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

[Pedestrian]

TRANSBAY BLOCK 4 (at temporary TransBay Terminal)

Location: Block 4 is located on Howard Street between Beale and Main Streets

Size: 1.04 acres

Developers: F4 Transbay Partners LLC, including Hines, Goldman Sachs and Urban Pacific, along with Mercy Housing of California

How they were selected: F4 Transbay Partners LLC obtained an option in early 2016 to acquire Block 4 from the Transbay Joint Powers Authority as part of its acquisition of Transbay Parcel F at the western end of the Salesforce Transit Center, since the authority owned both sites at the time. In April 2016, OCII approved that agreement.

How much they will pay: “The purchase price is not yet determined as OCII and the development team continue to negotiate a development agreement,” Ben Brandin, acting Transbay project manager, wrote in an email.

Plan: OCII is in negotiations with the developers to build two residential buildings, one a mixed-income tower and one a 100% affordable mid-rise building. There would be a total of approximately 669 housing units, according to Brandin. Townhomes are proposed, too. The 47-story mixed-income residential tower would include a “substantial” number of designated affordable units. The affordable midrise would be a 16-story, 160-foot tall residential building with 192 apartments, plus community rooms, laundry rooms and other indoor amenities, roof terraces, and community-serving commercial spaces, said William Ho, associate director of real estate development at Mercy Housing, in an emailed statement.

Status: It is in active predevelopment, with negotiations on development agreements and designs underway.

When construction could start: 2023-2025

What you need to know: There are overarching affordable housing requirements for the Transbay district that Block 4 is a key part of meeting, said Daniel Esdorn, managing director at Hines. The option to acquire Block 4 and Parcel F offered a way for the F4 Transbay Partners team to work with the city through the challenges of Parcel F, where there are strict zoning constraints, while still producing enough affordable housing in the Transbay district to allow the city to meet requirements, he said. The plan for Block 4 also includes “an ambitious slate of community benefits” that could include things like community-serving retail and taking on elements of the streetscape improvement plans, Esdorn added . . . .

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco...ent-temporary-transbay-transit-site.html

[crazy amy b]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

So in your 8th post you are calling someone who's been participating here for a decade or so a liar which means, in case you are so ignorant as not to know, an intentional teller of untruths. You are rude, nasty and don't know what you are talking about. None of your posts that I've seen contributed anything to the discussion here about building so one needs to ask why you crawled out from under your rock onto this site?.

None of that changes the fact that you are a LIAR. All you can do is deflect like a typical elitist CON.

Also you are very bad at math if you say you've been here a decade when your account was created in 2016. No wonder you can't read a mode share chart.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by crazy amy b

None of that changes the fact that you are a LIAR. All you can do is deflect like a typical elitist CON.

Also you are very bad at math if you say you've been here a decade when your account was created in 2016. No wonder you can't read a mode share chart.

Reported--and there's much you don't know (not just about the substance of these threads).

[Pedestrian]

Application Filed For Balboa Reservoir, West Of Twin Peaks, San Francisco
BY: ANDREW NELSON 5:30 AM ON MAY 3, 2021

A recent Phase planning application has been filed verifying the composition of phase one in a 17-acre residential project on land controlled by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission at Balboa Reservoir around 11 Frida Khala Way, San Francisco. Phase one will replace surface parking with an expected 628 new residential units divided between six horizontal and vertical blocks, ranging from townhouses to condos and market-rate to affordable housing. Balboa Reservoir is a joint venture between BRIDGE Housing and AvalonBay Communities.

BRIDGE Housing, AvalonBay Communities, Mission Housing Development Corporation, Pacific Union Development Company, and Habitat for Humanity will be involved with the development process. Master planning is a collaboration between Van Meter Williams Pollack and PYATOK Architects, while GLS Landscape Architects is responsible for the open space design. A developer of the townhouses has not yet been determined.

The development will be built on portions of the original Balboa Reservoir site, on which there are no existing buildings. Phase one will include the construction of 676,000 square feet between blocks C, D, E, F, TH1, and TH2, relevant transit infrastructure, and the two-acre Reservoir Park.

Blocks C and D will rise between five and seven floors to add 250 market-rate apartments between 171,000 and 110,000 square feet, respectively. Block E and will stand five stories tall, with just twenty units across 23,000 square feet, while the six-to-seven story Block F will produce 171 apartments across 179,000 square feet. Each block has an average unit size of around 850 square feet ranging from studios to three-bedroom residences.

Block TH1 will see 40 townhouse units across 77,000 square feet of built area, and TH2 will see 60 townhouse units made from 116,000 square feet. The townhomes average 1,680 square feet per unit.

