HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


2700 Sloat Boulevard in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • San Francisco Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
San Francisco Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 2:46 PM
38 Geary 38 Geary is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 11,563
SAN FRANCISCO | 2700 Sloat Boulevard | 255 FT | 24 FLOORS

This probably has a low chance of being approved/built but it's a bold proposal so figured it deserves its own thread.

Quote:
EXCLUSIVE: Skyscraper Proposed For 2700 Sloat Boulevard In Outer Sunset, San Francisco



BY: ANDREW NELSON 5:30 AM ON APRIL 13, 2023

The pre-application has finally been filed for a 50-story mixed-use tower at 2700 Sloat Boulevard in San Francisco’s Outer Sunset District. The increased plan, first hinted at last month, is a remarkable change from prior versions. Nevada-based CH Planning LLC is the project sponsor. Speaking with YIMBY, the founder of CH Planning explains why this proposal should be approved.

Plans for the skyscraper in the Outer Sunset were first revealed on March 29th, when CH Planning LLC’s founder, Raelynn Hickey, shared their intent to submit plans for a 560-foot tower with 646 units to Sarah Klearman of the San Francisco Business Times. Two weeks later and now in writing, the plan has further increased in scale.

The 589-foot tall structure will yield around 616,180 square feet with 506,790 square feet for its 712 apartments, 15,300 square feet for retail, and 94,090 square feet for the 212-car basement garage. Additional parking will be included for 327 bicycles. Unit sizes will vary, with 344 studios, 184 one-bedrooms, 114 two-bedrooms, and 80 three-bedroom apartments.

...

Of the 712 residences, 115 will be designated as affordable for low-income households earning around 80% of the Area Median Income. By including affordable housing, CH Planning can use the 50% State Density Bonus program, Senate Bill 330, and the recently-passed San Francisco Automotive Uses to Housing Uses Ordinance enacted in December last year. Half of the 0.87-acre lot is surface parking, while the single-story Sloat Garden Center occupies the other half.

The podium base will align to an incline across the property, with the garage entrance on 46th Avenue being a full level lower than the retail shops along 45th Avenue. Next to the residential lobby on Sloat, a commercial gym will have its own lobby at the corner of 46th and Sloat, where members can access the 31,070-square-foot commercial fitness center. On the opposite side, two-story retail spaces will wrap around the streetscape along 45th and Wawona Street.

The third-floor amenity deck will include an indoor community facility and private space surrounded by an expansive open-air terrace and dog run. Beyond that, the amenity programming has not yet been finalized. Across stories four to 49, each level will be occupied by apartments. The crowning 50th floor includes a public community facility.

Solomon Cordwell Buenz is listed as the project architect. The firm has been responsible for many of the region’s tallest proposals, and in keeping with tradition, their initial filing does not provide us with much detail about exterior design. This happened with 395 3rd Street, 620 Folsom Street, 636 4th Street, and 655 4th Street. For the first two filings, we now see SCB remain as an executive architect while separate design architects have provided architecturally unique plans. While specific details have not yet been released for the tower facade of 2700 Sloat Boulevard, the initial plans include a useful diagram explaining the evolution of the massing and its overall height.

The illustration starts with the 12-story base zoning plan and the 50% density bonus plan. The dense project has sheer walls rising from the property line upward. SCB writes this iteration creates a “wall on Wawona and Sloat” and what they describe as “undesirable units that face directly onto one another.” Consolidation to a single 37-story tower on a podium solves the issue of units looking into each other. The next iteration raises the height to “maximize ocean views” for each unit. Finally, aerodynamic sculpting creates more visual interest. The result is the 50-story massing we see depicted in these preliminary illustrations.

...

If built as proposed today, 2700 Sloat Boulevard would be the 12th tallest building in the city, just ten feet shorter than Salesforce West and 101 California Street. There are seven other projects in San Francisco’s pipeline taller, all of which are in Downtown, SoMa, and the Civic Center.

