View Full Version : Bay Area Proposals/Approvals/Construction Tidbits II
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
[
12]
peanut gallery
Aug 22, 2008, 11:25 PM
ive been hoping something would go in here for a long time, its such a beautiful building, and definitely doesnt deserve to be used as a toilet.
It's beautiful and in such a prominent location. It really is a shame it has sat there so long.
BTW, how exactly does one smoke crack out of a shoe?
peanut gallery
Aug 23, 2008, 7:42 AM
So, what do you think about the proposal to redo Jefferson St. along Fisherman's Wharf? I'm particularly intrigued by the idea that improving it for walking and biking will make it more appealing to locals. That stretch between Powell and Taylor could sure use wider sidewalks and I love the idea of closing a gap in the Bay Trail. But would it make you more likely to spend more time here? It would certainly be more tolerable when you have to be in the area.
Here's the story from Thursday's Chronicle (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/21/MNDN12EE51.DTL&hw=wharf&sn=002&sc=936):
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/08/21/mn_revamped_street.jpg
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/08/19/ba-wharf20_0498985394.jpg
S.F. plans a new look for the old wharf
Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer
Thursday, August 21, 2008
The main drag of Fisherman's Wharf would become more welcoming to pedestrians and cyclists and less auto-friendly as part of a $10 million city plan to improve the world-famous tourist attraction.
The preliminary proposal focuses on Jefferson Street, the one-way road that runs from Powell Street to Aquatic Park. Plans call for removing on-street parking and taking away one of two traffic lanes, using the space instead for bicycle lanes and widened sidewalks with benches. Artists' renderings of two sections of the revamped street were made public Wednesday.
The idea is to create a more relaxed, European feel in an area that tourists flock to but is generally maligned by locals as tacky, crowded and outdated.
Jefferson Street is a bustling spot. A recent city Planning Department survey counted 8,000 people on the boulevard at 3 p.m. on a Saturday. But merchants approached the city about a street makeover because they felt threatened by the recent success of the Ferry Building, the AT&T Park area and the continuing popularity of Pier 39, according to city project manager Neil Hrushowy.
"The area is like the goose that lays the golden eggs, and we want to make sure that it keeps laying those eggs," Hrushowy said. "This is an opportunity to build a strong economic base for the city and for the tourist industry."
Jefferson Street also is a notable missing link in the Bay Trail, which features dedicated bike lanes so cyclists can follow connected waterfront paths.
City officials and planners were happy to help with the makeover, believing the area has long needed a boost. They also see an opportunity to attract locals, whose historic distaste for tourist hordes and curio peddlers has steered them away from the wharf's fresh seafood, beautiful bay views and an important part of San Francisco's maritime history.
"It's a shame that city residents don't go there," Hrushowy said. "It's a real jewel of a place, and the views of the water and back up toward the city are stunning."
The plan is far from complete and faces some hurdles. While it generally enjoys the support of an organized group of 180 area merchants who tax themselves for additional street cleaning and security, some business owners don't want to lose a traffic lane or parking.
And although the city has dedicated about $100,000 for planning and designing the improvements, and Bay Trail supporters have pitched in another $30,000, the about $10 million needed for actual upgrades has not been secured. Hrushowy said the city would apply for federal and state grants to cover those costs.
On a recent weekday, a noon-hour visit to Jefferson Street revealed bicycle-riding tourists navigating through a phalanx of vehicles, including double-decker tour buses, taxis, trucks unloading retail goods and the Muni F train.
Those on foot found some parts of Jefferson Street's sidewalks thick with pedestrians.
"We've been bumped and knocked around a little," George Flores said. Flores was visiting from Orange County with his two small children, and he and his wife, Carol, were pushing strollers on Jefferson. He said he liked the idea of wider sidewalks.
But nearby merchants have mixed feelings.
Richard Grice, who has worked at the Bike and Roll rental company for five years, liked the idea of connecting the Bay Trail but said Jefferson Street is congested only during the tourist season - maybe 3 1/2 months out of the year.
"Bike lanes are probably not totally necessary," Grice said. "Having parking is really important for business down here."
Grice noted that there are numerous nearby parking lots, but he said they are very expensive.
