Bay Area Proposals/Approvals/Construction Tidbits II [Archive]

fflint

09-01-2006, 01:05 AM

Check out the PDF!
---

S.J. Skyline to Get Makeover
Developers Rushing to Fill Up the Gap in Luxury Housing

By Katherine Conrad
Mercury News
August 29, 2006

http://www.mercurynews.com/images/mercurynews/mercurynews/15390/236864133980.jpg
An artist's rendering of Axis, a 22-story condo project planned for downtown San Jose.

Graphic: Planned Residential High-Rises (PDF) (http://www.mercurynews.com/multimedia/mercurynews/news/highrise.pdf)

Bucking a nationwide trend, developers are on track to build high-rise condominiums that will dramatically alter downtown San Jose's skyline.

As builders in Southern California and along the East Coast pull back from condominium construction, developers in San Jose remain bullish about a market they say is eager for their product -- luxurious urban condos offering views, spas and concierge services. Such housing, they say, appeals to those with six-figure incomes, no children and a desire to be downtown.

Even more important, banks are showing confidence. Two weeks ago, Fremont Investment & Loan agreed to lend KT Properties of San Jose and Spring Capital of Eugene, Ore., $128.5 million to build the Axis, a 22-story tower on Almaden Boulevard and Santa Clara Street. Construction on the 320-unit project has begun.

``The loan closing speaks for itself,'' said Lesley Love, vice president for Fremont. ``We believe in the underlying market fundamentals of San Jose. We think San Jose is the next candidate for what we've seen in other markets.''

Mike Kriozere, who paid $28.6 million for 1.5 acres of prime property in June, agrees. Saying he is not fazed by declining numbers in either sales or builder surveys, Kriozere prepared to write a $130,000 check Monday for city-imposed fees on his high-rise 670-unit development, City Front Square.

``Everybody is talking about a big housing slowdown, but this is a community that is completely, totally 100 percent under-served in this product,'' said Kriozere, of Urban West Associates.

``If you live in Santa Clara County and you've got money, what's your choice? A lot of people don't want a 5,000- or 6,000-square-foot house in Woodside.''

While he does not yet have the financing for the two towers of 670 units, estimated to cost $300 million, he is confident he'll secure a loan. When that happens, he hopes to push the start date for construction from the end of 2007 to spring next year.

``We're on track,'' Kriozere said. ``We're not slower, we're trying to make it go faster.''

Condos for sale

Chicago-based Mesa Development just opened its West Coast office in San Jose and named Rick Friedman, formerly of eBay, to run it. As development manager, Friedman will oversee the sales office for 360 Residences, a 22-story condo project at 360 S. Market St., at the corner of San Salvador Street, scheduled to open in January. Mesa also announced that it will build 360 Residences with Kimball Hill Homes.

And Barry Swenson Builder is hoping to finish construction on City Heights, a 16-story, 124-unit development on San Pedro Street next spring, even as the company considers converting Vendome Place from apartments to condominiums. The first phase of Vendome is just 76 units, but the entire development calls for 500.

``One of the differences between San Jose and other markets is there's not an overabundance of condos. If you go to Las Vegas and Miami, they've been building a mass amount of condos for some time,'' said Jessie Thielen, a development project manager for Barry Swenson Builder.

Barry Swenson Builder, the first to offer San Jose a high-rise project, is taking ``tons of calls'' from buyers, Thielen said. ``It's the product that the San Jose buyer is looking for.''

John Weiss, the city's redevelopment deputy director, is not surprised that developers are moving ahead in San Jose.

``We're beginning to have job growth -- the most encouraging in five years,'' Weiss said. ``My observation is that there certainly is a substantial slowdown in Southern California and on the East Coast, but they were substantially overbuilt.''

To keep the fires going, the city is considering whether to extend the incentive program, begun in 2004, that waived the affordable housing component.

``If we stop where we are today, we end up with four projects and about 1,000 units. We really need 5,000 units, and we'd love to do 10,000,'' said Joe Horwedel, the city's interim planning director. ``Should it be a period of time or a number of units? Our goal is to get units downtown. We want that high-rise market to be really strong.''

While some preliminary proposals have stalled, other developers are forging ahead and even scouting around for more sites to build. Meanwhile, the city is grappling with another question: How much housing is too much?

Housing deficit

The Bay Area has a housing deficit that is expected to worsen as the economy improves. According to the Association of Bay Area Governments, the shortfall is expected to reach more than 150,000 units by 2010, while Santa Clara County is expected to generate 95,000 jobs in 2006 and 2007. Yet the city also has an obligation to provide places to work.

KT Properties proposes to build a high-rise on another site downtown at Market and Santa Clara streets that San Jose had eyed for a BART station/office tower.

``We're having a debate: Are there sites worth preserving for office rather than residential?'' Horwedel said. ``How do you balance a BART portal to accommodate a major investment in downtown? Do you say `no' to somebody ready to go, in favor of someone who could take another 15 years? We're taking that question to the city council in the next month or so.''

San Jose may not have BART, but Paul Zieger, president of Pacific Marketing Associates and a spokesman for Axis, Tower 88 on Second Street and City Heights, said the city has plenty of other attractions.

``They have a hockey team, light-rail system, a children's museum, an adult museum, the symphony -- all these things that most cities get after everybody moves into downtown. It's a suburban community supported by a rich business community,'' he said.

The true test, however, is how quickly the units sell once they hit the market. And for high-rises, which take 20 to 24 months to build, that's still a year or two away.

rocketman_95046

09-01-2006, 03:46 AM

SJ will really be changing over the next few years. If the office market ever gets going look out.

BTinSF

09-01-2006, 06:44 AM

SJ will really be changing over the next few years. If the office market ever gets going look out.

There's good news. See http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=114432

EastBayHardCore

09-01-2006, 06:52 AM

That's a great PDF. Question though, what's up with those single family houses between 280 and the Convention Center? Will that be rezoned once these lots start to fill up? It seems odd to have those houses caught in between the freeway and some nice new towers.

fflint

09-01-2006, 10:46 AM

There used to be twice as many of those single-family homes (although I think most are apartment houses these days) in that area before they built the convention center via eminent domain. I remember driving on the streets there, lined with such homes, after I had read they would disappear--just so I'd remember the old downtown SJ. I was a teenager then, living a few miles west, but I do remember the old downtown SJ. I hope they don't rip out the remaining blocks of homes, if only for history's sake.

EastBayHardCore

09-01-2006, 06:18 PM

fflint: If I'm thinking about the same area aren't those houses just some boring old single story suburban style homes? BTW, what was OLD downtown SJ like?

BTinSF

09-02-2006, 12:22 AM

A number of interesting articles in this week's SF Business Times and I'll try to post them Sunday evening when they become available on the web site.

Among them:

- Pat Kuleto is breaking ground on a pair of $10 million restaurants in Rincon Park (that's the gravely vacant space on the Embarcadero across from the Gap Building). One will be called Waterbar, run by Mark Franz of Farallon, feature floor to ceiling aquaria and sell "exotic fish that has been responsibly harvested or farmed". The other will be called Epic Roasthouse, be run by Jan Birnbaum (once head xchef at Campton Place), and sell grass-fed beefsteaks, Kobe beef and Argentine steaks. Also on-site will be food kiosks selling to go items for people to eat while sitting out along the Embarcadero.

- Eddie DeBartolo (!!) is taking over development rights for the cruise ship terminal project from lend Lease of Australia.

- "Oakland's condo mania is now single-family home frenzy" discusses plans for 816 houses at the Oakland Naval Hospital site and another 61 houses ranging up to $2.5 million on a site bounded by I-580, Lake Chabot Golf Course and Knowland Park.

- UC Berkeley is about to open Stanley Hall, a 285,000 square foot, $162 million building which is to be part of the California Institute for Quantitative Biomedical Research, a partnership between Berkeley, UCSF and UC Santa Cruz. UCSF's contribution to the Institute is Byers Hall, a building at the Mission Bay Campus.

coyotetrickster

09-02-2006, 07:10 PM

A number of interesting articles in this week's SF Business Times and I'll try to post them Sunday evening when they become available on the web site.

Among them:

- Pat Kuleto is breaking ground on a pair of $10 million restaurants in Rincon Park (that's the gravely vacant space on the Embarcadero across from the Gap Building). One will be called Waterbar, run by Mark Franz of Farallon, feature floor to ceiling aquaria and sell "exotic fish that has been responsibly harvested or farmed". The other will be called Epic Roasthouse, be run by Jan Birnbaum (once head xchef at Campton Place), and sell grass-fed beefsteaks, Kobe beef and Argentine steaks. Also on-site will be food kiosks selling to go items for people to eat while sitting out along the Embarcadero.

- Eddie DeBartolo (!!) is taking over development rights for the cruise ship terminal project from lend Lease of Australia.

It'll be truly interesting to see how folks (Read the NIMBY Brigade and the Bay Guardian 'Progressive' types) react to DeBartolo taking over such a crucial development project.

rocketman_95046

09-03-2006, 05:39 AM

Nvidia in talks to move to S.J. tower
DOWNTOWN BUILDING REMAINS VACANT AFTER FOUR YEARS
By Katherine Conrad
Mercury News
John Sobrato confirmed Friday he is negotiating with chip maker Nvidia to move its headquarters from Santa Clara to his downtown San Jose office tower, vacant now for four years.

Negotiations began about four months ago, Sobrato said, because the leading graphics chip maker is outgrowing its 500,000-square-foot Santa Clara campus.

The two sides, however, remain far apart on what could be a billion-dollar deal.

``They need space and we have an existing relationship,'' Sobrato said. ``As you might guess, we've made them a very aggressive proposal. But they have so many less-expensive suburban options.''

Sobrato should know. With 9.5 million square feet of commercial real estate across the South Bay, Sobrato Development is Silicon Valley's largest owner of commercial real estate. Nvidia, which just leased an additional 47,000 square feet across the street from its headquarters, is one of Sobrato's tenants, as are Apple Computer, Advanced Micro Devices, Applied Biosystems and Yahoo.

``We have not made any decisions in regards to new office space. We are evaluating several alternatives,'' said Nvidia spokeswoman Calisa Cole.

Nvidia, which has 3,000 employees worldwide, will be the last maker of stand-alone graphics chips for personal computers once AMD completes its acquisition of Canada's ATI Technologies. The company's chips command the highest prices in the highest-end gaming computers now. Nvidia also designed the RSX, the graphics chip in the upcoming Sony PlayStation 3 video game console.

If the chip maker is looking for a downtown high-rise for its headquarters, the 380,000-square-foot Sobrato building is the only game in town.

Sobrato planned it that way when he broke ground on the 17-story tower in 2000, just as the torrid commercial real estate market had hit its peak. And he remains determined to wait for a single tenant to take the entire building. He said the 7-million-square-foot downtown office market with its 22 percent vacancy rate already has plenty of smaller spaces, including the 60,000 square feet recently vacated by Knight Ridder.

Other large spaces on the scale of the tower on Almaden Boulevard, however, do not exist in downtown San Jose.

``It's been four years since we built that thing. Our timing was awful in early 2001 -- that's when the Internet bubble burst,'' he said. ``That's been part of our problem. And it's an expensive building, but we've been willing to be aggressive on rents.''

Asking rents for full-service, Class A office space downtown are about $2.50 a square foot per month, but Sobrato said, ``We're well below that.''

The developer would not disclose the financial terms of a downtown deal, but a 15-year lease at the current asking rate of $1.95 a square foot a month for the Almaden tower would be valued at almost $1.4 billion. A lease in a suburban location would be about two-thirds that amount.

The developer said he is considering appealing to the city's redevelopment agency to determine whether San Jose could make up the difference.

Nancy Klein, the city's economic development manager in charge of commercial real estate, would not speculate about how the city would react to such a request. While she said it's important to the city both psychologically and financially for the building to have a tenant, she does not believe the city would be willing to subsidize a company's move to downtown when the construction is already complete. In the mid-1990s, San Jose subsidized Adobe Systems' downtown move with a $35 million grant and gave the same amount to the Fairmont Hotel.

Klein acknowledged, however, that the city is eager to see the tower at 488 Almaden Blvd. filled with workers.

``We have long desired to have another corporate entity name to invest in San Jose. That's a huge value to us to have a company along the ilk of an Adobe,'' Klein said.

Once the building is leased, San Jose's downtown office vacancy would drop from 22 percent to about 15 percent, according to Ritchie Commercial. The city would gain about 1,100 employees.

``We would get a whole lot of people in that building and on the street thinking about downtown housing, and we would get retail patrons,'' she said. ``This would make downtown hum and attract other additions to our daytime and nighttime pop.''

If the deal falls through, Sobrato said he will sit tight. He has resisted so far, plus he can afford to hold out, since his company built the $100 million glass-and-granite structure with its own cash.

``We're willing to wait,'' Sobrato said. ``The current thinking is we have the ability to do that and we probably will.''

FourOneFive

09-03-2006, 07:20 AM

If Nvidia is in fact looking for new offices, it's a shame they haven't looked north to San Francisco. I think we can all think of an office tower they could occupy.

ahem...

http://www.rendimage.com/images/full_size/555mission_full.jpg

rocketman_95046

09-03-2006, 10:05 PM

^yea, but if Sobrato is worried about his building being priced to high I doubt that Nvidia is even in Tishman Speyer's ballpark.

BTinSF

09-03-2006, 11:21 PM

BTinSF

09-03-2006, 11:27 PM

If Nvidia is in fact looking for new offices, it's a shame they haven't looked north to San Francisco. I think we can all think of an office tower they could occupy.

Seriously, if they had any desire to be in SF, here's what they could do. The original plan for Foundry Square was to have buildings on all 4 corners at 4th & Howard. Two of the corners are presently built and the 3rd is now going up, the whole building leased to CIBC World Markets. The Southwest corner, however, remains a parking lot. I think the site is already entitled for the 4th building and I bet the developer (Equity Office) would be happy to put up the 4th building if they were sure it would be leased. It would look more or less like this (except each of the 4 buildings were to have different color panels--this one is reddish):

http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/foundry1lr1064352820.jpg

BTinSF

09-04-2006, 06:01 PM

The return of Eddie:

DeBartolo back with deal for piers
Former 49ers owner set to take over $400M cruise terminal
San Francisco Business Times - September 1, 2006
by Eric Young

Former San Francisco 49ers owner Eddie DeBartolo Jr. is poised to take over development of the city's new cruise ship terminal, despite the project's skyrocketing costs.

The current developer, Lend Lease Corp. of Australia, wants out of the project. Lend Lease defaulted in April on a $150,000 payment required by the Port of San Francisco to maintain exclusive negotiating rights on the $400 million deal on Piers 30-32. Port officials gave Lend Lease several months to find another developer interested in buying rights to the project, which includes an office building and a park.

Lend Lease said it decided to drop the project after estimates of retrofit work needed on the piers rose to $80 million from $40 million when it first got involved in the project several years ago. The sharp increase in cost is attributed to higher materials prices and continued deterioration of the piers.

But the higher price tag apparently is not scaring off DeBartolo, who helped turn the 49ers into an NFL powerhouse that won five Super Bowls between 1981 and 1994.

A Lend Lease executive said the company is close to a deal with DeBartolo's real estate company to sell the development rights. "We essentially reached an agreement" with DeBartolo Development LLC, said Paul Osmundson, development director with Lend Lease Corp. Osmundson said Lend Lease has talked with several developers. But talks with DeBartolo, whose interest is "pretty strong," were the most advanced, he said. He declined to provide details of the agreement.

A DeBartolo spokesman did not respond to calls for comment.

With its roots in shopping mall development, DeBartolo Development is also involved in building community centers, mixed-use developments and grocery-anchored centers .

In 1997, DeBartolo turned control of the 49ers over to his sister, Denise DeBartolo York. At the time, federal prosecutors were probing DeBartolo's connection to an alleged extortion plot by the former Louisiana governor involving a riverboat casino license. DeBartolo pleaded guilty in 2000 to failing to report a felony, agreed to pay up to $1 million in fines and was placed on two years' probation.

Rising costs
Commissioners with the Port of San Francisco will meet Sept. 12. It is not yet known whether they will take action on the Piers 30-32 project. A spokeswoman said Port Executive Director Monique Moyer hasn't yet decided whether commissioners would simply be briefed on Lend Lease's efforts to sell development rights, or asked to vote on giving Lend Lease more time to negotiate its exit from the project.

The costs of fixing San Francisco's aging piers has bedeviled other projects.

Consider a proposed development on Piers 27-31. Shorenstein Properties, which wants to build office and recreational space there, estimates that the cost to repair and seismically upgrade the area has increased to between $60 million and $65 million. That is double the amount estimated by a previous developer, Mills Corp., which pulled out of the project amid neighborhood opposition.

At least one other development has been scuttled due to high costs. Last year, the International Museum of Women decided against locating on Pier 26. Board members of the nonprofit said costs of renovation proved higher than they expected.

Ongoing challenge
San Francisco's port, which controls much of the city's waterfront, lacks the money to fix its many rotting piers and other structures in need of repair. So port officials want to line up deals with developers willing to pay for infrastructure improvements before they bring new projects to the waterfront.

The port's interest in a new cruise ship terminal comes as the cruise ship industry in the city is expanding. San Francisco's cruise ship business has doubled since 2000 to about 80 dockings, bringing about $20 million to city coffers annually. A new cruise ship terminal would double the capacity of the current cruise ship terminal at Pier 35.

The development at Piers 30-32 is not just for a cruise terminal. The project also involves a new office complex and a park on Brannan Street. The first phase of the overall project, construction of a condominium tower, was completed this year. Eighty of the 135 condos have been sold.

Eric Young covers government for the San Francisco Business Times.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/04/story1.html?t=printable

BTinSF

09-04-2006, 06:08 PM

More food on the Embarcadero:

Kuleto sets new table
Bold venture shocks S.F. restaurant vets
San Francisco Business Times - September 1, 2006
by Ryan Tate

Restaurateur Pat Kuleto and his partners have just finalized an unprecedented gamble, putting down $18 million on a new restaurant project in San Francisco.

Kuleto and his investors, including landlord JMA Ventures LLC, about two weeks ago began excavation for two large restaurants at Rincon Park, on the northeastern waterfront across from Gap Inc.'s downtown headquarters. A formal groundbreaking is scheduled next week.

It's the biggest-ticket new restaurant launch anyone can remember, and industry players regard the project with awe. Amid fast-rising labor costs, higher food prices and shrinking profit margins, Kuleto is doubling down on a game more and more top chef-owners are walking away from entirely: the fancy San Francisco restaurant.

"I don't know of any restaurateur who would have the cojones to do that," said Daniel Scherotter, owner and chef at Palio d'Asti in the financial district. "It runs counter to the trend of chefs opening restaurants that are low-labor, downscale. San Francisco has been shrinking in population and the (business customer) hasn't come back to the way it was."

The project has been on the drawing board for four years, following the scuttling of a previous deal on the same Port of San Francisco-owned parcel by restaurater Reed Hearon. Landlord JMA has a 60-year lease with the Port and has been making minimal ground lease payments over the past two years, payments that will grow after the restaurants are built and begin to make money.

Kuleto has a 25-year lease from JMA. JMA will spend about $8 million to construct the buildings, while Kuleto and his investors will spend $10 million on the interiors of the restaurants.

"I think you have to go to Las Vegas to see money spent with that level of aggressiveness," said Ed Levine, CEO of restaurant chain Left Bank and of an accounting company serving 40 Bay Area restaurants. "These are big budgets now, what are they going to be when they actually get done?"

Long history in the city
Kuleto is a 35-year veteran of San Francisco's restaurant scene, both as a designer and an entrepreneur. He has been involved with everything from the Fog City Diner to Postrio, and his own restaurant ventures include highly regarded eateries like Boulevard, Farallon and Jardiniére.

Kuleto is conservatively estimating just over $20 million in revenue for the first year for both Rincon Park restaurants combined.

But each restaurant has a peak capacity of about 200 diners, with the average dinner table expected to turn two-and-a-half times. Then there's the lunch business, where special menus for the business crowd indoors will be supplemented by sales through outdoor food kiosks Kuleto is planning. Entrees are in the $20-35 range, at least at dinner, and Levine said the average check could easily be around $80.

Those factors could push Kuleto's annual sales closer to $30 million. It's not an unrealistic number given how well casual restaurants in the nearby Ferry Building have been doing. Charles Phan has built a $12-million-a-year business there with his 230-seat restaurant Slanted Door. Though most of his street-food entrees cost less than $20, Phan often sees his tables turning three times, even during lunch, plus brisk drinks business.

Other restaurants in the building do anywhere from $1,000 to $3,500 per square foot. For example, Traci Des Jardins' Mijita does more than $1 million per year out of 300 square feet; MarketBar does close to $6 million out of around 3,000 square feet.

Two visions
Kuleto's restaurants are each about 9,000 square feet, and serving pricier fare.

The seafood restaurant, Waterbar, will be run by Mark Franz of Farallon and anchored by floor-to-ceiling aquariums. Kuleto bills it as "the Monterey Bay Aquarium meets Tadich Grill," with exotic fish that has been responsibly harvested or farmed.

The meat restaurant, Epic Roasthouse, will be run by Jan Birnbaun, once head chef at Campton Place. Kuleto said dishes would include grass-fed beef steaks, Kobe beef and Argentine steak cuts. The upstairs bar is named Quiver, a nod to the nearby public art installation.

A large plaza will separate the two restaurants and Rincon Park will surround them.

"We see these as timeless, forever restaurants," Kuleto said. "I sort of looked at the crystal ball and tried to pick two things I felt would be an asset to the city."

Kuleto also wanted the restaurants to be completely distinct from one another -- and to not compete with his other restarants like Farallon or, particularly, Boulevard, which is just three blocks away.

Restaurant industry insiders said Kuleto's biggest problem won't be winning diners from competitors but controlling costs and earning enough on each check to turn a profit. Labor costs have spiked in restaurants thanks to San Francisco's minumum wage increase, which went into effect in 2004 and has been climbing each year since. Unlike New York and other states, California does not allow restaurants to credit tips toward workers' minimum wages, keeping costs for restaurant owners especially high.

Restaurateurs with more than 20 workers also face city-mandated health care spending for health care coverage starting at $1.06 per worker per hour. A ballot proposal would, if passed, also require restaurants and other businesses to offer each worker nine sick days per year, or six if they have less than 10 workers.

"People from other areas hear so much negativity about San Francisco, they don't want to open heavily capitalized restaurants in the area," said Kevin Westlye, head of the Golden Gate Restaurant Association, which just awarded Kuleto a lifetime achievement award. "So we celebrate when a local restaurateur wants to make an investment."

Kuleto said the scale of the new venture may be more of an asset than a liability.

"The restaurant industry is, unfortunately, being caught in the crossfire," Kuleto said of the city legislation. "The margins, frankly are somewhat smaller than they used to be, and you have to do pretty impressive volume, or you're dead."

Ryan Tate covers hospitality for the San Francisco Business Times.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/04/story2.html?t=printable

BTinSF

09-04-2006, 06:13 PM

Houses in Oakland:

Oakland's condo mania is now single-family home frenzy
San Francisco Business Times - September 1, 2006
by Ryan Tate

After eight years of high-density, downtown condominium development, Oakland is seeing a return to single-family home construction.

The countertrend began with SunCal Cos.' plan for 816 homes, some in a stand-alone configuration, at the site of the former Oak Knoll naval hospital in the Oakland Hills. SunCal bought the 167-acre site for close to $101 million in November.

Now another landowner is peddling his own plan for 67 acres in the hills. Edward Patmont and his Chabot Dunsmuir LP would construct 61 single-family homes ranging from $900,000 to $2.5 million. They range in size from 2,100 to 4,610 square feet. The land is bounded by Interstate 580, Lake Chabot Golf Course and Knowland Park.

The development needs city approval for a subdivision of legal lots but falls within density allowed by existing zoning as well as allowed uses under the city's general plan.

The land and planned development, at 3421 Malcolm Ave., is for sale at $8.5 million through Gary Robinson of Coldwell Banker.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/04/newscolumn6.html?t=printable

BTinSF

09-04-2006, 06:21 PM

New biomedical research institute going up at UC Berkeley and Mission Bay:

Cal's nano-bio center about to open its doors
San Francisco Business Times - September 1, 2006
by Sarah Duxbury

The brave new world is almost here.

In January 2007, Berkeley's Stanley Hall is scheduled to open. The 285,000-square-foot, $162 million biosciences and bioengineering facility is Berkeley's contribution to QB3, the California Institute for Quantitative Biomedical Research -- a partnership between the University of California, Berkeley; UCSF; and UC Santa Cruz.

Stanley is Berkeley's answer to Byers Hall, UCSF's QB3 home in Mission Bay. It will house about 40 research labs and up to 10 specialized core research support facilities like the Biomolecular Nanotechnology Center, as well as administrative offices and the bioengineering department.

QB3 is one of four California Institutes for Science and Innovation approved by then-Gov. Gray Davis to encourage scientists from a range of disciplines to collaborate and apply quantitative sciences like chemistry and engineering to biomedical sciences. The goal of the QB3 institute is to speed technology transfer to private industry.

The institute has an industrial advisory board of close to 20 private sector folks, each of whom pays an annual membership fee. QB3 doesn't do any proprietary work for these companies, though they do have ground-floor access to the research being conducted within the ivory tower, said Clayton Heathcock, chief scientist of QB3 Berkeley.

According to Heathcock, Berkeley and UCSF will each account for 40 percent of QB3's research and budget. At Berkeley, research will build on its core strengths of engineering and the physical sciences. Santa Cruz, known for its engineering and math faculty, will focus its research in those areas while UCSF's work will center around medicine.

Lab on a chip
Berkeley's Biomolecular Nano technology Center is where biology and nanotechnology collide. It will occupy 11,000 square feet of Stanley Hall and do work that has strong chances of transferring to the private sector.

Like its Silicon Valley forebears, BNC will manufacture chips. These, however, are designed for biochemical and medical applications, like disease detection at the cellular level, something that is currently impossible.

"It's using the technology of Silicon Valley to make tiny reactors, a lab on a chip, where we can carry out chemical analysis and biochemical analysis on chips like in your cell phone or computer," Heathcock said.

The engineers in the center will know how to design and make such chips; the biologists will know how to use them.

For example, the work could include tracking how a protein changes in a cell, thereby allowing scientists to detect cancer years before they can through existing methods.

