HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2221  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2009, 6:21 PM
nequidnimis nequidnimis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 507
I did. It was more about Planning Department receiving input for their ideas. I had concerns about the linear park proposed on Webster St. I was concerned it is interrupted by two large parking lot or garage driveways (Gordo, how do you like this?). The Planner in charge of writing down the comments told me it could be mitigated by edge treatment, and told me "So I will write down you have concerns about edge treatment". I could have argued but I didn't. There's no money for this park in the foreseeable future anyway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2222  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2009, 6:40 PM
Gordo's Avatar
Gordo Gordo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, WA/San Francisco, CA/Jackson Hole, WY
Posts: 4,201
I'm actually not sure I particularly like the idea of the linear park at all, but especially not if it's going to have the two driveways running through it. It will become an unused and wasted area of needless greenspace in a matter of days. That type of greenspace isn't necessarily bad if it has some other purpose (for example, the greenspace on either side of Park Presidio Blvd acts as a sound/sight buffer for the neighborhood), but this won't have that. Without making it attractive for people to use (and having it sliced and diced by parking ramps hardly makes it attractive), it simply won't be used except for less than desirable purposes.

Did they talk any more about the parking proposals for the neighborhood? (Back-in angled parking on Post St, possible removal of the two-hour free limit for residential parking spots, etc)

Last edited by Gordo; Apr 27, 2009 at 7:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2223  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2009, 10:31 PM
nequidnimis nequidnimis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordo View Post
Did they talk any more about the parking proposals for the neighborhood? (Back-in angled parking on Post St, possible removal of the two-hour free limit for residential parking spots, etc)
As I recall, the only aspect of parking that was discussed was the size of the rebuilt Japan Center parking garage. Planning has an information center in the Japantown mall which you can visit during open hours (not sure what they are), or by appointment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2224  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2009, 6:59 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
The new SPUR:


Source: http://sf.curbed.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2225  
Old Posted May 1, 2009, 4:59 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTinSF View Post
The new SPUR
Nice!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2226  
Old Posted May 1, 2009, 5:37 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Quote:
Friday, May 1, 2009
SPUR moves into iconic new home
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

SPUR finally has a home that lives up to its lofty ideals.

The San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association moved this week into a its new SPUR Urban Center at 654 Mission St., $18 million modernist structure that is one part office, one part community meeting space, and one part urban research center with changing exhibits on planning and architecture.

With four floors of multi-purpose space squeezed into 14,000 square feet, the building, designed by Peter Pfau of Pfau Long Architecture, is a physical embodiment of SPUR’s goals of smart growth, green building, and transit-oriented development.

In addition to raising SPUR’s profile, the building creates a venue for planners, builders, architects, politicians to come together and discuss the future of the city.

“This is a city that likes to fight,” said SPUR Executive Director Gabriel Metcalf. “We wanted to create a place for productive conversations, a neutral meeting ground where people can come together and figure things out.”

It has not been easy. SPUR, which has 3,500 members, has been raising money at a time when real estate industry is in shambles and many of its core members -- architects, planning, and development firms -- are going through layoffs. The organization still has to raise about $4 million to pay for the new building. SPUR has a $2.5 million budget and about 17 employees.

“SPUR is a nonprofit so there was no gilding of the lilly,” said Pfau. “When I got the job I referred to it as the little building that could.”

Jim Chappell, SPUR’s former executive director who is now director of the organization’s citizen planning institute, said the idea of the new building came out of discussions in 1999 during SPUR’s 40th anniversary celebration.

At that time he was talking with architect Diane Filippi, then a principal at SMWM, about how San Francisco needed a urban planning center similar to the Pavillon de l’Arsenal in Paris.

“She said, ‘let’s find a little site on a good retail street with existing parking and good bus service and take planning retail in San Francisco,”

said Chappell. “SPUR has been famous for its debates but the organization has always been largely invisible in our little fifth floor office.”

SPUR brought Filippi on board to head up the urban center effort. They looked at a site on Market Street and talked with Tishman Speyer about putting SPUR on the ground floor of 555 Mission St., an idea that was scrapped when that building was put on hold.

The center, constructed by Nibbi Brothers, officially opens with a donor party on May 27th and a an all member party on May 28th. The illuminated glass front features a two story window and an enormous SPUR was still being installed last week.

“What we said was we want to be open and light and airy and as transparent as we believe government should be,” said Chappell. “And indeed it is.”


jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971
Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...4/story15.html

"Iconic"? Well--maybe that word should be given a rest until the recession is over. But it IS nice (if short).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2227  
Old Posted May 3, 2009, 12:13 AM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Sonoma Strong
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,882
it is nice. i dont think you could get too much more for that small lot.
__________________
"I firmly believe, from what I have seen, that this is the chosen spot of all this Earth as far as Nature is concerned." - Luther Burbank on Sonoma County.

Pictures of Santa Rosa, So. Co.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2228  
Old Posted May 8, 2009, 12:13 AM
Downtown Dave's Avatar
Downtown Dave Downtown Dave is offline
North Beach
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 519
Goodbye to everyone's favorite building:





And again the unstrained quality is visible:



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2229  
Old Posted May 8, 2009, 3:44 AM
hi123 hi123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 584
Wow that last shot really establishes how well that new building fits into its surroundings. Looks great!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2230  
Old Posted May 8, 2009, 8:03 PM
HarryBarbierSRPD's Avatar
HarryBarbierSRPD HarryBarbierSRPD is offline
Anti-NIMBY
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 58
Hooray Economy!

