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

[hruski]

Originally Posted by fflint

Market/Van Ness and its immediate surrounds are perfect for new, high-rise housing--at the crossroads of the city, with excellent public transportation in every direction, busy but reasonably quiet at night, and absolutely no worries about destroying the urban fabric or overwhelming small-scale, fine-grained Victoriana.

this area really has a ton of potential because of its location. it could go the direction of residential high rises, or it could go in the direction of retail, like a san francisco version of times square.

[RST500]

Originally Posted by hruski

this area really has a ton of potential because of its location. it could go the direction of residential high rises, or it could go in the direction of retail, like a san francisco version of times square.

There was a plan to do just that but it was voted down.

http://www.spur.org/goodgovernment/ballotanalysis/Nov2009/propd

[peanut gallery]

Yes, it's all very exciting. I'm hoping the increased demand for transit will encourage more funding as well.

On the Hugo Hotel project, SocketSite has a new rendering:


Source: SocketSite.

Here is the previous version we had seen before:


Source: SocketSite.

And some details from an older SocketSite post on the development:

As designed by Kennerly Architecture & Planning, the new building will feature a total of fifty-six units composed of seventeen three-bedroom flats, twentytwo two-bedroom flats, and seventeen one-bedroom flats.

The new building will have two distinct masses: a larger nine-story mass at the corner of 6th and Howard Streets and a smaller eight-story mass along 6th Street. Overall, the design will be contemporary in style and will feature brick veneer cladding, dark patinated metal siding and exposed structural concrete on the exterior. In addition, the project will feature painted or dark anodized aluminum windows, steel and glass entry marquis, and concrete and translucent glass balcony rails.

The main question now: how will the demise of redevelopment agencies in California affect this proposal? Who will finance it now and will that change anything about the size, scope and design of this development?

[hruski]

Originally Posted by RST500

There was a plan to do just that but it was voted down.

http://www.spur.org/goodgovernment/ballotanalysis/Nov2009/propd

Just because it can't have signage and billboards like Times Square doesn't mean it can't be a retail mecca.

[CyberEric]

I will be truly sad if they put that in for the Hugo. I know it's abandoned now, but even as it is I find it to be a truly inspiring corner of interesting street art, goofy comedy and interesting ideas.

I don't want to be all NIMBY, I like almost all of the new highrises being proposed or built, but the lower level housing, not so much. I am just concerned about the soul of our city and a lot of this redevelopment looks like it belongs somewhere else besides SF. Just my thoughts though, I completely respect the other side and see the value of it.

[viewguysf]

Originally Posted by CyberEric

I will be truly sad if they put that in for the Hugo. I know it's abandoned now, but even as it is I find it to be a truly inspiring corner of interesting street art, goofy comedy and interesting ideas.

I don't want to be all NIMBY, I like almost all of the new highrises being proposed or built, but the lower level housing, not so much. I am just concerned about the soul of our city and a lot of this redevelopment looks like it belongs somewhere else besides SF. Just my thoughts though, I completely respect the other side and see the value of it.

I certainly understand what you're saying and I wholeheartedly agree with your philosophy, but the Hugo was not meant to last. It looked much better when the wacky art installation was done years ago, but it looks faded and tired to me now. Surely that old, damaged, exposed building can't last much longer either. At least the new rendering looks better than the previous one, which I instantly disliked. Anyone reading my posts knows I've complained about a lot of boring, standardized and VE'd architecture in SF, a city that deserves much better.

[viewguysf]

Here are the plans for student housing at Ninth and Mission--nice concept, dull building IMO.

http://cdn.e2ma.net/userdata/1405882/assets/docs/1321plans.pdf

[Jerry of San Fran]

Today's San Francisco Chronicle has pictures of a proposed 34 story building on the corner of what is now a parking lot and donut shop. The article is by John King. Beautiful building. I'd be surprised if it happens. You can see the story here at SF Gate: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/04/26/BAR01O4QT5.DTL

I'm not sure about copy rights so I did not upload a picture here.

