SAN FRANCISCO | 2700 Sloat Boulevard | 589 FT | 50 FLOORS

[deanstirrat]

could not agree more

[jbermingham123]

This pains me to no end. Because I just know its going to get shot down

We REALLY need at least 100 of these in this area and we needed to start building them 30 or 40 years ago. Ugh

#TorontifySF

[homebucket]

Renderings Revealed For 50-Story Skyscraper In Sunset District, San Francisco



BY: ANDREW NELSON 5:30 AM ON JULY 4, 2023

Renderings have been revealed for the proposed 50-story skyscraper at 2700 Sloat Boulevard in the Outer Sunset of San Francisco. The 589-foot tall structure hopes to replace the Sloat Garden Center across from the San Francisco Zoo with 680 for-ownership homes and new retail designed by Solomon Cordwell Buenz. Raelynn Hickey of CH Planning is responsible for the application.

...

Solomon Cordwell Buenz is the project architect. New renderings show the tower wrapped with glass railing balconies. The facade will consist of floor-to-ceiling windows and aluminum panels. Its triangular floorplate will be softened with rounded edges, making the building appear narrowest when viewed from the west on Ocean Beach towards the 50-foot wide nose. The floorplate tappers out to a 78-foot-wide eastern facade. By contrast, people looking at it from the north and south will see the 179-foot-long profile.

Along the podium facing Sloat Boulevard, the deck will feature large double-height windows framed by silver and faded international orange-painted metal girders conforming to the gradual slope of the property, with transparent glass showcasing the interior shops and gym. Along the third floor, the rectangular mass will be punctuated by a consistent row of windows, establishing a rigid datum below the resident’s amenity deck. Along Wawona Street, a row of six retail spaces will be housed in two-story townhome-style units complete with landscaped stoops.

Confluence is the landscape architect. Details about the landscaping remain scarce at this preliminary stage. For the streetscape, the project applicant writes they anticipate “undertaking a range of public realm improvements along all four frontages, including sidewalk widening, installation of street trees and landscaping, lighting and hardscape improvements.” Illustrations show bulb-outs at each corner, an extended plaza close to the residential lobby, and widened sidewalks around the retail.

https://sfyimby.com/2023/07/renderin...francisco.html

[homebucket]

And the renderings:

















https://sfyimby.com/2023/07/renderin...francisco.html

[e40]

Build it!

Turn the Sunset into a foggy mini-Manhattan!

[Charmy2]

I really hope this gets built...I can't imagine it will be but my point stands.

[homebucket]

I don’t think it’ll get approved but I’m also on Team Just Build It.

[dimondpark]

OMGoodness. Yes Please. Who can get this done? Like who we have to kill?

[tech12]

It looks like out-of-place garbage that will convince a lot of formerly neutral, and even some pro-development people, that development can be bad. Which could even lead to backlash against high-rises, like we saw in the past, in reaction to towers getting built among low-rises in Pacific Heights, Russian Hill, Fisherman's Wharf, etc. Housing is needed, but 50 story buildings in a low-rise neighborhood on the beach aren't a necessity for large-scale housing growth, and context should matter too. Basically, if you're a yimby who likes to convince people in this development-averse city about how we need to build lots more housing, then by wholeheartedly supporting this specific project (instead of say a 10 story building at that location, with the 50 story buildings staying downtown instead), you might be shooting yourself in the foot. It doesn't follow zoning rules anyways.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by homebucket

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.

Yeah. It's so hilariously out of place (in size, and in regards to zoning as well as local sentiment) that the proposal almost feels like a conspiracy cooked up by NIMBY types lol.

"Look they want to wall off your beach!!!"

[dimondpark]

Party pooper.

Can't you see this is now we get to transform that hideous neighborhood into Miami

[Charmy2]

Originally Posted by homebucket

I don’t think it’ll get approved but I’m also on Team Just Build It.

Yeah. I'm a sucker for anything tall and any big proposal in the city gets me excited.

[Zapatan]

I think I would both love and hate this at the same time if it got built.

[BobbyMucho]

Originally Posted by tech12

It looks like out-of-place garbage that will convince a lot of formerly neutral, and even some pro-development people, that development can be bad. Which could even lead to backlash against high-rises...

Originally Posted by tech12

Housing is needed, but 50 story buildings in a low-rise neighborhood on the beach aren't a necessity for large-scale housing growth, and context should matter too.

I could not agree more with both of these statements. No one seems to have a coherent strategy for building housing that helps mitigate the ongoing need while also addressing people's rational concerns about context and scale—this project (and all of the 'build it now' rhetoric) is specifically the wrong approach.

[deanstirrat]

"out of context" and "out of scale"... are we serious people??? The sunset is out of context and out of scale. The entire neighborhood is a suburbs in one of the most expensive cities on the planet. Bulldoze those single family homes and build a coastal skyline to rival Miamis. Build it now.

[Zerton]

SF needs the housing. If they want to make the rest of the city into a museum they need to allow the occasional megaproject like this one to keep up with demand. So long as this contains reasonably sized units and not entire floor ultra luxury units.

[BobbyMucho]

Originally Posted by Zerton

SF needs the housing. If they want to make the rest of the city into a museum they need to allow the occasional megaproject like this one to keep up with demand. So long as this contains reasonably sized units and not entire floor ultra luxury units.

And, by that same logic, we should replace the least used parks and open space in the city with 500ft towers as well?

No reasonable person is arguing against building more housing or turning the city into a 'museum'. There are more than enough unused, under-built and approved sites throughout the county that are contextually appropriate places for greater density and be sensibly up-zoned, namely the entire eastern shore and all of SOMA...

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by Zerton

SF needs the housing. If they want to make the rest of the city into a museum they need to allow the occasional megaproject like this one to keep up with demand. So long as this contains reasonably sized units and not entire floor ultra luxury units.

Yeah but this isnt a neighborhood of beautiful Victorians worthy of preserving tho...
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7362...8192?entry=ttu

[deanstirrat]

Originally Posted by BobbyMucho

And, by that same logic, we should replace the least used parks and open space in the city with 500ft towers as well?

WHAT? I'm sure everyone here understands the value of parks and open space. The avenues are not parks... they're crumbling single family homes with lots of wasted space for cars and zero verticality. Parks of one of the only uses of land thats better then housing imo. Also, the more people we let live in dense vertical cities, the less natural land is bulldozed to build sterile suburbs to the north and east. Get on board or get out of the way.

[twinpeaks]

Originally Posted by deanstirrat

WHAT? I'm sure everyone here understands the value of parks and open space. The avenues are not parks... they're crumbling single family homes with lots of wasted space for cars and zero verticality. Parks of one of the only uses of land thats better then housing imo. Also, the more people we let live in dense vertical cities, the less natural land is bulldozed to build sterile suburbs to the north and east. Get on board or get out of the way.

At first, I was like no way... but I'm growing to like it. I think it will be cool to have high rises along Lake Merced, Ocean Beach and Golden Gate Park (like in Central Park)