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

[Jobohimself]

Sue Hestor needs to get pushed in front of a BART locomotive.

[nequidnimis]

Originally Posted by Jobohimself

Sue Hestor needs to get pushed in front of a BART locomotive.

Moderator: I do not think death threats are appropriate in this forum.

[Gordo]

In this case, with this project, I really won't be crushed if the height becomes the issue that kills it. This plot has had a 200' height limit for decades. We can argue over whether it should have a height limit of 200' (my argument would of course be that that makes no sense), but if we're ever going to get to a place where the planning department automatically greenlights certain heights that fall within the limits for the area, we're also going to have to get to a point where the planning department automatically redlights heights that go above the limits for an area.

For example - I will be extremely annoyed if the building at the corner of Market/Buchanan has to cut a floor or two, considering we just finished a decade-long plan for that area and the project falls within the height limits for that lot. I will not be annoyed if this project doesn't get the extra 200' that it's asking for. We've got to have some consistency at some point in time.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by Gordo

In this case, with this project, I really won't be crushed if the height becomes the issue that kills it. This plot has had a 200' height limit for decades. We can argue over whether it should have a height limit of 200' (my argument would of course be that that makes no sense), but if we're ever going to get to a place where the planning department automatically greenlights certain heights that fall within the limits for the area, we're also going to have to get to a point where the planning department automatically redlights heights that go above the limits for an area.

I'm afraid what will happen is that the height limit won't kill it but will simply result in a lower, much uglier and less interesting design--the usual San Francisco mediocrity. I also wouldn't blame the Planning Department for the state of affairs in building approvals. The problem is the nearly endless series of commissions that get a say and appeals that are possible. Curbed identified some of them in the article above but each of them offers a chance for the NIMBYs to cut down a buildings size and increase its blandness. There is almost no chance to increase its size or inspiration (the one case I can think of where that actually happened was with ORH).

We already have a lower, squatter, uglier design for this building (put forward in case the height limit was not waved), to be found wherever the earlier series of articles on it were posted.

[BTinSF]

Another in the series of darned nice midrises proposed for Market St. One could only hope some of them get built. If only they were in the Tenderloin where there are, apparently, no NIMBYs to care. This one is in (or near, depending on your view of the neighborhood border) the Castro so expect a fight.

It's Rendering Thaim Time For 2200-2210 Market At 15th



The proposed design for 2200-2210 Market at 15th Street via Curbed above. As the corner and Thai House Restaurant currently stand below.



As proposed the single story restaurant and surface area parking lot will become a restaurant and retail on the ground floor with 22 residential units in four additonal stories over, and 12 parking spaces (including one for car share) beneath.

Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2....html#comments

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by nequidnimis

Moderator: I do not think death threats are appropriate in this forum.

Yeah, but he's talking about Sue Hestor.

Oh well, you're right.

[BTinSF]

OOOOH! Curbed offers a view of the 15th St facade of 2200 Market and assures it'll go up soon:


Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/0...dences.php?o=1

[SFView]

Sue Hestor quote from http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...BAHC16NIED.DTL:

"There were real reasons for these heights limits, and they came from multiple years of hearings," Hestor said. "It was not done in a vacuum. Citizens pushed for the limits for a reason."

Such reasons could result in 555 Washington looking like this instead.
From: http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfi...ngton_DEIR.pdf

[SFView]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

I can't even remember--does this thing have a thread? I remember posting about it but not whether it had its own thread and I can't find one:

We almost forgot about this thread:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=130808

[fflint]

I will be able to see 2200 Market from my living room! Woohoo!

[Gordo]

Originally Posted by fflint

I will be able to see 2200 Market from my living room! Woohoo!

You must be incredibly concerned about it affecting your access to "light" and "air" then, eh?

[Reminiscence]

I think listening to Hestor babble is "bad city planning".

I really hope this proposal passes as is, but I'm preparing to once again be disappointed.

[peanut gallery]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

OOOOH! Curbed offers a view of the 15th St facade of 2200 Market and assures it'll go up soon:


Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/0...dences.php?o=1

I really like what they've done here: give the Market side a solid street wall and break-up the 15th St side so it reads as separate, smaller buildings. It also steps down from Market to 15th. I think that nicely fits into the surroundings.

[BTinSF]

Six-Story SoMa Building Should Have Sweet Freeway Views



A couple days ago the preliminary thumbs up on 870 Harrison St came down from the Planning Department: the remaking of SoMa shall continue apace with the demolition of a two-story light industrial building (the Robyn Color photo ad digital lab) and construction of a six-story mixed-use building with 26 residential units, designed by local firm Leavitt Architecture. Everything looks good to go at the moment— let's just see what color it ends up being, k?

Source: http://curbednetwork.com/cache/galle...df37b8d3_o.png

[BTinSF]

More Forum Design work!

2655 Bush Street: Designs For Density On The Corner Of Divisadero



Assuming a conditional use authorization to allow for the development of over one-half acre in addition to all the other requisite approvals, the vacant two-story and 48,000 square foot convalescent facility at 2655 Bush Street (corner of Divisadero) would be razed.

In its place a 108,000 square foot mixed-use building providing 83 new residential units, 4,500 square feet of ground level retail (four and one-half times the current) and below-grade parking for up to 99 cars (again, four and one-half times the current) would rise.



As proposed the new building would range from four to six stories (40 to 65 feet) in height and contain a unit mix of one studio, 19 one-bedrooms, and 63 two-bedroom units.



Architecture by Forum Design, and yes, we’re working on some better renderings but at least you can click the image directly above to enlarge (a little).

Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2....html#comments

[Gordo]

It's funny - I walked by that building about a week ago and thought to myself that it would be a good place for something new Divisadero needs a lot of work, glad to see something potentially getting the ball rolling.

One of the comments on Socketsite also mentions the upcoming "greening" of Divis (which I wasn't aware of), with new trees being planted as well as widened sidewalks and a new median that has waiting areas for crossing pedestrians:

http://www.examiner.com/a-1143028~Di...-San_Francisco,

[tommaso]

Originally Posted by SFView

Sue Hestor quote from http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...BAHC16NIED.DTL:


Such reasons could result in 555 Washington looking like this instead.
From: http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfi...ngton_DEIR.pdf

Nobody and I mean nobody in any state of mind would build a hell hole of a building looking like this crap! I mean YIKES! I thought diapers were only for babies. Now I'm gonna have to buy San Francisco a humongous diaper and put it over its head before its s**t smears all over the city. What a shame! I love San Francisco and the original design of 555 Washington shows great respect for the city and its residents. When will we learn to grow up as children and allow our men and women to build beautiful and functional buildings like adults?! I feel like every time San Francisco is ready to grow up and build structures worthy of the city's great name and history, some effers have to come in and screw it up for the rest of us including our children. Do you building killers out there really think my children are going to want to look at that 'box out of hell' looking building?!!!

I love Little Italy, TransAmerica and the Financial District! But, it's instances like these that make me want to pack up and move to Antarctica! WOW... what more did I expect, ah... actually I'm sure those chumps who don't like the original design of the building wouldn't want the park to become public and these are the same people who once the building gets built without their input or modifications ... they're gonna be praising it with all their friends at some B.S. dinner party and they'll even have the nerve to try to have a farmer's market at the park and claim the success of the project as their own idea ... what the hell! ... and these people who fought the original design will then praise the building like it's a Gothic cathedral and be the first people in S.F. to go to the top and visit every floor! You know what they are these people? Hypocrites that's what they are. I guess their backyard is not good enough for beauty and greatness and since it's only one of the densest ares in the city, it sure as hell shouldn't be a candidate for another tall structure! I mean what are these people thinking?!!! This is not communist Russia we're living in here in S.F. Let the people of our city live a little! Please. Is that too much to ask for?

I'm not a bad person and I don't hate sunlight or some people's views. Quite frankly, I would rather every person in S.F. have a beautiful view out their living room window with plenty of sunshine! But, that's impossible, so I now propose for the more educated ones out there (I'm not talking about book smarts) that we build up in an area where we can, like here next to TransAmerica, and it's a perfect location because this building will get views, many of them and sunlight! So, you see, the benefit of views and sunlight for most of the floors of the high-rise outweigh the cost to your little 3 story building, which really there's no negative cost because you should be grateful that your neighborhood is improving (and realize that there are neighborhoods like Richmond and the Sunset that are not near downtown, where you can make a reasonable claim that mid-rise or high-rise buildings should probably go through a hefty neighborhood approval: and we already know that tall buildings won't get built out there).

Back to my point now, that downtown is downtown and your backyard is essentially my backyard and everybody else's because we're talking about downtown. You know what that means?! That means that me and everybody else who don't live down the block from the TransAmerica should have just as much to say about 555 Washington and ... guess what? ... we outnumber you! ... haha! So what now? Let's move on once and for all and let downtown be downtown, and if you're not happy, go ahead and fight your pointless battles out in Western Addition, Haight Ashbury, and every other neighborhood that makes us San Franciscans looks like we just woke up @ 6 in the morning and it is still freakin' 1910!

You guys realize if those people back then were still alive and they knew that current city residents weren't making progress, they would probably shoot us! We all know that the people who rebuilt our city a little before and after 1910, those guys were being progressive innovators by building the kind of buildings they built back then. If those people from 1910 lived in our era today, they would want to build the grandest most amazingly grandiose buildings with the most forward thinking technology and mindset. Believe it or not, those people would probably end up building skyscrapers over every square inch of San Francisco soil and I'm being conservative in my estimate. I estimate that from Ocean Beach to North Beach all the way to South Beach, you would see a city full of beautiful skyscrapers with high-rises and mid-rises mixed in. This pioneering group of innovators would pride themselves on building the greatest city on Earth just as they did when rebuilt S.F. around 1910 (with what are now ancient designs and an archaic blueprint for urban planning and real estate construction).

How about we now all take a page out of our founding fathers' and mothers' book of San Francisco history and make yesterday's innovators and pioneers proud by building a city that will make our grandchildren's grandchildren proclaim to the world: Damn! What an amazing city our great grandparents built! Let's now build a city in the 22nd century that would make our ancestors proud!

[Jobohimself]

Damn, you guys need to lighten up.

Plus, Sue Hestor isn't even human. Sue Hestor is actually a corrupted version of the NIMBY-550 RegrettaBot model released in 1986.

[nequidnimis]

Originally Posted by Jobohimself

Damn, you guys need to lighten up.

There is nothing funny about death threats.

Originally Posted by Jobohimself

Plus, Sue Hestor isn't even human.

In Rwanda, the Tutsis were "cockroaches", and in Germany, the Jews, "rats". Sue Hestor has every right to a long life.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by nequidnimis

There is nothing funny about death threats.
In Rwanda, the Tutsis were "cockroaches", and in Germany, the Jews,"rats". Sue Hestor has every right to a long life.

In another line of work. Most of the unfortunate figures of history were nice people in person. I won't go into how the "H" person was nice to his dog and all. But Sue Hestor and those she represents have quite simply made San Francisco an uglier place. And for that it is hard to forgive her no matter how nice she may be to puppies and small children.