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

[mt_climber13]

^Nice! The fried chicken and comfort food at Home was awesome though. It's now a cess pool in a prime corner, so build, build, build. Though buildings on a major subway line in a major American city should be at least 20 stories.

[Pedestrian]

A historically huge wave of new offices is about to crest in San Francisco
Jan 26, 2017, 1:37pm PST Updated Jan 31, 2017, 10:38am PST

Roland Li
Reporter San Francisco Business Times

San Francisco will see more new office space in 2017 than at any time in the past three decades. More than 3 million square feet, including the city’s tallest new building, Salesforce Tower, will provide a big dose of new supply, twice the amount delivered in 2016.

Whether the city is thirsty for all that space remains to be seen.

Optimists point to the 40 percent of that pipeline that is already pre-leased, with heavy representation by the tech industry. Salesforce will occupy about half of its namesake, 1.4 million-square-foot tower. Tech companies Pinterest and Stripe have each fully leased a new building opening South of Market. Amazon.com’s gaming site Twitch has committed to about half of 350 Bush St., the only new tower arriving in the North Financial District . . . .

Skeptics think . . . the burst of space is almost certain to raise the vacancy rate in a market where rents have been largely flat for the last year and sublease space – typically a sign of a weakening market – was on the rise for most of 2016. So were landlord concessions like tenant improvement subsidies and free months of rent.

“Job creation is slowing by about half,” said Ken Rosen, chair of the University of California, Berkeley Haas Business School’s Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economics. “The day of reckoning is coming” . . . .

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...al-estate.html

You gotta wonder about projects like Park Tower . . .

[viewguysf]

Originally Posted by wakamesalad

^Nice! The fried chicken and comfort food at Home was awesome though. It's now a cess pool in a prime corner, so build, build, build. Though buildings on a major subway line in a major American city should be at least 20 stories.

Highrises in the Castro area have been discussed many times previously and most of us don't want them here. This new building fits in well with everything on 14th, Market, and Church. There will eventually be significant development across the street on the huge Safeway lot.

Have you tried getting onto Metro at the Church station during any peak period? It's difficult, especially since cars are often packed in the downtown direction after leaving Castro. It isn't only during traditional commuter rush hours; it's also during Giants games, other events at AT&T Park, demonstrations at Civic Center, whatever. Yes, the Metro and other transit is being improved with new cars, longer trains eventually, etc., but it's fairly maxed out now as it is.

[ozone]

Originally Posted by timbad

in case anyone missed it, Hoodline reports that the former Home Restaurant on the corner of Church and Market has been demolished. to make way for this:

I miss the old Home Restaurant... said nobody.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by ozone

I miss the old Home Restaurant... said nobody.

I believe wakemesalad said he enjoyed the comfort food and fried chicken and presumably he misses it.

[pseudolus]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I believe wakemesalad said he enjoyed the comfort food and fried chicken and presumably he misses it.

"Several of the incarnations of restaurants at 2100 Market Street have included gay bars attached to it.

From 1974 to 1976, the 24-hour diner Truck Stop included a gay bar called the Rear End Bar, which reportedly attracted an attractive clientele. Then from 1977 to sometime in the 1990s, the restaurant was Church Street Station and its bar, Hideaway, was apparently popular with drag queens."

http://www.sfgayhistory.com/neighbor...market-street/

[Pedestrian]

^^In as much as my first SF memories date from 1976, I will always remember it as Church Street Station (but only from outside--never went inside in all the years it was there and in spite of being a fairly frequent customer of several other resturants in the 'hood and, of course, the Safeway (and Blockbuster Video and the produce market nearby on Church St., though never the cannabis dispensary).

[homebucket]

A look at the impact of the new towers on the overall skyline. Taken yesterday.

[Pedestrian]

Yet more evidence this development cycle is winding down: Pipeline of Residential Development in San Francisco Slips

"newly proposed development in San Francisco has dropped to a four-year low."

[fimiak]

Oceanwide Center


Salesforce Tower (slightly distorted pano)

[1977]

Great view of the roof landscaping at the TBT - this is going to be beautiful:

under construction by hanoi_hoang, on Flickr

[ConstructDTLA]

Originally Posted by 1977

Great view of the roof landscaping at the TBT - this is going to be beautiful:

under construction by hanoi_hoang, on Flickr

Looks incredible. Here are a few pics I took last weekend. SF is hopping, a true urban tourist destination.

Salesforce Tower by Hunter, on Flickr

Salesforce Tower by Hunter, on Flickr

Salesforce Tower by Hunter, on Flickr

Salesforce Tower by Hunter, on Flickr

Salesforce Tower by Hunter, on Flickr

Salesforce Tower by Hunter, on Flickr

Salesforce Tower by Hunter, on Flickr

Salesforce Tower by Hunter, on Flickr

[viewguysf]

I took these almost three weeks ago, but let's add 181 into the mix.

[IMG]IMG_1828 by viewguysf, on Flickr[/IMG]

and the other kids on the block...

