BTinSF
02-05-2007, 06:17 AM
I just couldn't put this in "tidbits". What we need is a section entitled "The World Turned Upside Down".
Peskin looks to put hotels on S.F. waterfront
San Francisco Business Times - February 2, 2007
by Ryan Tate and Najib Joe Hakim
San Francisco city and port officials are discussing rule changes that would allow hotels to rise from port-controlled waterfront land.
The idea is being floated by Board of Supervisors president Aaron Peskin and port Director Monique Moyer. Peskin believes such rule changes could be useful to Shorenstein Co., the local developer with a plan to redevelop Piers 27-31 for commercial use. Shorenstein is in the midst of revising its piers plan after the State Lands Commission raised objections to the amount of office space initially put forward, though the company's political consultant, Mark Mosher, said it is too early to comment on the possibility of including a hotel there.
Speaking at a Hotel Council lunch Jan. 17, Peskin said he had been quietly discussing repealing the ban on waterfront hotels with city and port leaders and staff. Specifically, Peskin would like to revisit the terms of Proposition H, a 1990 city ballot initiative that banned hotel construction on the city's piers.
Port Commissioner Rodney Fong is optimistic the plan could come to fruition: "Hotel development is a possibility to come," he said a few minutes later from the lectern.
Pressed later on possible locations, Peskin said Piers 27-31 "relate a lot" to his efforts.
"That would be a candidate pier and an appropriate place," Peskin said, adding that Shorenstein was aware of his efforts.
But Moyer said that lengthy discussions for changing Prop. H probably mean market conditions will have changed by the time any rules changes are enacted, meaning "there's really no point" in looking into a hotel at Piers 27-31 at this point.
Private development like hotels is seen by port leaders, including Moyer, as one of several ways to drum up financing of close to $1 billion the port needs to repair crumbling infrastructure, including the piers themselves.
"It wouldn't save the crumbling piers but it would give us another option," Moyer wrote in an email message. "The port is interested in relaxing the ban in order to add flexibility to our options."
A waterfront location is generally considered a slam-dunk by hotel operators.
Rick Swig, a politically connected hotel consultant, had little doubt hotel developers would be interested in the opportunity.
"San Francisco's greatest real estate asset is the port," Swig said.
In San Francisco, though, waterfront hotel development can be risky, due to the extraordinarily large number of state and local entities that must give approval, including, depending on the exact location, the Port Commission, State Lands Commission, city Planning Commission, city Recreation and Park Commission and the state's San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
Joie de Vivre Hospitality ended up with a hit at the Hotel Vitale, which needed approval from seven boards and commissions over as many years before opening near the start of 2005 on the Embarcadero just south of Market Street. It now earns daily room rates better than many of the city's toniest business hotels.
Stanford Hotels, though, bitterly threw in the towel on a hotel project at Embarcadero and Broadway -- port-owned land far enough from the waterfront to avoid Prop H -- in late 2005 after a $5 million, six-year entitlement struggle that ended with city supervisors cutting the project by 25 stories.
The port is interested in finding a new boutique hotel operator for that site, Moyer said, but would like to get it entitled beforehand. Peskin said he believes five feet can be added to the 40-foot height limit.
rtate@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4968
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2007/02/05/story20.html?t=printable
Was not Peskin the one who killed the Stanford Hotels deal by demanding a hotel so low-slung that the developer decided it wasn't economically doable?
Peskin looks to put hotels on S.F. waterfront
San Francisco Business Times - February 2, 2007
by Ryan Tate and Najib Joe Hakim
San Francisco city and port officials are discussing rule changes that would allow hotels to rise from port-controlled waterfront land.
The idea is being floated by Board of Supervisors president Aaron Peskin and port Director Monique Moyer. Peskin believes such rule changes could be useful to Shorenstein Co., the local developer with a plan to redevelop Piers 27-31 for commercial use. Shorenstein is in the midst of revising its piers plan after the State Lands Commission raised objections to the amount of office space initially put forward, though the company's political consultant, Mark Mosher, said it is too early to comment on the possibility of including a hotel there.
Speaking at a Hotel Council lunch Jan. 17, Peskin said he had been quietly discussing repealing the ban on waterfront hotels with city and port leaders and staff. Specifically, Peskin would like to revisit the terms of Proposition H, a 1990 city ballot initiative that banned hotel construction on the city's piers.
Port Commissioner Rodney Fong is optimistic the plan could come to fruition: "Hotel development is a possibility to come," he said a few minutes later from the lectern.
Pressed later on possible locations, Peskin said Piers 27-31 "relate a lot" to his efforts.
"That would be a candidate pier and an appropriate place," Peskin said, adding that Shorenstein was aware of his efforts.
But Moyer said that lengthy discussions for changing Prop. H probably mean market conditions will have changed by the time any rules changes are enacted, meaning "there's really no point" in looking into a hotel at Piers 27-31 at this point.
Private development like hotels is seen by port leaders, including Moyer, as one of several ways to drum up financing of close to $1 billion the port needs to repair crumbling infrastructure, including the piers themselves.
"It wouldn't save the crumbling piers but it would give us another option," Moyer wrote in an email message. "The port is interested in relaxing the ban in order to add flexibility to our options."
A waterfront location is generally considered a slam-dunk by hotel operators.
Rick Swig, a politically connected hotel consultant, had little doubt hotel developers would be interested in the opportunity.
"San Francisco's greatest real estate asset is the port," Swig said.
In San Francisco, though, waterfront hotel development can be risky, due to the extraordinarily large number of state and local entities that must give approval, including, depending on the exact location, the Port Commission, State Lands Commission, city Planning Commission, city Recreation and Park Commission and the state's San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
Joie de Vivre Hospitality ended up with a hit at the Hotel Vitale, which needed approval from seven boards and commissions over as many years before opening near the start of 2005 on the Embarcadero just south of Market Street. It now earns daily room rates better than many of the city's toniest business hotels.
Stanford Hotels, though, bitterly threw in the towel on a hotel project at Embarcadero and Broadway -- port-owned land far enough from the waterfront to avoid Prop H -- in late 2005 after a $5 million, six-year entitlement struggle that ended with city supervisors cutting the project by 25 stories.
The port is interested in finding a new boutique hotel operator for that site, Moyer said, but would like to get it entitled beforehand. Peskin said he believes five feet can be added to the 40-foot height limit.
rtate@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4968
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2007/02/05/story20.html?t=printable
Was not Peskin the one who killed the Stanford Hotels deal by demanding a hotel so low-slung that the developer decided it wasn't economically doable?