Well, 45 Lansing is officially canceled. Somehow I don't think this will be the last.

http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/...l?surround=lfn
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2231  
Old Posted May 9, 2009, 4:00 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryBarbierSRPD View Post
Well, 45 Lansing is officially canceled. Somehow I don't think this will be the last.
This project has had its own thread for years now--read more about it here:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=115515
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2232  
Old Posted May 14, 2009, 9:35 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Quote:
Drawings And Details For The Proposed Development Of 2001 Market



The website for 2001 Market Street has filled out with drawings and details for a proposed mixed-use development to replace the shuttered S&C Ford dealership on Market at Dolores and 14th. As proposed, 80 condos (50% two-bedrooms or more) over a 30,000 square foot Whole Foods Market with outdoor seating at the corner of Market and Dolores.



Conditional use permits will be required for demolition of the existing buildings, for the grocery (over 5,000 square feet and a chain), and for a parking ratio of .75 spaces per unit. No variances are required, however, for the 85 foot height along Market/Dolores to 100 feet north of the 14th Street property line at which point the height drops to 40.



With approvals, and without delays, construction could start as early as fall 2010 with a Whole Foods opening in early 2012 and the condos soon thereafter (mid to late 2012).
Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2....html#comments

Excellent project web site: http://www.2001marketsf.com/

Inquiring minds wonder: How much longer can the Safeway sit there in its surface parking lot??
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2233  
Old Posted May 14, 2009, 5:01 PM
Jerry of San Fran's Avatar
Jerry of San Fran Jerry of San Fran is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,553
2001 Market - Whole Foods

BTinSf - Thanks for the drawings. A Whole Foods on Market St. would be a plus for me. As it is now I have to take to busses to the South of Market store or go up a hill on California to get to the other.

The plans look good too. I think the flowers and foilage plan is very ambitious. That is one place where many schemes don't often work well in the real world.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2234  
Old Posted May 14, 2009, 6:51 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,234
I like this plan too. The design is nothing special, but it doesn't offend anyway. I do like a lot of the features though (light wells, green roofs, scale).
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2235  
Old Posted May 15, 2009, 7:20 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Quote:
113 New Apartments at 430 Main/429 Beale Approved By Planning



A plugged-in tipster reports on last night's Planning Commission meeting:

Looks like 430 Main / 429 Beale was approved last night with a 6-1 vote. The one in opposition, of all people, was Commissioner Antonini, who was in full support of the project and merely opposed the condition that the project remain rental for at least 20 years before going to condos. (As he stated, he believes boxing a developer in can only be detrimental).
As proposed, 113 apartments sandwiched between the existing Baycrest condos and a Caltrans yard with construction slated to begin early 2010 and the early design above.
Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2....html#comments

Quote:
Rincon Hill 84-Footer Approved, Light-Blockage and All



Last night, 430 Main St / 429 Beale St, a project that got a few buckets of flak from both nearby residents and city officials for steamrolling into the neighborhood, walked away from a public hearing with an approval. The eight-story, 84-foot building will have 113 units and 57 underground parking spaces. But the central issue that led to residents rising up against developer Portland-Pacific, the height of the building and thus the obstruction of "light and air" from lower-level courtyard-side units in neighboring BayCrest, went unfixed. According to the president of Portland-Pacific, they "cannot come up with a viable project that enables them to keep their view." Alas! Sounds like one of the project's more vocal opponents has softened his stance a bit, though: "I am hopeful that the additional residents who move to Rincon Hill will help us get closer to the critical mass of population needed to attract more neighborhood serving businesses."
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/0...eader_comments
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2236  
Old Posted May 15, 2009, 7:24 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Quote:
Infill du Jour: Mid-Rise Lands On Lower Nob Hill Parking Lot



Another parking lot down in Lower Nob Hill: an 11-story, 35-unit building with ground-floor commercial space is making its way toward 1080 Sutter St between Larkin and Hyde, where 20 car spaces currently live. The building will be just around the corner from 1299 Bush, which is currently under construction, and will have six 1-bedrooms, seven 2-bedrooms, 22 3-bedroom units. Each unit gets one car space, with 30 of them in the basement. Total cost is estimated to be $10 million, and the building should take 20 months to build.
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/0...eader_comments
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2237  
Old Posted May 15, 2009, 10:19 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,234
The best parking lots are ex-parking lots. It's just a small b&w drawing, but that render is promising.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2238  
Old Posted May 15, 2009, 11:07 PM
Gordo's Avatar
Gordo Gordo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, WA/San Francisco, CA/Jackson Hole, WY
Posts: 4,201
Agreed. For years, I've walked past that lot and daydreamed about the day that something would be built there. Glad to see my dream is coming true
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2239  
Old Posted May 17, 2009, 4:09 PM
nequidnimis nequidnimis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTinSF View Post
113 New Apartments at 430 Main/429 Beale Approved By Planning


Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/0...eader_comments
I am glad the developer gets to retain ownership of the units. That way, once the Caltrans lot to the South is developed and his units retain their light and air but get to face a wall, he will be the one feeling the financial pain. I have an issue with projects that rely on the neighbors lots to provide acceptable views from their units.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2240  
Old Posted May 28, 2009, 3:47 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Gosh, it wasn't easy to find this thread.

Anyway, news on the planned California Pacific Medical Center hospital on Van Ness:

The plan:



Renderings (at last):



In context aerial rendings (note the new building would be substantially taller than Daniel Burnham Court--one of the SocketSite comments says 290 ft which would, of course, make it a "highrise" by SSP criteria):



Source of images: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...developme.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:51 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.