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

[The_Analyst]

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

That last bolded paragraph is intriguing. With current inventory selling well and very little new inventory coming online next year, I would think developers of projects like The Californian, 45 Lansing and ORH (phase II) would be motivated to get moving. I also hope it means that Tishman will move rather quickly on Infinity's sister development next door (once they have finished up Infinity of course). I'd love to see that parking lot bite the dust.

Yeah, but unfortunately, all the motivation in the world is not going to get around the fact that banks are super shy about real estate lending and probably will be for 2 years or more. And, yes, any forward thinking person would agree with you that demand will likely outstrip supply with the impending lull in high rise condo buildings over the next couple years. But, generally bankers are far too nearsighted for visionary plans.

[peanut gallery]

That's a good point. I think some of these developments already have their funding lined up, but I'd have to go back and research which ones exactly. I want to say ORH2 and 45 Lansing, but I can't say for sure.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by Reminiscence

From Socketsite.com: In The Pipeline For First And Folsom: 550-feet And 600 Units

Here's the full article. I would have posted it earlier except I have been having a disorienting week and didn't even realize it was Friday, i.e BizTimes day:

Friday, August 8, 2008
Another big tower slated for San Francisco's Transbay
City invites developers to reach for sky at 'Block 8'
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

The San Francisco Redevelopment Agency is seeking a developer to tackle a prime 600-unit residential project at First and Folsom streets, the first step in a planned 2,600-unit highrise Transbay District the city is counting on to help pay for a new Transbay rail and bus terminal.

On Sept. 8, the agency will issue a request for proposals for Block 8, one of a dozen state-owned lots freed up when the elevated Embarcadero Freeway was knocked down after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. While nine of the 12 parcels are set to be eventually redeveloped with housing -- two will be parks and one a 700,000-square-foot office tower -- Block 8 is the boldest. It calls for a 550-foot tower reaching above two mid-rise affordable apartment buildings and a row of townhouses that will open onto Folsom Street, a thoroughfare that will eventually be reconfigured as a retail mecca with wide sidewalks, greenery and outdoor seating.

Besides the Transbay Terminal and Tower site itself, where Hines is negotiating to build a 1.7 million-square-foot tower, Block 8 is the most valuable parcel the development agency plans to sell to developers as part of the Transbay District, according to Michael Grisso, project manager for the Redevelopment Agency.

"It will have the tallest tower and it's right on Folsom Street, which will be the retail heart of the neighborhood," said Grisso. "It will have views of the water. We think it's the best (location)."

Grisso said about 75 developers have requested information on the project. He declined to speculate on the site's value.

"We think it's worth a lot," said Grisso. "We all know the residential markets are struggling, but San Francisco is pretty resilient -- especially this neighborhood."

A shaky marketplace

Given the credit crunch and slowdown in absorption in highrise condo projects from coast to coast, the agency's request for proposals is coming at an awkward time, though Grisso hopes the market will turn by the end of 2009, about the time the eventual developer is expected to get entitlements for the site.

The high water mark for the sale of downtown sites for entitled condo projects came nearly two years ago when Jackson Pacific sold 45 Lansing St. for $30 million, or about $125,000 per anticipated unit. Developers said that the current market downturn had reduced the value of prime entitled downtown sites to between $100,000 and $110,000 per unit. One developer set the value of Block 8 at $35 million, payable when the land is entitled.

"It's a tough deal for a whole bunch of reasons," said Tony Crossley, a broker with Colliers International who has brokered a number of land deals in the area. "Construction costs are very high, condo prices and the rate of absorption are off and then you roll in the increased affordability (probably around 25 percent) and you really have to do some hard math."

He added: "These are very big projects in a market that is uncertain at best -- your cast of characters is going to be a pretty short list."

Broker and developer Chris Foley, a principal of Polaris Group, said the project would be "impossible to finance today," but he said the timing of the agency could work out.

"There may be a lot of projects going up, but there are holes in the pipeline over the next four, five, or six years, and that could be a compelling story for Block 8," said Foley. "But it will most likely be somebody with outside money or foreign investors."

Sources said the project would be a natural for Forest City or Related Cos., both of which specialize in complex public-private partnerships. One developer reportedly making a run at the project is Avant Housing, a joint venture between TMG Partners and AIG Capital backed by CalPERS.

"TMG and Avant would be a great buyer because they believe in the longterm San Francisco market," said Foley. "They have a vision and they have the money."

Land use consultant Nina Gruen of Gruen + Gruen said the growing demand for downtown housing from "baby boomers and Generation Y" make the site viable. "The market is not in great shape, but we think it will be by the time they get through selecting the developer and going through the entitlement process," she said.