Up the block at the corner of Jefferson and Taylor streets, Mike Guardino was serving fresh clam chowder at his family's sidewalk restaurant, Guardino's.
He said removing parking could discourage customers who like to pull up in their cars and buy a quick snack. But he liked the idea of placing tables out on a wider sidewalk.
"It's a trade-off," Guardino said. "In the end (the plan) is probably a good idea."
The new streetscape is a work in progress, and Hrushowy doesn't expect a final draft until early 2009.
The city has contracted for the services of renowned Danish architect and street designer Jan Gehl to help them crystallize the new vision.
"Areas have a way of transitioning and a city either has to provide renewal with what it thinks people want or the area will become static and people will tire of it," said Dean Macris, the former city planning director and a special adviser on the project.
Next steps
The city plans to host a number of community meetings on the proposed street makeover before developing a final plan next year.
For information on upcoming meetings or documents on the Jefferson Street plan, go to links.sfgate.com/ZEPD.
BTinSF
Aug 23, 2008, 8:59 AM
I think the design will be much more attractive for the tourists and this is one street we can choke off the cars without losing anything but I don't see why it makes it any more attractive to locals. There's still nothing there but rip-off restaurants and souvenir shops. It'll just have wider sidewalks.
BTinSF
Aug 23, 2008, 9:01 AM
Another possible bit of good news for the Tenderloin.
Yeah, if it happens. There's seems to me to be a lot of hope and crossed fingers in the plan.
peanut gallery
Aug 23, 2008, 5:07 PM
^^^No doubt. There is definitely a lot of emphasis on the word "possible" in that sentence.
On Jefferson, that's pretty much my feeling as well. I could see it as another area along the waterfront people would use for biking, walking and jogging. Basically extending the appeal of the Embarcadero for those activities all the way to Aquatic park (and from Fort Mason in the other direction). But other than that, I don't see it making this a real destination for locals.
Gordo
Aug 23, 2008, 8:19 PM
On Jefferson St - it's about damn time. But, like everyone else, not sure why it would make me want to go down there any more often. As PG mentioned though, it will at least be more tolerable while taking friends from out of town there.
AndrewK
Oct 4, 2008, 4:09 AM
the burkha is almost off on the building at fell and van ness, i cant remember the address, maybe 91? the three sides that have been revealed look quite nice.
SFView
Oct 4, 2008, 5:15 AM
:previous: It is 77 Van Ness Ave.
AndrewK
Oct 11, 2008, 2:19 AM
from curbed:
Construction Watch: 77 Van Ness Gets Meat On Its Bones
http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/10Oct08_Vanness.jpg
There's something about these old-school block-style developments that just gets us going. (Honestly, probably the fact that they're easy to photograph on cameraphones.) 77 Van Ness Avenue, a 50-unit mixed-use project designed by local firm Forum Design, looks like it's coming along nicely— there's still scaffolding in front complete with elevator action, but there's clearly some meat growing on those bones. No word on what it might be called yet, but given the rash of A-name developments in SF's recent past (Argenta, Artani, Arterra... you feeling us?), would it be too much to ask to go for something a little more distinctive? Kthx.
AndrewK
Oct 11, 2008, 2:20 AM
its getting mediocre reviews from people on curbed but up close i really like it.
peanut gallery
Oct 22, 2008, 5:12 PM
The Haight Whole Foods goes before the Planning Commission on Thursday. According to this article in the Examiner, (http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Whole_Foods_in_Haight_comes_up_for_debate.html) it's expected to be approved with some changes but will likely be appealed.
BTinSF
Oct 22, 2008, 5:16 PM
What is with the top floor at 77 Van ness? It's like they forgot to put the roof on it. Another of Forum Design's famous and controversial (IMHO anyway, given the wind in the Van Ness corridor) roof gardens?
AndrewK
Oct 23, 2008, 6:33 PM
i wouldnt be surprised if they put a roof garden on it. im all for green roofs, but it does kinda look like there should be guys with bows and arrows sticking out of those holes. maybe if they plant some greenery which is visible through those slots itll look nicer.
peanut gallery
Oct 24, 2008, 10:21 PM
690 Stanyon (where Whole Foods will go) was unanimously approved yesterday. The design has been changed, and not for the better if you ask me. You have to go to Curbed SF (http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2008/10/24/690_stanyan_even_more_rendings_revealed.php?o=1) to see them because of the way they post images.
