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

[fflint]

I'm mostly happy with the election results--the Giants development will be awesome, we won't be imposing a moratorium on housing in the Mission, Raw Smirk-a-rimi is out of office, etc.

However, I was hoping Prop F would pass, and I cannot stand Aaron Peskin. Yes, Lee is Ron Conway's little hack and he could certainly use some pushback--but Peskin is, if the past is any indicator, going to do a lot more than just check our accidental mayor's dumbest decisions. Peskin's an old-school NIMBY, a throwback to the zero development days, who likes to stick his nose into every f'n development he can to the benefit of almost nobody.

[hruski]

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Really? More important than Geary BRT? More important than the Caltrain extension? More important than Muni Forward? In terms of "bang for the buck", it rates pretty low for me.

• Geary BRT is a bandaid. We should be running BART or MUNI light rail down Geary
• Caltrain: this is already approved.
• MUNI forward is not an infrastructure development. It's process improvement, essentially.

Central Subway to North Beach is necessary for this city to actually have effective public transit within its core. There's no good reason not to do this other than nimbyism, and that's Peskin's speciality.

[pseudolus]

Originally Posted by hruski

• Geary BRT is a bandaid. We should be running BART or MUNI light rail down Geary
• Caltrain: this is already approved.
• MUNI forward is not an infrastructure development. It's process improvement, essentially.

Central Subway to North Beach is necessary for this city to actually have effective public transit within its core. There's no good reason not to do this other than nimbyism, and that's Peskin's speciality.

I like fantasy subway maps as much as anybody. Too bad there isn't an extra $100 billion lying around. But the reality is SFMTA doesn't even know how it's going raise the $20 billion just to maintain the existing system. Hence the denominator is my proposed yardstick, bang for the buck. By the way, the Caltrain extension may be approved but it isn't funded. Muni Forward includes things like bulbouts and new traffic signals, which in fact do cost money, and it requires political will to fight against the car folks for exclusive transit lanes and taking away parking spaces. As for the numerator in my yardstick, bang, I'd define that as saving time on people's commutes, mode share change or even lessening car ownership. I don't think there's much bang in having a subway station in a neighborhood that's already within easy walking distance of the FiDi.

[fimiak]

Just going to repost this.

[pseudolus]

Originally Posted by pseudolus

I like fantasy subway maps as much as anybody. Too bad there isn't an extra $100 billion lying around. But the reality is SFMTA doesn't even know how it's going raise the $20 billion just to maintain the existing system. Hence the denominator is my proposed yardstick, bang for the buck. By the way, the Caltrain extension may be approved but it isn't funded. Muni Forward includes things like bulbouts and new traffic signals, which in fact do cost money, and it requires political will to fight against the car folks for exclusive transit lanes and taking away parking spaces. As for the numerator in my yardstick, bang, I'd define that as saving time on people's commutes, mode share change or even lessening car ownership. I don't think there's much bang in having a subway station in a neighborhood that's already within easy walking distance of the FiDi.

I should have included in the Muni Forward hurdles: eliminating stops. The 21-Hayes example may show this one's not doable.

[a very long weekend]

peskin: "Their job is to make the most money they can, and my job is to get the best deal for the city that I can,"

this is the right attitude.

[mt_climber13]

Originally Posted by a very long weekend

peskin: "Their job is to make the most money they can, and my job is to get the best deal for the city that I can,"

this is the right attitude.

That's a talking point, not a result.

[fimiak]

Market Street Place - This is going up incredibly fast.








Trinity Phase III - It is already receiving its cladding. This is another fast one.

[peanut gallery]

^Thanks for the updates. Trinity 3 looks more like the uninspired phase 2 than the much better phase 1. We can only hope they go back to something closer to the phase 1 look on the Market frontage.

[Jerry of San Fran]

101 Polk St. now has a name, The Civic. Apartments available December 2015. See more pictures at the web page: www.thecivicsf.com

[url=https://flic.kr/p/zP1hXV]

[ChargerCarl]

Originally Posted by a very long weekend

peskin: "Their job is to make the most money they can, and my job is to get the best deal for the city that I can,"

this is the right attitude.

That sound like someone who views development as a burden to begrudgingly extract concessions out of rather than a benefit we should encourage.

Also, long time lurker first time poster. Hi SSP.

[BushMan]

Originally Posted by ChargerCarl

That sound like someone who views development as a burden to begrudgingly extract concessions out of rather than a benefit we should encourage.