"Now, technicians are looking at cancer cells, which means you already have cancer and you're counting it," said Luke Lee, director of the BNC. "Instead, can you develop a sensor to detect early conditions of cancer patients a few years before, so you can get preventive treatment?"

All this happens at the biomolecular level, and Lee said it has huge implications in terms of the future of preventive and personalized medicine. Technology coming out of BNC could be used to build home diagnostic systems that are less expensive and faster than current medical techniques.

Lee said that his lab will be the first that is custom-designed to do this kind of research.

Applied Biosystems, Intel and Samsung are some of the companies that, before the center has even opened, BNC is talking to.

Lee is also turning to industry to raise the $10 million he needs to equip his lab. Fundraising is underway. Lee declined to say how much he has already raised, but said that he needs at least $6 million to get the center running.

Lee is not alone in raising money to outfit his lab.

Davis approved QB3's mandate and provided sufficient funds to build its buildings on the three campuses, but not to operate them, Heathcock said. The state provdes just $1 million to run Stanley Hall, and Heathcock estimates the actual cost will reach $4 million annually. An anonymous donor has pledged $1 million a year; the school must fundraise for the other $2 million it needs each year.

Collaborative power
QB3 and Stanley Hall were founded on the principle of multi-disciplinary collaboration.

"We're seeing a new kind of scientist being born ... becoming a generalist instead of a specialist," Heathcock said. "That's what this new building is about, bringing the different disciplines together again."

The same collaboration is happening on a smaller scale in the BNC.

BNC will serve more than 30 faculty from the departments of molecular and cell biology, chemistry, physics, bioengineering, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering and electrical engineering. Over 100 Ph.D. students will also work there.

"We're not only in the process of creating the basic science and engineering tools to lay the foundation of a new industry, but also train the people who will be the workers in that industry," Heathcock said.

And Heathcock and Lee both have high hopes that biomolecular nanotechnology is a nascent industry.

"I think this nanobiology, which is at the intersection of Silicon Valley and the Bay Area biotech alley, can become its own industry. It can spawn new companies just like Silicon Valley and the biotech community have," Heathcock said. "When they invented the integrated circuit chip, they were not sure what they would use them for. We're at the same juncture for the bionanotechnology area."

Sarah Duxbury is a staff writer for the San Francisco Business Times.

http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/04/focus4.html?t=printable

rocketman_95046

09-06-2006, 03:44 AM

Small sports arena possible addition to Candlestick Point development
Phillip Matier & Andrew Ross

Wednesday, September 6, 2006
The San Francisco 49ers and their building partners are wrapping up a long-awaited megaplan for a new, 68,000-seat stadium at Candlestick Point -- as well as a possible last-minute addition, a 12,000- seat arena.

"It is part of the uses being considered,'' said Adam Alberti, spokesman for Lennar Corp., which is handling a development that the 49ers also envision including housing, stores and a hotel.

Chances are slim that an arena with 12,000 seats would be big enough to attract the Golden State Warriors basketball team or any other major sports franchise. The Oakland Arena, where the Warriors play, has 20,000 seats, and San Jose's HP Pavilion holds 17,000 for the Sharks hockey team. Even the ancient Cow Palace in neighboring Daly City has a bigger capacity than the Niners' arena would.

But Lennar thinks a midsize venue could be just the ticket for second-tier sports such as indoor soccer and arena football, along with big-name musical acts and other entertainment.

The idea is to bring people out to Candlestick Point on more than just the 10 days or so per year that the Niners play there and to put cars into a massive garage that the team would build.

In other words, the idea is to make money year-round.

In addition, Lennar is negotiating with Forest City Enterprises -- builder of the downtown Bloomingdale's development -- to develop the retail portions of the Candlestick Point project.

"No doubt there is going to be a significant commercial partner in this venture, and Forest City would be a great addition and capable partner, but no agreements are in place,'' Alberti said.

Lisa Lang, spokeswoman for the 49ers, would say only that the team was awaiting a final feasibility study from Lennar. "The hope is we are close,'' she said.

But she cautioned that "there are still some areas that we have to work through, and we are waiting for these issues to be resolved.''

Lang also put some distance between the team and the arena scheme, saying it's "just an idea, and it isn't really connected to the Niners.''

But she did not rule out the possibility that the team could lease the arena if Niners owners John and Denise York exercise their rights to an Arena Football League team -- something on which the couple have put a down payment.

Word of the arena bubbled up when Lennar added the idea to a poll it commissioned to test the Candlestick plan with San Francisco voters.

In addition to the arena, the plan outlined in the poll included a 68,000-seat football stadium, 6,000 units of housing, and open space and parks -- all to be "privately financed," with an eye toward using the sports venues for the 2016 Olympics, should San Francisco win the Games.

If the Games come here, the stadium would temporarily be expanded to 75,000 to 80,000 seats -- the minimum required to host the opening and closing ceremonies, as well as track-and-field events.

While he declined to give details, Alberti said the poll of more than 400 registered voters was "quite encouraging for the land plan and the private financing of the stadium.''

Given that public land would be involved in the deal, however, the exact meaning of "privately financed" is open to interpretation.

Lang said the Yorks were ready to put "hundreds of millions'' of their own money into the deal. Any tax increment financing, which allows a public agency to issue bonds to help finance development and to repay the debt with new real estate taxes generated by the growth, would go toward infrastructure improvements in the area, Lang said.

The Niners are also counting on the city providing land for the stadium and development rights to surrounding Candlestick Point -- terms that voters approved in 1997 as part of a now-discarded stadium-mall deal.

Michael Cohen, who has been helping direct the development from the mayor's office, said the Niners' plan would satisfy the city's goals of creating jobs in the Bayview, adding affordable housing and providing a "tremendous" waterfront park.

As for signs that the housing market is starting to weaken -- even across the channel at the old Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, where Lennar is developing 1,600 units of housing -- Cohen insisted that wasn't a factor.

"The notion that the economics won't support these projects is just wrong,'' Cohen said, noting that the 6,000 units of housing in the Niners' project would be phased in over several years.

Testing the voters' appetite was one of the last pieces of business before the Niners and Lennar go public with their plan, which could be any day now.

"People wanted to feel comfortable about what they were undertaking before they ran off and showed it to the world,'' Lennar spokesman Alberti said.

However, he emphasized, "It's a draft plan, and it's subject to change.''

Mayor Gavin Newsom has said that any revision of the 1997 stadium-mall plan would probably have to go back to the voters, but our sources say the 49ers still hope to avoid that.

"We need to look at the final proposal and make a determination at that point,'' Lang said.

Page B - 1

FourOneFive

09-06-2006, 04:00 AM

right on! now we won't have to shelp to oakland or san jose to see big time musical acts! let's hope they finish it before madonna retires. i want to see her live on SAN FRANCISCO soil. ;) :D

San Frangelino

09-06-2006, 04:38 AM

In addition to the arena, the plan outlined in the poll included a 68,000-seat football stadium, 6,000 units of housing, and open space and parks -- all to be "privately financed,"

Correct me if I am wrong but that would make the residential component equal in size to Mission Bay's at 6,000 units final build out? Not too bad at all, hopefully it will be good, dense and well planned. Does anyone know what the unit count and Hunter's Point is to be at final Build out?

BTinSF

09-06-2006, 05:25 AM

right on! now we won't have to shelp to oakland or san jose to see big time musical acts! let's hope they finish it before madonna retires. i want to see her live on SAN FRANCISCO soil. ;) :D

Naw. You'll have to schlep to Candlestick Point--with no public transportation of significance. That thing should have been built across McCovey Cove from AT&T Park where it was talked about for so long.

J Church

09-06-2006, 05:34 AM

BT is right. At least the Coliseum is by BART.

rocketman_95046

09-06-2006, 05:42 AM

BT is right. At least the Coliseum is by BART.

and the Shark Tank in SJ is next to Caltrain, and VTA.

tuy

09-06-2006, 06:03 AM

And don't forget all the Commercials running about taking Capitol Corridor to the Coliseum.

EastBayHardCore

09-06-2006, 06:05 AM

How many trains per day actually stop at the Coliseum? I can't imagine anyone would brave Amtrak to or from an A's game.

SFBoy

09-06-2006, 06:11 AM

I'll have no problem getting to the arena in my car. But they really should go for 20,000 to get the Warriors back in the city.

dimondpark

09-06-2006, 06:40 AM

Houses in Oakland:

Oakland's condo mania is now single-family home frenzy
San Francisco Business Times - September 1, 2006
by Ryan Tate

After eight years of high-density, downtown condominium development, Oakland is seeing a return to single-family home construction.

The countertrend began with SunCal Cos.' plan for 816 homes, some in a stand-alone configuration, at the site of the former Oak Knoll naval hospital in the Oakland Hills. SunCal bought the 167-acre site for close to $101 million in November.

Now another landowner is peddling his own plan for 67 acres in the hills. Edward Patmont and his Chabot Dunsmuir LP would construct 61 single-family homes ranging from $900,000 to $2.5 million. They range in size from 2,100 to 4,610 square feet. The land is bounded by Interstate 580, Lake Chabot Golf Course and Knowland Park.

The development needs city approval for a subdivision of legal lots but falls within density allowed by existing zoning as well as allowed uses under the city's general plan.

The land and planned development, at 3421 Malcolm Ave., is for sale at $8.5 million through Gary Robinson of Coldwell Banker.

my friend a prominent realtor in that particular area expects this development to become the bay area's black Bel Air. If it'll keep some wealthy blacks considering Elk Grove and Antioch in The Town-then thank goodness!:tup:

dimondpark

09-06-2006, 05:14 PM

Fox Theater billed as key to new downtown area
Oakland takes up restoration of 1928 theater in attempt to create a downtown arts district
By Chris Metinko
STAFF WRITER

Nearly 80 years after its doors first opened, city officials are hoping the rebirth of the long-silent Fox Oakland Theater will be a key to sparking the development of a new arts and theater district downtown.

The Oakland City Council unanimously approved the $53 million rehabilitation plan for the theater late last month and construction is on schedule to begin in September. The renovation plan includes a theater, space for the Oakland School for the Arts and the development of a new bar and restaurant on the theater's ground floor.

"We're very excited about this," said Phil Tagami, managing general partner of California Commercial Investments, who is leading the rehabilitation project. "When I first saw this place, my first thought was 'Let's fix this up.'"

Tagami has experience restoring old buildings -- his résumé includes redoing the Rotunda Building in downtown Oakland -- and it's hoped this project also will breathe life back into the city's downtown.

The Oakland Redevelopment Agency purchased the Fox for $3 million in 1996 with the intention of restoring the historic building and trying to encourage investment in the city's Uptown district. While efforts to rehabilitate the Fox moved slowly, the neighborhood has seen other development, including construction of 655 apartments by the firm Forest City Inc. next to the theater. It's hoped the Fox will help contribute to the night life in the area and create an arts district downtown has lacked.

"It's very fortunate that Oakland still has the Fox," said Daniel Vanderpriem, the redevelopment agency's director. "In 1963, the Fox Theater in San Francisco was demolished. That was a terrible mistake. It's good fortune Oakland was able to hold onto its Fox Theater."

A large portion of the project will be paid for by a $25.5 million loan from the Oakland Redevelopment Agency -- money that will be raised mainly through issuing bonds -- with other money coming from a combination of tax credits and grants.

The redevelopment agency already had spent more than $6.5 million in costs related to the project, including a much needed $1 million roof replacement in 1999.

"There was mold at least an inch thick in some areas," Tagami said. "It needed some work."

The leaky roof and grimy interior represented quite a fall from grace for the old theater. The Fox opened in 1928 -- three years before the Paramount in downtown Oakland -- and operated as a first-run movie house until 1962. After that, theater ownership changed hands several times, as did the movie house's direction. For a few months in 1962, the theater showed adult-themed movies, and in 1965 the Fox closed for the first of what would be many times. By 1975, the city's public works agency wanted to demolish the shuttered theater to make room for a parking lot, but the proposal lost steam and in 1979 the theater was listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

After that, the theater played host to only a few special events and eventually closed permanently in 1984.

Tagami is hoping to reopen the doors in September 2008, when the theater is expected to make its triumphed return to the city's arts stage.

Seating in the theater will be movable, allowing for as few as 500 people and as many as 2,300. The project also includes remaking the second and third floors of the building that wrap around the theater for use by the Oakland School for the Arts. The ground floor is planned to have restaurant/retail space opening both to the street and to the interior lobby of the theater. The theater will be managed by Another Planet Entertainment, which also runs the Greek Theatre in Berkeley.

The plans seem to please those who have been fighting for years for the Fox to take what they feel is its rightful place as one of the city's crown jewels in the Uptown district.

"I think this (plan) makes a lot of sense," said Patricia Dedekian, a founding member of the Friends of the Oakland Fox, a group that has been trying to save the theater. "I think the Uptown district needs the Fox. There are a lot of interesting things happening there with new restaurants and things, and with the Paramount and now the Fox you could have a thriving arts and entertainment district."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reach Chris Metinko at 510-763-5418 or cmetinko@cctimes.com.

tuy

09-06-2006, 05:35 PM

double post...

tuy

09-06-2006, 05:48 PM

How many trains per day actually stop at the Coliseum? I can't imagine anyone would brave Amtrak to or from an A's game.

The newest schedule now has 9 Eastbound and 11 Westbound weekday trains daily that either begin, end or make a stop at the Coliseum station. However, the last Eastbound train of the day leaves at 8:10 pm, so it is a little late for a night game. Day games however, it would work.

They promote going to A's games on the Capitol Corridor website.

http://www.capitolcorridor.org/promotions/oakland_athletics.php

Maybe they run a late special train on game days, but I didn't see any indication that they do.

BTinSF

09-06-2006, 06:06 PM

my friend a prominent realtor in that particular area expects this development to become the bay area's black Bel Air. If it'll keep some wealthy blacks considering Elk Grove and Antioch in The Town-then thank goodness!:tup:

With Piedmont and Montclair in existence for a very long time, why would this development make such a difference? I'm not saying it wouldn't; just wondering.

dimondpark

09-06-2006, 10:00 PM

Only a small number of wealthy blacks live in Piedmont or Montclair-the majority overwhelmingly live further east along 580 around and above the eastern hill areas. As you may know, California-especially the coast, is losing blacks at a steady pace. If these projects have the ability to attract upper class blacks who might otherwise move to the central valley or out of state-then Im all for it.

FourOneFive

09-07-2006, 09:53 AM

from today's san francisco examiner:

Condos planned north of zoo

Melanie Carroll, The Examiner
Sep 7, 2006 2:00 AM (44 mins ago)
Current rank: # 34 of 6,984 articles

SAN FRANCISCO - Condominiums proposed for construction just north of the San Francisco Zoo will offer views of the Pacific Ocean, but those views won’t come to fruition before the demolition of three buildings where a motel, surf shop and café make their homes.

The proposal for the 2800 block of Sloat Boulevard, between 46th and 47th avenues, calls for three new mixed-use five-story buildings standing 60 feet, dozens of condominiums and 26,000 square feet of ground-floor retail space.

Eighty-two off-street parking spots are also in the blueprints.

“That whole block is kind of decrepit,” said Buffy Maguire, co-owner of the Java Beach Café on La Playa and Judah streets. “We really are due for revitalization. We are trying to revitalize our little nook.”

Plans call for tearing down three buildings totaling 21,000 square feet along with the existing 30-space parking lot. The developer aims to provide space for two of his commercial tenants, city planner Susan Mickelsen said. John’s Ocean Beach Café and the Aqua Surf Shop are expected to get retail space in the new development.

The café has been open for nearly three decades and the rent is affordable, said Tony Batshon, the son of the café’s namesake.

Batshon said the future of the café is unknown since it is unclear what the rent will be in the new building.

“The issue is how much” will it cost to stay, he said. “Anything that’s overpriced would have to push us out.”

The plan has yet to go through the public approval process. The soonest demolition could take place is in about a year, Mickelsen said.

Aqua Surf Shop intends to stay near Ocean Beach, co-owner Aleks Petrovich said. But he was reluctant to discuss further details since he doesn’t want his competition to know his plans.

The third tenant, Robert’s At The Beach Motel, won’t be given a chance to relocate into the new space.

Owner-manager Andy Patel said he’s not sure where he will move once he has to leave his oceanside motel.

“I want to stay in the hotel business,” Patel said. “I may look in another city or state.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

overall, this looks like a great project. i was never a fan of that ugly motel. it's a shame we couldn't go taller on that lot though. it wouldn't block any views, it's close to transit (the 18, 23, and L-Taraval are right outside), and it's on an "edge", so it wouldn't be a huge monstrosity sticking out of the middle of the neighborhood. the urban design plan of the 1960s once called for buildings at tall as 160' for this site. maybe it's something we should revist? :yes:

coyotetrickster

09-07-2006, 02:46 PM

J Church

09-07-2006, 04:12 PM

coyotetrickster

09-07-2006, 06:19 PM

I don't know, I'm surprised the neighbors aren't already apoplectic about 60' by the beach. Is there anything taller out there? The condos where Playland used to be out at the end of the Richmond, by the Cliff House--four stories?

dimond, that's an interesting piece of information.

A) The plot is two streets east of the Great Highway. There are already several 35/40' foot buildings on the access street parallel to the highway, so there is not a lot of view blockage. Plus, the housing stock in the immediate vicinity is pretty run down (not proof of non-owner occupancy in this city, but anything would beat the craptastic structures there already.

rocketman_95046

09-08-2006, 06:47 AM

SJ greater downtown infill continues... 1,904 units under construction...2,925 units in planning/permit phase.

The SJ Redevelopment Agency has a great monthly update.

http://www.sjredevelopment.org/monthlyReports/housing.pdf

I know we all make fun of SJ from time to time. but SJ was ranked as one of the best in the Bay Area to promote infill and prevent sprawl.

dimondpark

09-08-2006, 12:55 PM

These people are unbelievable

REFERENDUM
Oakland throws out Oak-to-9th signatures
Christopher Heredia, Chronicle Staff Writer

Thursday, September 7, 2006

A referendum to block Oakland's largest housing development in decades should be invalidated because organizers failed to provide accurate information when they approached potential voters, Oakland City Attorney John Russo said Wednesday.

Russo said the signature gatherers -- among them members of the Oakland Heritage Alliance, the League of Women Voters of Oakland and the Sierra Club -- failed to present to voters with the final ordinance approving the 3,100-unit Oak-to-Ninth project, which was adopted by the City Council on July 18.

They also did not include attachments delineating public access to some 30 acres of open space associated with the 64-acre project along Oakland's estuary. Petition gatherers said they opposed the project as approved by the council for, among other reasons, a lack of open space.

The referendum committee submitted 25,000 signatures Aug. 17 seeking to either have the council overturn its approval of the project or put Oak-to-Ninth before voters.

Russo directed Oakland's city clerk to toss out the referendum once the Alameda County registrar of voters finishes validating signatures later this month.

"Under state law, it was not done properly," Russo said. "I don't know whether it was their intent or by inadvertence. It doesn't matter."

Stuart Flashman, an attorney for the referendum committee, said the group will appeal Russo's decision and is confident the referendum will pass muster in court. Flashman said the group went to great lengths to verify with the city clerk that it had all the documentation needed to go forward with its drive.

Russo said that argument is moot because state law supports the public's right to know the full facts of any law being petitioned.

E-mail Christopher Heredia at cheredia@sfchronicle.com
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/07/BAG8LL0HK714.DTL

J Church

09-08-2006, 04:07 PM

False petitioning is a serious problem. A woman came up to me last week asking me to help "stop the city from taking away homes in the Bayview."

craeg

09-08-2006, 04:46 PM

I'm surprised to hear that this is even an issue. I dont think I have ever talked with a signature gatherer in SF who represented the facts accurately.

J Church

09-08-2006, 06:41 PM

Today's Biz Times reports that 222 19th St.:

http://sfcityscape.com/forum/lake_merritt_tower.jpg

... has grown 10 stories, to 420'.

You might not be able to read about in the Times, but you can read NIMBYs whining about it (and a few folks fighting back) here:

http://grandlakeguardian.org/index.php/schiff/2006/09/02/40_story_skyscraper_planned_at_lake

A couple of interesting twists in the Times story. One, because it's a controversial site, there may be the possibility of a land swap for something closer to the downtown core. And two, the developer describes it as "an obelisk ... Oakland's answer to the Transamerica building." Unless it's been redesigned, that sure doesn't seem to describe the structure rendered above.

Anyway, this would be 370 condos with no retail.

dimondpark

09-08-2006, 06:55 PM

Isnt the building in that rendering closer to 600'? How tight would that be?

About swapping locations, I think it would go nicely on Broadway@11th or Broadway@17th-but anywhere is nice, beggars cant be choosers.

J Church

09-08-2006, 07:14 PM

No, that's the 318' version. I think. It always seemed a bit tall, though.

I doubt the swap will happen. The idea was raised by a neighborhoodie opposed to the project. But she acknowledged it would be difficult to stop. Nancy Nadel doesn't like it, but what else is new. For buyers, and by extension for the developer--what a location.

dimondpark

09-08-2006, 07:23 PM

Nancy Nadel? That's not even her district is it?

J Church

09-08-2006, 07:28 PM

Has that ever stopped her?

J Church

09-08-2006, 07:44 PM

Important point here: The project is no longer on the architect website. I suspect it may in fact have been redesigned.

It is a sensitive site and those are some beautiful old buildings right next door. It would be a shame for something highly visible yet ordinary to be built there.

San Frangelino

09-08-2006, 08:54 PM

Glad to hear some news on the building, when I noticed it wasnt on the architects site, I thought possibly the entire project was canceled. At its current design it sort of reminds me of the semi-new Shaw Tower on Vancouvers waterfront. Even this image on the oak to 9th website has a faint resemblance to the site of 222 19th St Tower on Lake Merrit... dont you think?

http://www.oakto9th.com/images/open7l.jpg

dimondpark

09-08-2006, 10:12 PM

True about Nadel. Isnt there some crack house in West Oakland she should be attending to?

Thanks for the update. Let's hope its as tall as it looks in the pictures*drools*

BTinSF

09-08-2006, 11:08 PM

You might not be able to read about in the Times,

If you wait until Sunday evening or Monday morning you will be able to.;)

BTinSF

09-08-2006, 11:12 PM

Spent a few minutes today watching them pour the ground (1st) floor at The Millenium Tower.

And The Infinity now has lots of emerald green glass curtain wall in place. I think it's really going to look a lot nicer than the rendering. It's worth going by to take a look.

San Frangelino

09-09-2006, 03:47 PM

Does anyone have any information on the current status of this Oakland Tower?

23rd AND VALDEZ
Description: Luxury Urban High-Rise
Location: Oakland, CA
Developer: Pacific Properties
Homes: 237
http://www.pmateam.com/communities/23rd_valdez.htm

http://www.pmateam.com/im/communities/23rd_valdez.jpg

dimondpark

09-12-2006, 04:15 PM

I dont know, but Peter Wang(the author mistakenly wrote "Wong") apparently is still planning his 63-story tower on Broadway!-GO TOWN:D At least that's what this article says-interesting this penthouse mania that seems to be sweeping the city

S.F. penthouses offer rooms with a view
Wave of luxury condo towers means hot addresses moving skyward

San Francisco Business Times - September 8, 2006by Steve Ginsberg

When real estate mogul Victor MacFarlane bought all three units atop the St. Regis Hotel late last year, it triggered a new era of penthouse buying and living in San Francisco.

Spectacular penthouses have been a staple of New York's and Chicago's residential markets for decades, but are a recent phenomenon in San Francisco. Before MacFarlane's record-smashing $30 million purchase on the 40th floor, anything over $10 million or $1,000-a-square-foot was considered exorbitant, but the St. Regis deal set a new standard. The bar could be raised even higher over the coming decade as luxury condo towers soar over 40 stories in new projects south of Market Street. These buildings will reshape San Francisco's skyline and their competing rooftop palaces are likely to usher in a new era in penthouse design and cost.

Despite the downturn in the housing market, the penthouse market has held up because so few of them exist and they attract rich people who aren't as affected by rising mortgage rates as most buyers.

The prestige and snob appeal of owning the top floor of a signature building is part of a buyer's incentive. Sweeping bay and city views are the aesthetic draws, but there are also more practical advantages in opting for a penthouse. Space is a consideration, especially in San Francisco where it's difficult to find three-bedroom condos. Even though most penthouse buyers are not moving in with large families, the extra bedroom is often converted to a home office. A penthouse's unique floor plan, its upgrades and limited supply add to its resale value. Both new and resale penthouses that come on the market often sell before less expensive units on lower floors, sales agents said.

Range of offerings
For developers, a quick sale of a penthouse unit can have a trickle down effect.

"At the Watermark we sold a penthouse for between $2 million and $3 million and it established a great price point for the rest of the building. It sets the benchmark," said Alan Mark, whose the Mark Co. is a consultant and marketer for upscale condo projects, including the Infinity and the Brannan in San Francisco. In Santa Clara County, Mark was involved in several $4 million rooftop villa sales at Santana Row, an upscale retail and residential development.

At 15,000 square feet, MacFarlane's deal was extraordinary, and by far at the top end of the trend, but penthouses can be bought for as little as $650,000 in smaller developments in the East Bay. The Lansing in San Francisco's SoMa offers spectacular city views from outdoor roof decks for $1.6 million.

Tishman Speyer's Infinity project on Folsom street recently sold a unit on the 37th floor for over $5 million, more than double the $2 million the luxury 3,365-square-foot units on the top 10 floors start at. Another unit still available on the 37th floor will likely fetch over $5 million. Perks for Infinity's penthouse buyers include an extra parking space, jets in the oversized tubs and 10-foot ceilings instead of the standard nine feet. The project is now under construction and a contiguous 42-story tower will be built in the future. The project's architect, Miami's Arquitectonica, has been used to promote the project. Arquitectonica's projects include the Westin New York and the opera house in Dijon, France.

Buyer's perspective
Penthouses are bringing a new level of luxury to the city and neighborhoods where they're located are increasingly vibrant. For the first time in San Francisco, they are also luring some high-end buyers away from mansions in the suburbs.

MacFarlane is a good example. His purchase of three penthouses makes a lot of sense to anyone who has followed his career. He has been a champion of urban renewal through his San Francisco-based MacFarlane Partners, building mixed-use projects that stretch from the Bay Area to Washington D.C. With his St. Regis purchase, he melded career with lifestyle. For years MacFarlane has preached the benefits of urban renewal while living in Hillsborough. He plans to move into the St. Regis when his shell is built out.

