1501 Greenwich (www.SocketSite.com)

The transformation of 2655 Van Ness from a 27,000 square foot class B office building (with private tennis court up top) into twenty-nine (29) new condominiums with a more upscale 1501 Greenwich address (no offense Marina Chateau) is about three months from completion. And in case it’s not readily apparent, it’s not another conversion but rather a complete razing and rebuild by Shamrock Realty.

Yes, these twenty-eight units are already reflected in our Complete Inventory Index (Cii). Yes, these twenty-nine new homes now stand where none stood before (and despite the fact that they’re not building any more land in Cow Hollow). And no, we don’t have any details with regard to floor plans (beyond “1, 2 & 3 bedrooms”) or pricing, but we will note “two floors of underground parking.”

SocketSite’s Complete Inventory Index (CII): Q3 2007 (SF) [SocketSite]

39 thoughts on “1501 Greenwich: Twenty-Nine New Condominiums Coming Soon”
  1. Do you have any info on timing?
    [Editor’s Note: Is that a trick question? From our post above: “…about three months from completion.”]

  2. I actually like this building.
    It’s a modern take on Mansored (spelling?) roof design and modert take on bay windows
    I also feel like this ‘fits’ in with a lot of SF architecture, unlike a lot of the modern stuff being built. It could fit in with most neighborhoods.
    I highly disagree that the “location blows”… it is near Aquatic park and Giaradelli square and the marina…
    plus, it fits what I’ve been railing about for some time… it increases housing density, in what I feel is a harmonious style that fits even the more historic neighborhoods.
    i’d definitely consider buying it!

    1. I’m a nanny in the building today!! So I googled the apartments because I love them! The lighting is AMAZING!! The apartments and location is great, the baby and I walk to the Marina, and the Presidio. I didn’t realize how close the Presidio was. Not to mention Polk Street! It’s a Fantastic area! Anyhow your comment is spot on! The only bad thing right now is the construction on Van Ness, but it’s temporary.

  3. I concur that this building is really ugly. It does look like a low-class hotel. It only fits into SF architecture because much of SF’s architecture is almost as ugly.

  4. I like the look of the building too and I don’t think the location is bad if you owned a unit that doesn’t face directly onto Van Ness.

  5. I think the design is very much in keeping with a modern twist on the architecture already in the area. Its is WAY better than many of the carbon-copy lofts and condos of similar size that have been built in the past 5 years.

  6. I too 100% agree with ex-SF-er! This is an excellent example of quality infill.
    I think the design gets a B, the location gets an A- and we’ll wait to see what the price gets.
    This is much nice than the [Removed by Editor] lofts being built in SOMA

  7. The building’s style echoes that of Marina Chateau across the street, so it makes sense the context of its immediate surroundings. Does anyone have information about pricing?
    Looking out from a friend’s place on the sixth story of the Marina Chateau, I wondered about the layout of lower three floors – it looks as if the kitchens in those units are placed right up against their Greenwich-facing window…where one would assume the living room would be placed.

  8. I live next door to this building with a view of the Golden Gate Bridge, I’m offended by someone saying the location sucks. It’s probably one of the best in the city of San Francisco, and that’s coming to you from a native…

  9. Best locations in the city? This is Van Ness people…there’s nothing special there, except for easy access to gas stations. Most natives like myself know that the Marina district means Beach, Jefferson, and Avila…and Pacific Heights means Broadway and Pacific, up on the hill…not this corner, please.

  10. gh – you’re right, it’s not the Marina, which is why I love it. It’s two blocks in either direction to shops on Union street and/or Polk street. Close enough to walk (or hop a cheap cab) to Chestnut or Pac Heights when the mood strikes. It’s also two blocks in either direction from the 45 and the 30 bus lines, making it an easy commute to the FD. So yeah, it’s not the quietest block in the city, but it’s better than most.

  11. “The building’s style echoes that of Marina Chateau across the street, so it makes sense the context of its immediate surroundings.”
    Why do buildings have to “match” other buildings in the neighborhood? We’re not talking about a clothing ensemble.
    Besides, it looks like a cheap business hotel.

  12. I walk past this building every week and I agree, the location is *great* if you like Union Street and Polk Street but don’t want to be right on them. Plus, easy public transportation to downtown! I also don’t love the exterior but the windows promise lots of light inside.

  13. That place is going to be full of young, hot, blonde communications majors just our of college and living off of Daddy’s bankroll.
    Sign me up!

  14. I think the location is great…also important to note, there is very little land left in north end of town, and even less that is zoned for high density housing, so if you like the marina/ russian hill and you want newer construction, you will have very few other opportunities.
    Shamrock also a good builder, so I’m sure the quality of construction will be great.

