HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2021, 5:36 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
SAN FRANCISCO | 620 Folsom St | 664 FT | 62 FLOORS

Quote:
58-Story Tower Revealed For 620 Folsom Street, SoMa, San Francisco
BY: ANDREW NELSON 5:30 AM ON AUGUST 26, 2021

A preliminary project assessment application has been filed, revealing for the first time a proposed 58-story residential tower for 620 Folsom Street in SoMa, San Francisco. Located between Hawthorne, 2nd Street, and Howard Street, the address would create 623 new rental apartments, boosted by the 50% state density bonus. Ground Matrix is listed as the applicant.

The building will rise 575 feet to its rooftop and 600 feet to the top of the elevator enclosure. With a rooftop height of 575 feet, it ranks as the 17th tallest skyscraper in the Bay Area planned or built, narrowly beating Market Center by two feet.

Solomon Cordwell Buenz will be responsible for the architecture . . . . .

The skyscraper will yield 802,800 square feet, with 697,810 square feet dedicated to residential use, 93,150 square feet for the 173-car below-grade garage, and 11,840 square feet of useable open space. An amenities deck will be included on the fifth floor, with terraces on the rooftop.

Of the 623 proposed apartments, 102 will be rented out as affordable housing. Parking will also be included for 280 bicycles. One percent of construction costs will be dedicated to public arts. Unit sizes will vary with 123 studios, 246 one-bedroom units, 153 two-bedroom units, and 101 three-bedroom units.

Without the state density bonus, the development would only have produced 440 apartments, with a rooftop height of 340 feet.

The proposal will require the demolition of an existing three-story building. The construction job is roughly expected to cost $250 million, according to planning documents. McLaughlin Family Associates LP and EJC Folsom LLC are listed as the property owner.

As illustrated in the planning application, 620 Folsom will rise adjacent to 95 Hawthorne Street, a 42-story apartment building with 412 units designed by Skidmore Owings & Merrill . . . .





(Existing)

https://sfyimby.com/2021/08/58-story...francisco.html

Last edited by Urbannizer; Sep 30, 2022 at 7:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2021, 5:47 PM
JMKeynes's Avatar
JMKeynes JMKeynes is online now
In the long run...
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: SW3
Posts: 4,021
I love SF, but that’s a lame tower.
__________________
"Men will still say, 'This was their finest hour.'"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2021, 7:49 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMKeynes View Post
I love SF, but that’s a lame tower.
That's just a massing--not the actual design. I don't think it's even been designed yet.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2021, 8:05 PM
JMKeynes's Avatar
JMKeynes JMKeynes is online now
In the long run...
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: SW3
Posts: 4,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
That's just a massing--not the actual design. I don't think it's even been designed yet.
Great. SF has been building some pretty amazing towers lately. Hopefully, that trend continues at this site.
__________________
"Men will still say, 'This was their finest hour.'"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2021, 8:30 PM
homebucket homebucket is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 6,088
Should be a nice addition to the ever growing Folsom St canyon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2021, 3:55 AM
AndrewK AndrewK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 430
This building appears like it would directly abut 95 Hawthorne (this looks like it will go all the way to the lot line?)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2021, 7:03 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Supersized Tower Raises Recommendations but No Red Flags
November 4, 2021

Having completed their preliminary review of the proposal for a 575-foot-tall, 623-unit apartment tower to rise on the South of Market parcel at 620 Folsom Street, upon which a 43-foot-tall office building currently sits, Planning didn’t raise any red flags or Code issues that couldn’t be overcome if the State’s Density Bonus Law is invoked. But there were a few recommendations and encouragements, which includes the addition of ground floor retail at the base of the tower, rather than just a lobby, to activate the street.

And with respect to the tower’s proposed height and approach:

[I]“With a proposed roof height of 575 feet, the Project greatly exceeds the established height limit of the underlying height and bulk district by 255 feet. While the Project Sponsor may invoke State Density Bonus Law to request a waiver or concession/incentive to exceed the height limit, the Department recommends the Project Sponsor reevaluate the overall land use program and site plan to evaluate options for reducing the overall height while still maximizing residential density.

As currently designed, the Project proposes additional height on the tower instead of massing within a podium up to the height and bulk limits. The project is not eligible for waiver from height controls, as the project could still accommodate the project with the density bonus at lower floors.

If the Project Sponsor pursues the current design, then a concession/incentive — as opposed to a waiver — is required to exceed the height limit, and additional documentation may be required to verify that the requested concession/incentive results in cost reductions for the bonus density project” . . . .
https://socketsite.com/archives/2021...red-flags.html

I'll never understand why SF Planning so hates height. Elsewhere slender towers seem popular (although this one can hardly be termed slender as proposed, they seem to want to make it shorter and bulkier).

Also, San Francisco seems over-stored already. While I appreciate sidewalk level retail, I would not appreciate yet another boarded up empty storefront. Does every residential building need ground level retail when we already seem to have an excess of such space?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2022, 4:18 PM
unpermitted_variance unpermitted_variance is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Oakland
Posts: 80
Quote:
Renderings Revealed, Increased Height , And “The Cube” At 620 Folsom Street In SoMa, San Francisco
BY: ANDREW NELSON 5:30 AM ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2022



BY: ANDREW NELSON 5:30 AM ON SEPTEMBER 29, 2022

New detailed renderings have been revealed for the residential skyscraper at 620 Folsom Street in SoMa, San Francisco. The 62-story plans also disclose a significant increase in height and two hundred more homes than initially proposed. Designed by Arquitectonica, the crowning five-story feature will be what we at YIMBY have already labeled “The Cube.”



The building will create 826 rental units, of which 691 homes will be market rate and 135 homes will be affordable. Unit sizes will vary, with 118 studios, 118 one-bedrooms, 472 two-bedrooms, and 118 three-bedrooms.

The 640-foot tall structure will yield 696,200 square feet with 674,250 square feet for housing, 5,740 square feet of common open space, and 87,750 square feet for the 133-car garage in five below-grade floors, well below city code recommendations, in a move that will promote public transit infrastructure and reduce traffic. There will be additional parking for 324 bicycles.

Arquitectonica is the project architect. The following statement comes from the studio’s entitlement application: “hovering above SOMA like a subtle glowing lantern, the building’s cubic form reflects a design that is both unique and expressive of its time, but also complementary to its historic Bay context.”

The facade will be clad with high-quality materials, including transparent and framed structural elements. The gridded exterior will rise from the base with dark grey material up to the 54th floor. The 54th-floor communal amenity deck will be wrapped with a 29-foot curtain wall skin. The amenity space will feature a fitness center, lounges, and workshare rooms. Above that, seven floors and the mechanical overrun will be wrapped with white panels.




Full article:
https://sfyimby.com/2022/09/renderin...francisco.html



This is pretty significant; 640 feet will make a big impact on the skyline, especially with the cube feature on top (although I suspect it won't stand out as much in reality as in the renderings). I like the design, although it feels a bit like some of the cornier luxury towers that NYC has seen go up lately.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2022, 4:28 PM
homebucket homebucket is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 6,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by unpermitted_variance View Post
Full article:
https://sfyimby.com/2022/09/renderin...francisco.html



This is pretty significant; 640 feet will make a big impact on the skyline, especially with the cube feature on top (although I suspect it won't stand out as much in reality as in the renderings). I like the design, although it feels a bit like some of the cornier luxury towers that NYC has seen go up lately.
Nice project! I'm guessing the cube will stand out more at night if it's lit up. It does remind me of a miniature version of 432 Park Ave in NYC. In the end, I think the materials will be what makes this tower stand out. And at 663 ft to the top in this part of SoMa, it'll be a nice skyline extender.

Glad to see that there is a substantial affordable portion, about 16% of the total units, and that there is also only a 133 car garage that is all underground.

Let's hope this project actually gets approved and built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2022, 6:02 PM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,595
I'm loving this tower.
__________________
UnitedStateser
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2022, 10:24 PM
OneRinconHill OneRinconHill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 118
OMG I want this to be built but I fear...

Also it would be the 6th tallest building in the city if built to size.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2022, 11:38 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: 1,479
If built as it appears now the top cube will seem to float in the air during the day depending on the glass used. There is one building in my view south of Market that almost disappears when reflected by the sky. I think it will be a miracle if it is built as seen today. I've seen too many buildings altered after the "last" drawing has been presented.
__________________
(Essex) Fox Plaza 51th year resident in 2022 - (the building everyone loves to hate :------>))
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2022, 11:52 PM
Hudson11's Avatar
Hudson11 Hudson11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,955
this looks like a Vinoly. I like it, pretty interesting concept.
__________________
click here too see hunser's list of the many supertall skyscrapers of New York City!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2022, 5:22 AM
just a dummy just a dummy is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2022
Posts: 10
beautiful
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2022, 12:20 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 5,370
Awesome!
__________________
Dump Trump 2020
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2022, 9:36 PM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 687
I was at 20th and Church this afternoon and the Avery actually did kinda disappear (except for the crown), like the top pic in post #8.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2022, 10:44 PM
OneRinconHill OneRinconHill is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 118
Dean Preston has started advocating against this project, so there's that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2022, 10:51 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 5,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRinconHill View Post
Dean Preston has started advocating against this project, so there's that.
Supposedly he advocates against every major project, but how much say does a member of the board of supervisors actually have?
__________________
Dump Trump 2020
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2022, 11:06 PM
homebucket homebucket is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 6,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Supposedly he advocates against every major project, but how much say does a member of the board of supervisors actually have?
His rationale is that if a building is not 100% affordable then it shouldn't be built, citing concerns about gentrification.

469 Stevenson was voted down last October in an 8-3 vote. 469 Stevenson would've provided 495 units, 73 of which would be affordable.

https://www.sfgate.com/local/article...e-16569043.php
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2022, 11:32 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 5,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
His rationale is that if a building is not 100% affordable then it shouldn't be built, citing concerns about gentrification.

469 Stevenson was voted down last October in an 8-3 vote. 469 Stevenson would've provided 495 units, 73 of which would be affordable.

https://www.sfgate.com/local/article...e-16569043.php
So basically no more skyscrapers until this guy is off the board? Horrible.
__________________
Dump Trump 2020
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 > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:47 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.