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

[Pedestrian]

Thank God the old San Francisco isn't dead yet (though it's not in the Mission District)!

Renderings Revealed For 2051 Market Street, Mission District, San Francisco
BY: ANDREW NELSON 5:00 AM ON JANUARY 24, 2022

New renderings and a preliminary project assessment for 2051 Market Street have been revealed, located on the northern edge of the Mission District in San Francisco. The seven-story residential infill will replace a two-story commercial building with commercial retail and 29 new apartments to be sold for ownership. The project will also apply for protection from Senate Bill 330.

The 85-foot tall structure will yield 31,950 square feet, with 27,270 square feet for residential use, 1,930 square feet for ground-level retail, and 1,890 square feet for usable open space. Parking will be included for 29 bicycles. There will be no vehicular parking, a sensible decision given the neighborhood density and public transit access.

Of the 29 units, there will be 16 one-bedrooms and 13 two-bedrooms. A few units will include private balconies. The rooftop will include a shared deck, giving residents views across the Mission District. The deck will be set back from the parapet, obscuring its view of the street and neighboring buildings.

The proposal expects to benefit from the Density Bonus and plans to receive protection from Senate Bill 330. Three units will be priced as affordable, aiming for middle-class residents earning around 80% of the Area Median Income.

Winder Gibson Architects is responsible for the design, and Shadi AbouKhater of Sak Design Build is the property owner. City records show the property last sold in September of 2020 for $3.6 million.

The former commercial tenant at 2051 Market Street was Eros, a queer bathhouse and sex club. Eros closed the location and is planning to open a new location, address unspecified, in the Spring of this year . . . .



[Now]

https://sfyimby.com/2022/01/renderings-r...reet-mission-district-san-francisco.html

[38 Geary]

^ Technically it is in the Mission District. It's in the neighborhood known as Mission Dolores, which is part of the Mission District. And since this project on the South side of Market, it is within the boundaries. Across the street is Duboce Triangle.

[tall/awkward]

Aw, would've been more fun if Eros shared the lobby in the new building.

[Jerry of San Fran]

2052 Market St. former Eros. I was in the building only once, for a meeting with intactavists. The building looked to be poorly constructed. I am glad to see some nice architecture replacing it.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by homebucket

^ Technically it is in the Mission District. It's in the neighborhood known as Mission Dolores, which is part of the Mission District. And since this project on the South side of Market, it is within the boundaries. Across the street is Duboce Triangle.

Ask most city residents what neighborhood it's in and I think they'd say something like "Upper Market" or maybe even "the Castro". "Technically" there is no "Mission District". There is "Mission Dolores" and the "Inner Mission". The block in question is indeed just at the border between Mission Dolores and Eureka Valley in the official breakdown. Culturally, it feels to me a lot more like Eureka Valley which is the official name for the Castro.


https://www.bayareamarketreports.com/trend/san-francisco-neighborhood-district-map

Is it necessary to argue about everything? Even non-existent neighborhoods? I guess so.

The sun will rise tomorrow. Objections?

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Jerry of San Fran

2052 Market St. former Eros. I was in the building only once, for a meeting with intactavists. The building looked to be poorly constructed. I am glad to see some nice architecture replacing it.

You must have gone in when the lights were turned up. I'm not sure the construction details would be easily observed during business hours.

[38 Geary]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Ask most city residents what neighborhood it's in and I think they'd say something like "Upper Market" or maybe even "the Castro". "Technically" there is no "Mission District". There is "Mission Dolores" and the "Inner Mission". The block in question is indeed just at the border between Mission Dolores and Eureka Valley in the official breakdown. Culturally, it feels to me a lot more like Eureka Valley which is the official name for the Castro.

Is it necessary to argue about everything? Even non-existent neighborhoods? I guess so.

The sun will rise tomorrow. Objections?

Actually, as a native San Franciscan, my initial impression was indeed the Castro. However, after looking up the official boundaries from multiple sources including Google Maps and various neighborhood guides, it is, objectively, without argument, within the boundaries of the Mission. Of course, this is just a technicality, as I would agree, subjectively, it feels more culturally like the Castro.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Ask most city residents what neighborhood it's in and I think they'd say something like "Upper Market" or maybe even "the Castro". "Technically" there is no "Mission District". There is "Mission Dolores" and the "Inner Mission".

lol are you serious? Collectively those areas are known as "the Mission District", or "the Mission" for short, and a lot of people, including Mission natives, never even make a distinction between them. It's all just "the Mission".

Look, here's a map that very specifically says "Mission District", that predates your weird real estate map by over half a century:



Old Muni maps from the 1990-2000s also said "Mission district", as have plenty of other maps, past and present.

How strange, why do these maps say that? Maybe it's because that's what the area is called? Weird.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by tech12

lol are you serious? Collectively those areas are known as "the Mission District", or "the Mission" for short, and a lot of people, including Mission natives, never even make a distinction between them. It's all just "the Mission".