Whether or not one believes this project is likely to happen or well positioned, one has to hand it to the developer, this is bold. This is the tallest proposal to be floated in the Bay Area this year and would be the tallest on the city’s west side. Not to mention, if built today, 2700 Sloat would be the tallest structure in the Bay Area constructed so far this decade. These projects include 50 Main Street (992′), the stalled Oceanwide Center (910′), Parcel F (806′), 620 Folsom Street (640′), 415 20th Street in Oakland (622′), 10 South Van Ness Avenue (610′), and 45-53 3rd Street (600′). The current tallest building under construction, 30 Van Ness Avenue, is expected to reach a 540′ peak, nearly fifty feet shorter than 2700 Sloat.

...

The property is a predominantly residential neighborhood, with apartments and single-family homes to the north, and the San Francisco View to the south. The project is also just two blocks from Ocean Beach and the Pacific Ocean. As Raelynn shared with us, the neighborhood is undergoing a $90 million renovation of the MUNI Light Rail L Traval Line, improving access. As well, two cross-town bus lines stop right near the site.

Construction is expected to last around 20 months from groundbreaking, with an estimated cost of $134 million. That figure is not inclusive of all development costs.
https://sfyimby.com/2023/04/exclusive-sk...evard-in-outer-sunset-san-francisco.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 2:49 PM
38 Geary 38 Geary is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 11,563
And the renderings (keep in mind this is not the actual design, just the initial massing and height):















https://sfyimby.com/2023/04/exclusive-sk...evard-in-outer-sunset-san-francisco.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 2:52 PM
38 Geary 38 Geary is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 11,563
Just for some background, this was the initial plan prior to this most recent update. A 12 story, 125 ft tall structure with 400 units.





https://sfyimby.com/2021/12/increased-pl...at-boulevard-parkside-san-francisco.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 2:55 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Closeted Normie
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 12,871
One of these things is not like the others...
__________________
Everything new is old again

Sic semper tyrannis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 3:02 PM
38 Geary 38 Geary is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 11,563
The specs:
- 589 FT | 50 FLOORS
- 712 units (344 studios, 184 1BR, 114 2BR, 80 3BR)
- 115 of the units will be affordable for households earning 80% of AMI
- 15,300 sq ft of retail
- 50th floor will include a public community facility
- Parking will be included for 212 cars (basement garage) and 327 bicycles
- Public transit access: <1 min walk to Muni Metro L Taraval and Muni bus lines 18 and 23

The site:
https://goo.gl/maps/RE7TfxuZCpeP9kt96
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 3:52 PM
DCReid DCReid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,505
We know SF has a housing shortage, but this proposal is not the answer. It seems to me that they eliminate the surface parking on the main street shown, narrow the road to 2 lanes instead of 4 and use the gained land to build 4-6 stories of apartments, retail, condos, bike racks, some public space, and perhaps one or two garages. I don't know the area, but does it really need 2 lanes in each direction in a city like SF?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 4:29 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NY - Cali
Posts: 6,781
A building of such height in that location is a bit out of place. I thought this was gonna be in FiDi when I read the title but yikes.

Still cool though I guess... doubt it ever happens with the NIMBYs and local disapproval.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 4:45 PM
38 Geary 38 Geary is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 11,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCReid View Post
We know SF has a housing shortage, but this proposal is not the answer. It seems to me that they eliminate the surface parking on the main street shown, narrow the road to 2 lanes instead of 4 and use the gained land to build 4-6 stories of apartments, retail, condos, bike racks, some public space, and perhaps one or two garages. I don't know the area, but does it really need 2 lanes in each direction in a city like SF?
I'd say Sloat Blvd, is a somewhat major east-west arterial, and there aren't any other east-west 4 lane roads until 2 miles north at Lincoln Way. Everything in between is 2 lane roads through dense residential (~17-22k ppsm). However, there are two east-west light rail lines though (N Judah and L Taraval), as well as multiple bus lines.