I want to know what happened to the curvy rooftops? That was the best feature of the whole thing. Now it looks entirely generic.
ltsmotorsport
Oct 25, 2008, 7:40 AM
So, what do you think about the proposal to redo Jefferson St. along Fisherman's Wharf? I'm particularly intrigued by the idea that improving it for walking and biking will make it more appealing to locals. That stretch between Powell and Taylor could sure use wider sidewalks and I love the idea of closing a gap in the Bay Trail. But would it make you more likely to spend more time here? It would certainly be more tolerable when you have to be in the area.
Here's the story from Thursday's Chronicle (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/21/MNDN12EE51.DTL&hw=wharf&sn=002&sc=936):
It's a nice ideal, but 25ft sidewalks? Why don't they just close down the street? It's a little overkill IMO.
ozone
Nov 19, 2008, 6:52 AM
^^^^ If I remember the crowds at the Wharf correctly 25 feet would just about accomodate them comfortably. At least there is some vehicular access.
peanut gallery
Nov 19, 2008, 5:19 PM
I don't make it down there very often, but it has always had extremely crowded sidewalks and just a few cars. I think a single lane of traffic and some loading zones would suffice. Most traffic is on Bay, Beach and North Point.
Gordo
Nov 19, 2008, 5:58 PM
I don't make it down there very often, but it has always had extremely crowded sidewalks and just a few cars. I think a single lane of traffic and some loading zones would suffice. Most traffic is on Bay, Beach and North Point.
Agreed. There's really no need or reason to acccomodate thru-traffic on Jefferson - one lane for deliveries is plenty.
peanut gallery
Nov 20, 2008, 8:40 PM
More cheerful news from the Examiner (http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Bay_Area_businesses_reeling_from_global_downturn.html) this morning. Note: I'm being sarcastic. Follow link at your own optimism's peril.
I won't post the whole depressing article, but it's basically a survey of business confidence in San Francisco, San Mateo County and the Bay Area at large It's from The Bay Area Council, a big-business-funded public policy organization. The bottom line: things are bad and will continue to get worse. They expect improvement in the 1-2 year time frame.
A large part of it is construction and office space based, so I posted it here.
peanut gallery
Jan 9, 2009, 4:20 PM
Miracle of miracles, the Pagoda Palace Theater redevelopment plan was approved. It's not out of the woods yet as there is likely to be an appeal to the BOS, but this is a huge step in the right direction. From today's Chronicle (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/09/BA931568RK.DTL):
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2009/01/08/ba-pagoda09_ph_0499636063.jpg
Pagoda Palace Theater redevelopment approved
Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, January 9, 2009
A gutted hulk of an old movie house in the heart of San Francisco's North Beach took a big step toward a new life Thursday when the Planning Commission approved converting the building into condominium dwellings and a Mexican restaurant.
The Pagoda Palace Theater is at the corner of Powell and Union streets - directly across from Washington Square.
It opened as a first-run theater in 1908; by the 1980s, it was showing kung-fu movies; since 1994, it has remained vacant.
In recent years the Pagoda Palace has been the subject of a neighborhood spat over what should come next.
Restaurateur Joel Campos bought the building in 2004 and subsequently proposed a variety of projects - including a new theater. None of the ideas satisfied enough lenders, preservationists or neighbors to get off the ground.
Campos' most recent proposal for 18 condominium units above a large restaurant and bar ran into fierce resistance from critics who argued that its design was inconsistent with North Beach's unique character and a nearby historic district.
The theater has been stripped of nearly all of its original design features, and does not have any recognized historical value. The Telegraph Hill Dwellers neighborhood association and other groups, however, complained that Campos' proposed design was out of step with the prevailing Art Deco and Moderne styles common in the immediate area. They also wanted the building to contain a new theater and feature a marquee.
Other neighborhood merchants and residents wanted to see Campos' project move along and viewed the Telegraph Hill Dwellers - particularly member Nancy Shanahan, wife of former Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin - as NIMBYs who would never be satisfied. Shanahan did not return calls for comment.