Look, here's a map that very specifically says "Mission District", that predates your weird real estate map by over half a century:



Old Muni maps from the 1990-2000s also said "Mission district", as have plenty of other maps, past and present.

How strange, why do these maps say that? Maybe it's because that's what the area is called? Weird.

I am absolutely serious. The San Francisco Association of Realtors recognizes the map I posted which does not show a "Mission District". But in a way, that was my point. People who live in the city mostly go by neighborhood designations independent of the official designations and no place directly on Market Street is viewed by most people as part of the Mission District as I said. There is no official "Upper Market" just as there is no official "Mission District" but there is a "Merchants of Upper Market" business association because to most people something along Market St feels distinct as a neighborhood called "Upper Market".

Your old maps are just that: Old and not reflective of modern SF.

[fimiak]

Just because your Compass (real estate) map says 'Inner Mission' instead of 'Mission District' does not mean that area is not still considered the Mission by everyone in SF. Your dumb map doesn't even say anything about the Castro...it is meaningless. You really think 'Parnassus Heights' is more of a neighborhood than the Castro?

The only reason Compass wants to get rid of Mission and Castro is because they don't want institutional investors to think 'Latinos' and 'Gays'. Also no Chinatown..in SF....interesting how racist the map is when you actually look at it.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by fimiak

Just because your Compass (real estate) map says 'Inner Mission' instead of 'Mission District' does not mean that area is not still considered the Mission by everyone in SF. Your dumb map doesn't even say anything about the Castro...it is meaningless. You really think 'Parnassus Heights' is more of a neighborhood than the Castro?

The only reason Compass wants to get rid of Mission and Castro is because they don't want institutional investors to think 'Latinos' and 'Gays'. Also no Chinatown..in SF....interesting how racist the map is when you actually look at it.

You are making my point precisely except for one thing: "Everyone in San Francisco" does NOT consider the strip of Market Street near the Safeway as part of the Mission. They consider it as part of "Upper Market" or possibly the Castro or even Eureka Valley as I've been saying.

This began when I questioned whether a gay sex club on Market Street across from the Safeway was a "Mission District" structure. Do you think it is? If not, we agree. If so, we don't.

[twinpeaks]

Originally Posted by fimiak

Just because your Compass (real estate) map says 'Inner Mission' instead of 'Mission District' does not mean that area is not still considered the Mission by everyone in SF. Your dumb map doesn't even say anything about the Castro...it is meaningless. You really think 'Parnassus Heights' is more of a neighborhood than the Castro?

The only reason Compass wants to get rid of Mission and Castro is because they don't want institutional investors to think 'Latinos' and 'Gays'. Also no Chinatown..in SF....interesting how racist the map is when you actually look at it.

I grew up in SF and live near this area now. No one calls this area Mission District or the Mission. Most people refer to this as the Castro or Upper Market or sometimes "Church and Market". Few blocks south is where the Mission really starts.

Agree - those real estate maps does not reflect reality in most cases.

[fimiak]

Well I never meant to call that specific area on Market the Mission District, I simply think that map that excludes the Castro and Chinatown is a little ridiculous.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by fimiak

Well I never meant to call that specific area on Market the Mission District, I simply think that map that excludes the Castro and Chinatown is a little ridiculous.

Speak to your favorite realtor. It's their map. I just used it to make the point that whatever the Eros building is, no San Franciscan would think of it as "Mission District" as Yimby did. And I said from the beginning, I'd call it "Upper Market" myself.

[black beatle]

SFYimby gets neighborhoods wrong all the time. So obvious they don't have anyone local making the posts.

[Pedestrian]

Ella Rohlffs Place Affordable Senior Housing Proposed For 1001 Franklin Street, San Francisco
BY: ANDREW NELSON 5:30 AM ON JANUARY 28, 2022

Preliminary plans have been filed, showing a draft design for new affordable housing for seniors at 1001 Franklin Street on Cathedral Hill, San Francisco. The new project, dubbed Ella Rohlffs Place, will replace surface parking with 94 new homes. The John Stewart Company is sponsoring the development for the property owner, Martin Luther Towner Inc.

Construction will replace a surface parking lot and garage facing Ellis Street between Franklin and Gough Street. The proposal will not impact the three existing structures connected to the Saint Marks Lutheran Church, including the Martin Luther Tower, Saint Mark’s Urban Life Center, and Saint Mark’s Lutheran Church . . . .

In this preliminary design stage, the new 76-foot tall structure will yield 70,800 square feet with 49,720 square feet for residential use, 18,050 square feet of common circulation space, and 1,150 square feet for offices. Parking will be included for 20 bicycles and no vehicles. The project will include a new landscaped lower courtyard, connected by stairs to an upper courtyard between the church and community center. The building and landscaping will span 0.39 acres.

