SAN FRANCISCO | 10 South Van Ness Avenue | 820 FT | 67 FLOORS

[mt_climber13]

That MASSIVE podium is the size of 2 or 3 Van Ness ave. city blocks

[1977]

Nighttime rendering:


https://www.kpf.com/projects/10-south-van-ness

[SLO]

That is a stunner! I really like the build up on Market ...

[gillynova]

This would be an amazing addition to our skyline

[timbad]

been wondering about this one...

some news!

... the (EIR) for the proposed 55-story tower to rise up to 590 feet in height, not including a 20-foot-tall parapet, at 10 South Van Ness Avenue is now slated to be certified early next month, clearing the way for the project’s approval (assuming the City’s Hub District Plan is approved as well).

Keep in mind that the 10 South Van Ness project was deemed an Environmental Leadership Development Project ... which limits the scope and timeline for any EIR-based legal challenges of the project...

[tall/awkward]

I think it's time to adjust the height on this one. Should be 610. Will really stand out!

[Zapatan]

Damn, that's huge for the area

[timbad]

guess I should post this here as well...

Hub vote *next* week

and new info about a potential fate for the Monster in the Mission site...

The San Francisco Planning Commission Thursday delayed by a week a decision on a plan to advance development in a transit-rich 84-acre area centered around the intersection of Market Street and Van Ness Avenue.

...

A deal that is currently being negotiated by the Hub Coalition and a developer proposing to built a 55-story tower at 10 South Van Ness Ave. would involve the acquisition of the now-infamous "Monster in the Mission" site at 1979 Mission St. As I reported previously, Crescent Heights, which is seeking approval to develop the 966-unit tower, would acquire the Mission District site from Maximus Real Estate Partners and transfer it to the city or affordable housing organizations for development into affordable housing.

The commission is scheduled to take the Hub District Plan back up next week.

[botoxic]

Courtesy of Socketsite, 966-Unit, 610-foot 10 South Van Ness Goes Before SF Planning Commission Next Week

With a new image that seems to have reversed the previous color scheme:

[timbad]

Originally Posted by botoxic

...a new image that seems to have reversed the previous color scheme:...

and also now renders 1500 Mission and 30 Otis as complete - very nice!

(1977's post 62 above has the earlier version)

[Iceman12]

Looks like it goes up tomorrow, actually.

https://sfplanning.org/sites/default/files/agendas/2020-05/20200604_cal.pdf

[pseudolus]

Originally Posted by botoxic

what's with the vines at the Muni Metro entrance?

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Damn, that's huge for the area

"The area" will be very different from the past if all the proposals get built. Actually, a good start has already been made.

PS: Hey, the vines would cover up the frequent graffiti at least.

Love the way they show people INSIDE a coffee shop and, like, standing close to each other. Maybe someday . . . and there'll be bluebirds over the white cliffs of Dover . . . .

[timbad]

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/SF-supervisors-hold-up-part-of-big-Van-15423386.php

SF supervisors hold up part of big Van Ness-Market development plan for equity study

The scope of a long-percolating plan to allow for taller and denser housing around the intersection of Market Street and Van Ness Avenue was cut back after members of the Board of Supervisors Tuesday unanimously called for a pause to complete a race and equity study of how the rezoning would impact communities of color and other marginalized groups.

The new, narrowed version of the area rezoning — planners call it the Hub — allows three big developments in the plan area to go forward: 960 units at 10 South Van Ness Ave., 335 units at 30 Van Ness Ave., and 345 units and a new French-American International School at 98 Franklin St.

But another 15 sites in the 84-acre area — properties for which no development plans have been filed — will be delayed as the city explores how the rezoning might impact existing residents and organizations susceptible to displacement and gentrification.

The scaled-back plan was approved at the Board of Supervisors Land Use and Transportation Committee on Monday.

At Monday’s committee meeting, Supervisor Dean Preston, whose district includes a portion of the plan area, said that the three projects that will go forward all offer significant community benefits that have been agreed to through several years of negotiations. The remaining 15 properties, he said, do not have any active proposed developments and therefore would not be immediately be adversely impacted by more scrutiny.

...

The 320-foot 98 Franklin St. tower will include 25% deeply affordable housing as well as a new French-American International School. The 520-foot 30 Van Ness project will be 25% affordable and contribute $10 million in affordable housing fees to the city. The developer of the third parcel, the 55-story tower at 10 South Van Ness, has offered to buy the infamous “Monster in the Mission” site above the 16th and Mission BART Station and donate it to the city for low-income housing.