Residential buildings from phase one will surround Reservoir Park . . . . Full buildout of Balboa Reservoir hopes to add 1,100 apartments across eleven blocks and 1.28 million square feet of residential buildings, four acres of public space, a child care center, and 339,900 square feet for parking. As many as fifty percent of all units will be affordable housing for persons earning half two 120 percent of the Area Median Income. The developer subsidizes 33%, and around 17% are pending public subsidies.

The tenants and the public alike will gain access to new public open spaces and vehicular parking. There are four other proposed landscaping opportunities to complement Reservoir Park. Gateway Landscape is a 0.1-acre gateway landscape dog facility by Lee Avenue and South Street. Brighton Paseo will be a 0.25-acre pedestrian + slow bike path connecting Reservoir Park with Ocean Avenue . . . .

Construction is expected to start in mid-2022, with the full buildout as early as 2026.

https://sfyimby.com/2021/05/application-...ir-west-of-twin-peaks-san-francisco.html

I very much like this. The renderings make it look almost old-world European. I hope it turns out that way.

And thanks again to SFYimby.

[crazy amy b]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Reported--and there's much you don't know (not just about the substance of these threads).

Same to you.

[twinpeaks]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Let me know how you get around in another 4 decades or so (how you communicate with me at that point will be up to your ingenuity).

Why so defensive? No one is stopping you from riding a car or taxi. Again, too much of our public space are dedicated for private car parking and driving. My parents do not have a car and they get around the city where they need to go, it's just slow via Muni. I'm advocating for more dedicated transit lanes so they can get around faster and easier. And this city is not just for old people, we need more dedicated bike lanes and pedestrian streets to make it safe to travel for everyone. 4 decades from now, I'm looking forward to teleportation using the internet, but seriously, when I'm old, would love to live in a "pedestrian is priority" area where I can walk around to get all my basic needs and feel safe doing so.

[twinpeaks]

Pedestrian - Thanks for the development updates

[timbad]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

https://sfyimby.com/2021/05/application-...ir-west-of-twin-peaks-san-francisco.html

I very much like this. ...

me too. when this first was proposed I remember thinking it was not ambitious (dense) enough, but this looks OK to my eye now, given its surroundings. and I really like the connections through to/from Ocean Ave (esp the pedestrian one from the park) and the fact that there is one even to the existing neighborhood to the west. will be so nice to have this filled in. now if CCSF could just get its act together about the other half...

[pseudolus]

Originally Posted by timbad

and the fact that there is one even to the existing neighborhood to the west

The Westwood Park Association was very much against this, for fear that this would increase competition for parking. I don't often speak at public meetings, but I got quite irate when they opposed it.

[tall/awkward]

Hi Pedestrian, are there more renderings of Transbay Block 4 in that article?

I clicked on the link, but want me to subscribe and I already subscribe to too many things...

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by tall/awkward

Hi Pedestrian, are there more renderings of Transbay Block 4 in that article?

I clicked on the link, but want me to subscribe and I already subscribe to too many things...

Unfortunately, no. The article also covers the other 3 parts of the site but nothing nearly as interesting planned for them. I haven’t checked the developers’ sites—“ Developers: F4 Transbay Partners LLC, including Hines, Goldman Sachs and Urban Pacific”—you might do that. Also the one image is from Steelblue. Maybe they have more.

[Pedestrian]

New Rendering Revealed For 401 South Van Ness Avenue, Mission District, San Francisco
BY: ANDREW NELSON 5:30 AM ON MAY 5, 2021

Developers have filed a Large Project Authorization request for an eight-story group housing project at 401 South Van Ness Avenue in the Mission District, San Francisco . . . . The corner-lot proposal will become a mixed-use building with 153 bedroom suites, commercial retail, and residential amenities. The Kansas-based Elsey Partners is responsible for the development.

The 99-foot tall proposal yields 63,960 square feet, with 44,190 square feet for residential use and 3,660 square feet for retail. The rooftop includes a 750 square foot amenity terrace with seating and an open kitchen area, while another 856 square feet of the rooftop will be covered with solar panels.

Residential space will be included within the two basement levels and floors two through eight. Each floor will consist of a shared living area open to the dorm-like studios between the second and eighth levels. The basement and sub-basement include several bathrooms, a dining hall with a kitchen, an exercise studio, a courtyard, a gym, and a lounge.

. . . Parking is included for 60 bicycles and no vehicles. Twenty-nine units will be rented as affordable, ranging for residents earning 55%, 80%, or 110% of the Area Median Income.

In the planning document, Elsey Partners describe the intent behind 401 South Van Ness, writing that “the proposed group housing project is a modern-day version of the affordable SRO (single-room occupancy) hotels that were populated by San Francisco’s working classroom, transient laborers, and immigrants during the last century. The same dynamics that attracted the working class to SRO hotels 100 years ago are at play with the current development.” The description goes on to highlight the relative affordability and access to transit . . . .