"We like what has been happening and is going to happen around there (the Yerba Buena neighborhood). The museums, restaurants and retail etc. and, of course, the services and quality of the St. Regis," MacFarlane wrote in an email.

MacFarlane didn't specify how he would build it out. "Ask me again when we finish building it out," he said.

While MacFarlane wants to build out his property, other buyers are enticed with promises of upgraded finishes.

Dr. Michael Hornberg and his partner Chip Brian Jr. bought a penthouse with upgraded cabinetry, a fireplace and sub-zero refrigerator. Other penthouse buyers have been lured with hardwood floors, expensive curtains and wine refrigerators.

Hornberg and Brian canvassed the penthouse market before settling on their $1.4 million, 1,400-square-foot unit atop the Lansing. With spectacular city views and a large patio, the couple was also attracted to the convenient downtown location, and the posh upgrades. The Lansing is built on bedrock and its seismic stability was a factor. Ultimately, it was the view that won over Hornberg.

"I lived in Twin Peaks before and had a fabulous view. I came from Chicago and always had a water view so this was important for me. You can't get the view we have on a lower floor," he said. "If we eventually resell, our unique floor plan will be a big advantage."

Penthouse pioneering
In Oakland, a recent burst of highrise proposals downtown is expected to result in a slew of new penthouses .

Top-shelf pads are expected not only in condominiums, like Las Vegas-based Molasky Pacific's 15-story tower near Lake Merritt, but also in rental apartment buildings, in particular Essex Property Trust's 100 Grand, which will rise 22 stories. Penthouse units are also a key feature of most development options Peter Wong is considering for his proposed 63-story tower at 1930 Broadway.

Oakland's existing towers along Lake Merritt include penthouses. Oakland Warriors basketball player Andris Biedrins, 19, spent $1.2 million for a penthouse at the Essex last year.

Building penthouses wasn't always a big advantage. Developer Rick Holliday was among the local pioneers when he built three penthouses atop his Fourth and Brannan streets project in 1988.

"We were pioneers and we ended up with arrows in our back when we sold them as shells. We ended up having to redo the roof twice. It was also a hassle when the tenants below the penthouses complained about the construction," Holliday said.

Holliday has gone on to build penthouses in Emeryville, but is not doing penthouses in his latest West Oakland development because it's higher risk in a new neighborhood, he said.

Today's penthouses are seldom built as shells, but rather as finished products. Major projects such as the Beacon, Infinity and Lansing have in-house design centers to help buyers pick out floors, lighting and other amenities.

"Many of our clients have hit 50 and have gone through renovating at least one house. They know it can take two to three years, but with their penthouse they want to move in the day they close," Mark said.

New York-based developer John Tashjian of Centurion Real Estate Partners likes the penthouse concept so much that he bought one himself, at his own Beacon project. Although he has yet to move into the unit, Tashjian is convinced the penthouse has selling power. Of the Beacon's 20 upper-floor units, just three are left and those that sold have generated $19 million.

"In the first week of sales, 25 percent of the penthouses sold because we had a very appealing price that was approachable," Tashjian said. "The Beacon is not the Four Seasons or the St. Regis where some of the residents spend 10 days a year or vacation there. It's a place to live."

Steve Ginsberg is a frequent contributor to the Business Times.

http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/11/focus5.html?page=1&b=1157947200^1342963

BTinSF

09-12-2006, 04:59 PM

If you wait until Sunday evening or Monday morning you will be able to.;)

Sorry I'm late:

Oakland eyes tallest tower, Willie Brown Builder: The city's 'answer to the Transamerica building'
San Francisco Business Times - September 8, 2006
by Ryan Tate

A San Francisco builder and architect are proposing Oakland's tallest-ever tower on Lake Merritt, 42 stories of condominiums rising 420 feet.

The builder, David O'Keefe, said the tower will go in next door to another San Francisco export, former mayor Willie Brown's political institute, although the institute's executive director said she was aware of no such plans.

The roughly $140 million tower has already come under fire from at least one community group for its size and location, but is not expected to face significant legal hurdles. An extension of an earlier plan by O'Keefe for a 32-story tower, it would be by far the tallest building in the city, surpassing the 28-story Ordway Building. O'Keefe and architect Ian Birdsall see the height as an asset.

"(The) building, slender like an obelisk, will be Oakland's answer to the Transamerica building in S.F.," O'Keefe said. "You couldn't ask for a better site."

The building would be located at 222 19th St., near Lakeside Drive. Skyscraper-filled downtown Oakland is on one side, and on the other is Lake Merritt, home to a variety of towers of about 20 stories.

The site has several ties to Willie Brown, who is part-owner of a neighboring 20-unit apartment building and who, with the other owners of that building, sold 222 19th St. to O'Keefe. Brown's wife lives in the apartment building, as does Brown's former planning department chief, Gerald Green, according to O'Keefe.

Green's name was listed as the applicant in O'Keefe's filing with the city. However, O'Keefe said that is only because Green volunteered to drop off the application and the city insisted on the name of an applicant. Green is not involved in the project, he said.

O'Keefe said Brown is planning to open an office of the Willie Brown Institute on Politics and Public Policy in the carriage house connected to the apartment building. But institute executive director Eleanor Johns said there are no plans to vacate existing offices in San Francisco's Ferry Building and no plans she is aware of to open an expansion office in Oakland. Plans to locate the institute on the UC Berkeley campus were scuttled years ago, she added. Brown did not return a call seeking comment.

Not all Oaklanders are happy about the San Franciscans' plans on the lake. Naomi Schiff, head of preservation group the Oakland Heritage Alliance, said the building would demolish an historic garden that should be converted to a park. She is also concerned it will block views to the lake from a chunk of downtown.

Schiff has some support in city hall. Councilmember Nancy Nadel has scheduled a hearing on the site for next week. But the project does not appear to Schiff to violate any landmarks laws, and O'Keefe said city staff, with whom he and Birdsall have been working for the past nine months, told him the building's height and density are allowed under the city's General Plan.

Still, Schiff is hoping the developer can be persuaded to swap his land for something closer to Broadway, downtown's spine. Since the city earlier passed on an opportunity to accept the site as a donation -- a now-contentious decision -- she is also hoping the city can be persuaded to help finance such a swap.

Schiff hopes that "perhaps, if people are very upset, then in the interest of expediting his building process" O'Keefe will agree to a move.

Architect Birdsall said the building would fit in with the location. Its narrow, 12,000-square-foot floor plates are designed to compress the building away from nearby Alice Street, preserving a view corridor to the lake. The slender design is also intended to keep the structure from overwhelming neighboring buildings.

"There are precedents throughout the world for contemporary, elegant, sleek towers nestling next to historic buildings that are 300-400 years old," said Birdsall.

Despite the cooling housing market, the tower would be built for 370 for-sale condominiums. O'Keefe is not planning any ground-floor retail, citing existing retail space in neighboring buildings.

When originally reported in the San Francisco Business Times in April, O'Keefe's tower was only 32 stories. News of the expanded tower first surfaced in the Grand Lake Guardian, an online publication.

Ryan Tate covers East Bay real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/11/story2.html?t=printable

J Church

09-12-2006, 05:02 PM

I forgot, Matier & Ross had more on this yesterday:

Jerry Brown, Barbara Boxer -- watch out. Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown has become the latest big-time pol to buy into Oakland -- and as usual with Willie, he's landed right in the middle of a controversy.

The mayor-turned-talk show host and lobbyist has purchased a 20 percent investment in an 11-story, 22-unit apartment building overlooking Lake Merritt. Brown doesn't actually live there -- it's for his wife, Blanche, who for decades has led a separate life and moved to the East Bay after the couple sold their longtime San Francisco home.

Fact is, there are all sorts of San Francisco connections to this Oakland building. One of them is Roy Guinnane, a former member of the San Francisco Building Inspection Commission, real estate investor and racehorse owner, who recently made headlines when it came to light that he once made a short-term, no-interest loan of $58,000 to the city's inspections boss, Amy Lee.

Guinnane, it turns out, is a co-owner of the building with Brown. A co-owner who has teamed up with San Francisco builder David O'Keeffe to develop a garden lot adjacent to the apartment building into a 42-story condo tower, which would be the tallest building in Oakland.

But this is not just any garden. It's a 30,000-square-foot historic garden -- put in by Schilling Spice founder August Schilling in the late 19th century -- that until recently was part of the property belonging to Brown and his fellow tenants-in-common.

Brown and the other owners had hoped to donate the garden to Oakland in exchange for tax credits, though they insisted it remain closed to the public and limited to weddings and the like. But the cash-strapped city wanted Brown and his partners to fork over $750,000 to pay for disability-access improvements and to help maintain the spot.

The talks broke down, so instead Guinnane and O'Keeffe -- minus Brown -- came up with the high-rise idea. They soon bought out Brown's and the other partners' interest in the garden for $3.6 million, according to Guinnane.

Well, it turns out the plan for a towering complex isn't going over too well with the neighbors. And one of the NIMBYs is none other than Brown, who fears that an adjacent high-rise will hurt the value of the building he bought into.

"I ain't in that deal,'' Brown said.

Now, O'Keeffe's longtime friend and business associate, Residential Builders Association boss Joe O'Donoghue, has started popping up around the Lake Merritt neighborhood as O'Keeffe's unpaid adviser.

"I lean on Joe for his experience,'' O'Keeffe said. "His focus is to get the neighbors involved and bring everybody to the table.''

As for where the high-rise discussions are headed, O'Keeffe tells us preservationists are floating the idea of a land swap -- something to which he says he and his partners are "very open-minded.''

In the meantime, City Councilwoman Nancy Nadel has jumped into the fray. She has scheduled a hearing for Tuesday to find out just why the city staff turned down the garden donation in the first place, and without consulting with the council.

"I think the city should have taken the deal,'' she said. "I'm very upset.''

She should be, said Brown, complaining that the officials who rejected the land donation "ought to pay the price for their stupidity.''

dimondpark

09-12-2006, 05:54 PM

In the meantime, City Councilwoman Nancy Nadel has jumped into the fray. She has scheduled a hearing for Tuesday to find out just why the city staff turned down the garden donation in the first place, and without consulting with the council.

"I think the city should have taken the deal,'' she said. "I'm very upset.''

She should be, said Brown, complaining that the officials who rejected the land donation "ought to pay the price for their stupidity.''

LOL......love that. the price being a new highrise! yes.

and The Oakland Heritage Alliance never fails to irk the hell outta me.

slock

09-13-2006, 03:10 PM

sf_eddo

09-13-2006, 05:43 PM

Cal Stadium news...

Cal's stadium work remains on schedule
- Jake Curtis, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Click to View

The first phase of Cal's three-phase stadium renovation project remains on schedule, with construction set to begin Dec. 2, pending approval by the UC Board of Regents in November.

Phase I calls for the construction of the Student Athlete High-Performance Center adjacent of Memorial Stadium. Cal has raised about $95 million of the $125 million required to begin work on the two-story structure, which will house locker rooms, coaches' offices, weight rooms and a study center. Football coach Jeff Tedford had said Cal needed such a facility, and the administration made a commitment to provide it.

Cal published a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) in the spring and is addressing issues raised in response. Athletic director Sandy Barbour acknowledged some representatives of the City of Berkeley have voiced concerns about the project, but she is confident Cal will satisfy those concerns.

The DEIR as well as the plans and financing for the center then must be approved by the UC regents at their Nov. 15-16 meetings. If approval is granted and the $125 million is raised, Cal can begin building, with a target date of Dec. 2.

Construction of the performance center is scheduled to take about two years, but as soon as construction begins, Cal will develop a fundraising plan and a seating-plan design for Phases II and III, which are the seismic retrofitting and renovation of Memorial Stadium.

Phase II deals with work of the west side of the stadium, and Phase III the east side. Stadium renovation will take about three years, but Cal is expected to be able to play all its home games at Memorial Stadium during construction.

All three phases could be completed within five years, a timetable Barbour calls "ambitious" but not impossible.

Cal's project differs from the $100 million renovation of Stanford Stadium that was completed in 10 months, in large part because Cal is a public institution.

In July, Cal hired Jim Bartko as its senior associate athletic director for development to head up fundraising. While at Oregon, Bartko led funding efforts for the $91 million renovation of Autzen Stadium and developed strong ties with Nike boss and prominent Oregon donor Phil Knight.

E-mail Jake Curtis at jcurtis@sfchronicle.com.

Page D - 3
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/09/13/SPGGPL4GS61.DTL

sf_eddo

09-13-2006, 05:44 PM

Stanford Stadium news...

Time to take off the bubble wrap
Stanford Stadium ready for unveiling
- Michelle Smith, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 13, 2006

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/09/13/sp_stanford2.jpg

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/09/13/sp_stanfordstadium058cs.jpg

In the span of 42 weeks -- dating from the late-November night when backhoes ripped into the turf at Stanford Stadium -- an 84-year-old facility with worn-out bleachers, aging restrooms, a chasm separating fans from the field and tens of thousands of empty seats, has been transformed.

The reincarnation of Stanford Stadium is a remarkable achievement of time, money and the dogged vision of a university benefactor with the clout to match his contributions.

Stanford's $100 million remodeling project, one the athletic department hopes will revitalize its foundering football program, opens Saturday night with what is expected to be a near-capacity crowd as the Cardinal take on Navy at 7 p.m.

It is a shinier, noisier, smaller version of its predecessor that took a Herculean effort to complete, an effort that began minutes after Stanford's 2005 football season ended with a dramatic home-field loss to Notre Dame.

A daily work force of 300, including crews brought in by 25 to 30 sub-contractors, worked 16 hours a day (in two shifts), seven days a week since Nov. 26 to build Stanford a football stadium that could live up to the rest of its world-class athletic facilities.

"It's nothing short of a miracle, what's happened here in the last nine months," said Stanford athletic director Bob Bowlsby, who has only been at Stanford since July after leaving his job at Iowa, which just completed a remodel of its own football stadium. "I can tell you without any hesitation whatsoever that if this project was undertaken at a public university, that it wouldn't have gotten done in 10 months and it would have been $300 million, if it was a penny."

Instead, Stanford spent a third of that, financing the project largely through the Department of Athletics, Physical Education and Recreation (DAPER) Investment Fund with donations from alumni and "friends" of the university. The facility is, in effect, paid for, leaving the athletic department to reap the benefits of increased ticket sales -- season ticket sales are up 136 percent from 2005 -- and concessions from the get-go.

The mover and shaker (and, at $30 million, the largest donor) of the project is, once again, billionaire developer John Arrillaga, the alum who also shepherded the sixth-month, under-budget remodeling of Maples Pavilion two years ago. Arrillaga was heavily involved in both the design of the football facility and in establishing the abbreviated time line for its completion, working closely with contractor Vance Brown Builders.

"If it wasn't for John, nobody would have believed we could do this," said Bill Walsh, the former Stanford coach and current athletic department administrator who has been the face and voice of this project, touting the new stadium (and ticket sales) in ad campaigns since last spring. "We'd still be talking about it, but when he starts something, he makes it work."

Former athletic director Ted Leland called Arrillaga "the godfather" of the stadium project and said the developer initially needed some convincing to take it on.

"I think he was a little skeptical about spending that kind of money on something that's only going to be used seven times a year," Leland said. "But when he finally decided it was something he wanted to undertake, in my mind, we were already 70 percent done."

Leland said Arrillaga's stamp is everywhere.

"The design of it, the double decks, the concourse all the way around, the new press box, two scoreboards, all that stuff is his," Leland said.

To call Stanford Stadium a remodeled facility is to undersell the breadth of the changes. The Stadium has been downsized from 85,500 to approximately 50,000 seats, a nod to the reality of decreased attendance over the years, as well as a hope to create what Bowlsby calls "pent-up demand."

The stadium bowl has been completely enclosed, and with the elimination of the track, seating has been brought significantly closer to the field. At the 50-yard-line, the first row of seats in the new stadium is 70 feet closer to the field than the first row of usable seats in the old stadium.

The second deck seating is made of aluminum bleachers which will increase the noise level during games. Restroom and concession space has doubled throughout a concourse area that has an open view to the field, which remains natural grass after brief conversations about installing artificial turf. A new three-story press box has been constructed to include seven luxury suites.

All that remains from the previous facility is the dirt berm that surrounds the stadium and the main elevator structure that leads to the press box.

"Each time I go in there it blows me away," said Dave Tipton, the Stanford defensive line coach who has been with the program since 1989, working under five head coaches. "People are going to be shocked. The pictures don't do it justice. Our fans have gotten so used to the cavern and being so far from the field. Now they are going to be right on top of things."

Dave Schinski, Stanford's associate athletic director for facilities operations, said he's never seen a project of this scope and size completed this quickly. University officials ended up pushing the opening back just one week past its original date.

"You'd come out here some days and say 'There's absolutely no way we are going to get this done,' and you'd come out two days later and say, 'Oh, this looks good, I think we're going to get there,' " Schinski said. "I'd wake up in the middle of the night panicked about something and come to work the next day and it's all resolved. But there would always be something else."

Record-breaking rains in March threatened to put construction behind schedule.

"We had to abandon the stuff that was rain-dependent and switch to other things," Schinski said. "If you had come out here in April and May, you would have seen the whole upper bowl and the upper seats done, but the field was completely mud."

Former running back Darrin Nelson, now a senior associate athletic director at Stanford, said he believes the stadium project shows the university has made a big commitment to the success of the football program, which hasn't had a winning season since 2001.

"With this stadium, our university is telling us to go for it," Nelson said. "We can do this. We've been good to great in almost every sport we've had here. And we've gone up and down in football. Now it's time to focus on football a little more and try to turn things around."

Jim Plunkett, whose 1970 season ended with a Heisman Trophy and a Rose Bowl win, isn't so sure that's the message.

"They committed to doing it, but they were only willing to spend a certain amount of money, and they only put in 50,000 seats. I would have preferred a larger stadium," Plunkett said. "What impact does that have on the program? In a sense, that's a concern for me. But as much as I loved that old place, a new stadium was certainly needed."

Stanford could certainly use a home-field advantage. The Cardinal come into Saturday's game with an 0-2 record, on the heels of last week's 35-34 loss at San Jose State. There are still nearly 10,000 tickets available.

"We don't want to see this big stadium, be selling all these season tickets, put our pictures on the sides of trains and get everybody all excited and then go in there and not perform," junior wide receiver Evan Moore said. "It adds a little pressure, but we'll take it. We'll welcome it."
Group seating

(3,101 seats)

Family seating

(7,074 seats)

Varsity level seating

(912 seats)

Alumni seating

(2,656 seats)

Faculty and staff

(2,806 seats)

Touchdown level seating

(1,362 seats)

Visiting team seating

(3,863 seats)

Student seating

(3,322 seats)
By the numbers

100

million dollars to complete

22

donors who gave at least $2 million

85,500

seating capacity of old stadium

50,000

seating capacity of new stadium

29,000

season tickets sold

41,000

tickets sold for Navy game

30

price in dollars of new "cheap seat"

12

price in dollars of general admission ticket last year

7

luxury suites

100,000

cubic yards of excavated earth

14,000

yards of concrete poured

300

workers on-site daily

16

hours a day crews worked in two shifts

294

days between first day of project and grand opening

115

feet from first-row seat to sideline (at 50-yard line) in old stadium

45

feet from first-row seat to sideline in new stadium

240

women's toilets in remodeled stadium

154

women's toilets in old stadium

5

games to be played in Stanford Stadium this season

0

Stanford band members who will be performing at the Navy game. The band is still serving a university-imposed suspension.

.

John Blanchard / The Chronicle

E-mail Michelle Smith at msmith@sfchronicle.com.

Page D - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/09/13/SPGGPL4L211.DTL

BTinSF

09-13-2006, 05:52 PM

Did anyone read the articles about the Cruise Terminal in the Examiner and Biz Times? They seem contradictory. The Examiner implies that they are looking for other uses, while the Biz Times implies that they still want to move forward with a Cruise Terminal but alter design and implimentation. ( I trust the Biz Times).

Either way, the Port's current financial structure is not working. It is one thing to have an agency that is autonomous and financially independent, but when you burden that agency with over 1 billion in retrofits, before projects can even start, you'll never make progress. This is the second major project to back out, and I'm still unconvinced that 27/31 or the Exploratorium can pull it off. With some of the most prime land in one of the most expensive cities in the world, this agency struggles on a daily basis to make ends meet. Something has to change, this setup is obviously failing.

I don't think you've quite got the problem identified. There are a couple of different problems, as I see it. One is the public policy that maritime uses have to be given priority for port land. Everyone understands that you could take this land and build condos on it or office towers and you would have developers lined up to do those projects. But San Francisco decided decades ago that it doesn't want to be walled of from the Bayfront by private towers (there's also another policy that slopes height limits down toward the Bayfront). Therefore, the struggle is to find projects for the Bayfront that not only pencil out financially but could only be done at the water's edge--in other words that involved water uses like ships or fishing.

You are correct that it is a struggle but most people think we'll eventually have a more liveable city than if we just put up whatever some developer wanted to build there.

However, there are other issues as well on which I think we clearly should change policy. We have allowed far too much politcal interference from everybody from Willy Brown (as Mayor) to Aaron Peskin (current Board of Supervisors President). Brown wrecked the Chelsea Piers project by nixing it at thr last minute in favor of something undoable by his buddies at Mills Corp. and Peskin throttled a hotel development on Port land (on the land side of the Embarcadero roadway) because his constituency in Telegraph Hill thought it might block a few of their views.

The bottom line here IMHO is that it isn't the retrofit costs that are the real problem. It's that the politicians and the NIMBYs get together to so restrict every proposal on port land that it either becomes uneconomic or the developer backs out in frustration.

coyotetrickster

09-13-2006, 06:52 PM

I don't think you've quite got the problem identified. There are a couple of different problems, as I see it. One is the public policy that maritime uses have to be given priority for port land. Everyone understands that you could take this land and build condos on it or office towers and you would have developers lined up to do those projects. But San Francisco decided decades ago that it doesn't want to be walled of from the Bayfront by private towers (there's also another policy that slopes height limits down toward the Bayfront). Therefore, the struggle is to find projects for the Bayfront that not only pencil out financially but could only be done at the water's edge--in other words that involved water uses like ships or fishing.

You are correct that it is a struggle but most people think we'll eventually have a more liveable city than if we just put up whatever some developer wanted to build there.

However, there are other issues as well on which I think we clearly should change policy. We have allowed far too much politcal interference from everybody from Willy Brown (as Mayor) to Aaron Peskin (current Board of Supervisors President). Brown wrecked the Chelsea Piers project by nixing it at thr last minute in favor of something undoable by his buddies at Mills Corp. and Peskin throttled a hotel development on Port land (on the land side of the Embarcadero roadway) because his constituency in Telegraph Hill thought it might block a few of their views.

The bottom line here IMHO is that it isn't the retrofit costs that are the real problem. It's that the politicians and the NIMBYs get together to so restrict every proposal on port land that it either becomes uneconomic or the developer backs out in frustration.

Don't forget the California Coastal Commission (or is the a board???) and it's mandate to ensure the state's water fronts are preserved for public access/recreations/etc. with a maritime emphasis. BTinSF has mentioned this in other threads, and the Port having to serve two masters (SF Voters/Board of Supe NIMBYs) and the commission all but guarantee gridlock...

Sometimes, an enlightened dictator could be a blessing. Look at the Renaisssance:-) More towards topic, the Examiner story threw me for a loop. What about deBartolo's interest in taking over the project.

How about a port infrastructure bond issue???

munkyman

09-13-2006, 07:50 PM

Regarding the Renovation of Cal's Memorial Stadium:

I am a little bit confused by the term "renovation." How is it possible to renovate a stadium that perfectly bisects the Hayward fault, and that will (with 100% certainty) undergo catastrophic ground rupture during a Hayward fault earthquake? I mean the stadium will essentially split in half down the middle, with an offset by as much as 6 feet (if each side moves 3 feet in opposite directions)...how do you "renovate" for something like that? Or are they renovating to ensure it doesn't suffer a total collapse during the earthquake? Just curious if anyone here knows the details about that.

coyotetrickster

09-14-2006, 04:53 AM

On my way back from practice last night, I rode past the future site of the development formerly know as One Polk/One Bovet Place. It's totally leveled now and I could tell in the dark if it was backhoe or bigger excavation equipment inside the fenced area. Looks like the australian developers do have funding and will be building the condos.

BTinSF

09-15-2006, 09:06 PM

Yes, if what you want is ultra-lux in the skies over Rincon Hill, hold your wallet before writing a down payment check for a pad at One Rincon because Turnberry has paid $30 million for the parcel at 45 Lansing St. and they are coming to town with "exotic" marble baths, Italian Snaidero cabinetry, Gaggenau appliances, jacuzzi hydrotherapy tubs with built-in TV's, individual security systems and 12 ft penthouse cielings--or so says the SF BizTimes whose headline today reads "Miami cash to produce skyline flash"

As usual, we'll have to wait until Sunday evening when the entire article becomes available online, but for now they are apparently sticking with the existing and city-approved design for a 40-story tower.

This is apparently Turnberry's first venture into California.

coyotetrickster

09-15-2006, 09:15 PM

BTinSF

09-15-2006, 09:23 PM

Does that mean the original developer is bailing? Oh, doh, guess it does..

If you want to call $30 million bailing, I guess so, but I view this as unequivocally good news. Turnberry would not have bought the parcel if they didn't plan to build and they have the resources to proceed come H*ll, high water, bursting bubbles or economic downturn: Check out some of their existing projects at http://www.turnberryltd.com/ . So far, their main markets have been Florida, Las Vegas, Paradise Island (Bahamas) and suburban Virginia.

craeg

09-15-2006, 09:31 PM

Yeah, I hardly see this as the tower not getting built. They've already excavated the site.

BTinSF

09-18-2006, 08:18 AM

As promised:

Miami cash to produce skyline flash
Turnberry to pump $230M into 'exotic' condo tower
San Francisco Business Times - September 15, 2006
by J.K. Dineen
Turnberry Associates, a name synonymous with the glitz and glamour of Las Vegas and Miami's South Beach, is planting its flag on Rincon Hill.

The South Florida-based developer has paid $30 million for 45 Lansing St., a parcel near First and Harrison streets entitled for 305 units.

Turnberry President Bruce Weiner said the project would cost $230 to $240 million, including land, and would be the most upscale development the new neighborhood has seen, with "exotic" marble baths, Italian Snaidero cabinetry, Gaggenau cooking appliances, Jacuzzi hydrotherapy tubs with built-in TVs, Individual security systems, and 12-foot penthouse ceilings. He said prices have not been set, but compared it to the Turnberry Ocean Colony project in South Florida, which is priced between $1.8 and $4 million per unit.