[IMG]IMG_1825 by viewguysf, on Flickr[/IMG]

[IMG]IMG_1808 by viewguysf, on Flickr[/IMG]

[viewguysf]

Meanwhile, the Temporary Transbay Terminal sits next to our new Rincon Hill area

[IMG]Rincon Hill area from the Temporary Transbay Terminal by viewguysf, on Flickr[/IMG]

[mt_climber13]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Yet more evidence this development cycle is winding down: Pipeline of Residential Development in San Francisco Slips

"newly proposed development in San Francisco has dropped to a four-year low."

voters in SF passed prop C last year that doubled the requirement of units that developers must build or pay for affordable housing. This might have something to do with it, as projects don't pencil out as well, and another example of piecemeal market manipulation at the ballot box which reduces housing supply and drives costs further up.. especially since NIMBYs are challenging the California law that allows for increase in density in exchange for more affordable units built in a project. SF has been legislating housing costs for decades and the result? Most expensive housing in the country.

[Pedestrian]

^^ Maybe or maybe not a coincidence you should mention it but:

SF’s Affordable Housing Recommendations and Dissent
February 13, 2017

. . . Proposition C also raised the income threshold for the designated affordable units, allowing roughly half the required below market rate units to be priced as affordable to middle-income households making up to 100 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI) for rental units or 120 percent of the AMI for condos.

In addition, the Proposition granted the City the right to alter the required percentage of BMR units based on recommendations from San Francisco’s Controller. And this afternoon, the Office of the Controller released its final report and recommendations, which included a strongly worded letter of dissent from a quarter of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) members appointed by the Mayor and Board of Supervisors.

The Office of the Controller’s final recommendations and percentages:

The City should impose different inclusionary housing requirements on rental and for-sale (condominium) properties.
The City should set the initial onsite requirements from 14%-18% for rental projects and 17%-20% for ownership projects.
The City should set the Fee Option at 18-23% for Rental, 25-28% for Ownership to maintain equivalence with previous on-site recommendations. These percentages are based on [Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development’s] 2016 Fee schedule, and should be modified accordingly if MOHCD adjusts its fee schedule in the future.
The City should commit to a 15-year schedule of increases to the inclusionary housing rate of 0.5% per year
The City should impose additional affordability requirements for any 80/20 project financed through the City’s financing approval process.
Consistent with current practice for any project to which inclusionary requirements apply, the City should allow projects that are utilizing the State Density Bonus to combine provision of onsite units for the base portion of the project with payment of the fee for bonus portion of the project.
The Controller and TAC should reconvene in 3 years to reconsider feasibility, density bonus, and other issues, and produce an updated report.
And from the summary of dissent from TAC members and local affordable housing developers, John Elberling (TODCO) and Whitney Jones (Chinatown Community Development Corporation), who advocated for higher percentages of affordable housing and challenged the report’s methodology and appropriateness:

“…it should come as no surprise that a TAC process composed of 5 for-profit housing developers/financiers, 1 mega-national nonprofit developer, and 2 San Francisco community affordable housing developers finally voted 6-2 to recommend the Alternative that…(1) maximizes windfall profits for developers/land owners from the new State Density Bonus Law, [and] (2) provides the least Affordable Inclusionary Housing for the people of our City.”
San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors will now be tasked with either adopting or challenging the Office of the Controller’s recommendations.

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...d-dissent.html

[SLO]

Originally Posted by viewguysf

Meanwhile, the Temporary Transbay Terminal sits next to our new Rincon Hill area

[IMG]Rincon Hill area from the Temporary Transbay Terminal by viewguysf, on Flickr[/IMG]

Great shots, thanks for the updates.


Are there plans for the Temporary Terminal property?

[viewguysf]

Originally Posted by wakamesalad

voters in SF passed prop C last year that doubled the requirement of units that developers must build or pay for affordable housing. This might have something to do with it, as projects don't pencil out as well, and another example of piecemeal market manipulation at the ballot box which reduces housing supply and drives costs further up.. especially since NIMBYs are challenging the California law that allows for increase in density in exchange for more affordable units built in a project. SF has been legislating housing costs for decades and the result? Most expensive housing in the country.

I attended my political club meeting last night with three supervisors (including President London Breed) speaking. It was a very positive event, with all of them committing to be data driven in order to actually produce more housing, particularly for the working middle class. A majority of the Board plus Mayor Lee are onboard with following the Controller's recommendations.

San Francisco is in good political shape now, as is California. The elephant in the picture is back in Washington.

[viewguysf]

Originally Posted by SLO

Great shots, thanks for the updates.
Are there plans for the Temporary Terminal property?

Thanks...it's good to see again how far we have come, plus 45 Lansing was thankfully not in that shot.

I'm not sure if this has been further updated, but here you go.

http://sf.curbed.com/2013/8/15/10208...nsbay-terminal

[Pedestrian]

The park etc can be seen here in context:


http://www.parktowerattransbay.com/u...a02_0423_1.jpg