[Jerry of San Fran]

Originally Posted by viewguysf

Here are the plans for student housing at Ninth and Mission--nice concept, dull building IMO.

http://cdn.e2ma.net/userdata/1405882/assets/docs/1321plans.pdf

viewguysf - thanks for the link. This would be in my view a block away but would not block anything significant in my view.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by Jerry of San Fran

Today's San Francisco Chronicle has pictures of a proposed 34 story building on the corner of what is now a parking lot and donut shop. The article is by John King. Beautiful building. I'd be surprised if it happens. You can see the story here at SF Gate: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/04/26/BAR01O4QT5.DTL

I'm not sure about copy rights so I did not upload a picture here.

Nice! I've always dreamed of a tower going up at that location, and that design looks pretty good. But from the renders, it looks like in addition to the parking lot, it won't be replacing that little 3 story building with the donut shop, but rather the larger 4 story building on the other side of the parking lot.

And I'm pretty sure it's ok to post images from a news article, as long as you link them. Here are the renderings:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/04/26/BAR01O4QT5.DTL









As for that building proposed at ninth and mission, I agree it's pretty boring. But at the same time it's pretty inoffensive, and it's some more infill (and over 10 floors at that), so I'm happy enough with how it looks.

And here are the renderings for 9th and mission:

[1977]

Wow, I love the Richard Meier building!

[peanut gallery]

Wakamesalad created a thread for One Van Ness. It's gorgeous.

I agree, the 9th and Mission building sort of leaves you unmoved, either for good or bad. And that appears to be by design. It has a couple of interesting elements, but overall it's a wallflower.

[flight_from_kamakura]

the meier building will be a complete failure without a grade-level retail wrap, and someone should have told meier that before he designed the thing, because there's no way this gets through planning without it. work in progress, a nice start, but work in progress.

[NOPA]

That's awesome! Hey these are some photos of the new building on Central and McAllister. Small but better than before.

[CyberEric]

I like the Meier building as well, nice looking design.

[1977]

CPMC cleared one more hurdle...

The final EIR was approved tonight by the Planning Commission.

Also:

The Planning Commission approved exemptions to several zoning laws so the structures can be built as planned. The site of the planned hospital permits a 240-foot-tall building, but the commission allowed the hospital to be 265 feet. At the St. Luke's campus, where the current maximum height allowed is 88 feet, the hospital can be rebuilt at 99 feet and an office building can be 100 feet.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/04/26/BAOH1O98TF.DTL#ixzz1tDVKIsVa

[viewguysf]

Originally Posted by 1977

CPMC cleared one more hurdle...

The final EIR was approved tonight by the Planning Commission.

Also:

Great! Van Ness is going to be immensely improved by the hospital, the AAA redo and the Meier tower if it is built!

[minesweeper]

Originally Posted by NOPA

That's awesome! Hey these are some photos of the new building on Central and McAllister. Small but better than before.

Thanks for the photos! I like the natural wood appearance, but I wonder how it'll hold up to a constant beating from the sun and fog.

[1977]

Originally Posted by viewguysf

Great! Van Ness is going to be immensely improved by the hospital, the AAA redo and the Meier tower if it is built!

Don't forget about 1800 Van Ness and 1285 Sutter (under construction).

Some info about 1800 Van Ness (and a few other projects) in today's SF Business Times:

At 1800 Van Ness Ave., Oyster Development has picked a lender for a $30 million, 98-unit development, according to Oyster Development President Dean Givas, who declined to identify the lender because the loan isn’t due to close for several months. And Principle Global Investors has acquired a site entitled for 299-unit phase two of the One Rincon Hill development for $29.75 million, a sale that should finally revive construction of the long-delayed second tower at the entrance to the Bay Bridge.

In 2014, Foley anticipates that there will be fewer than 200 new condos on the market in a market that typically absorbs 800 to 1,000 new units each year. The Spiers/Canyon Johnson Market Street project is slated for completion in October of 2013, 1800 Van Ness a few months into 2014, and the second Rincon phase in fall of 2014. While the real estate investment trusts will hold on to their development sites, Foley thinks some smaller apartment developers will end up selling to condo builders.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/print-edition/2012/04/27/condos-make-a-comeback.html

[flight_from_kamakura]

walked by 1800 van ness site the other day, it's much larger than it appears. a shame we'll get only those 98 units (at that price, 2-3 levels of underground parking, with 4 story woodframe over a concrete base). this site could easily support a concrete construction of ~10 floors without any trouble, same footprint, limited viewline interruption, etc., a signature tower there would be something else.