Weiner called the emerging neighborhood at Rincon Hill a natural fit for the deluxe builder, which has developed or owns more than $5 billion worth of hotels, resorts and condominiums in Florida and Las Vegas, including the Residences at MGM Grand in Las Vegas and Fontainebleau in Miami Beach.

The Rincon Hill marks Turnberry's first venture in California -- but not the last, according to Weiner. The company has a history of investing heavily in select markets, and Weiner said San Francisco would be no exception.

"We have big plans for California overall and San Francisco fits our model," he said. "We like world-class cities and San Francisco is certainly one of them."

Weiner said the company had been searching for sites in San Francisco for a while and was drawn to the Rincon Hill location as well as the fact that the site already had planning approval from the city for a 40-story tower.

"We liked the design, the views, and the neighborhood is really coming along," he said. "It's going to be a great place to live and work."

The seller was Jackson Pacific Ventures, a San Francisco firm headed by developer and architect Ezra Mersey, who co-designed the project with Chuck Davis of EHDD.

Mersey said he picked Turnberry because the company has the means and experience to pull the project off.

"Their entry into San Francisco is very good for Rincon Hill's continuing evolution, and another vote of confidence in highrise, downtown residential -- near transit, jobs and amenities," said Mersey. "Turnberry has shown the experience, skills and resources to successfully implement the project Jackson Pacific has created at 45 Lansing St."

A work in progress
Located next to a Union 76 gas station and a block from the Bay Bridge on-ramp, it would be hard to confuse 45 Lansing -- or any site on Rincon Hill -- with the neon energy of the Vegas strip or South Beach's mix of surf and celebrity. But the neighborhood is evolving quickly. The residential tower planned for 45 Lansing is one of seven approved highrises expected to sprout on Rincon Hill during the next three to four years. In addition to the 45 Lansing development, the emerging neighborhood will include Tishman Speyer's 656-unit the Infinity; Urban West Associates' 709-unit One Rincon Hill; Fifield Development's 432-unit the Californian; and a site at 340-350 Fremont St. entitled for 380 condos, also owned by Jackson Pacific.

Of the seven, construction has begun on the first tower of the Infinity and One Rincon projects. Both will ultimately have two towers. While neither building will be ready for occupancy until early 2008, sales offices for both developments opened in the spring and are reporting phenomenal business, with One Rincon nearly selling out and the Infinity with 100 reservations and 75 condos in contract.

Weiner said Turnberry was already sold on Rincon Hill before hearing numbers from the Infinity and One Rincon Hill. "That was good to hear, but we were in the process of acquiring the site before those sales offices opened up," he said.

A softening market
Yet despite the robust sales at the two Rincon Hill projects, San Francisco's real estate market is seeing a noticeable softening. Since Labor Day active listings for condominiums in the city have jumped 21 percent, according to Adam Koval, who tracks the market on the real estate web site SocketSite. Weiner said the slackening is fully expected and healthy. He said the 15 percent to 20 percent price increases of the last three years were "unnatural" and that "unless interest rates are in the double-digits, business will be good." He also said that 60 percent of Turnberry buyers pay cash for their units.

"We have been through this before over the past 40 years. Our end of the market, the upper tier, is usually the last to slow down and the first to pick up," he said. "You have to look at these things as long term propositions. If you're looking six months out it's hard to take our business very seriously."

He said Turnberry owners in Las Vegas and Miami have already expressed a desire to own in San Francisco.

"We're selling a lifestyle and we're selling service found in a four- or five-star hotel," he said.

Carl Shannon, a managing director at Tishman Speyer, said Turnberry's investment is "testament to the market's depth."

"They are an outstanding organization. We know them well and welcome them to town," said Shannon.

He added that the fact that so many buyers are willing to make hard deposits 18 months before the Infinity will be delivered speaks for itself.

"You can read all the press you want about how national housing market is slowing down but in San Francisco, we continue to see strong fundamentals," he said.

Planning Director Dean Macris said Turnberry executives have yet to come in and talk to the city. He said the Mersey/EHDD design had "a nice modern look to it that works well with the other design emerging on the hill."

Weiner said the design's exterior would not change, but the interiors would be revised somewhat. In particular, he said Turnberry market research has indicated a higher demand of two- and three-bedroom units than the plan currently calls for. "There is a niche that is not being filled right now," he said.

Mersey said Jackson Pacific would continue to focus on developing other projects, including its 200-unit tower at One Hawthorne St. in the South Financial District.

J.K. Dineen covers real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/18/story1.html?t=printable

dimondpark

09-19-2006, 03:01 PM

Last updated: September 17, 2006 11:06pm
Brandywine Exec Talks NorCal Strategy
By Brian K. Miller Email this story | Printer-friendly | Reprints

OAKLAND, CA-When Brandywine acquired Prentiss Properties earlier this year in a $3.3-billion transaction, it inherited a dominant position in Oakland’s Lake Merritt submarket. Prentiss owns four buildings there totaling about 1.4 million sf that is currently all but full, with just 40,000 sf of vacancy.

In an interview with GlobeSt.com, Brandywine SVP and Northern California managing director Daniel Cushing says Brandywine will focus on maintaining its dominant position in Oakland and building on its relatively new presence in the I-680 corridor.

The tight situation in its Oakland portfolio--2101 Webster, 1901 Harrison, 1333 Broadway, One Kaiser Plaza--has Brandywine following through on a speculative project Prentiss broke ground for in late 2005. The 215,000-sf office building is rising at 2150 Franklin St., which is a piece of land that came with its acquisition of 2101 Webster.

“We did it for a handful of reasons, not the least of which is that we are struggling to meet the expansion needs of our existing tenants,” says Cushing, who prior to Brandywine was in charge of Northern California for Prentiss. “With the dot-com boom Oakland experienced a run-up, but only at about 60% of what occurred in San Jose and San Francisco; the highs weren’t as high and the lows weren’t as low and, as a result, our recovery came first.”

The building at 2150 Franklin will be complete in about 12 months. Steel starts going up at the end of the month. “We’ve got good activity; there’s not a ton of big user blocks available, especially in the East Bay,” Cushing says.

Over Labor Day weekend, Brandywine relocated and expanded its local office to 9,000 sf at 2101 Webster. The move filled up some vacant space there while freeing up ground-level space at 1901 Harrison that will be repositioned as retail space, Cushing says.

Looking further out, Brandywine has two other development sites in Oakland that are capable of supporting a combined 900,000 sf of built space. Both are near existing Brandywine properties. One of the sites is near its 1901 Harrison building and the other is near One Kaiser Plaza, also known as the Ordway.

“They are not quite entitled or planned,” Cushing says. “They are maybe mixed-use opportunities.”

As part of its acquisition of Prentiss, Brandywine sold to Prudential Real Estate Investors a $753-million portfolio of Prentiss assets. In Northern California, that included one of Prentiss’ Oakland buildings (155 Grand) and its only Silicon Valley asset, 5500 Great American Parkway, which is better known as 3Com’s old campus. As part of the deal, Prentiss retains the management assignment for the properties.

From an ownership perspective, Brandywine’s only non-Oakland assets in Northern California now are a pair of buildings in Concord, CA, known as Concord Airport Plaza A and B. After some recent expansions there, Wells Fargo now occupies the majority of the space. “Right now it’s a very stable asset; there’s not much value to be added,” he says. “But it gives us a little bit of a foothold in that market.”

Overall, Brandywine’s situation is pretty stable in Northern California at the moment. “We’ve got a solid base with good occupancy and not a lot of distractions,” he says. “There are no huge tenant rollovers on the horizon and no credit problems.”

Looking ahead, Cushing says that along with entitling its other Oakland development sites he will continue to seek out value-add opportunities elsewhere in the Bay Area. “None of the markets are off limits,” he says.

http://www.globest.com/news/720_720/sanfrancisco/149094-1.html

San Frangelino

09-20-2006, 01:43 AM

I found this architects website http://www.sb-architects.com/ and thought I would share it with those who haven't seen renderings/ descriptions of the projects listed below. Just look under "Portfolio" and search thru the catgories "Urban Mixed Use" and "Residential" to see these projects:

72 Townsend Street in South Beach/Mission Bay
74 Residential Units
5,000 Sq. Ft. Retail

Mission Bay 4 West along 4th street Southg of the Channel
192 Residential Units
10,000 Sq. Ft. Retail

One Henry Adams across from the Design Center
212 Residential Units
15,000 Sq. Ft. Retail

Bryant Square in the Mission
76 Units

As well as bigger and more plans for Central Place and The Globe projects in downtown San Jose

FourOneFive

09-20-2006, 05:44 AM

so i checked out steve's site today, and it says 631 folsom AND the argenta are now under construction? is this true? if so, rock on san francisco!

i can't wait to see these towers rise on the skyline!

http://www.malcolmproperties.com/images/631folsom_04a1.jpghttp://www.handelarchitects.com/mediatedspaces/images_uploaded/38777.6714997917exterior2.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/70/202228755_ea5d794066_o.jpg

dimondpark

09-20-2006, 01:22 PM

Officials with the City of Oakland are meeting with a developer next week for a site at 11th and Broadway.. an empty site(directly behind UCs HQ). I think they are interested in building a 330,000 to 400,000 sq. foot building or about 30-35 stories.

Also, the highrise condo tower at 3rd and Broadway has broken ground.

more info to come.

coyotetrickster

09-20-2006, 03:17 PM

J Church

09-20-2006, 04:05 PM

BTinSF

09-20-2006, 05:58 PM

dimond, are you sure 3rd & broadway is u/c? And where did you hear about 11th & Broadway?

Re: 631 Folsom, I got an email from a guy. I did not go over to personally confirm, but he was pretty specific:

The parking lot where the building will be is now emptied and is surrounded
by construction fences. I would guess that surveying is underway and
groundbreaking will take place in the next week or two.

I walked by the 1 Polk Argenta site a couple weeks ago and there were also fences and some heavy equipment and it looked like they were preparing to demolish the small restaurant and other structures on the site, but once they clear it there still could be a long delay before they build anything.

J Church

09-20-2006, 06:06 PM

Yeah, I'm putting a bit of faith in both those projects.

coyotetrickster

09-20-2006, 06:45 PM

I walked by the 1 Polk Argenta site a couple weeks ago and there were also fences and some heavy equipment and it looked like they were preparing to demolish the small restaurant and other structures on the site, but once they clear it there still could be a long delay before they build anything.

Nope, the demolition on the Argento site is complete. I posted here??? hhmmm , that excavation equipment was visible behind the fencing. Australian developers are still relatively flush from the Melbourne/Sydney condo boom (now slowing according to bud in Melbourne), so they've got the capital to build withouth pre-sales.

briankendall

09-20-2006, 08:17 PM

The 3rd and Broadway project has at least demolished all the buildings and cleared everything. A property owner I am working with is in negotiations to build out three storefronts across the street on 2nd Street to house their construction and sales office so it looks like a go to me.

BTinSF

09-20-2006, 09:38 PM

Nope, the demolition on the Argento site is complete. I posted here??? hhmmm , that excavation equipment was visible behind the fencing. Australian developers are still relatively flush from the Melbourne/Sydney condo boom (now slowing according to bud in Melbourne), so they've got the capital to build withouth pre-sales.

Whaddaya mean "nope"? So they've cleared it as I said they appeared about to--any signs of actual construction? Demolition and construction require two different permits in SF. I saw only a demolition permit posted when I went by (and I looked pretty hard).

coyotetrickster

09-20-2006, 10:50 PM

Whaddaya mean "nope"? So they've cleared it as I said they appeared about to--any signs of actual construction? Demolition and construction require two different permits in SF. I saw only a demolition permit posted when I went by (and I looked pretty hard).

True, true, true. Plus it was evening and all I saw was the earthmoving equipment. No construction permit, though, you are correct.

San Frangelino

09-21-2006, 09:17 PM

Images/Description of Jack London Square Towers

Download the PDF to see the Images

Proposed
444 Embarcadero
http://static.flickr.com/79/249330652_d5e91cad4b.jpg?v=0
Image:
http://www.oaklandnet.com/government/ceda/revised/planningzoning/MajorProjectsSection/ISpublished.pdf
Information:
Project name
Jack London Square Residental Tower
Address
444 Embarcadero St
Developer
Jack London Towers LLC
Construction company
-
City info
Catherine Payne, Major Projects, (510) 238-6168
Number of Residential Units
257
Retail/commercial space
7,650 sf retail
Building height
Up to 310'
Building stories
Up to 26
Expected Start date
Late 2007 or later
Expected Completion
Late 2009 or later
Current status
Pre-application filed, environmental scoping underway

-
Other notes
This is an "Emabarcadero Canyon" contributing project. May be several years before started, another likely candidate for sale of development rights as the planning application appears to be largely speculative.

Apparently Under Construction
200 Broadway
http://static.flickr.com/79/249330647_72be9282d9.jpg?v=0
Image:
http://www.oaklandnet.com/government/ceda/revised/planningzoning/MajorProjectsSection/Title%20Page_5-30-02.pdf

Project name
200 Broadway
Address
200/210/228 Broadway
Developer
The Enterprise Group (owned by Molasky Pacific Properties)
Construction company
?
City info
Heather Klein, Projects 238-3659
Number of Residential Units
134
Retail/commercial space
11,000 sf retail
Building height
around 200'
Building stories
18
Approved
01/18/06
Start date
August 2006
Expected Completion
Early/Mid 2008
Current status
Site has been fenced off and current buildings demolished 8/17/06. Pile driving is expected to start the week of August 21st.

Project entitlements acquired from previous developer. Will be the tallest building in JLD until 444 Embarcadero is built

More Infor : http://www.oaklandnet.com/government/ceda/revised/planningzoning/MajorProjectsSection/ER01-0008_final.html

Other Projects Proposed and Under Construction in Jack London Square go here http://jlda.org/development/

J Church

09-21-2006, 10:49 PM

http://sfcityscape.com/forum/jack_london_towers.jpg

San Frangelino

09-21-2006, 10:59 PM

Thanks J!!

fflint

09-21-2006, 10:59 PM

^What is that?

J Church

09-21-2006, 11:14 PM

Details are in San Frangelino's original post, but these are the Jack London Square condo towers. The one in the black-and-white sketch is 200 Broadway--which apparently just broke ground--and the color rendering is 444 Embarcadero, which may or may not happen.

San Frangelino

09-21-2006, 11:19 PM

And to go along with the Oakland Towers....another one for San Jose. At least according to this architects website http://www.amaa.com/portfolio/html/?page=1

1 S. Market Street San Jose, CA
http://static.flickr.com/80/249824068_aa184dbf0f.jpg?v=0

DESIGN RESPONSE: Located in the heart of downtown. The building is adjacent to the San Pedro Square dining and entertainment district. New retail space at street level and the addition of permanent residents will strengthen and improve the district. The building design utilizes traditional materials in a modern curtainwall skin at the base and rises to a modern glass and stone tower that will offer residents views of downtown and the surrounding Santa Cruz and Diablo Mountain ranges.The residents of the 300 luxury condos can enjoy amenities including a landscaped elevated plaza deck with lap pool and spa. Bus and lightrail access is only one block away.

San Frangelino

09-22-2006, 12:48 AM

Oak to 9th Video:slob:

One more discovery for today guys. On the Oak to 9th Website there is a new video up promoting the project. It has computer animated renderings and all.

http://www.oakto9th.com/

dimondpark

09-22-2006, 01:52 PM

San Frangelino,
WOW...great finds

fflint

09-22-2006, 11:00 PM

Oak to 9th seems too good to be true.

dimondpark

09-23-2006, 12:56 AM

Oak to 9th is really going to change the whole dynamic of that part of town.

J_Taylor

09-23-2006, 06:34 PM

To bad I don't have the money or else I would move there, when its built.

San Frangelino

09-25-2006, 11:55 PM

San Francisco Business times via http://mattlanning.com/blog.html

Tenderloin developer puts down $5.5 million on site for 80 units
San Francisco Business Times - September 22, 2006
by J.K. Dineen

Most Emailed
Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corp. is snapping up a Mission Street parcel for $5.5 million and plans to develop 80 units of affordable family housing there.

The 15,000-square-foot site, 1036-1040 Mission St., sits between Sixth and Seventh streets, a long-depressed part of the Mid-Market neighborhood that has seen considerable investment over the past two years. It was owned by Skyline Investments, a company owned by the Lembi family, which is being sued by the city for violating housing laws.

Nick Griffin, a senior project manager with nonprofit TNDC, said it's getting increasingly difficult to tie up development parcels for below-market projects. In addition to the SoMa Grand, a high-end 22-story highrise AGI Capital and TMG are developing at Mission and Seventh streets, national developers Crescent Heights and Forest City are looking at condo developments in the neighborhood.

"It's competitive and sites are scarce," said Griffin. "We feel that when someone like Skyline gives us the opportunity to tie up a site, we don't have the luxury to dicker around with it. We need site control as quickly as possible."

About 20 percent of the project will be set aside for the formerly homeless. The project will include 13 one-bedroom, 50 two-bedroom, and 15 three-bedroom units. Rents will be pegged at 30 percent of median income.

Griffin said the TNDC scaled back the number of three-bedroom units.

"We have found that even for larger families, unless they are subsidized, three bedrooms are too costly," he said.

TNDC, which mostly develops in the Tenderloin, has made family housing a priority in recent years. The nonprofit is developing a 110-unit senior development at 999 Polk St. (with Citizen Housing Corp.) and an 83-unit project at 650 Eddy St. (with Community Housing Partnership).

J.K. Dineen covers real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

fflint

09-26-2006, 01:14 AM

Major props to Anshen + Allen, my former employer!
==

SAN FRANCISCO
New S.F. General plan will save old buildings
Constructing secret: Put part of hospital under the ground

Heather Knight, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, September 25, 2006

After many failed attempts, architects have come up with what initially seemed like a magical sleight of hand: building a new San Francisco General Hospital on the same campus without demolishing any parts of the existing facility.

The new plans -- to be unveiled today at a Board of Supervisors committee meeting -- involve building the new hospital between the two gargoyle-decorated red-brick buildings on Potrero Avenue and deep into the ground. The acute care hospital will remain in place just behind that space, toward Highway 101.

"It's the first truly feasible option we've had to rebuild San Francisco General Hospital," said Dr. Mitch Katz, the city's public health director. "We think we have figured out a smart way to do it."

Greenery now fills the space between the two red-brick buildings on a plot of land that previously wasn't considered big enough for a new hospital. Under state law, the new hospital and the red-brick buildings have to be 40 feet apart so the brick buildings don't crumble onto the new hospital in an earthquake, Katz said. The height of the new building is limited by zoning regulations.

But architects at Anshen and Allen have come up with what they call a "super-floor," which will be a huge basement underneath the 90-foot-high new hospital. The super-floor won't be bound by the 40-foot rule and can expand underground all the way to the edges of the surrounding structures.

That would give the city a seismically safe, acute care hospital with space for 230 beds and leave all the current buildings -- even the historic gargoyles -- in place.

Under state law, all acute care hospitals in the state must be deemed seismically safe by 2013 or shut by 2008. The matter is of particular urgency for San Francisco; a county civil grand jury's report in May concluded that San Francisco General, the city's only major trauma center, is vulnerable to collapse in an earthquake.

There have been many ideas for how to rebuild San Francisco General while keeping the hospital up and running throughout construction, but none of them has been deemed workable until now.

Some of the discarded ideas included purchasing pricey property in Mission Bay for a new hospital, building in the parking lot of the current hospital, tearing down a building adjacent to the current hospital that's used for outpatient care -- or even knocking down one of the red-brick buildings.

The cost of designing and building the new hospital is now estimated at $622 million; it had been more than $800 million in previous plans. City officials expect to put a facilities bond for the project on an upcoming ballot, which will need two-thirds approval to win.

The new plans are garnering support from the city officials who've seen them. Mayor Gavin Newsom, who paid for the feasibility study with $12 million in city funds this year, said the new plans show the rebuilding can have minimal impact on the current hospital and surrounding neighborhood.

"This is good news for San Francisco," he said.

Supervisor Sophie Maxwell, whose district encompasses the hospital, called the plans "a great attempt to try and satisfy a lot of parties."

Supervisor Tom Ammiano, who will chair the committee hearing on the rebuilding today, said he will support the bond measure campaign. "At first blush, it looks pretty good," he said. "It looks like they're really doing their homework."

Katz said he believes the bond to raise the $622 million for the project will go before voters in either June 2008 or November 2008 -- when high-interest presidential primaries or a presidential election will be decided.

"You want large turnout elections," he said in explaining the political calculations that go into deciding whether to go to the ballot. "Special elections tend to bring out more conservative voters."

The city also would need $157 million for furniture, fixtures and equipment, which cannot be paid with a facilities bond and instead would come from city general funds or private donations.

Under the new plan, the hospital will keep its 120 beds for psychiatric patients and patients needing advanced nursing skills. Those patients aren't bedridden or connected to ventilators or intravenous lines and therefore can be more easily evacuated in the case of an earthquake, Katz said.

The hospital may also become the site of administrative offices that are now rented by the city on Howard Street.

Katz said the new hospital probably wouldn't be completed until 2015, but he expects the city will have no problem getting a waiver from the state to go beyond the 2013 deadline. He said that he feels "incredibly jazzed" by the potential for building a new hospital without dismantling the old one.

"General Hospital has a special place in people's hearts," Katz said. "A lot of people's lives have been saved there."

sf_eddo

09-26-2006, 01:58 AM

Opponents of Oak to Ninth waterfront development sue Oakland
- Jim Herron Zamora, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, September 25, 2006

(09-25) 17:44 PDT OAKLAND -- A group that wants voters to decide the fate of the proposed 3,100-unit Oak to Ninth development on the Oakland waterfront sued the city today, claiming that Oakland officials improperly excluded the referendum from the ballot.

The lawsuit is the latest tussle between supporters and opponents of what would be the largest new development in Oakland in about 50 years.

The project -- on largely unused, uninhabited waterfront land belonging to the Port of Oakland -- would stretch 64 acres from Oak Street to Ninth Avenue, hence its name.

Opponents want the development to include more open space and better public access to the shoreline and obtained 25,000 signatures in an effort to force a referendum.

But on Sept. 6, Oakland City Attorney John Russo issued a legal opinion that the petition for referendum should be invalidated because signature-gatherers failed to present voters with some attachments in the final ordinance.

The Oak to Ninth Referendum Committee, which includes the Sierra Club and League of Women Voters among other groups, is asking in its lawsuit that an Alameda County Superior Court judge overturn that decision and reinstate the referendum, which would appear on the ballot in 2007.

Stuart Flashman, an attorney for Referendum Committee, said today that signature-gatherers acted in good faith when they received a version of the ordinance from the Oakland City Clerk on July 21 -- three days after the City Council voted to approve the project.

Opponents who wish to put an ordinance before voters must do so within 30 days of the City Council vote. But Flashman said that the city attorney's office and lawyers for the developers made changes in the ordinance 45 days after it was approved by the council -- creating a Catch-22 for opponents.

"By the standards used by the city attorney it would be impossible for voters to challenge this ordinance," Flashman said. "If something is not available for a month and half and you only have 30 days to (challenge) the document, then your right of referendum is denied."

Erica Harrold, spokeswoman for Russo, said the city attorney's office was simply upholding state law governing the initiative and referendum process.

"We haven't seen the lawsuit yet, but we're defending the transparency of the process, and it's ironic that the League of Women Voters is challenging this opinion," Harrold said. It's unfortunate they've chosen to go this route."

E-mail Jim Zamora at jzamora@sfchronicle.com.

URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/09/25/BAGIFLCH006.DTL

fflint

09-26-2006, 02:15 AM

I wonder how many Sierra Club and League of Women Voter members live in the flats of Oakland?

sf_eddo

09-26-2006, 07:24 AM

This is not development news, but I still think it's super cool. Hayes Green is the centerpiece to the Octavia Plan, and they opened it with much fanfare with David Best's Burning Man temple, and now are planning something else for it.

from sf metroblogging:

Golden Gateway at Hayes Green
posted by Nancy McClure at 3:00 AM on September 25, 2006

image courtesy of SF Arts Commission
http://sf.metblogs.com/archives/images/2006/09/GOLDENGATEWAY.jpg

As an active advocate for the development of urban public spaces, I've delighted in the spacious Octavia Boulevard that now graces what was once the underbelly of the eye-sore Central Freeway ramp. The ambitious project boasts a gracious open setting for rotating public art, which currently stands a bit vacant - but not for long.

The SF Arts Commission's Public Art Program is soon to commence construction of a new, temporary art installation on the green by Oakland artist Seyed Alavi. The proposed structure's visual imagery appears to reference icons both historic and new - the Arc d'Triomphe in Paris, and the 2005 The Gates installation in NYC's Central Park by the artists Cristo and Jeanne-Claude. The three-dimensional arch will be constructed of scaffold framework with bright orange, semi-opaque fire-retardant nylon ensconcing it, and lit from within by halogen floodlights. (Thanks to SFAC's Jill Manton for a preview of the project).

The installation is the latest in an ongoing partnership of public and private funding, aimed at bringing more temporary public art to San Francisco. Hayes Green also boasts a permanent installation by Berkeley sculptor Wang Po Shu, of 12 kaleidescope sculptures of unique combinations of mirrors and lenses, devised both to be works of art themselves, and to visually engage with the rotating art centerpieces.

The site previously held the lacey framed temple sculpture by famed Burning Man artist David Best. The temporal theme of the sculpture and the plywood construction led many visitors to leave their own mark on the piece - multi-colored graffiti graced the interlocking surfaces and added to the theme of intricate decoration. I, too, added a ballpoint pen inscription, which like the Hindu practice of lekhapraratha havana 'written prayer burning rite', would be floating to the heavens, as with many of Best's structures, the temple was purported to be sacrificed during 'the burn' in 2005.