Construction is expected to cost $25.4 million over an estimated duration of 18 months. The project is two blocks away from the 16th Street Mission BART Station.









(The site now)

https://sfyimby.com/2021/05/new-renderin...enue-mission-district-san-francisco.html

It's interesting to do the math on this: $25.4 million/202 "beds" = $125,742.57 per "bed" (some of the 153 rooms have 2 beds) or about $166,000 per room (no bathroom or kitchen).

It seems to me that this is what SF would have to build in large quantities to actually house our homeless population. But given the problems some of them have, I'd strongly consider ensuite bathrooms and at least a microwave for meal prep. Otherwise you'd have to have a staff present all the time to make sure the communal bathrooms and kitchens remained sanitary. Either way, it would add to the cost. In the end, can we afford it?

[fimiak]

The problem with this entire scheme is that this is ultimately still paid for by taxpayers, raising the cost of living for everyone, simply to house 202 people for $25m. Instead of spending all money and effort on the plight of the bottom 5%, they should go back to trying to build new homes for wealthy residents and newcomers so that older homes can go to the middle class at a more affordable rate.

Common sense is not wanted when every electoral contest becomes a battle of who is more progressive.

[pseudolus]

401 South Van Ness is not subsidized housing for homeless people.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by pseudolus

401 South Van Ness is not subsidized housing for homeless people.

No, it's not. As the article says, it's market rate with 29 of the 153 units "affordable".

But as I said (and the point of what I said) it seems like it's approximately what the city would have to build if it set out to build new housing for all of the people currently living on its streets and so its economics give us some idea of how much that would cost. It's really the most stripped down basic form of housing I can imagine--almost like a people warehouse--and therefore the lowest cost form of new-built housing I can imagine.

[Pedestrian]

Here's what you can see of the latest new building at UC Hastings law school on Golden Gate Ave.:



Looks like they are finishing up demo (judging by the visible pile of debris).

The crane is for the project next to the YMCA building on Eddy (I think). Jerry can get better pictures of that (from above) than I thought I could.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Pedestrian - Yes, the crane is at 361 Turk Street. Here is what the area looks like today. To the right of the 361 Turk St. crane is another very tall crane - I do not know that that is for. I did see a large streel frame being moved there this morning. And in the foreground is the demolition of the Hastings building.

361 Turk, San Francisco

[timbad]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Here's what you can see of the latest new building at UC Hastings law school on Golden Gate Ave.:



Looks like they are finishing up demo (judging by the visible pile of debris).

is this not this thread? I may be confused

[Pedestrian]

^^You aren't confused. I was--I couldn't find it and guessed it didn't have a thread because it may not be tall enough. Will, post the photo in the thread.

[timbad]

OK, great, thanks for clarifying.

some random things from this last weekend...

the floating firehouse





Folsom canyon, not backlit for once



speaking of Folsom, it was nice to see signs of life at the ground-floor retail of 400 Folsom (Avery)





the Guy Place Mini-park (just up the hill from Folsom off... First?) is open. I didn't take pics inside because there was a yoga class going on when I was there







random Second St shot



Serif (also not backlit for once)





with a glimpse of some its new neighbors down the street



those neighbors



supportive housing on Mission near 7th



the little one across from the former Flax site on Market, just cause the light was better than usual (have I mentioned not backlit?)



Van Ness

moving south to north...

I'd been getting concerned because all the construction on Van Ness didn't seem to be getting to the final blocks closest to Market, but that is no longer the case:







as we move up the hill we start to get some idea of what it will look like when done



in front of new 1001 Van Ness and near CPMC



even the sidewalks look about done in some places (though I would say this was the exception. it was hard for me to discern a pattern of why some things were done and others not)



looking south



at least in some cases it seems they are trying to preserve existing median trees. I seem to remember that was a point of contention when planning this



don't remember the address of this one on Franklin, or whether we had seen it completed, but here you go



south again, from north of the Holiday Inn



having crested the hill, looking down toward northern waterfront



more sidewalk



new one at Union St



if this is a typical example of a boarding platform, I dig it



again looking south



median plantings in progress?



construction ends a couple blocks before Lombard. this is from Greenwich



speaking of Lombard, it is looking fairly spiffy these days



jumping over to Union Square area, former Macy's Men's





looking a bit more official, the Muni station entrance at... well, you can see.





I've always sort of wondered why they didn't put the entrance at the corner of 4th and Folsom, where it would be more visible and connect better to the east-west thoroughfare that Folsom is. there will be affordable housing on the corner, but it seems to make more sense to have kind of swapped the two. this is the corner:



the infill on Fourth near Folsom



4th and Brannan station looks about done