The building will yield 94 affordable rental homes. Unit sizes will vary with 19 studios and 75 one-bedrooms.

At ground level, residents will find a large community room with a connected kitchen and a residents lounge. The property manager will be given offices on the ground floor. The building connects with the new landscaped outdoor courtyard, offering a social hub to connect the building with the church.

Van Meter Williams Pollack, or VMWP Architects, is responsible for the design. With the proposal at an initial period, it’s important to withhold judgment from architectural massings. The architect writes that the exterior will take cues from the historic church while engaging with contemporary design. The facade will include red brick and red-colored materials and a grid pattern that relates to Martin Luther Tower. The rest is to be decided.

Construction will cost $48 million, with an estimated construction timeline not yet established.

Existing condition

https://sfyimby.com/2022/01/ella-rohlffs...-1001-franklin-street-san-francisco.html

[38 Geary]

I agree. This is considered Cathedral Hill, which is a sub-neighborhood of the Western Addition. Interestingly and curiously, on the Compass map, this location would be considered Van Ness/Civic Center.

[38 Geary]

An update for 198 McAllister:
https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=244269&page=2
https://sfyimby.com/2022/01/excavation-u...r-street-civic-center-san-francisco.html

[38 Geary]

I believe this was the last we had heard of 545 Sansome, up until now.

Family-owned Sai’s Vietnamese Restaurant ordered to vacate after nearly 40 years in San Francisco
Susana Guerrero, SFGATE
Jan. 31, 2022

Inmy Chi had anticipated renewing the lease of her nearly 40-year-old family business, Sai’s Vietnamese Restaurant in San Francisco, but now she faces the real possibility of closing for good after her landlord ordered her to vacate next month.

Sai’s will need to vacate its space at 505 Washington St. on Feb. 28, as first reported by KRON4. Chi told SFGATE that the news was a total surprise after her landlord had initially offered a lease extension earlier this month.

“They emailed us on Jan. 5 and asked if we wanted to renew the lease,” Chi said. “We emailed them back on Jan. 20, but we didn’t hear from them. We called and called and on Jan. 25, they answered and said they wanted us to leave. I still have to process this. I think it unethical.”

Chi says that she wasn’t sure why SHVO, the property landlord and large development firm, had a change of heart in a matter of weeks. SFGATE reached out to SHVO for comment, but the agency abruptly ended the call. The development firm most recently made headlines in 2020 when developer Michael Shvo bought the Transamerica Pyramid for $650 million, which is just around the corner from Sai’s.

Once Sai’s Vietnamese Restaurant moves next month, it’s unclear what will go in its place. According to San Francisco Planning, an application that was filed in 2020 proposed a redevelopment of 545 Sansome St. that would effectively demolish the first level of 501-505 Washington St., where Chi’s restaurant currently resides. San Francisco Planning told SFGATE that those plans are currently under review and that no public hearings have been scheduled.

https://www.sfgate.com/restaurants/artic...16820209.php?IPID=SFGate-HP-CP-Spotlight

[Pedestrian]

Lab space — not nonprofit space — coming to S.F. Mission after Bryant Street site sold
By Laura Waxmann – Staff Reporter, San Francisco Business Times
Jan 25, 2022 Updated Jan 25, 2022, 3:17pm PST

A Boston development company has bought a Mission District site once destined to be an office complex for local nonprofits and now plans lab space there.

An affiliate of Lighthouse Real Estate Investment LLC paid $31 million for the property and entitled plans at 1850 Bryant St. in December. A two-story building formerly occupied by Abbett Electric Corp. currently occupies the site.

The seller was developer Chris Foley, a partner at Pacific Polaris and founder of the real estate firm Ground Matrix. Foley, as part of a team called Common Ground Urban Development, pitched plans for a 223,000-square-foot, five-story commercial condominium building for nonprofits in 2017. Foley could not be reached for comment Monday.

Lighthouse plans to convert the Common Ground plans for the building to feature 185,000 square feet of lab use. The San Francisco Planning Department approved the change, permitted under the site's zoning, Oct. 26 . . . .

Permits allowing Lighthouse to break ground — including shoring and excavation and new construction permits — have been issued, according Planning Deputy Director Richard Sucre.

Sucre confirmed that the project design itself has not changed.

“They basically are using the exact same design in terms of what was previously proposed,” Sucre told me.

The life sciences real estate market has been fueled by the pandemic, and available lab space is a rare commodity in San Francisco. The city's Mission Bay neighborhood held a total of 2.1 million square feet of lab inventory in the fourth quarter and reported a less than 1% vacancy rate, according to data provided by real estate services firm JLL. Direct asking rents for lab space now stand at $80 per square foot triple net.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco...t-street-nonprofit-development-sold.html

The proposal (now permitted):


https://common.dev/1850-bryant-street