While Alavi's piece may not garner the active public participation that the temple did (and is likely not desired to), the flowing scrim and ethereal glow of the sculpture is sure to enliven the Green, and give new cause to celebrate this recent addition to SF's collection of artful, and art-full, public spaces.

dimondpark

09-26-2006, 12:55 PM

I wonder how many Sierra Club and League of Women Voter members live in the flats of Oakland?
exactly.

also,
how many of them gave a rat's ass about this stretch of real estate prior to the project coming along? It sat in decay forever but suddenly the future of life in Oakland hinges upon their ability to walk freely on an historically industrial waterfront:rolleyes:

I think the judge will side with the city hence their opposition will be squashed by their own deliberate misinformation-poetic justice.:D

dimondpark

09-26-2006, 01:11 PM

drove by this yesterday, its really coming along nicely

Development drawing retailers Uptown
Massive Oakland project pulls in stores, bars, restaurants
San Francisco Business Times - September 22, 2006by Ryan Tate

With Oakland's large Uptown housing project now under construction, retailers and developers are scrambling to fill up the surrounding blocks.

Development firm Metrovation plans to renovate and add retail to the office building it recently acquired at 2201 Broadway, just two blocks away from Uptown. Rick Mitchell, owner of bustling Luka's Taproom, recently agreed to lease space for a wine bar across Broadway from Luka's near West Grand Avenue.

Directly across the street from Uptown, where 665 units are being built, the restaurateurs behind high-end Oakland Mexican restaurant Doña Tomas are planning a new bar and restaurant. A new Italian-themed cafe, Lenza, opened earlier this year near 17th Street and Telegraph Avenue.

Signature Properties of Pleasanton earlier this year added 10,000 square feet of retail to its Broadway Grand project, now under construction at the site of the former Negherbon auto dealership and across the street from Luka's, for a total of 17,000 square feet. Brandywine Realty Trust is building an Uptown-area office tower with 15,000 square feet of retail.

Developer Andrew Brog is in discussions with multiple firms to rent 5,300 square feet of retail space he has available at the Cathedral Building where Telegraph Avenue meets Broadway.

"The retail is beginning to grow, but organically," Susan Smartt, the Forest City executive in charge of leasing, said at a recent forum convened by San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association, a public policy group. "It's not like San Francisco or Emeryville, where there's a big shopping center."

Metrovation, the real estate firm started by retail pioneer Merrit Sher, in February paid close to $22 million for the 187,000-square-foot office building at 2201 Broadway. The company plans to renovate the lobby and new entrance and upgrade the office space, said Chris Curtis, who is managing the project for Metrovation.

The company is also planning to add retail on its ground floor, now home to nonprofit tenants taking up 6,000 square feet, and is considering eventually re-opening the building's original entrance onto Broadway, which is now locked in favor of a side-street entrance.

The idea is to integrate 2201 Broadway more closely with the community, which includes the Fox Theater, now being restored, and the Paramount, a hub for smaller concerts and old movies.

"I want to get us into the community in some sort of cultural way," Curtis said.

Brog said the office building he bought in May at 1755 Broadway has about 97 percent of its 110,000 square feet leased, and rents are rising.

"I'm very happy with what's taken place -- this has become the hottest area in Oakland," Brog said.

Ryan Tate covers East Bay real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

rocketman_95046

09-27-2006, 05:18 AM

A few SJ updates from Webcor.

AXIS (SAN JOSE CONDOMINIUMS)
The excavation of the site is proceeding with placement of tiebacks and the ongoing dewatering process. We are currently 25 feet into the excavation and intend to reach the 40 foot mark by mid-October. All of the tiebacks on the top two rows have been installed and as of September 12th, 45 tiebacks have been post-tensioned on the second row. We expect to start drilling the third and final row of tiebacks the week of September 18th.

Due to our proximity to the San Jose Airport, a special “flat head” tower crane was ordered from Italy to comply with FAA height regulations. The Comedil 561-20A tower crane arrived at the Port of Oakland on September 11th and will be erected on October 16th.
http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/rendering1152225134.jpg
http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/axisseptember2006e1159296155.jpg
http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/axisseptember2006b1159296087.jpg

CENTRAL PLACE, SAN JOSE, CA
September 2006

We completed our first successful mat slab pour on September 23rd. Beginning at 1:00 AM, it took approximately 19 hours to deposit 6,135 cubic yards of concrete. We have begun to pour columns on the west mat and will continue to build-up the west side. The pouring of the east foundation is scheduled for 1:00 AM on September 30th and will require approximately 4,000 cubic yards of concrete.

http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/centralplacefinal1152222427.jpg
http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/centralplaceseptember2006matslabpourb1159295287.jpg
http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/centralplaceseptember2006matslabpour1159295300.jpg

fflint

09-28-2006, 08:43 PM

SAN FRANCISCO
Treasure Island development plan

Robert Selna
San Francisco Chronicle
Thursday, September 28, 2006

City officials and private developers unveiled a preliminary development plan Wednesday for a new community on Treasure Island that would include 6,000 homes, a school and 300 acres of open space.

Michael Cohen of the mayor's Office of Base Reuse and Chris Meany, who represented a group of developers, described to the Treasure Island Development Authority a plan that would be funded with taxes generated by increased property values and as a result would take no money from the city's budget.

The lead developer is Kenwood Investments, controlled by Democratic lobbyist and fundraiser Darius Anderson. Kenwood will work with Lennar Corp. and Wilson Meany Sullivan, which led the Ferry Building restoration.

The plan, which places an emphasis on sustainable "green" living, includes a ferry terminal, retail center, marina and eight neighborhoods, each with townhouses, flats and a 14-story residential tower.

Most housing units -- 1,800 of which will be priced below market rate -- will be clustered within a 10-minute walk of the ferry.

The plan calls for paid, central parking to encourage foot traffic, as well as a free intra-island shuttle. A congestion pricing scheme would levy an estimated $5 fee on motorists driving on and off the island during commute times.

The project will be reviewed by the development authority board and a citizens group, and will probably go to the Board of Supervisors for a vote by the end of the year, Cohen said. Building could begin in early 2009, he said.

craeg

09-28-2006, 08:53 PM

^ what happened to the 600' highrise plan?

fflint

09-28-2006, 09:25 PM

^That's what I was wondering. I hope it's just another example of the Chronicle's fine reporting and not a sign the skyscraper was quietly ditched.

If the latter is the case, then I shall oppose the plan for inefficient use of inner-city San Francisco land. The City is not the proper place for hundreds of acres of fallow, useless open land. Since when do 6000 homes require 300 adjacent acres of rural nothing? That would be appropriate in Healdsburg, not San Francisco.

San Frangelino

09-28-2006, 09:50 PM

All the stats seem to be the same as the plan submitted in 2005, only minus a mention of the cluster of towers on the south west corner of the island, one being 60 stories. 6,000 units of housing with 300 acres going to parkland are right. On the images I have of the project there looks to be 8 mixed residential neihborhoods each with thier own 14 story mid rise tower, so that part sticks to the proposed plan we all saw. I am thinking it's a case of what fflint just mentioned
just another example of the Chronicle's fine reporting and not a sign the skyscraper was quietly ditched.
Well I am thinking and hoping thats the case.

EastBayHardCore

09-28-2006, 10:59 PM

I can't help shake the feeling that this plan is going to be bastardized. I fear we'll be stuck with a crappy low density suburban setting that on paper sounds great, but in practice is quite unremarkable.

BTinSF

09-28-2006, 11:09 PM

^ what happened to the 60' highrise plan?

If it's gone I won't miss it. I never quite understood the point of one lonely highrise on that island. Now if they wanted to fill the thing with them, that would be different but they would have to do something drastic about the access (some form of rail transit or something).

fflint

09-28-2006, 11:36 PM

While it is not "one lonely highrise," it is indeed a standout skyscraper, and one I would miss enough to actually oppose the remaining "jolly green giant" island plan:

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/7526/treasureislandgb3.jpg

San Frangelino

09-28-2006, 11:58 PM

I myself think the plan could be quite unique as is. I know many don't like the idea of a tower standing off on its own, but I think for this location on the island it could work well. Sort of returning to the skyline a presence of 1939 worlds fair where in stood a lonely yet iconic tower. ( at least from what I have seen in pictures). Of course now it's on a modern and larger scale and wouldnt be completely alone with the other towers planned around it. I will admit, the other towers seem a bit too spaced out and awkward. But not so much to be off putting to me. I suppose it all depends at the end on the execution and design of the towers which is always a toss up. But I do hope to see something Grand and Iconic for the island which this plan I think could be. I will also hope a lot of thought is put into the design and we are handed something modernly unique yetclassy (very san francisco to me) and not something bastardized with many shortcomings. I say if it at street level looks like the renderings of the A-town project (http://www.a-town.com/)near angels stadium in anehiem, I wouldnt be happy at all. Even though I am being optimistic, I do understand EastBayCore fears that it will end up being a drab unremarkable plan at the end. Here's hoping

BTinSF

09-29-2006, 12:06 AM

I myself think the plan could be quite unique as is. I know many don't like the idea of a tower standing off on its own, but I think for this location on the island it could work well. Sort of returning to the skyline a presence of 1939 worlds fair where in stood a lonely yet iconic tower. ( at least from what I have seen in pictures). Of course now it's on a modern and larger scale and wouldnt be completely alone with the other towers planned around it. I will admit, the other towers seem a bit too spaced out and awkward. But not so much to be off putting to me. I suppose it all depends at the end on the execution and design of the towers which is always a toss up. But I do hope to see something Grand and Iconic for the island which this plan I think could be.

It IS off-putting to me. I don't even think the design can make much difference because it'll be too far away from the City to be able to see the detailing and make much of the design. What you will see is a monolith sticking up with, yes Fflint, a few stubby dwarfs around it. And people will ask, "Why is that tall building out THERE?" And no one will really have a good answer.

I'd almost rather see the place made into a really nice entertainment area--parks, sports fields, swimming pools, whatever--with good ferry-based access to the Ferry Building, Fisherman's Wharf Area, AT&T Park and other areas.

slock

09-29-2006, 01:28 AM

I disagree. I think housing is more than appropriate. We NEED housing. Every scrap of land we can get. The park in that area is understandable because of the bay fill, but housing we need. Facing the City, ferry access, it makes great sense.

I think the tower is still in the plan but was just neglected by the Chronicle. They didn't mention most of the other features either. And, the updated plan adds housing, not removes some, so I think it's still there.

If you read the plan in its entirety on the Treasure Island website, it is well thought out, and well articulated. There's a spread in this week's Economist about China building a truly sustainable development on an island parcel. This is the future of large scale development, and 6,000 housing units makes perfect economic and environmental sense for the City and the Bay Area. Let's hope these ideas are applied to Hunter's Point, Alameda and Mare Island.

BTinSF

09-29-2006, 02:57 AM

I disagree. I think housing is more than appropriate. We NEED housing. Every scrap of land we can get.

We've got plenty of more appropriate places to build it. I've said elsewhere here: Turn 3rd St into a version of Wilshire Blvd (line it with highrises) and Geary into something like the Grand Concourse in the Bronx (9-story apartment buildings next to each other all the way to the ocean--along with the Geary rail line of course). When all that's fully developed we'll need to look at places like TI.

fflint

09-29-2006, 03:07 AM

Third Street cannot be developed densely under current zoning. Geary cannot be developed more densely for political purposes.

We're looking to Treasure Island now.

BTinSF

09-29-2006, 03:31 AM

Third Street cannot be developed densely under current zoning. Geary cannot be developed more densely for political purposes.

Since when does anyone here allow their vision to be limited by "current zoning" and politics? Admittedly, though, San Francisco has a long history of doing the expedient.

rocketman_95046

09-29-2006, 03:39 AM

Since when does anyone here allow their vision to be limited by "current zoning" and politics? Admittedly, though, San Francisco has a long history of doing the expedient.

You can’t simply ignore reality and hope for some unrealistic dream either. Politics are real and must be dealt with. This is a great opportunity for more housing and it shouldn’t be passed up.

You should never let the impossible “perfect plan” get in the way of the realistic “good plan”.

quashlo

09-29-2006, 04:07 AM

I think you should aim high at first...
That way, when the NIMBYs get their pudgy fingers in the mix, you still have a chance of coming out with something decent (assuming a half-way compromise between the original proposal and what everyone else wants).

That being said, while the current proposal is decent, I would have liked to see more intensive development of the island. So much unused/poorly-used land is hard to come by, so shouldn't we be maximing its potential by making it denser and adding more towers? :shrug:

dimondpark

09-29-2006, 04:16 AM

I was never a fan of all that greenspace on treasure island....as if its returning to its natural setting-hello? Its manmade!

fflint

09-29-2006, 04:39 AM

^I know. I love the pseudo-wetlands, as if such a thing ever existed there in nature.

fflint

09-29-2006, 04:48 AM

Since when does anyone here allow their vision to be limited by "current zoning" and politics? Admittedly, though, San Francisco has a long history of doing the expedient.
Are we talking about visions now? I thought we were discussing plans.

I'd love to see your visions realized, as they make sense, but since voters recently shelved your Geary vision and the planning department just recently forestalled your 3rd Street vision, there's really not much to say about all that.

The Treasure Island plan is on the table. Hopefully it isn't degraded by anti-skyscraper NIMBYs.

J Church

09-29-2006, 05:29 AM

I'm all for the pseudo-wetlands, the farms, and the towers. They go together, because you're not going to put 20,000 people in a space whose sole connections to the outside world are a two-lane road and boats.

I'm all for a taller Geary, but then I keep wondering why my lottery ship hasn't come in.

SFView

09-29-2006, 06:21 AM

One might keep updated on TI, and any potential new tower development information regarding the island here:

http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/site/treasureisland_page.asp?id=21914

A revised development plan for September 2006 is not yet published, but the Treasure Island Development Authority web site is a good place to keep looking. In the meantime, within this link, you can view the Revised Land Use and Open Space Plan published on December 2005. Here is one of many interesting images in the presentation, from Part 4 of that document:

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m96/mrayatsfo/TIDec20051a.jpg

BTinSF

09-29-2006, 07:29 AM

I would have liked to see more intensive development of the island. So much unused/poorly-used land is hard to come by, so shouldn't we be maximing its potential by making it denser and adding more towers? :shrug:

How would you get all those people on and off the island (being realistic and all) to, for example, go to work or shopping or out to eat in the rest of the city?

BTinSF

09-29-2006, 07:31 AM

you're not going to put 20,000 people in a space whose sole connections to the outside world are a two-lane road and boats.

Precisely.

FourOneFive

09-29-2006, 09:21 AM

dimondpark

09-29-2006, 02:13 PM

Whoa! Find of the week...good job sfview

dimondpark

09-29-2006, 02:15 PM

I'm all for the pseudo-wetlands, the farms, and the towers. They go together, because you're not going to put 20,000 people in a space whose sole connections to the outside world are a two-lane road and boats.

that pesky accessibility issue is a real bummer.

FourOneFive....that would be a perfect site for the Olympic Village indeed.

BTinSF

09-29-2006, 04:22 PM

that pesky accessibility issue is a real bummer.

But, it's an essential feature of Treasure Island (that and the fact the place is totally made of earthquake-vulnerable fill).

I've said before I experienced the aftermath of the '89 quake there and it was scary (serious building and infrastructure damage, mud geysers everywhere)--I was working there then. But I also knew a lot of Navy families who lived there and many of them felt extremely cut off from the rest of the City. I think it's likely even civilians living there will too.

slock

09-29-2006, 06:50 PM

The plan is really well thought out as is. The most stable area of the island is where the highrises and density are proposed, and the most unstable vulnerable fill is where the parks and recreation are proposed.

It's also fortunate that the density is where the shortest trip to the City via ferry will be, and just this week they added another 500 units.

They're envisioning a ferry every 10 minutes, and with the bridge, people will not feel isolated. Maybe even by that time there will be a ped/bike lane on the Western span.

http://www.pbase.com/slock/image/67719093

slock

09-29-2006, 06:52 PM

I don't know why the pic doesn't show, it's a dope image.

J_Taylor

09-29-2006, 06:58 PM

http://i.pbase.com/g5/27/712527/2/67719093.1kQPEvOP.jpg

San Frangelino

09-29-2006, 07:13 PM

Here is the lot of T.I. images I have...VIVE LA T.I. PLAN:whip:

http://static.flickr.com/118/255785341_7966313b91_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/117/255785343_83868df668.jpg?v=0

http://static.flickr.com/95/255785346_5cfe89ea03_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/89/255785347_eba29466a5_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/107/255785349_0f26938723_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/108/255785350_9fd249f1b3_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/115/255786344_fced7f8309_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/87/255786345_a547e528fc_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/122/255786347_1850879533_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/90/255787142_2c15ebab70_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/61/255787136_de206e07af_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/112/255786349_c6ca906075_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/81/255786351_ccd93de021_o.jpg

J Church

09-29-2006, 07:50 PM

That one from the Ferry Building kills.

In other news, 555 Mission has broken ground.

San Frangelino

09-29-2006, 10:34 PM

Call me crazy but from the last picture I just posted of the T.I. plan, I see a flavor of Grant Park in Chicago looking towards area south of the loop. I believe the park on the T.I. plan (which I am for) and Grant park are roughly the same acerage. Inferiority complex....always my dears.

555 Mission has broken ground.

I remember being in my old apartment at 20th and Lexington in the Mission somtime in late 2000 (if memory serves me well) watching this building going up for planning approval along with 44 fourth street (of which hasnt broken ground yet). I am glad 6 years later to hear it's finally going to come along, remaining an office at that.

fflint

09-29-2006, 11:21 PM

That image from the Ferry Building really does kick ass--now that actually lives up to the name Treasure Island.

Very good friends of mine lived on Treasure Island for several years. They thought it was ideal when their daughter was really young. With strong ferry service, a few local stores, and a larger on-island population I think there will be a nice balance between integration and isolation, and when I say "isolation" I mean it in a more positive sense, the way my friends experienced it.

fflint

09-29-2006, 11:34 PM

You know, looking at the Ferry Building photo--it's clear to my partner that tourists are going to want to go out there. Will there be restaurants on the city-facing waterfront, and other attractions for the tourists when they arrive on the island?

dimondpark

09-30-2006, 12:05 AM

wow....those pics own.

rocketman_95046

09-30-2006, 12:54 AM

That one from the Ferry Building kills.

In other news, 555 Mission has broken ground.

:cheers:

wow... i would have never thought that the day would come when 4 towers of >400' are under construction at the same time in SF.

as for TI :slob:

BTinSF

09-30-2006, 02:16 AM

In other news, 555 Mission has broken ground.

SF BizTimes says construction is planned to take 22 months. "We have given Turner orders to proceed and they are mobilizing forces," said the Tishman-Speyer Managing Director.

Also of interest: "The glass-curtain design will be enhanced through glass and metal fins on every mullion. The fins will reflect light and create a "prism effect" . . . . A green back-lit glass box at the top of the building will give it a halo effect . . . . The design also includes large exterior balconies on the sixth and 21st floors . . . . The colors coming off the skin will create an interesting effect".

BTinSF

09-30-2006, 02:21 AM

http://static.flickr.com/112/255786349_c6ca906075_o.jpg

Reminds me of:

http://www.ninfinger.org/~sven/models/ksc/ksc003.jpg

StevenW

09-30-2006, 02:45 AM

Awesome!!! :) :yes: :)

quashlo

09-30-2006, 03:48 AM

Those models and renderings are making me drool already... Hopefully, this will make the jump from proposal to reality.

In regards to getting more people on/off the island, how about a dedicated lane on the bridge for AC Transit and the 108... It's quite frustrating sitting in a bus being stuck in the very same bridge traffic as the rest of the cars, so why not seal off one lane for transit, at least for commute hours? Quicker trips (and resulting higher frequencies, since buses can make more trips within a period of time) could also make the Transbay buses a more viable option for the East Bay commuter into the City.

SFView

09-30-2006, 06:24 AM

fflint

09-30-2006, 07:04 AM

^Nice

I sure hope those who don't appreciate skyscrapers fail to destroy that plan.

SFBoy

09-30-2006, 10:57 AM

Will thy have access to the bay bridge? Seems a lot more sensible than ferries.

dimondpark

09-30-2006, 12:52 PM

lovey SFView.

dimondpark

09-30-2006, 01:50 PM

Developers pull out of Alameda Point project, citing risk
San Francisco Business Times - 2:07 PM PDT Wednesdayby Jessica Saunders

The consortium of developers who wanted to build 1,700 homes on the former Alameda Naval Air Station have pulled out, saying the project is too risky for them to spend $108.5 million on for the property.

Alameda Point Community Partners sent a letter Sept. 20 to the city's reuse and redevelopment authority, saying the project is no longer economically feasible under the terms demanded by the U.S. Navy, which still owns the 700-acre property, given the downturn in the residential real estate market.

APCP is a partnership between Centex Homes, Shea Homes, Shea Properties, Industrial Realty Group and Morgan Stanley that was assembled specifically for the purpose of redeveloping Alameda Point. It has been working with the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority on a plan to develop the land for five years.

"The members of APCP have decided that further investment in this project is no longer prudent relative to the high degree of risk," APCP said in a news release Tuesday.

The developers' letter said they were "very disappointed" they were unable to continue with the project.

Debbie Potter, base reuse and community development manager for Alameda, did not immediately return a call Wednesday seeking comment.

Earlier this summer, APCP and the redevelopment authority exchanged letters in which they discussed changing the terms of their plan for Alameda Point.

The developers wanted to eliminate a proposal for the city to participate in profits from the project, due to what they contended was increased risk. The Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority board said that was premature, and asked APCP to put up a $1 million "good faith" bond before proceeding.

At the time, Potter said the authority updated other interested developers on the project's status while waiting to hear whether APCP would go forward.

In addition to the cost of purchasing the property from the Navy, the agreement also called for the developers to spend an estimated $40.3 million to clean up hazardous waste on the base.

http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/25/daily30.html?surround=lfn

slock

09-30-2006, 04:20 PM

In a sense, I'm actually glad.

I thought it was too low density and didn't take advantage of this ENORMOUS parcel of land right on the bay.

This land is a real gem and could accomodate thousands of people and be incorporated into the WTA's ferry growth plans. I say let's take some pages out of the Treasure Island playbook and build some real density.

(although I'm not sure how high the buildings can go because it's directly in OAK's flight path) Anyone know details?

BTinSF

09-30-2006, 04:26 PM

Will thy have access to the bay bridge? Seems a lot more sensible than ferries.

OMG, no it doesn't. When I worked there--before all these people lived there and the Bay Area population grew by a few hundred thousand--it was essential that I leave work by 3:30 PM or face near gridlock trying to get on the bridge. That situation is among the things that made the small number of Navy people living there then feel isolated. There has to be an additional means to access. I'm all for ferries--love them in fact--but I'm not sure even that will really be sufficient to make people feel able to freely and "easily" access the rest of the City.

coyotetrickster

09-30-2006, 04:42 PM

OMG, no it doesn't. When I worked there--before all these people lived there and the Bay Area population grew by a few hundred thousand--it was essential that I leave work by 3:30 PM or face near gridlock trying to get on the bridge. That situation is among the things that made the small number of Navy people living there then feel isolated. There has to be an additional means to access. I'm all for ferries--love them in fact--but I'm not sure even that will really be sufficient to make people feel able to freely and "easily" access the rest of the City.

There's nothing sensible about the "Deathrace 2000" merge from TI onto the Bay Bridge!

sf_eddo

09-30-2006, 05:09 PM

Tokyo architect to design Cal's new museum - Rick DelVecchio, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, September 30, 2006

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/09/30/ba_calmuseum01.jpg

Toyo Ito, Tokyo's acclaimed experimental architect, got the job of designing the new home of the UC Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive in part because he impressed university officials with his vision of how to blend a major cultural building into the life of a city.

The museum, to be built in downtown Berkeley across from the west gate to the Cal campus and less than a block from the downtown BART stop, is intended to be anything but a closed-off space for academics and art and film fans.

The goal is to keep the building open late and make it the anchor of downtown nightlife.

University officials envision the building as a regional landmark and a force for integrating the campus and civic communities. They want the building itself, not to mention what goes on inside, to have the power to pull people way from their broadband hookups and giant video screens at home.

Ito, who has been described as a conceptualist who combines the physical and virtual worlds, made a persuasive case that he could pull off the challenge and was picked from among five finalists considered for the job. The selection was announced this week.

"His intellectual curiosity and energy level was enormously impressive," said Kevin Consey, the museum's director. "He's 65 years old and has the energy level of a 45-year-old, which is simultaneously great and a little bit frightening."

The building has a preliminary budget of $80 million, and university officials hope to break ground in mid-2009.

No design details have been worked out yet -- they depend on the success of a fundraising effort, which is in the early stages of seeking major donors.

But Ito's Sendai Mediatheque, a municipal library and arts center in Sendai, Japan, gives an idea of the qualities university officials want to realize in their new building. Light, simple steel columns and floor plates open the interior to a variety of uses, and a glass skin extending to the ground blends the building with the surrounding urban neighborhood.

"Seeing his sites really suddenly provoked us to a conclusion about the importance of transparency -- the importance of demythologizing art and film," said Jane Metcalfe, vice president of the museum's board of trustees.

The museum building will be on university property at Oxford and Center streets. The university's printing plant and a parking structure will be razed to clear the site.

The museum's current home on Bancroft Way is a vaulted concrete structure that opened in 1970 and needs major work to resist earthquake shaking. It will be taken over by the university and put to another use after being seismically strengthened.

The museum owns 15,000 to 17,000 works of art and an equal number of films. In the new building, which will feature three theaters for film, university officials say Ito's experience and vision will come into play in integrating the two collections in a striking way.

"Ito has significance and thoughtful experience in dealing with the intersection of art and film and, more importantly, digital media," Consey said. "We also think that figuring out a way in which you create a total experience that bridges art, film and visual media for visitors will be an interesting challenge for him and our academic staff to work on together."

Consey said one challenge is to get away from isolating film as something that's only experienced in the dark.

"We want to bring film into the galleries and have people see it as a visual gestalt," he said. "We imagine that film will continue to become cheaper and easier to make and that a generation or two from now, there may be very little to distinguish a filmmaker from an artmaker."

Ito's earthquake-engineering experience also recommended him to the university. His technique of securing buildings in fault zones with base isolators and rolling blocks is on the cutting edge of Japanese practice, Consey said.

Contact Rick DelVecchio at rdelvecchio@sfchronicle.com.

Page B - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/09/30/BAGK7LFO961.DTL

dimondpark

09-30-2006, 07:43 PM

that's a great location for that museum.

SFView

09-30-2006, 08:02 PM

For those of you concerned with future transportation regarding T.I. Development, the issue is analyzed and discussed in detail here with text, images and charts:

http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/site/uploadedfiles/treasureisland/Treasure_Island_Development_Plan/May_06_Transpo_PlanONly.pdf

By the way, dimondpark, thanks.