As it stands, the proposed development would be a five-story structure with one-, two- and three-bedroom dwellings on the top four floors and a 4,000-square-foot restaurant and bar on the ground floor, along with some retail space. Twenty-seven parking spaces would be tucked into an underground garage.
"I am so relieved that this is finally done," said Campos, who said he has spent more than $2 million on the property's mortgage and on architects and lawyers. "We plan to get to work on this right away - getting permits and financing."
Barring any bureaucratic or legal delays, he said, work could start in three or four months.
With only Commissioner Hisashi Sugaya voting in opposition, the commission voted 6-1 in favor of the special permit needed to convert the former theater into housing and a large restaurant.
"I don't see a down side to this project," said Commissioner Bill Lee.
Although Campos' project has obtained the permit to move forward, the development is far from a sure thing.
It is widely believed that opponents will appeal the granting of the permit to the full Board of Supervisors, which would then have the final say. The board's new president is David Chiu, who represents North Beach.
Planning Commission President Christina Olague said Thursday that Chiu had called her Wednesday to try to have the vote on the Pagoda Palace's permit delayed for further review.
"Typically we try to accommodate supervisors' wishes, but this has been going on for so long and there are so many people who have been waiting for this hearing that I think we need to go forward," Olague said at the commission meeting Thursday.
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2008/06/30/ba-nevius01_ph_i_0498718879.jpg
peanut gallery
Jan 9, 2009, 5:58 PM
Found a rendering of the proposal on SocketSite (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2009/01/pagoda_palace_theater_plansapproved.html):
http://www.socketsite.com/North%20Beach%20Theater%20Proposal.jpg
Strange thing though, this doesn't look like 5 stories. So maybe it's an older proposal.
Gordo
Jan 9, 2009, 6:06 PM
:previous: I really hope that they can get started on this in the three to four months mentioned in the article. I guess we'll get to see how the new board of supes is going to act about proposals like this...
innov8
Jan 24, 2009, 3:59 AM
Friday, January 23, 2009
Developers bid to build 550-foot Transbay District tower
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen
Three development teams are bidding to build a 550-foot residential tower at First and Folsom streets in the Transbay District, despite a crushing economic downturn that has depressed the value of the state-owned site and precluded some major builders from taking on the project.
The three partnerships vying to take on project are: AvalonBay and affordable housing partner Bridge Housing; Golub Real Estate Corp. with affordable housing partner Mercy Housing; and Avant Housing with affordable housing partner Citizens Housing.
A number of developers who had been looking at the project, including Toll Brothers, Related Cos., and Intracorp San Francisco, did not submit proposals.
Mike Grisso, project manager for the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency, said the agency was still reviewing the proposals, but that all conformed to the Request for proposal, which called for a 550-foot condo tower reaching above two mid-rise affordable apartment buildings and a row of townhouses that will open onto Folsom Street.
“They are all housing and they all have a similar number of units, there is not a big variety” said Grisso. “The program was pretty proscribed in terms of height limits and bulk limits and building sizes.”
The 42,600-square-foot parcel is one of a dozen state-owned lots freed up when the elevated Embarcadero Freeway was knocked down after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. While nine of the 12 parcels are set to be eventually redeveloped with housing — two will be parks and one a 700,000-square-foot office tower — Block 8 is the largest. It calls for a 550-foot tower reaching above two mid-rise affordable apartment buildings and a row of townhouses that will open onto Folsom Street, a thoroughfare that will eventually be reconfigured as a shopping boulevard with wide sidewalks, greenery and outdoor seating.
All three teams feature deep pockets and experience. AvalonBay, a national apartment real estate investment trust, has constructed 823 apartments in Mission Bay and has another development site near City College. Avant Housing is a joint venture between well-known Bay Area developers AGI Capital and TMG Partners and is backed by CalPERS. Golub is one of Chicago’s most prolific developers and has developed, owned, or managed more than 30 million square feet of commercial property and 50,000 multifamily units.
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2009/01/19/daily69.html
WildCowboy
Jan 24, 2009, 6:27 AM
^^^D'oh! I just posted this (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=4044794#post4044794) over in the Transbay redevelopment thread. :)
peanut gallery
Feb 5, 2009, 6:15 AM
The Schlage plan in Vis Valley was approved by the Redevelopment Agency yesterday. Eric at the Transbay Blog has an excellent write-up (http://transbayblog.com/2009/02/04/unlocking-schlage/) on the history of this plot and the plans moving forward.