A quarter of units affordable

Under a 2007 agreement between the city and the state Department of Transportation, 35 percent of the total housing built on the Transbay District redevelopment sites must be affordable. However, not every individual project has to meet that threshold. Several of the parcels on the plan have been targeted for 100 percent affordability, creating breathing room for other developments, like Block 8, to do 25 percent. In addition to a lead for-profit developer, the Redevelopment Agency is seeking a nonprofit housing builder to handle the two affordable housing structures, which will include 70 apartments and be available to families making up to 50 percent of Bay Area median income. Eighty units will be moderate-income units -- 120 percent of area median income -- sprinkled throughout the 436-unit tower and the 11 townhouses.

In addition to providing affordable housing, the Block 8 developer will be required to move the Folsom Street freeway off-ramp to the parcel's northern edge. The agency estimates the cost at $2.3 million.

Caltrans stores materials and machinery for Bay Bridge construction work on the site. Grisso said Caltrans needs the parcel through 2009, by which time Block 8 entitlements should be completed.


jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...ml?t=printable

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by AndrewK

its kinda sad that in all the years since the embarcadero freeway came down only one building (gap) has gone up in the stretch between its connection to 80 and the embarcadero, but its nice to see that will finally be changing soon.

It's not "sad". It's been necessary. If you go by there--or have gone by there--you'll notice that the empty blocks are pretty full of CalTrans and contractor vehicles and equipment for the retrofit of the western Bay Bridge approaches. It's being used first as a staging area, next as the temporary TransBay Terminal. As the above article says concerning the 1st & Folsom site, "Caltrans needs the parcel through 2009". On the other side of Folsom, when both the Infinity and 201 Folsom came under the Tishman Speyer, it became inevitable that the projects would be done sequentially, not simultaneously.

Once the Bridge ramps and then the TransBay are finished, this will become prime land. The big question, though, is how long will Tishman Speyer wait after completing The Infinity before starting 201 Folsom.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by The_Analyst

banks are super shy about real estate lending and probably will be for 2 years or more.

A lot of commercial real estate lending is also done by non-bank outfits like REITs and hedge funds as well, many of whom must, themselves, borrow capital and they can't do it right now. The entire lending system is nearly shut down. Look what happened to the guy who owns the property and 1st & Mission. Only the largest, most solid developer like Tishman Speyer or, I hope, Turnberry, have a prayer of getting financing for a new residential tower right now.

[Reminiscence]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

Here's the full article. I would have posted it earlier except I have been having a disorienting week and didn't even realize it was Friday, i.e BizTimes day:

Ah, thanks for that BT. I'm still a little confused, and excuse my ignorance if this has been discussed before:

"It will have the tallest tower and it's right on Folsom Street, which will be the retail heart of the neighborhood," said Grisso. "It will have views of the water. We think it's the best (location)"

-- If this is the tallest tower, what happened to the other proposals like the TJPA site that were set to rise over 700'? Or has the rezoning proposal erased that? Could it be that they are only talking about residential towers?

"In addition to providing affordable housing, the Block 8 developer will be required to move the Folsom Street freeway off-ramp to the parcel's northern edge. The agency estimates the cost at $2.3 million."

-- I assume the developer will merely pay for the cost and not actually move the ramp. Isn't that something CalTrans is suppose to take care of?

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by Reminiscence

-- If this is the tallest tower, what happened to the other proposals like the TJPA site that were set to rise over 700'? Or has the rezoning proposal erased that? Could it be that they are only talking about residential towers?

I think you skipped the paragraph before: "the most valuable parcel the development agency plans to sell to developers as part of the Transbay District". The other sites--the "Piano site" at 1st & Mission, 350 Mission and so on are privately owned so the TJPA won't be selling them. I think that's what they meant--the tallest tower (zoning, really) on city or state-owned land that the TJPA can sell to raise money for the terminal (except the already spoken for TransBay tower site itself). The land they still have to sell is basically just land made available by tearing down the old freeway ramps. The other land covered by the rezoning is already in private hands or part of the tower/terminal complex already under negotiation.

"In addition to providing affordable housing, the Block 8 developer will be required to move the Folsom Street freeway off-ramp to the parcel's northern edge. The agency estimates the cost at $2.3 million."

-- I assume the developer will merely pay for the cost and not actually move the ramp. Isn't that something CalTrans is suppose to take care of?

I wondered about that too. Obviously, the ramp design will have to be part of the terminal project--the ramps will lead to the terminal (or be associated with ramps that do).

[Reminiscence]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

I think you skipped the paragraph before: "the most valuable parcel the development agency plans to sell to developers as part of the Transbay District". The other sites--the "Piano site" at 1st & Mission, 350 Mission and so on are privately owned so the TJPA won't be selling them. I think that's what they meant--the tallest tower (zoning, really) on city or state-owned land that the TJPA can sell to raise money for the terminal (except the already spoken for TransBay tower site itself). The land they still have to sell is basically just land made available by tearing down the old freeway ramps. The other land covered by the rezoning is already in private hands or part of the tower/terminal complex already under negotiation.

I see now, thanks for explaining that to me. My idea of the difference between these sites was a little fuzzy, but now I see the intentions of the agency clearly. As for the ramp, I would have imagined some sort of joint venture between Caltrans, Pelli, and the agency. I also would imagine to see some bulldozing of the current bus skyway structure because a part of it seems to sit on the temporary terminal's plot of land, at least judging by the renderings made available.

[peanut gallery]

Originally Posted by Reminiscence

I also would imagine to see some bulldozing of the current bus skyway structure because a part of it seems to sit on the temporary terminal's plot of land, at least judging by the renderings made available.

It flies over the northwest corner of the block. I've been pondering how they'll coordinate removal of the skyway (which is needed until the current terminal is closed) with the construction of the temporary terminal (which needs to be done before closing the current terminal). That sets up the problem of having to demo the old skyway when it will still be needed.

One thing they could do is put the buses on the street for a couple of blocks and build another ramp somewhere near Howard and Main. Seems like a lot of expense for something that will only be needed for several months (between demolishing the old skyway and opening the temporary terminal). Or maybe the old skyway will remain and they'll operate the temporary terminal around it. It's possible they just haven't shown it in the renderings. But I don't think that's the case. I'm really curious to see how they'll manage that timing issue.

[Reminiscence]

As I understand it, the bus terminal area also includes the space bounded by Beale to the northwest, Folsom to the southeast, Fremont to the southwest, and the current bus route to the northwest. Could they not just use this space while they demolish the ramp leading directly to the bus terminal itself? The Fremont St. freeway exit leads to right in front of the space anyways. The buses could always ride down Folsom over to Essex and use that freeway entrance to return to the Bay Bridge.

[SFView]

We can see where block 8 and other block numbers are located here:

Sources: http://www.sfgov.org/site/sfra_page.asp?id=5583


(also see)
http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedim...undary.jpg#Map

The new freeway off-ramp on the north side of block 8 can be seen in this early rendering - below center:


Early conceptual rendering by SOM -- the view south down Beale Street may be somewhat similar at Folsom Street.

[BTinSF]

Personally, I LIKE Stalinist gothic.

[BTinSF]

Since no one else has posted this and since I like the building so much (and even take a bit of pleasure from the NIMBYs discomfiture):

New synagogue livens up Richmond District
John King, Chronicle Urban Design Writer
Monday, August 11, 2008


As cities mature, they are shaped by the constant tension between old and new, tall and short, broad strokes and fine grain.

Now there's a fresh example of this tension in San Francisco, and it's not some cloud-popping tower downtown. It's a synagogue in the largely residential Richmond District that rises just 40 feet - but commands a prominent corner with a strong modern design that pushes the notion of neighborhood context to the breaking point.

The architectural provocateur is the new home of Congregation Beth Sholom at the southwest corner of Clement Street and 14th Avenue, yards away from busy Park Presidio Boulevard. Here, flanked by traditional homes built before World War II, Stanley Saitowitz has designed a synagogue that suggests nothing so much as a giant menorah in a silvery frame.

The "menorah" is the sanctuary, a bowl-shaped form of sandy windowless concrete the width of four adjacent houses. It sits atop a one-story base of offices clad in zinc-plated aluminum panels; there's a small courtyard and then, backed against Clement, the panels climb to enclose a box the height of the sanctuary that contains a small chapel and kitchen beneath event rooms.

It's an unusual project for Saitowitz, whose Natoma Architects has left a mark on San Francisco's South of Market landscape with housing that is machinelike and monochromatic, spare but sharp. Yet it's also a case study in what makes Saitowitz's work so uniformly good: He pares away frills.

At Beth Sholom, the emphasis is on the purity of the forms - that enormous concrete bowl set into an L turned on its side. The sand-colored concrete has a richness meant to evoke Jerusalem limestone, but also a smooth poise that makes it seem massive and weightless at once. As for the zinc-coated aluminum, the sleek darkness sets off the earthy concrete even more.

While Beth Sholom opened only in June, it's already attracting notice beyond the Bay Area's borders. The synagogue already has received several awards and is one of nine finalists under consideration in the religion and contemplation category of the new World Architecture Festival honors to be presented in Barcelona in October.

Closer to home, though, not everyone's a fan.

When the project was approved by the Planning Commission in 2005, 300 neighbors signed a petition against it. And now that it's done? "I don't think we'll ever get used to it," a next-door neighbor said last week. "Nobody on the block likes it. Would you? "

Well, yes. But I understand why some neighbors might still be reeling.

This is a building that wants space around it - not vast meadows, but breathing room. Instead, there's a methodical progression of vertical houses, stucco and wood, and then bam - a horizontal force that could be a barge among sailboats.

On 14th Avenue, the outer rim of the sanctuary comes within feet of the adjacent house; on Clement, the zinc-wrapped functions building stands impassive and large, treating a busy east-west street as a back alley.

Once the shock of the juxtaposition fades, the synagogue's architectural quality wins out.

For all the visual force of the primal shapes, this is a compact campus rooted in Jewish traditions. The concave sanctuary is Saitowitz's update of an emphasis on communal worship space dating back to the synagogue at Masada where Jewish rebels resisted Roman soldiers nearly 2,000 years ago. Seating climbs up either side of the "bowl"; at the bottom is where services are conducted and the rabbi and members read from the Torah.

As for the courtyard, it's part of the carefully mapped journey from the secular world into the sanctuary's calm.

You enter through glass doors from 14th Avenue into an airy space made distinctive by the soft curve of the bowl above. At the rear of the space, a broad staircase leads to a terrace that covers the roof of Beth Sholom's library and serves as the entrance to the sanctuary. There, the Torah rests in an ark in the east-facing wall, facing Jerusalem.

That focus on the synagogue's purpose drives the architecture, gives it a calmness that softens the structural drama.

With time, portions of Beth Sholom begin to seem at home. For instance, the earth-toned concrete complements the beige exteriors of several nearby homes.

The zinc box on Clement is the piece that doesn't fit; it could have wandered in from a South of Market fashion shoot. But at least it's well-done, and your eye quickly slides to the billowy green along Park Presidio.

On balance, Congregation Beth Sholom is a plus - for the members who have a welcoming home and for a city that has too few examples of ambitious, home-grown contemporary design. This is a house of worship for the ages and a gesture toward the future.

It also shows that in a densely developed city like San Francisco, the present and past aren't an easy fit. And that's not likely to change.

E-mail John King at jking@sfchronicle.com.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...BA9Q126FDN.DTL

[peanut gallery]

I like it too. But I agree with some of the Nimby's that it is jarring in that location. I remember the first time I drove by there, it stunned me. And I knew to look for it! In the long run, I think it will become a real landmark and people will (hopefully) proudly say, "yeah, I live by the giant menorah." I do feel sorry for the person who lives right next to the curved part though. It looks like his house is about to be crushed by a giant wheel!

[SFView]

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

I like it too. But I agree with some of the Nimby's that it is jarring in that location. I remember the first time I drove by there, it stunned me. And I knew to look for it! In the long run, I think it will become a real landmark and people will (hopefully) proudly say, "yeah, I live by the giant menorah." I do feel sorry for the person who lives right next to the curved part though. It looks like his house is about to be crushed by a giant wheel!

Wow, imagine living next door to that. I looks almost out of a cartoon or something...


Maybe this scene will make these houses famous someday...like a future San Francisco postcard?

[c1tyguy]

Being a fan of modern architecture, I like the juxtaposition of the two.

This is the future of design, so I'm sure we'll be seeing a lot more of this (even more so in cities other than San Francisco).

[BTinSF]

Well, I've been too lazy for a couple of weeks now to haul my camera up the street and photograph 818 Van Ness (aka "The Artani") after its unveiling. Now Socketsite has done it for me:




Source: http://www.socketsite.com/

I like it--at least compared to the other new buildings on Van Ness (I just wish it wasn't stucco).

[BTinSF]

I wasn't aware of this project but Curbed SF was and I thank them for alerting me because it's just what I think SF needs some more of--new SRO hotels to get the homeless off the streets:

Construction is moving forward on the new Bishop Swing Community House at 275 10th Street, a massive block of housing that angles through its SoMa block to face both 10th street and Folsom. The 83,000 square foot development will provide 135 SRO units at approximately 350 square feet each, to be used as permanent housing for homeless men and women. 275 10th was designed by Herman and Coliver, the firm behind the Ray & Joan Kroc Corps Community Center in the Tenderloin, and is planning on an April 2009 opening.

Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2008/0...r_soma.php?o=5

Not coincidentally, this also continues the renewal of 10th St from Market deep into SOMA now.

[POLA]

just a quick shot down mission that I thought I would share with you all:

[peanut gallery]

Cool shot! Do you know someone in The Paramount?