SFView

09-30-2006, 09:07 PM

fflint ^Nice

I sure hope those who don't appreciate skyscrapers fail to destroy that plan.

Most will agree that San Francisco is in great need of more housing. There is a great opportunity to do this on Treasure Island. Taller towers, widely spaced afford better air, light, views and more sensible density. Furthermore, there is plenty of "green" to keep a former 60's activist, and many others happy. There also is a rather convincing argument that lowering the towers could likely cause the development to spread and reduce the green spaces, and increase the low-rise bulk of the plan.

rocketman_95046

10-02-2006, 04:35 AM

can someone post the article on 555 mission.

thanks!

FourOneFive

10-02-2006, 04:40 AM

we may not have the article (yet), but at least we get a new rendering!

http://cll.bizjournals.com/story_image/57795-400-0.jpg

the overall design looks the same, but the crown now looks different.

EastBayHardCore

10-02-2006, 05:07 AM

Looks pretty good. Mission up to about 5th is shaping up quite nicely!

BTinSF

10-02-2006, 07:04 AM

can someone post the article on 555 mission.

thanks!

Sorry, can't help--I recently changed my address and now my print subscription is no longer "linked" to the web site locking me out along with the rest of you.

ltsmotorsport

10-02-2006, 04:51 PM

we may not have the article (yet), but at least we get a new rendering!

http://cll.bizjournals.com/story_image/57795-400-0.jpg

the overall design looks the same, but the crown now looks different.
Looks similar to the new 7WTC in NYC.

BTinSF

10-02-2006, 05:27 PM

Ah, I'm back in business:

Tishman kicks off S.F. office tower
33-story highrise is downtown's first since dot-com downturn
San Francisco Business Times - September 29, 2006
by J.K. Dineen

Tishman Speyer has broken ground on its long-anticipated 33-story highrise at 555 Mission St., the city's first Class A office tower in more than four years, company officials told the Business Times.

The announcement, which ends months of speculation in the real estate community, will be made next week with a video podcast sent to 100 high-profile brokers on a complimentary "555 Mission St." video iPod.

The glass-curtain building between First and Second streets, designed by Kohn Pedersen Fox and Heller Manus Architects, will take 22 months to complete, according to Carl Shannon, managing director for Tishman Speyer.

Turner Construction is the contractor on the project, which will cost an estimated $300 million.

"We have given Turner orders to proceed and they are mobilizing forces," said Shannon.

The 550,000-square-foot building will be the first in the next generation of office highrises to be built downtown, a group that will eventually include Shorenstein Properties' 350 Bush St. and a trio of dazzling highrises planned around the new Transbay Terminal.

Tishman Speyer has been extremely active in the Bay Area over the last five years, acquiring 1 Bush St., 595 Market St. and 550 Terry Francois Blvd., as well as properties on the Peninsula such as Bayside Towers and 800-900 Concar Dr. The company is also building the Infinity, a luxury highrise development on Rincon Hill.

Famously publicity-averse, Tishman Speyer has kept brokers guessing about the timing of the 555 Mission project. Tishman Senior Director Allen Palmer said the company "has kept a low profile on purpose."

"We decided to start construction first and then our marketing campaign will begin," said Palmer. "We're going to be very patient and focused. Not just about size of tenant, but quality and the type of tenant."

Palmer expects the building to attract major law firms, financial services, hedge funds and consulting companies. But as of now it's a speculative building, without a single tenant in tow.

The glass-curtain design will be enhanced through glass and metal fins on every mullion. The fins will reflect light and create a "prism effect," said Shannon. A green back-lit glass box at the top of the building will give it a halo. The design also includes large exterior balconies on the sixth and 21st floors. The floor plates will be 21,000 square feet on the lower levels, 18,000 in the middle and 16,000 on top.

"The colors coming off the skin will create an interesting effect," he said. "This is something very special. I can't think of a comparison in the Bay Area."

Bill Cumbelich, a partner with the CAC Group, said the building, along with 101 Second St. and 560 Mission, will cement Mission Street's arrival as the most desirable downtown location.

"Mission Street is sort of the street of the future for the financial district," said Cumbelich. "This is where premier companies are migrating to."

While Tishman Speyer sat on the site for more than five years during the dot-com crash and its ugly aftermath, the company never lost confidence in its potential, said Shannon.

"It's a testament to what Tishman Speyer is," said Shannon. "To have a building approved in 2000 and 2001 and wait patiently for the market to come back speaks to their confidence in the Bay Area economy."

In addition to Tishman Speyer's investment in the Bay Area, the company has built, developed or acquired more than 145 investments totaling approximately 80 million square feet with a total value of $27 billion. Properties include New York's Rockefeller Center and Chrysler Center, Berlin's Sony Center, CBX Tower in Paris and Torre Norte in Saõ Paolo.

J.K. Dineen covers real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

BTinSF

10-02-2006, 05:32 PM

I consider this very good news:

UCSF speeds plan for $1.3B hospital at Mission Bay
San Francisco Business Times - September 29, 2006
by Chris Rauber

UCSF Medical Center is back on track to build a giant new hospital complex at Mission Bay, now with an enhanced budget of as much as $1.3 billion.

The University of California regents quietly approved spending $34 million on preliminary planning for a new women's, children's and cancer hospital at Mission Bay on Sept. 21, reversing course after UCSF officials said this spring they would likely have to scale back the size, scope and cost of the project by delaying some parts.

At the time, UCSF Medical Center CEO Mark Laret indicated the university would first focus on the pediatric portion of the project, and initially aim to build only a 180-bed children's hospital at Mission Bay by 2015 while continuing to seek funding for other pieces of the puzzle.

In the interim, Laret and other officials indicated, UCSF would significantly upgrade inpatient facilities at its Mt. Zion campus to comply with the state's seismic safety requirements for hospitals.

But instead, the regents gave the go-ahead to preliminary plans for a 289-bed mixed-use Mission Bay facility, at a projected cost of $1 billion to $1.3 billion, according to a Sept. 25 internal news article on UCSF's web site and an interview with Laret.

UCSF officials called the revised approach an "ambitious plan" that is now the regents' preferred alternative to the option they approved in March, which authorized a two-pronged plan including a less-expensive, and longer-term approach to adding new clinical services at Mission Bay.

Possible law change
The change appears to be driven by the possibility that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will sign Senate Bill 1661, which would extend the existing Jan. 1, 2013, seismic deadline for the state's hospitals by two years, assuming hospitals make a good-faith effort to meet the earlier deadline.

If the bill "is signed into law, and we're hopeful, we're on a very tight timeline on planning," Laret told the Business Times on Sept. 26. "Even if it isn't signed into law, we'll continue with the planning" and hope that other legislative remedies will be developed, he said. In the online article, officials noted that a two-year extension also "would give UCSF more time to raise funds for the Mission Bay hospital project and potentially avoid spending up to $250 million in seismic upgrades at Mount Zion."

Laret said a two-year extension might also help moderate cost inflation affecting UCSF and other California hospitals "by spreading out seismic work over a longer period of time."

The newly approved plans call for the Mission Bay hospital to include:

A new, 183-bed UCSF Children's Hospital, replacing the existing Children's Hospital on UCSF's Parnassus Heights campus.
A 36-bed women's facility.
A 70-bed cancer center to replace inpatient facilities at UCSF's Mt. Zion campus.

Property in place
The project's giant price tag does not include construction costs for parking, faculty office buildings and affiliated medical research facilities, according to UCSF officials.

"Planning for the new hospital complex at Mission Bay must begin immediately to meet the deadlines of California seismic law," the web story said, adding that fundraising for the mammoth project will also begin immediately.

At the same meeting, the regents approved purchasing a 14.5-acre parcel at Mission Bay bounded by Mariposa, 16th, Owens and Third streets, the final piece of property needed for the hospital. The deal is expected to close next year.

"We're going to go ahead with the planning full speed ahead, and see how all this plays out longer term," Laret said. "We have the land, we'll have the plans, so we're moving."

Chris Rauber covers health care for the San Francisco Business Times.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/10/02/story3.html

BTinSF

10-02-2006, 05:36 PM

This is not so good:

Toll Brothers' Oakland highrise proposal at risk
San Francisco Business Times - September 29, 2006
by Ryan Tate
Apparently, nothing screams luxury living like a parking lot in downtown Oakland.

Toll Brothers, the national builder of luxury homes, has been negotiating to build its first-ever housing development in Oakland on top of a multi-story garage.

The Horsham, Penn., company has been working on a proposal since at least March for a city-owned site at 21st Street and Telegraph Avenue, across from the Paramount Theater. The site is now a parking lot, and city staffers would like to see additional spots there, possibly in addition to housing and retail.

Initial talks with Toll Brothers centered on putting at least 200 units of for-sale housing above 650 public parking spots, plus additional parking for condo owners, according to Patrick Lane, who oversees the parcel for the city's redevelopment agency. Plans called for concrete towers to rise roughly 20 stories and for the development to include some retail.

The company did not return calls and email messages seeking comment.

It is unclear whether Toll Brothers will be able to move forward with its plans. The cooling housing market has put the kibosh on plans from other regional and national builders. Olson Co. of Seal Beach has canceled plans for a condominium project in the Jack London Square area, and Dearborn, Mich.-based Pulte Homes said it is no longer pursuing mid-rise or highrise projects in Oakland after flat sales at its own Jack London project, along with ballooning concrete and steel prices.

Even if the housing market does not scare off Toll Brothers, the city may end up cutting a deal with another developer. Lane said developer Alex Hahn is putting together a proposal for the site. Hahn owns a corner lot needed to square the land and has special status with the city since the redevelopment agency seized land he once owned for another project.

Lane said Toll Brothers' initial plan for the site appears to be in doubt, though he is awaiting word from Hahn on whether Hahn was able to come up with an alternate plan with Toll Brothers.

"I think it's the housing market" that has endangered Toll Brothers' initial plans, Lane said. Shorter forms of housing may now be more attractive at the site, since they cost less to build, he added.

The area around the site remains a bit seedy, far from the core of downtown.

But the area should look better in a few years. Developer Forest City is at work on 650 apartments at Telegraph and 20th Street, the first phase of its massive Uptown housing development. Restaurateurs are swarming the area.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/10/02/story8.html

fflint

10-03-2006, 12:46 AM

When reading about a South of Market fire, I noticed one of the photos shows the core of the new Intercontinental Hotel coming along nicely...so with apologies to the fire victims, check out the city's newest hotel on the rise:

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/10/03/ba_fire_1.jpg

rocketman_95046

10-03-2006, 04:58 AM

^we really need a pic of all the SoMa cranes. This is really historical if you think about it. The next major boom like this may not happen for another 30 years!

3 cranes at 300 spear
1 " one rincon
1 " millenium tower
1 " Intercontinental Hotel
1 " Foundry square

and if all goes well, by next summer we may/should add a few of these...

1 " one rincon hill #2
1 " 555 mission
1 " 45 Lansing
1 " The Californian
1 " 631 Folsom

dimondpark

10-03-2006, 05:26 AM

But the area should look better in a few years. Developer Forest City is at work on 650 apartments at Telegraph and 20th Street, the first phase of its massive Uptown housing development. Restaurateurs are swarming the area.
yeah, its really coming along quite nicely. There's a gaping hole where the old capwell's parking garage and lot used to be...

speaking of Oakland,
that B'way@7th(or 8th?) condo project is looking good-drove by it today on my way to Alameda.

slock

10-03-2006, 07:14 AM

Actually rocketman, you bring up a really good point. This is historic. But I also am constantly suprised by how much faith and enthusiasm there is in this market right now. They continue to break ground on residential projects, and are now in the very early stages of a round of office projects. Developers new to the market keep coming and opening offices, and more and more properties are changing hands. Unless something major happens, this could really be the beginning of a historic wave from all the potential in Rincon Hill, Transbay, Yerba Buena, Mid-Market and Market/Octavia. There's a lot of optimism, and really unprecidented investment.

The skyline is in the early stages of a real metamorphosis.

And for your "next summer list," add 48 Tehama.

BTinSF

10-03-2006, 08:03 AM

FourOneFive

10-03-2006, 09:35 AM

Don't forget that they've also recently put up a fence around 535 Mission and done test pilings (since the property changed hands again), and construction on that one could start unexpectedly. Since it went from office to residential and now back to office, it's hard to be sure what it might look like but here's the latest rendering I know about:

http://www.sfnewdevelopments.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/142171.jpg

i believe that is the rendering of the office proposal for that site from 1999(?). i was hoping the new developer wouldn't drag that proposal back out. it isn't very inspiring. that site is zoned for 550', but is constrained by FAR restrictions. I never understood why the project sponsor never aquired the low-rise building next to the site to increase the project's site's footprint.

btw, add the crane for 1160 mission to the list as well.

fflint

10-03-2006, 10:10 AM

^That rendering leaves a sour, PoMo taste in my mouth...

FourOneFive

10-03-2006, 10:38 AM

^That rendering leaves a sour, PoMo taste in my mouth...

girl, what are you doing up at 3am? :sly: i'm 3 hours ahead. i have a (albeit) poor excuse for being up this bloody early.

coyotetrickster

10-03-2006, 01:53 PM

I consider this very good news:

16th. Mariposa and Owens.... Hmmmm, guess that means Burning Man will soon be hunting for a new HQ. Again.

San Frangelino

10-03-2006, 04:13 PM

yeah, its really coming along quite nicely. There's a gaping hole where the old capwell's parking garage and lot used to be....

I am curious....does the Uptown project still include a tower portion? There were renderings awhile back that showed a streetscape view of the project with a 20 story tower. Is that outdated or apart of a future phase?

BTinSF

10-03-2006, 05:20 PM

i believe that is the rendering of the office proposal for that site from 1999(?).

Maybe. I got it at http://www.sfnewdevelopments.com/blog/?cat=62 which sites an SF BizTimes article in April 2006 (which I remember reading). I quickly tried to check the original article but it didn't turn up when I searched for it at the BizTimes site.

rocketman_95046

10-04-2006, 01:22 AM

hmmm it seems that One Rincon Hill #2 will not start until mid 2008:(

the article was posted in the highrise section but this is the link.

http://www.onerinconhill.com/newsletterfall2006.html#onerincon

San Frangelino

10-04-2006, 03:01 AM

455 South Market Street, San Jose, CA

Another Rendering of the San Jose Project from:
http://www.thecorecompanies.com/communities-drawing-coregateway.html
http://www.dbarchitect.com/

http://www.thecorecompanies.com/images/communities/drawing-gateway2.jpg

market gateway tower

In the early design phase, this 240-foot residential tower with retail and gallery space presents a welcoming south gateway to San Jose 's intensifying downtown core and SoFa entertainment district. At the confluence of the city's historic South First and Market streets and the intimate urban plaza known as Parque de los Pobladores, the tower draws pedestrians from the neighboring museum, theater and City Center , the city's new urban residential community.

In other news:

The website for 451 Kansas Street also known as "The Potrero" is up and on it there are flashing pictures of a bald guy singing and organically grown fruit from "whole foods."

http://www.thepotrero.com/

Are they still calling this area the "Deisign District" :uhh:

San Frangelino

10-04-2006, 08:53 PM

The Treasure Island Towers still in the Plan
Via the September 28, 2006 Examiner Article
http://www.examiner.com/a-315298~Islands__redevelopment_plan_takes_shape.html

Islands’ redevelopment plan takes shape
Printer Friendly | PDF | Email | digg
Melanie Carroll, The Examiner
Sep 28, 2006 2:00 AM (6 days ago)
Current rank: # 384 of 5,989 articles

SAN FRANCISCO - Updated proposal calls for more condos, emphasis on ferries, penalties for driving

The latest blueprints for Treasure and Yerba Buena islands include a fifth high-rise residential tower, 6,000 apartments and condominiums, three ferries and an aggressive incentive plan to get people out of their cars and onto ferries and buses.

A prior proposal, announced late last year, called for 5,500 housing units, four towers of at least 30 stories and one less ferry to shuttle residents to San Francisco.

“We need a critical mass of people living on the island” to make it work financially, said Michael Cohen, of the Mayor’s Office of Base Reuse and Development.

The redevelopment plan calls for providing at least 1,800 affordable units and a 338-acre park.

Under the $1.19 billion proposal that’s still being hammered out, all parking would come at a price, residents would have to buy public transportation passes and cars driven off the island during rush hour would pay an extra fee, Treasure Island Development Authority members learned Wednesday.

“This is a land plan that makes it easy to walk,” said Chris Meany, of Wilson Meany Sullivan, a development firm. “With the carrot and the stick, you encourage people to do the right thing.”

Meany’s group is one of the would-be developers of Treasure Island. The Miami-based Lennar Corp. has agreed to pay $497 million as its portion to develop the manmade island between Oakland and San Francisco. Developers would eventually reap revenue from selling the residential units.

Treasure Island operated as a naval base during World War II, and it is still owned by the Navy. The City hopes to buy the 450 acres from the Navy for $40.5 million, the amount that cleaning up the island will cost, city officials said.

The proposal is slated to go to the Board of Supervisors in November or December, after a series of meetings in coming weeks to finalize details.

Under the proposed “congestion pricing management” plan revealed Wednesday, a resident choosing to drive to San Francisco during a weekday morning would be forced to pay an additional, yet-to-be-determined fee.

He or she, by virtue of living on the island, would possess a pass for riding Treasure Island ferries and buses.

Cohen compared the compulsory public transport pass with what a member of a homeowner association pays in monthly dues.

Treasure Island Development Authority board member John Elberling said he wouldn’t vote for the plan, including the current transportation component.

“Being mean to future residents is not a good tactic,” Elberling said.

San Frangelino

10-04-2006, 09:01 PM

J_Taylor

10-04-2006, 10:44 PM

^^Kick ass
I hope it all pans out like they want it to.

sf_eddo

10-04-2006, 11:09 PM

"Being mean" ?!?! DON'T LIVE THERE! You already get a break on rent as is... it's cheap to live on TI!

But I do see the point, as it kind of sucks for East Bay commuters.

FourOneFive

10-05-2006, 02:56 AM

From Globe St.

Blue Shield Renews, Expands at 50 Beale St.
By Brian K. Miller

SAN FRANCISCO-Blue Shield of California has renewed its longtime leasehold at 50 Beale Street and took down an additional floor, giving it 272,000 sf on 10 floors of the 23-story, 646,000-sf Downtown office building. The building owner is Beacon Capital Partners. The deal includes exclusive naming and signage rights and the right to take down additional space during the term of the lease.

Founded in San Francisco in 1939, Blue Shield of California has been headquartered at 50 Beale Street since 1996. Approximately 900 of the non-profit health plan’s 4,500 employees are housed in the building. Blue Shield was close to moving to One Front Street about 18 months ago and actually had a lease out for signature, but the deal fell through, according to local industry sources.

Edward Grammens and Monica Finnegan of Trammel Crow Company and Liberty Greenfield representative Ken Gilbert represented Blue Shield in the transaction. John Cecconi of The CAC Group represented Beacon Capital. Simon Adams and Charles Seaman of Reed Smith LLP’s San Francisco office acted as outside legal counsel for Blue Shield while Eric Shelby and Alain R’bibo did the same for Beacon Capital. Grammens, Finnegan and Cecconi were not immediately available Monday for comment.

Blue Shield occupied floors 16-23 plus a portion of the ground floor and a portion of the basement. Local industry sources tell GlobeSt.com that Blue Shield plans to renovate its entire leasehold over the next two years on a floor-by-floor basis, using its new floor, the 14th, as a swing floor. Blue Shield may also temporarily use one additional floor to support the renovations, which could take as long as two years to complete, sources say.

Due to the renovation effort, Blue Shield has reportedly been given a substantial amount of free rent on the additional floor it has leased. In addition, Beacon Capital Partners is paying for an undisclosed portion of the renovation work. Blue Shield has retained HOK as its architect for the project.

Blue Shield’s largest neighbors in the building are the University of California at San Francisco, which leases about 90,000 sf in the building, and Bechtel, which leases about 100,000 sf. Bechtel originally developed the building as its headquarters.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

it's nice to see a san francisco-based company adding more jobs and eating up more office space (although i am a little disappointed in the dimishing role of bechtel). the less available space, the lower the overall vacancy, the higher the rents, the possibility of construction of new high-rises.... :)

San Frangelino

10-09-2006, 06:18 AM

Remember Jack Meyers of 80 Natoma Fame (aka subject to eminent domain tower)

Well on his company's website there are the plans and graphics for what is or was the Mandalay Terrace Project.

This again is or was the project that connects to the Peninsula Mandalay already built in South San Francisco. I remember reading in the business times that he was shifting the project from being heavily residential to being heavy on the office. This is a mix of both with a large retail component.

Just go to the website http://www.myersdevelopment.com/ and under "projects" click the "mixed use" category and you will find the renderings and info for the project. I hope this is still active, being that it looks fairly attractive and more honestly because it fullfills a personal wish to see a high rise district in South San Francisco.:slob:

Here are the stats:
Mandalay Terrace

Location: South San Francisco

Residential:
351 units total. 20-story High-rise tower consiting of 180 Market rate units; three low rise and mid rise residences constructed over reatil consisting of 171 market and below market rate units.

Office:
20-story tower with 260,000 sq ft of office space.

Retail:
302,500 sq ft of retail space.

Project Summary:
Designed by RTKL Architects, Mandalay Terrace is one of MDC's most challenings and exciting development opportunities. Designed and organized to satisfy a clear demand for a more urban lifestyle in this geographical area, Mandalay Terrace incorporates multiple uses-residential, retail, and office components. Together, they will create a "gathering place" unique to the North Peninsula.

Mandalay Terrace is currently under planning and design review.

sf_eddo

10-09-2006, 08:13 AM

from http://sf.metblogs.com/archives/2006/10/joie_de_vivre_to_manage_newly.phtml

Joie de Vivre to manage newly acquired SOMA hotel
posted by Lil Mike at 7:02 PM on October 06, 2006
The Joie de Vivre Hospitality Group, already running hotels such as The Hotel Triton and 26 other "boutique" properties in the Bay Area has been retained by an as yet unnamed "private" investor to manage 308 rooms near 7th & Mission. These are currently part of The Best Western franchise just sold by Reneson Hotel Group.

Currently, these properties were aimed at mid-range budget & family travellers, and operate under the names Best Western Americania ( 143 rooms), Best Western Carriage Inn (48 Rooms), Best Western Flamingo Inn ( 38 rooms) and The Hotel Britton(79 Rooms). The hotels will likely undergo a makeover, name change and attain a hipper and no doubt pricier profile in the coming months.

In a press release Mark McDermott, a Senior VP with real estate consultant Colliers International Hotels' SF HQ involved in the sale said .

"While the seller was motivated in part by the current strength of the real estate investment market, the transaction is a win-win in the sense that the new owner will be able to take advantage of both a robust citywide hotel market and the neighborhood's growth prospects".

To read more on SF's tourist industry stats, glib press release fodder and some rampant speculation fit only for the blogosphere...continue on past the jump.

A recent report from Ernest & Young shows that San Francisco experienced the greatest growth in California's hotlel occupancy with a three percent increase. Now at about 78%, SF's occupancy is just shy of the 81% recorded during the pre 9-11 dotcom boom. SF also boasted the highest increase in revenue per available room (RevPAR) at 12.4 percent, the average room here goes for average daily rate at $167. Could that be why the 13 hotels were recently so quick to secure a new union contract and keep the SEIU's strike from hampering growth and scaring away conventions?

Enjoying SF's boom is Joie De Vivre Hospitality Group already 33 properties strong, and one of the industries most rapidly growing hotel companies, now expanding into the Southern California market as well. They took over a bland aging Holiday Inn on the 405 in LA recently and have turned it into a preminent destination hotel in West LA called The Hotel Angeleno. They are also involved in the revitalization and management of two properties in San Francisco's Japantown: The 218-room Radisson Miyako Hotel and the 125-room Best Western Miyako Inn. Both hotels (along with their adjacent malls) have been purchased by 3D Investments, and Joie de Vivre is "repositioning" the properties.

Currently SF's hotel scene is seeing bursts of "repositioning", the Park Hyatt is now a Le Meridien, considered one of Starwood's premiere bransds, of which only 5 operate in the US. The old Chinatown Holiday Inn had over $40 million dumped into it to become the "Financial District Hilton". The Pan Pacific was recently converted into a JW Marriott and near Moscone Center on 3rd St, The Argent Hotel is scheduled to be rebranded as a Westin. The city will also see the opening soon of SF's first so-called "Green" Hotel, the nine story Orchard Garden Hotel , an 86 room "environmentally friendly" property on the 400 block of Bush St.

SFView

10-09-2006, 07:33 PM

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m96/mrayatsfo/631folsom_overall_04a1.jpg

631 Folsom St - Construction has Started
8th October 2006

Construction of 21-story, appx. 214 foot residential building with 120 dwelling units, 47 offstreet parking spaces, and 3,677 gsf of ground-floor retail use on an existing parking lot.

http://www.sfnewdevelopments.com/blog/category/all/

quashlo

10-09-2006, 11:33 PM

^This is the first I've seen of this project. Looks like it will be a nice addition to that area, helping to get rid of those boring parking lots.

BTinSF

10-10-2006, 01:50 AM

Lots of balconies. I like balconies--not enough SF highrises have 'em.

northbay420

10-10-2006, 02:26 PM

^ thats cuz theres not enough highrises period

Smiley Person

10-11-2006, 03:57 AM

San Frangelino, is that Mandalay project near the South City BART or train station? otherwise it's gonna be another Emeryville.

San Frangelino

10-11-2006, 04:55 AM

Mandalay Terace will be closer to the South San Fran Cal Train station, but not butting it at all. Its adjacent to the already constructed Peninsula Mandala; I believe this is the second phase of the project. Anyhoo its not close enough to the station to be of access to train travelers. It is close by to the few small towers at the Cal train station. I suppose the high rise district I would like to see would be closer to those towers near the station, but this would be nice additions near by.The Mandalay Terrace looks to be alienated from a central location, being on a hillside next to the 101. At least I think that's where it is.

sbarn

10-12-2006, 01:30 AM

Without willfully offending anyone, I almost feel as if I am joyfully throwing bread crumbs to a flock of pigeons. Anyway, here I go...

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m96/mrayatsfo/TIrendering1.jpg

:cheers: As a Bay Area native, I'm stoked about the potential of this project to say the least...

SFView

10-12-2006, 04:38 AM

...and they've added at least one more 30 plus story tower to the mix!