He also posted a couple of street-level renderings, courtesy SF Redevelopment Agency:
http://transbay.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/leland_ave_streetscape1.jpg?w=425&h=219
http://transbay.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/schlage_rendering.jpg?w=425&h=249
Source: Transbay Blog at the URL linked above.
peanut gallery
Mar 2, 2009, 9:18 PM
The building at Haight and Stanyon that will house a new Whole Foods has gotten yet another new design:
http://www.haightbeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/wholefoodzwhite1.png
Source: Haight Ashbury Beat. (http://www.haightbeat.com/?p=1631)
munkyman
Mar 2, 2009, 9:26 PM
Wasn't it R. Mlynarik who a while back was saying the Transbay Terminal was poorly designed? Somewhere he is crying tears of joy.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/02/BA1J166LH6.DTL
Unbuilt Transbay station could soon be obsolete
San Francisco's planned high-speed rail station in the new Transbay Terminal would be obsolete within two decades, state transportation officials warn, forcing them to rethink the design.
The proposed station would not be large enough to accommodate half the passengers expected to be using the system by 2030. In addition, the current scheme poses engineering challenges for a Caltrain extension to the Transbay Terminal downtown, officials said.
"Three sets of engineers met and they concurred that the design for the station was inadequate and useless for high-speed rail," said Quentin Kopp, chairman of the High Speed Rail Authority.
The problems have transportation officials scrambling to find fixes to assure that the rail projects don't miss out on federal stimulus funds.
The emergency funding bill contains an unprecedented $8 billion for high-speed and intercity rail projects. President Obama indicated in his proposed budget last week that he would like to pump a further $1 billion annually over the next five years into such projects. The windfall provides opportunities that even the most optimistic rail supporters didn't envision.
Interested parties will have to make a case for their projects and compete for the money.
"I think we are well positioned to get these funds - unless we get in our own way," said Steve Heminger, executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, a regional planning and funding agency.
California is the only state with a high-speed rail plan and funding.
Heminger has been tapped to mediate the dispute that involves the potentially competing interests of Caltrain, the California High Speed Rail Authority and the Transbay Joint Powers Authority, the agency overseeing construction of the new Transbay Terminal at First and Mission streets.
The building - described by project sponsors as the Grand Central station of the West Coast, with bus and train service - is envisioned to be the San Francisco home of high-speed rail and the new Caltrain station, extending its service closer to the downtown job center than does the current terminus at Fourth and King streets 1.3 miles away.
As it stands, the first phase of the project would be built without a "train box," the skeleton of the underground train station. The idea is to build it later, when funding becomes available. But building the train box in the first phase could shave an estimated $100 million off the $490 million cost.
The Transbay Joint Powers Authority board must decide by summer whether to move up building the train box in order to keep on schedule, said Adam Alberti, spokesman for the Transbay Authority. Construction on the new terminal is expected to start in early 2010.
But even if Transbay officials put the train box on the fast track, there's still debate over whether the current design - one platform and two tracks for Caltrain and two platforms and four tracks for high-speed rail - would be sufficient.
Mehdi Morshed, executive director of the California High Speed Rail Authority, testified before the Metropolitan Transportation Commission governing board last week that it would not withstand the test of time.
"We have found out that the current design that was environmentally cleared gives us less than one-half of the capacity we'll need by 2030 to carry all the passengers," Morshed said.
The High Speed Rail Authority now believes that the station would have to be able to handle 12 trains an hour, or one every five minutes. Under that scenario, eight to 10 tracks would be required, Alberti said. He said the Transbay team only learned of that three weeks ago.
One idea being studied is whether a two-story underground train station would be feasible from engineering and funding standpoints.
Separately, Caltrain officials have raised concerns about the design pertaining to, in part, track alignment and slope.
The problems aren't insurmountable, said Michael Scanlon, executive director of the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, which operates Caltrain. But, he said, they require additional engineering work.
