashlo]

Construction on Block 8 (Rem Koolhaas / OMA with Fougeron Architecture), with 222 Second in the background. Nasty off-ramp is finally closed for good.
http://i.imgur.com/H0pVU6v.jpg

View down Folsom, the future neighborhood commercial corridor of Transbay / Rincon Hill... Patiently waiting for Jeanne Gang's design for Block 1. :)
http://i.imgur.com/u7nPpJk.jpg

Block 6, "Solaire" (SCB). This one is also rising quite fast. The basic form of the adjacent Mercy Housing mid-rise looks to be complete as well.
http://i.imgur.com/d4RgNkq.jpg

399 Fremont. Was surprised at how fast this was rising. In contrast, there doesn't seem to be much progress on 325 Fremont at all.
http://i.imgur.com/HSM6fyr.jpg

340 Fremont. Core is above street level.
http://i.imgur.com/1tBCZZm.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/b3MSpdG.jpg

[quashlo]

View from the mid-block passage between 333 Fremont and 399 Fremont. Love the intimacy and feeling of enclosure from these passageways.
http://i.imgur.com/udKbjh9.jpg

So much construction on Fremont...
http://i.imgur.com/TPSvLzI.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/i8dsaVK.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/u5YRkty.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/5KSm50t.jpg

[quashlo]

45 Lansing
http://i.imgur.com/GfJHcH4.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/3lnwWOq.jpg

This side doesn't look too bad.
http://i.imgur.com/OhHRTz1.jpg

Not sure if I like this side... Reminds me too much of the InterContinental :yuck:, although the glass here is much less offensive.
http://i.imgur.com/yeczpx5.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/FL2XfwG.jpg

[quashlo]

The PG&E substation at 401 Folsom is really going to stand out like a sore thumb when everything is built… Huge blank wall.
http://i.imgur.com/OMqZOTA.jpg

Nothing happening on 41 Tehama yet.
http://i.imgur.com/jTfgRbT.jpg

222 Second, adding some nice bulk along the western edge of Transbay.
http://i.imgur.com/feiEjpx.jpg

Not sure I like the exterior though. The smoked glass is almost black, although maybe it looks better under different lighting.
http://i.imgur.com/moVpLkG.jpg

With One Hawthorne behind. Maybe they should have picked a lighter color for the glass or for the frames of the panels… There’s not enough to break up the façade when looking at the building head on, and the shingle effect is only visible at angles.
http://i.imgur.com/7Tkij6S.jpg

[quashlo]

Future Oscar Park and bus ramps.
http://i.imgur.com/4G7Qa53.jpg

Parcel F, still a staging area for construction of the terminal.
http://i.imgur.com/PzUV2Ua.jpg

Crescent Heights plan for 524 Howard, currently still a parking lot. Interesting, if only for how thin it is.
http://i.imgur.com/72SZQX4.jpg

Some of the "tree branches" have already been erected.
http://i.imgur.com/yPvpo6x.jpg

The exterior on 350 Mission looks exceptional… Interesting to contrast the glass here with 222 Second. Just wishing they had built closer to the height limit they were given under the Transit Center District Plan.
http://i.imgur.com/zIR8EzC.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/ukxvc4i.jpg

From Minna
http://i.imgur.com/hwdO8Za.jpg

[quashlo]

Transbay Tower
http://i.imgur.com/B12p9fD.jpg

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

The high atrium / lobby should be a really nice addition to street level.
http://i.imgur.com/CTH7DVA.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/6Q84Ul1.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/asbit1e.jpg

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

181 Fremont
http://i.imgur.com/blfbv78.jpg

[simms3_redux]

Thanks quashlo. Is it possible to move each of these to their specific threads, though? Your pictures will get buried on the main thread, and each of these buildings has its own specific thread.

Again, thanks!

Links found here (they are stickied and show up in the High Rise Construction sub-forum, not the City Compilations sub-forum):

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/tags.php?tag=san+francisco

[fflint]

350 Mission's skin is simply beautiful.

45 Lansing looks surprisingly cheap.

Fremont Street has the most construction activity in the city, eh?

[botoxic]

*deleted*

[JWS]

350 Mission is a stunner.

399 Fremont is soaring...totally snuck up on me. I can only really see Lansing from my daily commute and barely realized this thing was as high as it is.

The terrible project on Franklin keeps looking sloppier...I drive past it almost every day and it's just bizarre. No crane, floors going up piecemeal, terrible clunky concrete parking garage base.

Excited for the one on Franklin and Pine, however.