By the way, It's been about a half year since we had any big news from a special meeting regarding Transbay. I wonder if this is anything to get excited about? The timing (Fall/6 months) seems about right.

The TJPA Board of Directors meets on the third Thursday of each month at 9:00 am in San Francisco City Hall Room 416, 1 Carlton B. Goodlett Place.

The TJPA Board Meetings for September 21, 2006 and October 19, 2006 have been cancelled.

The TJPA Board will hold a special meeting on:

Friday, October 27, 2006
12 Noon
City Hall, Room 400
1 Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102
http://sfgov.org/site/frame.asp?u=http://www.transbaycenter.org

San Frangelino

10-12-2006, 05:04 AM

I wonder if this is anything to get excited about?

I hope it's promising. 1,000 ft Transbay Towers and the TI plan are the number 1 and two projects I would like to see that have any likelyhood. A close number three would be the collective high-rise proposals in Oakland materializing. In fact I often look at the skyscraper page for Sacramento imagining those projects being plotted in Oakland. One day soon maybe a grand skyline will emerge to go along with a new eastern-span bridge.

Meanwhile in other news:

Theater eyed for housing, market

Sajid Farooq, The Examiner
Oct 11, 2006 2:00 AM (19 hrs ago)
http://www.examiner.com/a-337137~Theater_eyed_for_housing__market.html

SAN FRANCISCO - Developer working with S.F. to tear down old Galaxy in Van Ness corridor for project

The old Galaxy Theater on Van Ness Avenue has gone through its share of changes in its 22-year history.

The movie house, once a popular place to watch the latest offerings from Hollywood, turned its attention to foreign and independent films in a last-ditch effort to keep its doors open. Losing money, the theater closed its doors in December 2005 and is now being eyed by developers to undergo a transformation into a new mixed-use building with a grocery store as its centerpiece.

Bay Rock Residential is working with The City to tear down the boarded-up theater, which has become a hangout for the homeless and a canvas for aspiring graffiti artists. The developer wants to construct 107 residential condominiums on top of 15,500 square feet of retail space dedicated to a grocery store, according to Marilyn Ponte with Bay Rock Residential.

“We are still in the process, and right now we are still wrapping up our design plans,” she said. “[But], we hope to be on the Planning Commission by the end of the year.”

Bringing a supermarket to the neighborhood is a popular idea, according to Jordanna Thigpen, who lives near the site, especially with big chains such as Albertsons and Cala Foods having closed locations in The City in the past year. Dan Diez, who also lives in the neighborhood, said he was sad to see the theater close, but residents would love to see a grocery store open at the site.

“I really think we need a grocery store around Polk Street,” he said. “If it is a decent grocery store, I think that would be very good for the community.”

There are no full-service grocers that residents can go to in the Tenderloin, which abuts Van Ness Avenue, or in the Polk Street corridor, according to Thigpen. A Whole Foods market four blocks from the Galaxy Theater on California and Franklin streets is the closest supermarket. But, the store, often jokingly referred to as “Whole Paycheck,” is too expensive, according to some residents.

Ponte said she could not comment on what grocery store might fill the space, but the commercial use is reserved for a market. Bay Rock Residential presented the project to residents six months ago, according to Ponte. Diez, who is also the chairman of the Lower Polk Neighbors Association, said that because the presentation did not get into which retailer would be coming into the space and how traffic issues would be dealt with, it was hard to gauge the community’s reaction. Ponte said she plans to meet with neighbors again as her company moves forward with the project.

Tanster

10-12-2006, 05:50 AM

:cheers: As a Bay Area native, I'm stoked about the potential of this project to say the least...

that one tall building looks like the one in new york being build(freedom tower)

just a little diffrent post #186

BTinSF

10-12-2006, 09:19 AM

Bringing a supermarket to the neighborhood is a popular idea, according to Jordanna Thigpen, who lives near the site, especially with big chains such as Albertsons and Cala Foods having closed locations in The City in the past year. Dan Diez, who also lives in the neighborhood, said he was sad to see the theater close, but residents would love to see a grocery store open at the site.

“I really think we need a grocery store around Polk Street,” he said. “If it is a decent grocery store, I think that would be very good for the community.”

There are no full-service grocers that residents can go to in the Tenderloin, which abuts Van Ness Avenue, or in the Polk Street corridor, according to Thigpen. A Whole Foods market four blocks from the Galaxy Theater on California and Franklin streets is the closest supermarket. But, the store, often jokingly referred to as “Whole Paycheck,” is too expensive, according to some residents.

This just mystifies me. A Bell Market just 2 blocks away very recently closed for lack of business. Frankly, I don't think it had prices competetive with Safeway so unless this new store is a discounter (or another Safeway), I don't think it'll do any better. But to make sense of the above paragraphs, you have to accept that Tenderloin residents (is Sutter St. now really part of the 'Loin?) near the Galaxy location at Sutter and Van Ness feel somehow constrained from going all the way to Post and Franklin (well, actually between Franklin and Gough)where the Bell was.

BTinSF

10-12-2006, 09:23 AM

:cheers: As a Bay Area native, I'm stoked about the potential of this project to say the least...

That's a beautiful rendering but I think it's largely fantasy. The clear, fog-free night sky is especially enjoyable.

J Church

10-12-2006, 05:42 PM

Several differences between the closed Bell and the proposed market.

One, visibility. Bell had none. The new market should have plenty.

Two, location. Van Ness is the dividing line between Polk Gulch and Cathedral Hill, and is not just physically but psychologically accessible to both. Bell wasn't far from the Gulch, no, but across Van Ness, up the hill, and more or less out of sight? Not so much.

Three, Bell didn't know what it wanted to be. It was more expensive than Safeway but not as upscale as Whole Foods. Don't yet know what the new market would be, but both the Hyde and California Cala and Franklin and California Whole Foods could use some competition.

craeg

10-12-2006, 05:59 PM

sf_eddo

10-13-2006, 05:25 AM

that one tall building looks like the one in new york being build(freedom tower)

The rendering does look very similar to the Freedom Tower.

SFView

10-13-2006, 05:25 AM

The Transbay Open Space Plan (Final DRAFT) - 7 Parts are available as PDF's for viewing here: http://sfgov.org/site/sfra_page.asp?id=5583#D4D - scroll to near the bottom of the page. Earlier draft versions of the streetscape plans, and the Transbay Downtown Heights Study of May 2006 are also here. We are hoping to see an update to the heights study and a description of the Transbay Terminal and Tower Design Competition sometime soon. As I mentioned above, the TJPA Board is holding a special meeting on October 27, 2006. One can only guess...http://sfgov.org/site/frame.asp?u=http://www.transbaycenter.org

Also now available from http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/site/treasureisland_page.asp?id=21914:
Draft Development Plan and Term Sheet for the Redevelopment of Naval Station Treasure Island - September 2006

There is an enormous amount to review. Perhaps, some of you can help find some interesting images to capture and post?

BTinSF

10-13-2006, 07:13 AM

I dont get why anyone would argue against more supermarkets in SF.
As far as the bell site, I am in the area every single day - and have been for 6 or so years and It was only right before the market closed that I even knew it was there.
The most hidden supermarket in SF.

If by "anyone" you mean me, I'm not arguing against them. In a previous post I bewailed the closings of both the outer Clement Albertson's and the Cathedral Hill Bell. I shopped at both, especially the Bell (they had some items I really like that Safeway doesn't carry) and miss them both. I am saying, however, that I have serious doubts, all JChurch's arguments aside, that a market in that location will succeed any better than the Bell did unless it has something special to draw customers from a large swath of the city--and to do that it would probably need parking. Is the city going to allow underground customer parking for a market at this location (surely not above ground)?

As for the Bell Market's invisibility, that's city planning for you. You want another Upper Market Safeway? Hard to miss that one but nobody really likes it. The most recent large markets that have gone up have been very similar to the Bell--on the ground floor of large residential buildings and having very discrete signage (e.g the Fulton/Masonic Albertsons and the Mission Bay Safeway). A few months back I wanted to try the Mission Bay Safeway and had trouble finding it even though I knew it was there. I don't think the Bell was any less visible than these and what do you think the response would have been if they had asked (for all I know maybe they did) to put up bolder signs? I'd expect whatever goes in at Sutter and Van Ness to be equally "discrete". But I'll likely shop there anyway if it offers a good alternative to Safeway.

BTinSF

10-13-2006, 07:17 AM

Don't yet know what the new market would be, but both the Hyde and California Cala and Franklin and California Whole Foods could use some competition.

Best competition for both pending the new store is Molly Stone's (California and Steiner): Whole Foods quality with a lot less 'tude.

sf_eddo

10-13-2006, 11:13 AM

BTinSF

10-13-2006, 01:39 PM

Hey BT,

I think you're underestimating this City's population. While many may cater to your needs, you have to recognize that you only live here half the year, and perhaps your counterparts are the same. The stores that are here for those who are here for the entire year and will always be local customers. In a sense, to those who see you as a consumer, you ARE a tourist in your own home.

And, despite the income that would assume I would, I would *never* shop at Whole Foods, for image and quality alone.

In all honestly, I have to call that very unfair. I have lived where you know I live for 24 years and I lived there 12 months of the year until 2001. My patterns of living and consumption have not changed since I started leaving town for the rainy season except that I spend less time at home in bed with colds and flu, consuming chicken soup, for not having to ride in crowded, damp Muni busses catching viri from fellow San Franciscans. I consider myself every bit as much a "local customer" as you or anybody else who shops there and I won't accept my views being marginalized because I take extended winter vacations. Furthermore, the neighborhood under discussion with these groceries is my neighborhood and I have and do shop in every grocery store in it, from the Cala on Nob Hill to the Webster St. Safeway but including both Whole Foods and Molly Stones because cooking is a longtime hobby and they sell some ingredients I need that I can't reliably get in other places.

J Church

10-13-2006, 09:44 PM

Is the city going to allow underground customer parking for a market at this location

Yes.

But putting aside visibility (I'll bet Planning didn't mandate that blank wall), Van Ness and Sutter is also a much more accessible and higher-traffic location for pedestrians than Post between Franklin and Gough. As you no doubt know.

California and Steiner, where is that? The Farallons?

BTinSF

10-14-2006, 01:12 AM

Van Ness and Sutter is also a much more accessible and higher-traffic location for pedestrians than Post between Franklin and Gough. As you no doubt know.

Indeed I do know. But take a good look at all the vacant or marginal storefronts along Van Ness. It seems very hard for most businesses to make a go of it there. I don't really have a good explanation--perhaps you do and can also explain how a new market will have a different fate (I'm not being sarcastic--I'm really interested in your ideas on it).

By the way, perhaps you have been around long enough to recall that once there was a (very) small Safeway in the heart of the Tenderloin. I can't recall the exact location--Hyde maybe--but I remember shopping there once or twice. It also apparently didn't do very well and shut down. The building is still there. I sometimes walk past it still.

J Church

10-14-2006, 01:22 AM

No, I'm not that old. Can't imagine any large market making a go of it in the Loin proper, tho. Just not enough purchasing power, too many hassles.

Van Ness retail is weird. There are a lot of chains, a lot of vacancies, you're right, but I think what's really missing is neighborhood-serving retail--particularly as the corridor continues to densify (and that includes Polk, which has flown under the radar, but there's been a fair amount of infill lately). I don't know that a supermarket on Van Ness would survive (although bear in mind we're not talking about a very large one--I'm enclosing a render of the project below), but I'd give it much better odds than one hiding out on Cathedral Hill.

http://www.sfcityscape.com/highrises/new_skyline/imgs/1285_sutter.jpg

Hal Incandenza

10-15-2006, 02:12 AM

This seems like a sensible use for one of those cool old theaters on Mission, and we get some housing out of it too.

New Mission to have new use
SF Examiner, 10/14/06

Beneath several layers of paint on a wall of the New Mission Theater is a patch of gold and silver left over from the Depression era, when the theater experienced its heyday.

The historically significant portions of the 1916 art deco theater, located on the 2500 block of Mission Street, are scheduled to remain intact under plans to transform the vacant space into a venue for dancing, live music, movies and dining. Next door, 95 housing units are planned in an eight-story development, the second piece of the project designed to help pay for the theater’s restoration.

The historic theater, which can seat up to 2,300, is one of the last remaining early movie houses in The City. Starting in 2000, dozens fought to keep the theater from being demolished and turned into a campus building for the City College of San Francisco.

In late 2003, developer Gus Murad & Associates bought the building from the college and now plans to create a separate bar area behind the auditorium designed to serve as a movie house, dance floor or dining area. An elevator would transport people up and down to the basement level where a kitchen, storage and bathrooms are part of the blueprints.

Construction, if approved by The City’s Planning Commission, will likely begin in about two years, Morris said. The environmental impact report is in the works, city officials said. The architect declined to disclose the estimated cost of plans, which aim to make the theater a destination for diners. Preservationists who fought to save the theater on the National Register of Historical Places praised the new blueprints.

“This is the site of the proposed City College building,” said Katherine Petrin, a founding member of Save New Mission. “It came really close. ... We’re really lucky.”

The New Mission was designed by the Reid Brothers, who also designed the Fairmont Hotel. In 1932, Timothy Pflueger, the architect behind the Castro, Alhambra and El Rey theaters remodeled the New Mission, creating an art deco monument. The theater still features etched glass, decorative plasterwork, ceilings with floral motifs and medallions and Corinthian pilasters.

In keeping with the theater’s earlier uses, some hope plans will include screenings of 35 millimeter films there, although the latest proposal only includes digital movies.

“It would be an attractive spot for 35 millimeter film,” said Alfonso Felder, president of the San Francisco Neighborhood Theater Foundation. “In San Francisco there is a huge film-going population.”

Felder hopes to change the owners’ minds and persuade them to include the old-time films.

FourOneFive

10-15-2006, 06:57 PM

Demolition has begun on 333 Fremont (images courtesy of sfcondo.org)

http://static.flickr.com/70/171102997_968ec8364a.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/53/171102996_a471056dbf.jpg

it looks like construction will probably begin at the beginning of next year. along with 375 fremont aka the californian on rincon hill right next door, it looks like that side of fremont is going to be quite busy over the next two years.

what it will look like when completed:

http://0035e70.netsolhost.com/image/new_fremont.jpg

EastBayHardCore

10-15-2006, 07:48 PM

^ 2nd pic didnt load.

urban_encounter

10-16-2006, 02:50 AM

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m96/mrayatsfo/TIrendering1.jpg

Wow, that will look incredible, from either side of the bay...

Reminiscence

10-16-2006, 03:30 AM

If and when Treasure Island is completed, would it be concidered a separate city in San Francisco County, or still part of the city of San Francisco?

rocketman_95046

10-16-2006, 03:35 AM

it will be part of SF.

Reminiscence

10-16-2006, 04:24 AM

:previous:

Nice.

If only we had the money, another nice idea would have been to add a BART stop halfway accross the Transbay Tube offering service to Treasure Island ... oh well.

FourOneFive

10-16-2006, 06:58 AM

:previous:

Nice.

If only we had the money, another nice idea would have been to add a BART stop halfway accross the Transbay Tube offering service to Treasure Island ... oh well.

that would require much more than simply adding a new stop in the middle of the bay. the transbay tube turns south of treasure island/ yerba buena island. we'd need to build a completely new tube to link treasure island to the city. (but hey, then we'd have a second transbay crossing...)

Reminiscence

10-17-2006, 05:43 AM

Yeah, I remember reading a thread about a proposed second transbay tube. I believe J Church started it, I'm not sure. From SF to Oakland Airport I believe it was. I liked the idea, except I thought it should come from Marin via the Golden Gate Bridge (somehow) and then accross the Bay to Oakland and maybe San Jose sometime after that. I know that sounds tremendous but hey ... when you dream you've got to dream big right? Heh, at least we'll have our little Treasure Island BART stop, lol.

Reminiscence

10-17-2006, 05:49 AM

One more thing ....

I asked this in another place, but I was wondering if there were any plans to bring a Shangri-La Hotel to SF? I know theres some spots in North America that have or will have one.

BTinSF

10-17-2006, 06:07 AM

More Target rumors and a new tower at 417-451 Montgomery?

S.F. developer snaps up last property in Lurie Co. portfolio
San Francisco Business Times - October 13, 2006
by J.K. Dineen
The last of the Lurie portfolio is spoken for.

Mike Kelly's MK Equities in San Francisco has acquired 417-451 Montgomery St., one of a trio of downtown buildings that the Lurie Co. put on the market in March, said Jennifer Raike, vice president of business development at Old Republic Title Co.

The site is seen as a potential development play, according to industry sources. In marketing the property, Eastdil Secured hired architecture firm Heller/Manus to do a feasibility study of the site and the firm came back with a 320,000-square-foot tower.

Lincoln Properties had the site under contract earlier this year, but dropped it after determining that the building was saddled with a disproportionate number of long-term leases that would make development a challenge.

The other Montgomery Street Lurie property, 400 Montgomery, was acquired last summer by Hearst Corp. for $27 million. Urban Realty bought the third building, 901 Market St., for $65 million and is hoping to lure Target to the block between Fifth and Sixth streets.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/10/16/newscolumn6.html

BTinSF

10-17-2006, 06:13 AM

A $600K bargain?

Long-delayed Bayview condos to break ground
San Francisco Business Times - October 13, 2006
by J.K. Dineen
A Houston developer backed by Goldman Sachs Urban Investment Group has acquired a key seven-acre parcel near Monster Park and is set to break ground on a $90 million, 198-unit housing development.

James Noteware, a veteran Texas housing builder with condo developments in Houston, Las Vegas and Phoenix, is set to break ground at 833-881 Jamestown Ave., according to Claude Everhart, community outreach coordinator for Noteware Development San Francisco.

The seller was Jamestown Equity Partners, led by developer Matt Murphy, who endured a 15-year entitlement process, spanning several economic cycles. Noteware Development paid $18.5 million for the site.

Called the Jamestown, the 198 condos spread throughout 11 structures will cater to families, with 37 three-bedrooms, 149 two-bedrooms, and the rest one-bedrooms. There will be three play areas, a clubhouse, and 75,000 square feet of open space. Twenty-four of the units will be affordable. Everhart said in contrast to much of the swanky new high-end development South of Market and in Rincon Hill, the focus of the project is on creating a neighborhood specifically tailored to raising children.

Everhart said pre-construction work has already started on the site.

"We think it's going to be a very exciting family neighborhood," said Everhart, adding that Noteware is looking for other sites for "quality family housing in San Francisco."

The Jamestown Avenue property, which was formerly used for overflow parking at Monster Park, will feature three-story "neo-Mediterranean" homes with 30-foot façades fronting Jamestown Avenue.

"From the street it will resemble the character and nature of a normal San Francisco neighborhood," said Everhart.

Started in 2002, Noteware Development specializes in infill projects in rapidly growing urban areas. In addition to several projects in Las Vegas, including the 178-unit Brickwater Condominiums, the company is developing a project in the Moon Valley neighborhood in Phoenix, Ariz. This is the first project that Noteware has done with Goldman Sachs Urban Investment Group financing, but the company is aggressively seeking other sites.

The project comes as the San Francisco 49ers and Lennar Corp. are developing plans for a $600 million to $800 million football stadium and housing development that would also play a central role in the city's efforts to win the 2016 Summer Olympics.

The Bayview/Hunters Point neighborhood has seen a number of developers abandon housing and retail projects over the years, including former 49ers owner Eddie DeBartolo's plan a decade ago to construct a mega-mall and stadium complex. Everhart said given the history of broken promises around development and the poverty in the neighborhood, it's important that the development satisfy a number of neighborhood wishes spelled out during the entitlement process. These include upgrades to Bayview Hill Park and Coronado Street Park.

"We are going to work as hard as we can to make sure all the promises that were made, are kept," he said.

Everhart said he is not worried about selling the units.

"With the (Third Street) light rail coming in, the views, the proximity to the state park, the diversity of the neighborhood, (the neighborhood) is hot," he said.

Chris Foley, president of the Polaris Group, which is marketing the project, said the Jamestown was finally jump started once Noteware was able to work out an agreement where Murphy would handle some of the neighborhood improvements, and Noteware others.

"It took Noteware's creativity to unlock the potential of the site," he said.

Polaris Group is also marketing another neighborhood project: Top Vision's 176-unit the Cove at Candlestick Point. Like the Jamestown, the Cove offers family-sized units targeting middle-class residents unable to buy into the city's $1 million homes. The Cove offers two bedrooms at $500,000 to $600,000 and three bedrooms around $700,000.

"Where do you buy a home in San Francisco for $500,000 or $600,000?" Foley said. "We need to create opportunities of the masses and I believe the southeast quadrant of the city is the place to do it, without disrupting the existing neighborhood."

J.K. Dineen covers real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/10/16/story9.html?t=printable

BTinSF

10-17-2006, 06:15 AM

If and when Treasure Island is completed, would it be concidered a separate city in San Francisco County, or still part of the city of San Francisco?

I believe under state law, San Francisco is both a city and a county--i.e. the borders of both the city and county are the same. So anything in San Francisco County is also in San Francisco, the city.

SFBoy

10-17-2006, 11:13 AM

There no City Of San Francisco or County Of San Francisco.

Only the City & County Of San Francisco. A single entity

BTinSF

10-17-2006, 04:31 PM

There no City Of San Francisco or County Of San Francisco.

Only the City & County Of San Francisco. A single entity

Which is a third way of saying precisely what I said.

Reminiscence

10-17-2006, 07:05 PM

Heh, I get it now. Thanks for trying to simplify it as much as possible.

FourOneFive

10-18-2006, 03:32 AM

From GlobeSt.

Citywide Direct Vacancy Nears Single Digit
By Brian K. Miller

SAN FRANCISCO-The office market here has experienced 1.1 million sf of net absorption so far in 2006, with about half of that occurring in the third quarter, according to a third quarter review by Chris Roeder of Cushman & Wakefield San Francisco. As a result, Citywide vacancy is down to 11.4% and CBD vacancy stands at 12%, a five-year low, according to the report.

Moreover, the CBD sublease vacancy rate is down to 1.5% from 9.2% in mid 2002, which is alleviating its negative impact on the value of direct space. The current direct asking rent for class A space in the CBD, $39.72 per sf per year, is up less than 1% from the end of the second quarter but is nearly 20% ahead of where it was this time last year.

“As the increase in asking rental rates often lags the reduction in vacancy, it is expected that asking rents will continue to increase over the next quarter as the vacancy rate approaches single digits,” states Roeder in his report.

Effective rents for view space, which is in short supply, is upward $55 per sf, according to the report. One third quarter lease--by Renaissance Technology Corp. for space at Piers 1 ½, 3, 5--has a triple-net face rate of $69 per sf.

The tightness of the market has caused two new office projects to commence. Projects at 555 Mission St. and 500 Terry Francois Blvd. are expected to come online in 2008. Previously under way is Equity Office Property Trust’s 335,000-sf Foundry Square I development, which is set for delivery this time next year.

Third quarter leasing activity occurred primarily in class A space in the CBD. The North Financial District saw the steepest decline in vacancy in the third quarter, dropping 160 basis points to 13.6%. South Financial District held steady with an average direct vacancy rate of 10.5%.

“Improving economic fundamentals and an insurgence of small to mid-size high-tech and financial services firms will continue to drive demand,” concludes the report. “With little new construction coming online in the next year, San Francisco should expect to see the vacancy rate dip below 10% for the first time since 2001.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

if the office market continues to strengthen, we may see 350 bush street start sooner than later. :D

BTinSF

10-18-2006, 03:38 AM

FourOneFive

10-18-2006, 05:40 AM

:previous: Foundry Square, though, didn't get underway until they leased the entire building to Barclay's Global Investors which, as I pointed out elsewhere, is now the largest manager of financial assets in the US.

i still believe equity office properties would have proceeded with foundry square even if they had not signed barclays global investors. if you look at the overall market, the fundamentals are there to start new construction.

this news does bode well for the planning department's proposal two add two 800'+ skyscrapers to the transbay plan. if both towers are zoned primarily for offices (as i suspect they will be), developers could justify the costs of construction as well as the number of fees that may or may not be imposed on them by the board of supervisors.

BTinSF

10-18-2006, 06:48 AM

i still believe equity office properties would have proceeded with foundry square even if they had not signed barclays global investors. if you look at the overall market, the fundamentals are there to start new construction.

They made public statements before and at the time construction began that they would not have. I take them at their word.

San Frangelino

10-20-2006, 05:33 PM

5 Oakland/ SF project renderings from http://www.mbharch.com/

188 11th Street
Oakland, California
Mixed-Use Hi-rise
Condominiums over Retail
8,300 s.f. Retail
24 Stories
5,000 s.f. Open Space
286 Residential Units
369 Parking Spaces

Client:
DR Horton

Target:
In Design

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/mixeduse/development/188.jpg

300 Grant
San Francisco, California
Mixed-Use Residential
66 units
92,000 s.f.
10 floors of Condos
2 Floors Retail
2 Floors below grade parking
Ground floor retail and two basement parking levels. Ten-story condo tower. Landscaped terrace, clubhouse and solarium on 3rd floor for residents.

Client:
Madison Marquette
Thompson Dorfman Partners

Target:
In Design

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/mixeduse/development/grant.jpg

Broadway Grand
Oakland, California
Residential over Retail - surrounds a 3-level podium parking garage with center courtyard on-top
27 Townhomes
105 Condominium Units
Over Retail and Parking
22,000 s.f. Retail Space

Client:
Signature Properties

Target:
Early 2007

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/mixeduse/development/negherbon.jpg

Candlestick Cove
San Francisco, California
Mixed-Use Residential
Townhomes / Condos
283 Units
5 Stories of Residential Over
2 Stories of Parking with Retail
Light Gauge Metal Framing
Over Concrete
13,000 s.f. of Retail
2,500 s.f. Community Space
1 Parking Stall Per Unit
2 Parking Stalls Per Townhouse

Client:
Signature Properties

Target:In Design

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/mixeduse/development/candlestick.jpg

2nd & Harrison
Jack London Square
Oakland, California
Condominiums surrounding landscaped courtyard
38,067 s.f.
111 Units
20,300 s.f. of Common Space

Client:
The Olson Company

Target:
In Design

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/housing/development/2ndharrison.jpg

J Church

10-20-2006, 05:46 PM

You know, I don't believe we've talked about Candlestick Cove/Executive Park here at all, but the Planning Department has put out a draft plan calling for nearly 2,000 units over there. A couple thousand here, a couple thousand there ...