I don't think Sloat itself gets that much vehicular traffic except maybe on weekends? When people head to the beach and zoo, so it's possible it could undergo a road diet, but perhaps it might be better left as 4 lanes, and 2 of the lanes changed to bus only lanes, parking removed, and protected bike lanes added.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 4:48 PM
deanstirrat deanstirrat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2022
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 47
Build that mf and 25 more of equal or more height. westside hub.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 5:04 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Closeted Normie
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 12,871
Just imagine if Sunset had been built out with Barcelona style uniform density in the first place. That's probably like a 1/4 million people.
__________________
Everything new is old again

Sic semper tyrannis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 5:50 PM
theskysthelimit theskysthelimit is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 50
I live less than one mile from this proposal and knowing my neighbors and the general feeling of the area , this will never be approved under this proposal. In the end, I think it will top out at 6-7 stories.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 5:57 PM
38 Geary 38 Geary is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 11,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by theskysthelimit View Post
I live less than one mile from this proposal and knowing my neighbors and the general feeling of the area , this will never be approved under this proposal. In the end, I think it will top out at 6-7 stories.
Makes me wonder if it'll do more harm than good. Remember the fierce opposition to 2550 Irving which is only 7 stories, 78 ft tall, with 90 all affordable units. The NIMBYs are going to have a field day with this one, probably saying that if we allow 7 story buildings to get build then 50 story ones will start to sprout all over.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 6:05 PM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCReid View Post
It seems to me that they eliminate the surface parking on the main street shown
This is right next to the zoo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 6:22 PM
unpermitted_variance unpermitted_variance is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Oakland
Posts: 144
There is no way the applicants have any intention of seeing this through. I'm surprised they've prepared as much submittal documentation as they have. John Hickey, one of the three people who seem to be behind this (one of the others being his wife), was sentenced to 8 years in prison for a case related to a real estate scam he ran in the 90s/2000s:
https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/...oper-who-defrauded-investors-2501829.php

Further investigation of CH Planning Inc, the applicant, shows no background in development, and none of the people involved seem to have any experience or funding beyond being real estate agents. Building a tower in SF requires incredible expertise and capital, which there is no indication they have. I'm not sure what they're trying to achieve here, but it certainly isn't building a skyscraper.

While it's a fun exercise to debate the merits of this type of development in this location, the proposal should not be taken seriously IMO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 6:25 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Closeted Normie
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 12,871
This is the classic "ask for the moon" tactic - by comparison their 12-story proposal seems like the height of sanity.
__________________
Everything new is old again

Sic semper tyrannis
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2023, 8:05 PM
theskysthelimit theskysthelimit is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
Makes me wonder if it'll do more harm than good. Remember the fierce opposition to 2550 Irving which is only 7 stories, 78 ft tall, with 90 all affordable units. The NIMBYs are going to have a field day with this one, probably saying that if we allow 7 story buildings to get build then 50 story ones will start to sprout all over.
To give you a little back story. We have a new Supervisor in District 4 and his opponents were mailing out mailers with high rises all over the Sunset. In the end, he defeated the incumbent and is now our new Supervisor. He is pro development but I know even he thinks this is too far out of the box.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2023, 9:58 PM
OneRinconHill OneRinconHill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 192
I think they should have kept that original 125 foot design, now nothing will get built instead of 400 homes that are desperately needed, and the 125 foot would have still added more height to the neighborhood and allowed for more nearby upzoning.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2023, 5:42 AM
mrnyc mrnyc is offline
cle/west village/shaolin
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,149
holy schnickes bold indeed. no way sunset sf approves that big boi. they’ll just fight about it awhile and in the end build a lowrise.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2023, 4:46 PM
bossabreezes bossabreezes is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 975
Not happening, and honestly its a stupid proposal.

If this were in SoMa, I'd be thrilled.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Apr 21, 2023, 4:32 PM
Jordan de California's Avatar
Jordan de California Jordan de California is offline
El Guátqui
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 56
BAHAHAHAHA

Let the NIMBYs shriek and wail

I hope this is the first of five hundred more just like it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:01 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.