"The current alignment and design is fatally flawed," Scanlon told the Metropolitan Transportation Commission governing board last week.
Kopp said engineers from his agency and Parsons Brinckerhoff - the main consultant on the high-speed rail project - concur with Caltrain officials.
Alberti said the Transbay Authority has been working closely with Caltrain officials on preliminary design and engineering work. Until recently, he said, "at no time has Caltrain indicated that the rail design does not work for them."
Scanlon said in an interview that the worst thing to do would to be to construct a train box that wouldn't work. "I think we ought to slow down and get it right," he said.
Increasing the size or design of the train box could double the cost, but officials have yet to attach a final price tag.
Heminger said it's essential that a deal be brokered among the Transbay, Caltrain and high-speed agencies, which would require clearing funding and engineering hurdles. The goal, he said, is to apply for federal stimulus money with a unified voice. "It's critical," he said. "Even though we have a leg up, these funds are going to be competitive."
The U.S. Department of Transportation is expected to release the rules for the funding competition in about four months, which gives Bay Area and high-speed rail officials some breathing room. Heminger plans to convene another meeting with the Transbay, Caltrain and high-speed rail representatives this week.
peanut gallery
Mar 5, 2009, 5:30 PM
550 18th St in Dogpatch, a new condo that is going to be rental now, has been unwrapped. From SocketSite (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2009/03/550_18th_street_unwrapped_and_35_new_condos_now_renting.html):
http://www.socketsite.com/550%2018th%20Street%20-%20Illinois.jpg
http://www.socketsite.com/550%2018th%20Street.jpg
35 units and ground floor retail. This is in the northern end of Dogpatch, almost Mission Bay.
Reminiscence
Mar 18, 2009, 4:13 AM
No love for 110 The Embarcadero -- study ordered
A development that promises to be one of the greenest buildings on the West Coast will be delayed for at least a year while developers undertake a detailed study of the proposed building's environmental effects.
After hours of public testimony, the Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to approve an appeal of the project, 110 The Embarcadero.
At issue is whether a former union hall on the development site could be considered a historic resource and should be protected, and whether the proposed height of the building is too high.
The controversial project was narrowly approved by the Planning Commission even though city staffers opposed the project. Neighbors were already objecting to the proposed height -- 123 feet, nearly 40 feet over the waterfront area's 84-foot limit. But opposition grew in recent weeks because of the building on the lot that would have to be demolished.
That building was the headquarters of the International Longshoreman's Association -- now the International Longshore and Warehouse Union -- in 1934. That summer, as the ILA led a strike, two protesting workers were shot and killed by police outside the union hall. July 5 became known as Bloody Thursday and led to the four-day General Strike. Some labor leaders and preservationists argued that the building should be landmarked, and asked the board to force a longer study.
After several hours of public comment, and over the project sponsor's objections, the board voted Tuesday to require that the report be conducted.
Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/cityinsider/detail?entry_id=37117&tsp=1
peanut gallery
Mar 19, 2009, 6:19 PM
^ I just saw that today and my reaction is: does it really matter? No way Hines was going to start on it anytime soon. So it will gyrate in process limbo for awhile. Remember when I was the voice of optimism around here? Man, this economy sucks.
viewguysf
Mar 20, 2009, 6:15 AM
^ I just saw that today and my reaction is: does it really matter? No way Hines was going to start on it anytime soon. So it will gyrate in process limbo for awhile. Remember when I was the voice of optimism around here? Man, this economy sucks.
Yeah, you hung on for a long time!
I've been spending much more time in the Chicago threads since we have so little here. At least they have some exciting projects that are being completed.
peanut gallery
Mar 20, 2009, 11:02 PM
^ I just got back from Miami and noticed the same thing. It's mostly condos that may not fill anytime soon, but at least there are active projects to watch through completion. I might have to hang around some other cities' construction threads for awhile, just to get my fix.
Reminiscence
Mar 21, 2009, 7:13 AM
Miami? Chicago? Com on guys, wheres your faith? ;)
I do have to hand it you though, p.g. You did hang in there for the long run. But with you giving up hope, who can we look to now? I just hope with all the delays, these proposals (of which some are outstanding) don't end up fading out of our view.
viewguysf
Mar 21, 2009, 4:24 PM
Miami? Chicago? Com on guys, wheres your faith? ;)
I do have to hand it you though, p.g. You did hang in there for the long run. But with you giving up hope, who can we look to now? I just hope with all the delays, these proposals (of which some are outstanding) don't end up fading out of our view.