That 188 11th project in Oakland is proposed to be substantially taller than anything around it (it's near the Courthouse and cultural complex). Could have quite the skyline impact.

San Frangelino

10-20-2006, 06:02 PM

ou know, I don't believe we've talked about Candlestick Cove/Executive Park here at all, but the Planning Department has put out a draft plan calling for nearly 2,000 units over there. A couple thousand here, a couple thousand there ...

Wow, I didn't realize they were planning that many units. What are the borders of the plan? Looking at google maps I am assuming it's the 101 to Jamestown avenue, between Executive Park Blvd and Harney way...or is it broader than that?

Along with a redeveloped Monster Park area and Bayview Redevelopment, that could become a really dynamic area; nice urban entrance into the city from the south. If only the baylands in Brisbane went with the ambitious office skyscraper plan...no no...don't think about it...nearly impossible option.

J Church

10-20-2006, 06:09 PM

http://www.sfgov.org/site/planning_index.asp?id=42414

I've said it before and I'll say it again: New stadium should be on the Baylands, and Candlestick should be a neighborhood. Damned county line.

San Frangelino

10-20-2006, 06:12 PM

New stadium should be on the Baylands, and Candlestick should be a neighborhood.

Agreed...thanks for the link btw. Wow..it's along the hill with a 200 ft parcel.

J Church

10-20-2006, 06:24 PM

Yeah, I noticed that as well. Although the plan says something to the effect of "only above 85' under exceptional circumstances," etc.

San Frangelino

10-20-2006, 07:03 PM

only above 85' under exceptional circumstances

I wonder what would qualify exceptional circumstances for a high rise? I am just skimming at the moment but there is a section on the pdf that concerns the buildings greater than 85 ft. Whats also interesting though, is that the area granted a 200ft height limit is split in two by a road. Which either means the possiblity of two 200 ft buildings, or that they aren't considering the possiblity of somehting of that height. I hope its the former.

SFView

10-22-2006, 06:48 PM

Another one for Oakland:

188 11th Street - Oakland
21st October 2006

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m96/mrayatsfo/188oakland.jpg

188 11th Street Oakland, California Mixed-Use Hi-rise Condominiums over Retail 8,300 s.f. Retail 24 Stories 5,000 s.f. Open Space 286 Residential Units 369 Parking Spaces Client: DR Horton Target: In Design courtesy www.mbarch.com
http://www.sfnewdevelopments.com/blog/category/all/

BTinSF

10-22-2006, 07:21 PM

188 11th Street
Oakland, California
Mixed-Use Hi-rise
Condominiums over Retail
8,300 s.f. Retail
24 Stories
5,000 s.f. Open Space
286 Residential Units
369 Parking Spaces

Client:
DR Horton

Target:
In Design

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/mixeduse/development/188.jpg

Wow, cool. I'm a stockholder in Horton but I didn't realize they did multifamily projects. Glad to see it, though.

San Frangelino

10-22-2006, 07:49 PM

I should probably re-post this message I made a few days ago. I think it got missed.

5 Oakland/ SF project renderings from http://www.mbharch.com/

188 11th Street
Oakland, California
Mixed-Use Hi-rise
Condominiums over Retail
8,300 s.f. Retail
24 Stories
5,000 s.f. Open Space
286 Residential Units
369 Parking Spaces

Client:
DR Horton

Target:
In Design

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/mixeduse/development/188.jpg

300 Grant
San Francisco, California
Mixed-Use Residential
66 units
92,000 s.f.
10 floors of Condos
2 Floors Retail
2 Floors below grade parking
Ground floor retail and two basement parking levels. Ten-story condo tower. Landscaped terrace, clubhouse and solarium on 3rd floor for residents.

Client:
Madison Marquette
Thompson Dorfman Partners

Target:
In Design

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/mixeduse/development/grant.jpg

Broadway Grand
Oakland, California
Residential over Retail - surrounds a 3-level podium parking garage with center courtyard on-top
27 Townhomes
105 Condominium Units
Over Retail and Parking
22,000 s.f. Retail Space

Client:
Signature Properties

Target:
Early 2007

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/mixeduse/development/negherbon.jpg

Candlestick Cove
San Francisco, California
Mixed-Use Residential
Townhomes / Condos
283 Units
5 Stories of Residential Over
2 Stories of Parking with Retail
Light Gauge Metal Framing
Over Concrete
13,000 s.f. of Retail
2,500 s.f. Community Space
1 Parking Stall Per Unit
2 Parking Stalls Per Townhouse

Client:
Signature Properties

Target:In Design

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/mixeduse/development/candlestick.jpg

2nd & Harrison
Jack London Square
Oakland, California
Condominiums surrounding landscaped courtyard
38,067 s.f.
111 Units
20,300 s.f. of Common Space

Client:
The Olson Company

Target:
In Design

http://www.mbharch.com/portfolio/housing/development/2ndharrison.jpg

SFView

10-22-2006, 08:32 PM

Right. Sorry, I missed that.

AK47KC

10-23-2006, 01:08 AM

Looks like Oakland is getting its share of highrises as well. :)

BTinSF

10-23-2006, 03:10 AM

Progress in Oakland:

Project pulls in at West Oakland station
In cards since 2000, development will total 1,500 homes
San Francisco Business Times - October 13, 2006
by Ryan Tate
Spencer Brown
Developer Rick Holliday
View Larger
Developer Rick Holliday and his partners are starting work on a massive housing development at West Oakland's Central Station after an eight-month delay.

Slated to begin at the start of 2006, Central Station's groundbreaking was delayed until August by vocal opposition from some community groups to the project in its original form and by a shortage of construction labor. As the Business Times went to press, Holliday and partners Pulte Homes and Andy Getz's HFH Ltd. were slated to convene a formal launch event Thursday, Oct. 12.

Central Station is designed to reach 1,500 units of housing when it is built out. Now under way are 300 for-sale, maket-rate units from Holliday and Pulte Homes, to be followed in the spring by 100 units from affordable housing firm Bridge Housing. That would be followed by 300 units from HFH.

"Oakland has been the stepchild of the Bay Area, and West Oakland has been the stepchild of Oakland," Holliday said. "This is a way to tip our hat to (Mayor) Jerry (Brown) and acknowledge (Ron) Dellums coming in" to office.

To win neighborhood support and thus approval for the project, Holliday and his partners agreed to set aside 10 percent of units for first-time homebuyers, fund an on-site homeowners assistance center and keep 25 percent of rental units at affordable rent levels.

They also are participating, with public assistance, in a $15 million rehabilition of the old train station into a facility commemorating Pullman train porters and available for other community uses.

"This area had issues with gentrification, and you'll see a lot of people who represent that constituency very excited about the project," Holliday said

Citibank is providing construction financing for the project's $125 million first phase, the 300 for-sale units from Holliday and Pulte.

Holliday said he expects the units to sell for between $300,000 and $500,000, despite rising construction costs.

The West Oakland project has had a variety of ups and downs since Holliday acquired the abandoned station and surrounding property in a series of transactions starting in 2000. Originally, he planned 3 million square feet of office space and 250 lofts there. When the bottom fell out of the office market earlier this decade, he slashed that to just 50 to 75 lofts and renovation of the 8,000-square-foot station. Plans for 1,500 homes were resurrected in 2003.

Ryan Tate covers East Bay real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/10/16/story4.html?t=printable

San Frangelino

10-23-2006, 03:46 AM

Here is the website for the central station website for those who havent seen the plans:

http://www.welcomeaboard.com/pages/home.html

Now does anyone know whats going on with the multi tower project by Peter Sullivan Associates nearby at Mandela Pkwy and W. Grand Avenue. What a wet dream if that got built. http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/01/23/story5.html

BTinSF

10-23-2006, 07:20 AM

Hmmm--4000 sq ft on Rincon Hill. That's what I'll dream about tonight.

Peebles snags last Rincon tower site
Miami developer's $250 million highrise
San Francisco Business Times - October 20, 2006
by J.K. Dineen

When real estate mogul Don Peebles arrived in San Francisco two years ago, he was looking for a site to create the kind of super-luxe highrise he is renowned for in Miami Beach.

Now he has found it.

Peebles is in contract to buy 340-350 Fremont St. for $40 million, a site in the heart of the emerging Rincon Hill neighborhood that is entitled for a 40-story tower with 338 units. The seller is Jackson Pacific Ventures, a company run by architect and developer Ezra Mersey.

The transaction, likely to close in December, represents the final piece of the Rincon Hill Plan, which calls for a Vancouver-style neighborhood of six slender towers on a gentle incline south of the Transbay Terminal. In addition to Peebles' tower, Rincon Hill will eventually be home to Michael Kriozere's two-tower One Rincon project; the Californian, a Richard Keating-designed project by Fifield Cos. at 375-399 Fremont St.; Tishman Speyer's two-tower Infinity development at 300 Spear St.; and Turnberry Associates' development at 45 Lansing St.

"This is what we came to San Francisco to do," said Peebles. "We came here to find outstanding residential sites where we can provide the kind of understated elegance that the market wants and has not been provided yet."

Peebles, who is developing a brick-and-timber loft project at 250 Brannan St. as well as a proposed "town center" at the former Rockaway Quarry in Pacifica, said he was drawn to the site because it is fully approved and has potential for breathtaking views of the bay as well as downtown. He called it "one of the best-located sites on Rincon Hill." The total project cost will likely be about $250 million.

"It's an exciting city. It's a very elegant city. It's a very creative city, and it's a very understated city compared to some East Coast cities," said Peebles, who in addition to South Florida has developed in Washington, D.C., Las Vegas, and downtown Detroit.

While the site is entitled for 338 units, Peebles, who developed the Bath Club in Miami, said he plans to scale back the number to about 280 and make the condos larger. The smallest units will be 1,300 square feet and the largest between 3,000 and 4,000 square feet. The pricing would likely be between $1,200 and $2,000 a square foot, which could translate to well over $5 million for the larger penthouses.

Peebles said that most of the new development in SoMa has focused on squeezing the maximum number of units into each site, and units of more than 2,000 square feet are virtually non-existent.

"When we look at what is coming on the market, it's smaller units, more apartment building living," he said. "When people are paying millions they should get something special. It's the difference between building a Cadillac and a Bentley."

Peebles said the project, with underground parking, would feature valet parking, a health club/spa and an automated concierge service that would let residents order a personal trainer or valet parking without picking up the phone.

"Our owners will get better service than a hotel guest at the Four Seasons," said Peebles.

Heller/Manus designed the building. Jeffrey Heller, a principal with Heller/Manus, said the tower is slim, with 9,500-square-foot floor plates. The northwest corner of the glass-and-precast-concrete building, is an arched all-glass concave wall. While Peebles became fully committed to the Bay Area in 2004, he actually met Heller about eight years ago when he began a low-key search for a development here. Heller said he would work with Peebles and the Planning Department to refine the building treatments over the next few months.

"I think he has a strong reputation, especially on the East Coast. He has for a long time been trying to establish a strong presence out here," said Heller. "I'm glad he got (the site)."

Michael Kriozere, who is building One Rincon Hill, said 90 percent of the first 55-story tower has been reserved and about 70 percent are in contract. He said the "strong price" of the Peebles purchase "speaks for itself."

"These are not fly-by-night developers," said Kriozere. "All the sites zoned under the Rincon Hill rezoning are now owned by strong developers who will go ahead with their projects. This confirms what we always thought, that Rincon Hill is going to be a real place, a neighborhood, that it will quickly become the new hill in San Francisco, like Telegraph Hill or Nob Hill."

The deal comes at a time when San Francisco's residential real estate market is slowing down, although much less severe than in other parts of the country. In September, average condo prices were down 3.7 percent from September 2005, although single-family homes still rose 7.8 percent. Peebles said competition could temporarily drive down prices for the 800- to 1,200-square-foot units, which most of the downtown projects offer. He said the timing on 340-350 Fremont, which is expected to be completed in 2009, should be fine.

"San Francisco has seen a slowdown in velocity and the market is going through a correction, a simple rebalancing," said Peebles. "By the time we're ready to deliver, the market will have rebalanced."

J.K. Dineen covers real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/10/23/story1.html?t=printable

http://sfcityscape.com/highrises/new_skyline/imgs/340_fremont.jpg

dimondpark

10-23-2006, 07:34 AM

that's lovely.......speaking of One Rincon Hill...driving by its a lot less bulky then I would have thought.

188 11th St is a good spot for that Oakland building.

BTinSF

10-23-2006, 08:34 AM

Tres cool:

Like a lot of outgoing mayors, Oakland's soon-to-be-ex, Jerry Brown, is making key appointments right up until his exit.

One of his more interesting picks was Michael Colbruno, vice president for public affairs for Clear Channel billboards, to a three-year fixed term on the city's Planning Commission.

What makes the appointment really fun is that Colbruno also heads OakPAC -- the political arm of the Oakland Chamber of Commerce -- which backed Dellums' main opponent in the June mayoral election, City Council President Ignacio De La Fuente.

Ah, but that was then. Colbruno tells us he has since made nice with Dellums -- he even called to get a blessing before taking his new seat.

Some of us remember when he used to be a journalist for one of the gay papers in SF (so long ago I can't any longer remember if it was the BAR or the Sentinel). But I got to know Michael when he was an aide to Carole Migden and I was a volunteer worker in her office. He's a really nice guy--and as this article suggests, a crafty political pro.

AK47KC

10-23-2006, 11:32 PM

2009 will be a very good year for Rincon Hill in terms of highrise activity, it seems.

San Frangelino

10-30-2006, 03:40 PM

I wonder if J-Church's cityscape posting had any influence on it? hmmmm. Sadly the 200 ft towers near MacArthur Bart station are no more. Will oakland ever rise?

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/10/30/focus5.html?b=1162184400^1367372

In tale of two villages, only one embraces density
Neighboring transit hubs take different approaches
San Francisco Business Times - October 27, 2006

Spencer Brown
Walter Miles, chairman of the Citizens Planning Committee for the planned MacArthur BART transit village in Oakland.
View Larger
Walter Miles is a rare sort of community leader in the Bay Area: one who is eager to usher skyscrapers into a neighborhood where few buildings rise beyond three stories.

Miles is the chairman of the Citizens Planning Committee for the planned MacArthur BART transit village in Oakland. While a transit village proposal at the neighboring Ashby BART station has drawn the ire of a smattering of community groups, Miles is out front in the MacArthur neighborhood urging buildings that are even taller and larger than those planned by developers Aegis Equity Partners, Shea Homes and Bridge Housing.

"I'm pleased with any density we can get our hands on," said Miles, who lives in an apartment about a mile from the station and who owns land closer by. "I felt towers -- 16 stories minimum -- would have been appropriate for the neighborhood."

Due to the rising price of steel, concrete and labor and declining home prices, the developers have scaled back their plans to 50-foot towers from 200-foot towers. Thanks to additional land, they plan to reduce housing units more modestly, to 550 units from 800 units.

In another community -- say, San Bruno or Temescal -- the downsizing would be an occasion for popping of champagne corks among many neighborhood activists. But Deborah Castles of Aegis acknowledges it was a bit of a letdown for MacArthur BART neighbors.

"Most people were very understanding," Castles said of an Oct. 5 community meeting about the downsizing. "They understood why we needed to amend our plan."

For Miles, skyscrapers made the most sense for MacArthur, since it already features an elevated freeway, above-ground BART station and connection to two busy roads well-blessed with bus lines, Telegraph Avenue and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. A concentrated group of residents would have attracted retail and put more eyes on the gritty streets that surround the station.

"I believe all cities and areas that have major transit corridors should have density," Miles said.

Just one more train stop down the Richmond BART line from MacArthur, at the Ashby Avenue station, some Berkeley residents loudly opposed a proposal for 300 units of housing on the west side of the parking lot.

Groups that have raised concerns about the plan include Neighbors of Ashby BART, United We Stand and Deliver and a handful of neighborhood associations, plus the merchants from the Ashby Flea market.

More than 200 people signed a petition against the project and phoned and emailed CalTrans, mostly in opposition to the project. The councilman who had sought a grant from CalTrans ended up pulling his application.

Community members said they felt blindsided by the proposal. In contrast, MacArthur BART neighbors have been trying to bring a transit village to the area for close to 20 years.

Consulting frequently with the community is key to making a transit village successful, said Robert Apodaca, director of business development in the Oakland office of MVE Architects. MVE has built a strong practice designing transit villages throughout California, including Bay Area projects at various stages at BART stations in Fruitvale, Pleasant Hill, Walnut Creek, Dublin and Pleasanton.

At Pleasant Hill BART, MVE client Millennium Partners had proposed a large retail and entertainment complex that had neighbors up in arms. As Apodaca tells it, the fear was the center would bring in young people from surrounding communities at night, generating noise and other nuisances.

Millennium pulled the plan and Contra Costa County officials, who have authority over the unincorporated town, hired a planning firm to lead a series of neighborhood meetings to ask community members what they wanted at the site. Millennium was a participant in the meetings, and at various points spoke out about plans that were not financially viable.

Millennium eventually won approval for 500 residential units and 40,000 square feet of retail on the site, plus a 225,000-square-foot medical office building.

"If the community is respected and told what will work and what won't work, they will come around," Apodaca said.

San Frangelino

10-30-2006, 03:40 PM

Sorry...made a blunder and double posted. Please delete..thank you

BTinSF

10-30-2006, 04:17 PM

I wonder if J-Church's cityscape posting had any influence on it? hmmmm. Sadly the 200 ft towers near MacArthur Bart station are no more. Will oakland ever rise?

Probably not as long as there is "additional land" available to supply the demand. Cities that build UP do it because they have little choice. It wouldn't be economically feasible if they could find "additional land" to sprawl.

J Church

10-30-2006, 04:40 PM

Will oakland ever rise?

If current trends continue I'm afraid we're going to see more and more of this. I worry about Oak to 9th and the OUSD project (although I'm less supportive of that one).

sf_eddo

10-30-2006, 05:09 PM

Berkeley NIMBYs are at it again.
====

BERKELEY
Neighbors say no to popular market
Trader Joe's project hits snag over traffic, low-priced alcohol
- Carolyn Jones, Chronicle Staff Writer
Monday, October 30, 2006

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/10/30/ba_traderjoes30_ph.jpg

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/10/30/ba_traderjoe.jpg

Most communities would be breaking out the Two-Buck Chuck and organic flaxseed chips at news that Trader Joe's is coming to town.

Not Berkeley.

In a city famous for its love of specialty gourmet food, irate neighbors are fighting a new Trader Joe's slated for University Avenue and Martin Luther King Jr. Way, now home to a Kragen outlet.

Residents are concerned about traffic, parking, the building blending in with the neighborhood, and the large volume of low-cost alcohol for sale just a few blocks from the UC campus, Berkeley High School and a number of homeless service agencies.

Not to mention the four stories of apartments that would be on top of Trader Joe's, making it one of the biggest housing developments in Berkeley.

Meanwhile, droves of Berkeleyans would love a Trader Joe's, if not necessarily so much housing at that spot.

The issue is headed for a showdown Nov. 9 at the zoning board, which is scheduled to vote on approving the $50 million project.

The Berkeley battle stands in contrast to last week's announcement that a new Trader Joe's is being warmly welcomed about 5 miles away in Oakland. Slated to replace a shuttered Albertsons on Lakeshore Avenue in the Grand Lake neighborhood, the Oakland Trader Joe's was sought in a campaign by local residents and Councilwoman Pat Kernighan.

If it's approved in Berkeley, Trader Joe's -- with its island decor and mix of basic food with organic and exotic imported foods -- would open in 2010. If it's not approved, the developers said, Trader Joe's likely will back out and the project will be resubmitted with more housing and less retail.

"Either way there will be a project there -- what we don't know is exactly what that will be," said Berkeley City Councilwoman Dona Spring, whose district includes the Trader Joe's site.

Developers Chris Hudson and Evan McDonald, proteges of Berkeley development mogul Patrick Kennedy, bought the 1-acre site in 2002 and have been haggling with the city and community ever since. The project began with 186 units of housing filling five full stories, 4,000 square feet of retail, 71 parking spots and almost no setbacks from adjacent houses. The proposal now has 146 units, four times as much retail as before, twice as many parking spots, landscaping around the perimeter and a stepped-back roof that goes from three stories to five.

"These are significant concessions we've made," said Hudson. "But the neighbors keep changing the bar. We're just looking at each other and scratching our heads because we've done everything they asked."

The neighbors most upset about the project live on Berkeley Way, a residential street parallel to University Avenue where the Trader Joe's parking lot entrance will be. A constant stream of cars and delivery trucks will dramatically change the character of their quiet street, they say.

"Trader Joe's is a nonunion store owned by a secretive German family that sells specialty food and low-cost alcohol," said Steve Wollmer, who lives 250 feet from the site. "Do we really need this in our neighborhood?"

Part of Trader Joe's popularity stems from its assortment of low-priced wine and spirits. It spawned the "Two-Buck Chuck" nickname when it sold Charles Shaw wine for $2 a bottle, though many of its other wine offerings fall into a higher price range. Wollmer fears that the availability of inexpensive wine will prove too tempting for the thousands of underage students and homeless people who live nearby.

A Trader Joe's spokeswoman would not release the company's alcohol sales figures, but a homeless advocate said the store's abundance of cheap wine is not an issue.

"I am convinced that the cost and distance of alcohol has nothing to do with people drinking. If a homeless person, or anyone, wants to drink, they'll know where to get it," said Boona Cheema, executive director of Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency in Berkeley. "I think it's great that Trader Joe's is coming to downtown."

Many in Berkeley agree with her, enticed by the prospect of affordable, high-quality groceries within walking distance of downtown, BART and the UC campus.

"For years, downtown residents and merchants have been wanting a supermarket downtown," said Michael Caplan, who worked on downtown development for the city and starts today as Berkeley's economic development director. "There are hundreds of new units downtown, and as it becomes more of a neighborhood, people want basic neighborhood amenities."

The nearest Trader Joe's are currently in Emeryville and El Cerrito. The Oakland outlet will open in early 2007.

Berkeley is hardly underserved by grocery stores, though no large markets can be found downtown, where Trader Joe's would go. Within its 10 square miles lie four Andronico's, Whole Foods, Safeway, Grocery Outlet, Berkeley Bowl and dozens of small specialty shops. A second Berkeley Bowl, which at 91,000 square feet will be Berkeley's biggest grocery store, is slated to open in West Berkeley by 2010.

Some in Berkeley say they welcome Trader Joe's, but it's the 146 units of housing they don't want. The units, most of which are one-bedroom apartments configured around a central courtyard, are too small to accommodate families, said Spring.

The developers say they feel they've made as many concessions as they can and still turn a profit.

"We think we have a great project here, and we're willing to invest in the long-term future of Berkeley," Hudson said. "But at some point, Berkeley's got to decide whether it wants to be Berkeley 1950 or Berkeley 2050."

E-mail Carolyn Jones at carolynjones@sfchronicle.com.

Page B - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/30/BAGMTM2HDE1.DTL

tuy

10-30-2006, 07:17 PM

Some in Berkeley say they welcome Trader Joe's, but it's the 146 units of housing they don't want. The units, most of which are one-bedroom apartments configured around a central courtyard, are too small to accommodate families, said Spring.

Sounds like great student housing. Isn't it really difficult for students to find housing near campus?

As mentioned in the article, most cities would love to have this development in their downtown. Tracy would welcome this with open arms.

_J_

10-30-2006, 07:53 PM

Yes, it's *very* difficult for Berkeley students to find housing that close to campus; often, there is a $300-500+ premium on rooms within walking distance of campus. I moved to Oakland to avoid that premium. Such shortsightedness is (City of) Berkeleyitis at its worst. But hey...I get a new TJs just a couple of blocks from home and they don't, so no complaints here ;-)

_J_

10-30-2006, 11:40 PM

-n-

rocketman_95046

10-31-2006, 02:13 AM

webcor update...

AXIS (SAN JOSE CONDOMINIUMS), SAN JOSE, CA

http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/rendering1152225134.jpg
UPDATE
October 2006

The excavation phase of the project is about 95% complete. The west half

of the site is almost completely at sub-grade level while the grading and off-haul continues at the east side. We expect to be done with the soil off-haul in the first week of November.

The tower crane foundation has been poured and we continue to place
filter fabric and crushed rock for drainage and compaction under the mat foundation. Carlysle Street will be closed on the weekend of 10/21 for the erection of our “flat head” style tower crane.

A 6” concrete rat slab will be poured on the west side as early as 10/24, so that the foundation rebar placement can begin. The first foundation concrete pour is scheduled for the weekend of 11/10. In order to accomplish the placement of 6,000+ cubic yards of concrete, Webcor will have five (5) concrete pump trucks on site – four active and one on standby in the event of equipment failure. Concrete placement will commence at 12:05am on 11/11 and will be continuous until about 2pm.
http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/axisoctober2006c1162232330.jpghttp://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/axisoctober2006a1162231439.jpg

EastBayHardCore

10-31-2006, 02:13 AM

City of Emeryville buying land for Bay Street expansion
East Bay Business Times - 6:22 PM PST Monday
by Jessica Saunders

The city of Emeryville spent $6.2 million to acquire a 53,273-square-foot parcel of land as part of its continuing Bay Street urban-renewal project at the foot of the Bay Bridge.

The purchase is part of a five-parcel acquisition of industrial and commercial land the city had declared blighted in 2004. City Economic Development and Housing Director Patrick O'Keeffe said the contiguous parcels totaling 3.3 acres will be developed by Madison Marquette as an expansion of Madison's existing mixed-use Bay Street Emeryville development.

The land is bounded by Powell Street to the north, Shellmound Street to the west, Bay Street to the south and the railroad tracks to the east.

O'Keeffe said three of the parcel sales are closing at the same time and one has already closed. Four different sellers are involved.

Madison Marquette is working on a development plan that would include ground-floor retail space with a combination of residential and hotel space above it, similar to the concept of the existing Bay Street development.

Although the city considered acquiring the land through eminent domain, and began the process with the blight declaration, O'Keeffe said no lawsuit was filed and the acquisitions are a straight sale.

The seller of the $6.2 million parcel, a private party, was represented by Hans Hansson, managing principal of Starboard Commercial Real Estate/TCN Worldwide, and John Robbins, principal of Carpenter/Robbins Commercial Real Estate/TCN Worldwide. The city of Emeryville's Redevelopment Agency was represented in-house.

Bay Street is a 22-acre mixed-use development that consists of 400,000 square feet of retail space, 366 residential units and a 250-room hotel.

jsaunders@bizjournals.com | 925-598-1427