HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2019, 7:39 AM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 996
Thanks for that, amvion!

I'm glad planning is leaning towards the single/taller tower. Looking forward to this one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2019, 7:10 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,128
Quote:
Plans for a Single, Taller 984-Unit Hub District Tower Picked
January 14, 2019

. . . with the anticipated passage of San Francisco’s Hub District Plan, which would up-zone the corner for development up to 600 feet in height, Crescent Heights is now formally proposing to pursue the single tower design . . . .

The 55-story tower would yield the same number of (slightly larger) residential units and retail space (30,000 square feet) as the two-tower design, but with around 240 off-street parking spaces as now envisioned (versus 518 as originally proposed) and an enclosed mid-block pedestrian connection between Market and 12th Street, the sidewalk for which would be widened and specially paved.

And with the support of San Francisco’s Planning Department, the preferred plan will be presented to the San Francisco’s Planning Commission on Thursday, with the hopes of having the project’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) certified this April and securing the project’s approval circa July.



http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...er-picked.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2019, 11:13 AM
Jerry of San Fran's Avatar
Jerry of San Fran Jerry of San Fran is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,566
amvion - thanks for the update! If the building looks like the plans presented it will a great addition to the intersection which now is boring & unattractive now. The intersection demands a building of quality. With the current high cost and shortage of labor I wonder how many years before we will see this building completed.

I looked at the document presented to the city to see if BART was mentioned, and yes, briefly on the last page. As noted before by me the BART tunnel turns south under the property which is why the high rise portion is set back from Market Street.
__________________
(Essex) Fox Plaza resident 54th year in 2025 - (the building everyone loves to hate :------>))
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2019, 6:31 AM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 996
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2019, 4:34 PM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
In the meantime, the existing building had new signage stretched over the metal framing, new LED lighting installed all the way down 12th Street, and other minor improvements have been made, so it looks like it might be around for a while.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2019, 5:07 PM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1977 View Post
Did they drop the checkerboard window glass that made it look like the Jack Tar Hotel?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2019, 10:15 PM
hruski hruski is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 165
Nema is 350 feet tall and this building is listed at 400 feet, but the rendering makes it look double Nema's size. Something isn't right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2019, 4:40 AM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 996
Quote:
Originally Posted by hruski View Post
Nema is 350 feet tall and this building is listed at 400 feet, but the rendering makes it look double Nema's size. Something isn't right.
This is the 600 foot version which was the SF planning's preferred version.

Quote:
And with the anticipated passage of San Francisco’s Hub District Plan, which would up-zone the corner for development up to 600 feet in height, Crescent Heights is now formally proposing to pursue the single tower design, as rendered by Handel Architects below, as their preferred plan for moving forward.

And with the support of San Francisco’s Planning Department, the preferred plan will be presented to the San Francisco’s Planning Commission on Thursday, with the hopes of having the project’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) certified this April and securing the project’s approval circa July.
https://socketsite.com/archives/2019...er-picked.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2019, 6:09 AM
SLO's Avatar
SLO SLO is offline
REAL Kiwi!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California & Texas
Posts: 17,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1977 View Post


Spectacular rendering, this building is tall enough to stretch the skyline...
__________________
I'm throwing my arms around Paris.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Apr 2, 2019, 7:51 AM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,287
That MASSIVE podium is the size of 2 or 3 Van Ness ave. city blocks
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2020, 7:36 AM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 996
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 12:11 AM
botoxic botoxic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The Mission
Posts: 690
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:


Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Jan 24, 2020, 5:20 PM
gillynova's Avatar
gillynova gillynova is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Austin / Bay Area
Posts: 2,786
This would be an amazing addition to our skyline
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 5:33 AM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 3,148
been wondering about this one...

some news!

Quote:
... 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...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 7:39 PM
tall/awkward tall/awkward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 196
I think it's time to adjust the height on this one. Should be 610. Will really stand out!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2020, 11:41 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NY - Cali
Posts: 6,679
Damn, that's huge for the area
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted May 16, 2020, 6:35 AM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 3,148
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...

Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 8:54 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
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 . . . .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2020, 2:07 AM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 3,148
Hub plan paused, but not this project

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...n-15423386.php

Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 6:42 PM
Iceman12 Iceman12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 41
Looks like it goes up tomorrow, actually.

https://sfplanning.org/sites/default...200604_cal.pdf
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 5:47 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

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