Also, long time lurker first time poster. Hi SSP.

^^
Very well said!

As if developers are somehow inherently responsible for more than simply providing much-needed housing, Peskin and his ilk also believe they are "on the hook" for funding all of their silly social engineering schemes, it's quite disgusting actually.

Especially when the real goal is preserving the view from Telegraph Hill.

[peanut gallery]

Welcome to the forum, Carl (as a poster that is).

Some news on 30 Van Ness from the SF Business Times:

In Mid-Market, developer Carmel Partners had been on the verge of a deal with San Francisco’s Department of Real Estate to buy 30 Van Ness, a five-story building full of city offices that would be knocked down for a 400-foot tower holding at least 600 housing units. Those negotiations recently broke down in the due-diligence phase, according to multiple sources.

The city is now only negotiating with Related California, the real estate giant that is also planning to build 560 residential units (including 110 below-market rate) and city offices a block away on land that now holds a Goodwill at 1500 Mission. City officials have said previously the land could sell for at least $80 million.

------------

Working with one developer on both sides of that stretch of Van Ness opens up more possibilities for increased affordable housing and height, especially if Related California can gobble up private parcels near 30 Van Ness. If they assemble two sites next to 30 Van Ness, they can propose a much bigger and more valuable project, giving more return to the city.

The development may get taller because of the Planning Department’s rezoning of the dozen blocks around the intersection of Market Street and Van Ness Avenue, known as “The Hub.”

This is a ways off as the city won't vacate the building until 2019.

[peanut gallery]

Bernalwood has the rendering for a new 9-story senior housing development in the Mission:

The history of this project is intimately tied to the Vida market-rate development at 2558 Mission Street that also created the soon-to-open Alamo Drafthouse Cinema inside the restored New Mission theater. Vida is a 114-unit, market-rate project in which the developer opted to meet their inclusionary housing requirements by purchasing 1296 Shotwell Street as a land dedication site for use by San Francisco to create affordable housing. This means the City basically received the land at 1296 Shotwell for free.

[peanut gallery]

The proposal to replace the Union 76 gas station at First and Harrison has been officially submitted to Planning, according to SocketSite:

Most of the building faces the wider, prominent First and Harrison Streets, a zone allowing taller height. The Lansing Street frontage faces the narrow pedestrian/auto “shared street,” with a smaller scale residential focus. The proposed building expresses these two zones with a light glassy 14 story tower element at First Street, and a stepped 5 to 7 story podium fronting Lansing, Harrison and First Streets. The base element employs projecting bay windows, balconies, and private stoops to further scale the building in a manner sympathetic to traditional San Francisco residential architecture.

The building includes a lobby, amenity spaces, a corner cafe at First and Harrison Street, and multiple roof decks with views of downtown San Francisco, the Bay, and Bay Bridge.

Not bad, but another proposal to under build what is zoned (400'). In this case, that's probably due to the minimum 100' buffer required between towers on Rincon Hill.

[fflint]

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

Not bad, but another proposal to under build what is zoned (400'). In this case, that's probably due to the minimum 100' buffer required between towers on Rincon Hill.

Yeah, there's no way to fit a 400' tower on that parcel given the buffer requirements, which are not terribly unreasonable.

[viewguysf]

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

Not bad, but another proposal to under build what is zoned (400'). In this case, that's probably due to the minimum 100' buffer required between towers on Rincon Hill.

My fantasy would be to see it on the opposite (west) side of Jasper and built higher than that monstrosity!

I don't think a taller building on that corner would be good, agreeing with fflint.

Why would anyone want balconies in that noisy, congested, polluted location?

[a very long weekend]

repeal the buffer requirement = yet another means by which to get affordable housing by design. no such buffer requirements exist in nyc, btw.

[viewguysf]

Originally Posted by a very long weekend

repeal the buffer requirement = yet another means by which to get affordable housing by design. no such buffer requirements exist in nyc, btw.

What perhaps works in NYC quite often has little bearing upon us.

[peanut gallery]

Yes, I think it makes sense in this case. I just hate seeing a taller site go unused, since those locations are limited. I wish in a case like this or 535 Mission, they could adjust the map to up-zone somewhere else to make up for unused height.

Anyone else inspired by the street improvements shown in this rendering? I'm not sure if getting those done is actually part of this particular proposal, but they are in the Rincon Hill plan (warning: large pdf). First and Harrison will look so much better with landscaped medians as shown here.