Preston said that further study of the remaining Hub land should include more input from the historically African American Western Addition neighborhood northwest of the Hub area.

...

The majority of the properties not being upzoned are smaller than the three going forward. Exceptions include 33 Gough St., which is owned by City College of San Francisco, and 170 Otis St., which is owned by the city. Both would see height limits increased from 85 feet to 300 feet under the current Hub plan.

...

At Monday’s meeting, some housing advocates criticized the decision to delay part of the rezoning, arguing that putting off a big piece of the plan could delay about 1,200 potential housing units, including 400 affordable units. Todd David, executive director of the Housing Action Coalition, called it “a fully baked plan that had it all — millions in fees, labor protections and desperately needed housing.”

... Erick Arguello, president of the Calle 24 Latino Cultural District, said the Hub plan must avoid the pitfalls of the 2010 Eastern Neighborhoods rezoning, which he said helped fuel the displacement of Latino families and blue-collar jobs from the Mission District.

Supervisor Aaron Peskin emphasized that the remainder of the plan, while delayed for more study, was not dead. “Let’s be clear: We are going to deal with this in the next six months,” he said.

[mizago]

Glad to see 10 Van Ness getting reaffirmed as moving forward.

Sounds like the other properties in question don't even have any developer proposals, so there's no immediate impact, other than having more stringent requirements for future projects.

[fimiak]

Originally Posted by pseudolus

what's with the vines at the Muni Metro entrance?

They are suggesting that this is how San Francisco in our post-Climate Change subtropical future will appear. Notice the skirts and t-shirts..anyone who has ever been at this intersection knows it for its 30mph winds.

[timbad]

bit of a strange twist to the Monster in the Mission deal for the affordable housing component of this project

Owners of ‘Monster in the Mission’ fighting in court over sale of housing project

A deal to build a 100% affordable housing project at the 16th and Mission BART Station is in jeopardy of falling apart because of a legal dispute between the partners that own the property.

In a lawsuit filed two weeks ago in Delaware, Baupost Group, the Boston hedge fund that has a controlling interest in the property, alleges that Maximus Real Estate Partners, its joint venture partner, is refusing to sign off on the $45 million sale of the property. Developer Crescent Heights is planning to purchase the property and donate it to the city for low-income housing to satisfy its affordable housing requirement for a skyscraper it plans to build at 10 South Van Ness.

... the purchase and sale agreement with Crescent Heights expires in September.

In the lawsuit, Baupost says its agreement with Maximus includes a provision where Baupost has “undisputed right to force the sale of the property to a third party.” Baupost owns 90% of the partnership that controls the property, while Maximus owns 10%.

In a court filing Wednesday, Maximus attorneys said the Crescent Heights deal is likely to fall through, and called the lawsuit “a last minute and obvious effort to try to blame Maximus in the likely event that Crescent Heights refuses to close the purchase at the required $45 million price.”

The attorneys said that “it is more likely that Crescent Heights, sensing Baupost’s unnecessary desperation to exit the transaction” would seek a lower price.

... on May 20, Baupost requested that Maximus sign the letter of intent on the deal. Instead of signing the agreement Rosania emailed: “Let me be clear — I’m signing nothing and when I’m ready to speak we will. I will never be bullied. Good try. Sorry. Do what you need to do.”

...
“Maximus has been explicit that it has undertaken this course of action for selfish and disloyal reasons: It has attempted to block a sale to Crescent Heights so that it may purchase the property itself, or else purchase Baupost’s interest in the company, at a price less than what Crescent Heights is willing to pay,” the lawsuit claims.

No hearings have been scheduled in the case, which was filed in Delaware Court of Chancery on July 31.

[Pedestrian]

Agreement signed to sell SF’s ‘Monster in the Mission’ site for affordable housing
Roland Li Sep. 4, 2020 Updated: Sep. 4, 2020 10:37 p.m.

“Crescent Heights has signed a binding agreement to purchase the property and plans to transfer it to the city to create hundreds of units of permanently affordable housing,” said David Noyola, a spokesman for the developer.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/art...to-sell-SF-s-Monster-in-the-15544467.php

So presumably 10 S. Van Ness won't be held up over this.

[gunna]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/art...to-sell-SF-s-Monster-in-the-15544467.php

So presumably 10 S. Van Ness won't be held up over this.

Good. Putting market-rate housing over 16th St BART was a terrible idea. Nobody who could afford one of those units would be caught dead using that station.

[viewguysf]

Let’s see if this or any other major project starts anytime soon; I think we’re going into a deep freeze, just as we saw in the 90s. Younger forumers have not experienced what we did, an extended time when nothing was happening.