  15. This building is pa-friggin-thetic, “quality infill” my ass! And how can people (above) possibly use the word ‘modern’ in the same sentence as any reference to this building?!? You seem to have, as LeCorbusier once said, “eyes that do not see” — open a book on architecture for crying out loud.
    This building is the OPPOSITE of modern (whose definition is: “of or pertaining to the present time”). If anything, its POST-MODERN in the worst way: cartoony historicist pastiche, if not outright kitsch; and represents everything wrong with much architecture in/from San Francisco: it’s backwards-looking, reactionary, conservative and closed-minded — as is often the case, bewilderingly the opposite of the majority of the progressive culture and politics here, go figure!

  16. This looks like something that would go up in a Shanghai satellite city, only there would be endless rows of them. A little more risk and a floor or two higher would have been preferable.

  17. This building already looks classic. I really enjoy this type of density in San Francisco. It makes it feel more like a ‘city’ than a village, which isn’t bad either.

  18. “I think the location is great…also important to note, there is very little land left in north end of town”
    That really depends on how many rebuilds from commercial space occur. For example, I know of two likely rebuilds not far from this one:- one on Pacific between Van Ness and Polk (currently a car repair place) and the other also on Pacific on the other side of Polk (currently mainly a parking lot).

  19. Agreed, most of the new construction will have to be from commercial rebuilds, as this was…there is just not any vacant land left ecept for a few gas stations…
    There are very few one story commercial buildings that could actually support development–the main reason being that it is very difficult to demo anything in this town…the preservationists believe that everything is historic…so if the old automotive buildings are nice looking, no way…
    Pacific is a great site…not sure how feasabile the actual project will be though….

  20. Ah ha!
    It just occured to me, the city keeps letting gas stations get ripped out and putting housing in it’s place…
    …part of the grand anti-car plan! No garages allowed, no gas stations allowed, and MUNI needs 5 years to come close to 85% on time.

  21. I never thought I would see the day when an “Embassy Suites” structure would be called “good” architecture. I need to move to a new city, can you imagine this design being celebrated in Chicago or London? I give up!

  22. Maybe the structure has an “Embassy Suites” feeling to it, but I also detect a strong influence of “Courtyard by Marriott.”
    But the photo above still doesn’t capture the full impact of the ugly clash between the building’s overall medium latte color and its doo-doo-brown window frames.

  23. I just got off the phone with the listing office for the property, and there will be 4 1-bedrooms, 16 2-bedrooms, and 9 3-bedrooms. They will be going on the market in February 2008 with pricing decided then. There will be parking available for purchase for all of the units. None of the pricing has been set, but the 1 bedrooms will start >$600,000 to anywhere to $750,000. Seems a bit pricey, but it is new construction with parking in the Marina. I think the location is quite nice, a few blocks from Union and Fort Mason.

  24. sanfranvalues: “this builing already looks classic”?!?! what is “classic”? do you mean ‘klassy’? — then I might agree, or “classical”? (which is an architectural style from a couple thousand years ago) — then I disagree strongly: if it were anywhere near authentic, it would be NEOclassical if anything (which in this day and age is typically realized as pure Disneyesque fakery).
    And sure, I also “really enjoy this type of density in san francisco”, but preferably done with some acknowledgment that we’re living in the 21st century.
    If you’re just talking ‘style’, then this building constitutes a sad example of “high cartoony neo-french/italianate pomo schlock”, circa 1987…

  25. Ugly? Eh, whatever. Location? Pretty solid actually. I live round the corner and love being by Polk and a short walk from the Marina. You’re at the far end of Van Ness so it’s relatively quiet – prolly wouldn’t get a unit facing VN but one in the back would be great.
    They are on crack if they think a 1-BR there is going to be get >$600k in the market right now. Wow, talk about some people with cash to burn. That’s unreal.
    Oh yeah, and before you “pay” for parking, there’s free parking at Mt. Mason 4 blocks away. Saved my life for the 2 years…

  26. Tee hee along with the homeless and prostitutes and I can’t wait for all of the accidents from the residents who will insist on turning left off of Van Ness onto Greenwich. 2.6 mil for the penthouse last I heard. Good luck. Just waiting for the first tagging of the building. Its ugly.

  27. New ugly buildings like this are part of the reason why SF is so anti-development. Having said that, at least it’s a better use than the old office building, Van Ness sure needs some life. I wish they would do something at the Hollywood Video corner at Pacific and Van Ness.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *