As proposed a 45-foot-tall, four-story, residential building with 23 single room occupancy (SRO) units would rise where a surface area parking lot currently resides at 42 Harriet.
Previously misidentified as 38 Harriet, the “contributor to [a] potential historic district” building built in 1925 next door, today the Planning Department seeks the Historic Preservation Commission’s comments on “whether the proposal is compatible and appropriate in terms of size, massing, scale, choice of material and detail” with said adjacent contributor (and within said potential historic district).
∙ Small Can Be Beautiful But…Will “SmartSpace” Sell In San Francisco? [SocketSite]
∙ 42-48 Harriet Street HPC Review [sf-planning.org]
Another building that looks like dozens upon dozens built and being built over the past 5 years. Where is the art in architecture? Where is the diversity in design? Where is the originality and creativity?
Time for some changes in the Planning Department.
Great to see an unused lot filled in but The City deserves more than just another cookie cutter modern building.
Even if this were a great work of art, being on Harriet hardly anyone would see it. Let’s just get these new units up.
Where is the originality and creativity?
In the construction techniques. From the ashes of the bubble, modular will revolutionize the home building industry. Or not. YMMV.
“Another building that looks like dozens upon dozens built and being built over the past 5 years. Where is the art in architecture? Where is the diversity in design? Where is the originality and creativity”.
ITA with frenchjr on this.
Tne lack of originality or anything interesting in terms of architecture is making so much of SF bleak looking and uninspiring. Little if anything to engage the pedestrian at street level.
Clearly this seems acceptable to many San Franciscans in general and posters on this board in particular. I still think it’s gotta be something in the water.
You know it’s bad when residential infill in suburban locations such as near the Dublin Bart station is far more interesting and varied than anything SF is doing.
Well, as someone told me, we’ll have a blanket of dreary new residential buildings to match the dreary blanket of summer fog that envelops SF.
We all know that planning doesn’t allow anything original, and neither do the NIMBY committees that get to review these projects. Let’s not pretend otherwise, as if the developer had a choice.
In addition, this is a run-of-the-mill project on what is now a parking lot. It’s creating SROs for deity-or-non-deity’s sake! Let’s not pretend it would be worth the expense of a highly original design.
SROs should be banned.
Poor people have to live somewhere.
Stockton? East Oakland? Bayview? Why do we need poor people occupying prime parcels of real estate at government expense again?
Sorry folks, SROs are not only not being banned, but money is POURING into them.
Didn’t it strike you as odd that an SRO would be built instead of “luxury condos”. Well, the name of the game is now “low income”, and it’s coming soon to a lot near you.
If you have steady taxable income, you can earn 10% by investing in low income housing tax credits. Corporations can’t get enough of them. The developer builds the buildings and runs it, and sells off the tax credits they get to corporations. The developer then turns around and plows more money into low income housing. Cities are the best place to build it because there isn’t enough of it. Where else will the ex cons and soon-to-be cons live? CITIES! They can’t build these things fast enough.
Read more about this exciting real estate development plan for your cities here:
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aVmJ4APTu09s
“If you have steady taxable income, you can earn 10% by investing in low income housing tax credits. Corporations can’t get enough of them.”
Banks used to be more happy to do these deals too. Citi and some other big lenders did tons of these deals during the boom.
prime parcels of real estate
Harriet is prime real estate? You should check out that part of SOMA, it is no ones idea of prime.
There are already lots of poor people in Stockton and East Oakland, we can have a few too. But I wonder why places like Pleasanton aren’t expected to share any of the burden of dealing with the mentally ill.
tipster – isn’t this project fully market rate? seems to be from everything that i read, planned for-sale units at market rate.
The modular boxes for this project on Harriet are being set presently. They are beautiful little units that look like they might do well in a Japanese airport.
In and out in one week with the modular units. How is that for low neighborhood impact to build? Renting by November. I think the rents are supposed to be north of $6psf for 320 foot studios…
Aiyahhhh!!!