Quote:
Three development teams (Kenwood Investments, San Francisco Giants, and Build Inc.) will be moving forward to the RFP phase for the development of Seawall Lot (SWL) 337. And while it’s almost certain that they wouldn’t have been invited to move forward anyway, the Federal Development team officially withdrew themselves from consideration.
The official Request for Proposals (RFP) should be published mid-May and will “provide approximately three months for the development teams to the prepare and submit their RFP proposals.” Scoring of the RFP’s will be based 60% on the Design and Development Program and 40% on the Financial Proposal and will likely take between 90 and 120 days.
And in moving from RFQ to RFP, emphasis and addendums have been added to the Development Objectives and Criteria. Two that stood out: 1. Minimum size for contiguous major open space, 5 acres at the northeast area of the site, and 2. Consideration for up to three "slender towers of 300 feet or more, to create an inspiring architectural identity."
|
Source:
http://www.socketsite.com/
What's with various parts of the San Francisco planning and development establishment all of a sudden seeing the "inspiring architectural identity" conferred by towers? And does the fact that 3 towers "of 300 feet or more" are now a part of the RFP mean that Seawall Lot 337 will deserve a thread in the highrises section once they settle on a design?
PS: I said, "shortened it will stay--you can bet on that (unless there were to be a radical change in the make-up of the Board of Supervisors and SF's delegation to the state legislature.)" I officially eat my words.