What happened to your old Northwestern Wildcat spirit when you were constantly looking at what was happening in Chicago? Go back now and look at Aqua, TIT, Legacy and others because they are tremendously exciting and they are happening now. I certainly haven't lost faith in San Francisco, I literally look at it everyday, but Aqua is hella thrilling compared to looking at the minute details of our two projects that are still rising. Take a look at the crane operator's pics from TIT because they'll make the hair on the back of your neck stand up! Aqua is so unique that it's thrilling--the coolest skyscraper anywhere in the US for me right now. You can monitor two cities at once with no more time invested than it what it used to take to keep up with San Francisco alone. Now, that's a sad testament of the times.
Reminiscence
Mar 21, 2009, 9:01 PM
What happened to your old Northwestern Wildcat spirit when you were constantly looking at what was happening in Chicago? Go back now and look at Aqua, TIT, Legacy and others because they are tremendously exciting and they are happening now. I certainly haven't lost faith in San Francisco, I literally look at it everyday, but Aqua is hella thrilling compared to looking at the minute details of our two projects that are still rising. Take a look at the crane operator's pics from TIT because they'll make the hair on the back of your neck stand up! Aqua is so unique that it's thrilling--the coolest skyscraper anywhere in the US for me right now. You can monitor two cities at once with no more time invested than it what it used to take to keep up with San Francisco alone. Now, that's a sad testament of the times.
Well, to be fair, I was actually living in Chicago, and I saw these skyscrapers fairly frequently. The Northwestern spirit though, was non-existent. On that part I did truly stay loyal to the local sports teams, heck, I even wore a Bonds jersey when I went to see the Cubs play at Wrigley field. My entire post up there was just teasing you guys :)
I certainly agree that Chicago has far superior buildings going up, or that have already topped out. I use to love going for long walks along Michigan and State streets just looking up in the sky and marveling at how impressive the buildings really were. I always imagined how cool it would be to have that here, but with our approval process and the custom to filter out (or prevent altogether) building designs like what you find on Aqua, it'll be a while before I see that. Transbay was their shot to create something bold like that here, and while they managed to at least land the dart, they missed the bullseye by quite a bit.
BTinSF
Mar 24, 2009, 12:35 AM
Going, going, hopefully very soon GONE!
It's the the old state office building at Golden Gate & Polk:
http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3548/3379613089_4239b8f651_o.jpg
http://curbednetwork.com/cache/gallery/3056/3380429984_25f2566f6b_o.jpg
Source (both): http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/03/23/deconstruction_watch_piece_by_piece_in_the_civic_center.php?o=1
BTinSF
May 28, 2009, 6:05 PM
The NIMBYs (and, one suspects, the recession) win another round . . . and save a surface parking lot:
The 690 Stanyan Project Scoop: Scaled Back To An Interior Gutting
http://www.socketsite.com/690%20Stanyan%20Site%205-28-09.jpg
A plugged-in reader reports on the proposed 690 Stanyan Project:
The other half had a storewide meeting at Whole Foods last night. It was told to them that the Stanyan Project has been scaled back to be just like the Noe Valley project. No external construction - no condos, just a interior gutting of the old Cala foods and a small format Whole Foods going into it.
The mixed-use design as was proposed (and conditional use approved):
http://www.socketsite.com/690%20Stanyan%20-%20Revised%20A.jpg
The proposed 26 studio units, 20 one-bedroom units, 15 two-bedroom units, and one three-bedroom unit have been removed from our pipeline inventory watch list.
Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2009/05/the_690_stanyan_project_scoop_scaled_back_to_an_interio.html
peanut gallery
May 28, 2009, 6:40 PM
I guess the good news is this neighborhood will get something. But it's far short of what it should have been. I have two friends in this area. Can't wait to hear what they have to say about it.
Gordo
May 28, 2009, 7:52 PM
Yuck. Now I bet that parking lot is still there in 30 years. Oh well, better than it being a boarded up building I guess.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.