CFAH

Giants Proposed SWL 337 Rendering
The Chronicle scoops up the rendering and a few more details for the San Francisco Giants’ proposal for development of Seawall Lot 337.

The Giants’ preliminary development proposal includes 875 homes, many of which will be in a 300-foot high-rise, 800,000 square feet of office space and a parking garage. The plan also features a 5,000-seat music hall, an entertainment district with restaurants, bowling and nightclubs, a 5-acre park and a refurbished pier available for staging trade shows and private events. Total development costs are estimated at more than $1 billion.

And while we’re all for the development, and would consider this an infinite improvement over what’s currently there, we have to admit we’re not getting that inspired by “Millennium Park” vibe (nor does it feel particularly bold).
At least two other design proposals are expected to be submitted. One from Darius Anderson, Boston Properties and Wilson, Meany, Sullivan which “would include 1,700 housing units and office space, but would also offer submarket rents for gallery space.” And one from Build Inc. and Urban Green Development which “features a green technology business incubator, offices and 1,600 homes” along with “artist studios, an art exhibition center, a wholesale market and parks.”
And to answer at least one reader’s question, regardless of which proposal is selected and approved, “construction would probably not begin for three or four years.”
Giants among bidders to develop S.F. Port land [SFGate]
Could This Be Curtains For Cirque Du Soleil In The City? [SocketSite]
Seawall Lot 337 Proposal: Inspired By Chicago’s Millennium Park [SocketSite]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by anon

    Seems too dense. More green space would be better. I am looking forward to seeing the other proposals. For a billion dollars, why not bring in some world class architectural firms like was done with the transbay tower?

  2. Posted by Zig

    The port needs money badly so it isn’t surprising that this is dense and full of office space and housing
    How much revenue does Millennium Park generate?

  3. Posted by anonyman

    Definitely dense, but that looks like a fairly large area of open green space, which would be really nice to have in the neighborhood.

  4. Posted by invented

    Dense? I can’t breathe.
    Move and cantilever the ‘music hall’ {follies?} on a pier so the experience is like floating on water. It looks like an afterthought in its proposed location. Think Sydney, Gehry undulating shimmering music water bridge views …. That 30-story thing should be much higher & brilliant like 1 Rincon isn’t– it needs to play off tall structures like the bridge and gulp, even 1 Rincon).
    Hello, San Francisco?
    IMO.

  5. Posted by Michael

    Agree with invented, at the very least move the music hall closer to the water. Looks like design by SimCity to me.

  6. Posted by cy

    I know that Build Inc. (the folks who did Linden Alley in Hayes Valley and Esprit Park condo project) have put together a team of architects and submitted a SWL 337 plan. Based on their previous projects (although much smaller), I’m hopeful that their vision will look a little less . . . SimCity, to borrow a phrase.

  7. Posted by EH

    Surprise, no Mission Creek houseboats!

  8. Posted by Weak

    What’s missing from the rendering people?
    See it?
    Nope? It’s the little baseball park for the kidies that seems to get scraped so that they can have a large green lawn – that dogs will poop on and chew up until it’s a giant mud bowl.
    I’m no baseball fan – but this proposal doesn’t really create that much more open space – it just repackages the open space that currently exists and paves the way for the boring condos that sit on top.
    What a let down.
    If the best the port/city can do is this proposal from the Giants – this will be the biggest waste of prime property since – the Brannan Street Piers/Wharf project fell apart.
    I hope the Esprit developer has something more interesting planned – they seem to have done good work and it would be nice to get somebody other than the Giants involved.
    Remember they were the guys that looked the other way with Barry Bonds – and short changed the City on taxes by claiming that the value of the ballpark depreciated signficantly a few years after they opened it – and were still selling out and raising ticket, beer, and fries prices.

  9. Posted by anoncomplainer

    What an insult for developers to claim that this project is inspired by Millennium Park! If you were to compare this to any project in Chicago it would be LakeShoreEast , which is by developers to see how many 80 story buildings they can squeeze next to the waterfront (at least they are tall), except for a large Dog Poop park in the center with a small postage stamp sized children’s sand box.
    Millennium Park is all about public space. Galleries, museums, performance spaces both indoors and outdoors, gardens, skating rink, cafes, and art, art, ART everywhere.
    What a waste of a waterfront location this plan is. Oh well, at least we will not “loose” the circus to San Jose if this gets built.

  10. Posted by anoncomplainer

    If you are curious about my spelling of “loose” , it is from the S.F.Gate posting about this project that has since been finally corrected by their editors.

  11. Posted by 170Buyer

    I think there needs to be more business/retail space instead of housing. I like the idea of a music hall or some performance venue. There is so much housing being built around the area already, but there needs to be more entertainment and retail put in to round out the neighborhood. The area comes alive with baseball season but aside from that, it seems a little too quiet. I think with the plethora of condos, there is a certain demographic that want to get out and about but don’t seem to have anywhere to go in the area.

  12. Posted by anonyman

    EH-
    The houseboats are further down (5th street and over), out of picture range. Artist didn’t wipe them out.
    Weak-
    “it just repackages the open space that currently exists and paves the way for the boring condos that sit on top.”
    Um — count me in for “repackaging” of open space from concrete wasteland to park and housing.

  13. Posted by Weak

    Anonyman,
    I don’t see how you are for the “repackaging” – take a look at the current shorline park and kiddie park – and add a little more grass – and that’s the extent of the open space. THen fill in the current parking lot with bland condos and offices.
    You’re willing to settle for that?
    It’s incredible how little will be added on a net basis – after they absorb the current park facilities into the big swath of grass that will be used only by dogs. Remember this is Mission Bay so anyone picnicing in the afternoon – will be fighting the big winds that come over Twin Peaks.
    So it’s really like the Giants are trying to pull another fast one on San Francisco. Hate to bring up Barry Bonds – but what do we expect from the same crew responsible for that mess.
    I seriously hope there are other ideas that the Port can run with. This one is so unimpressive it would be a missed opportunity to give it the 3-4 years worth of planning, environmental impact studying, and neighborhood meeting time.
    I say send it back to the drawing boards and come up with something magnificent.

  14. Posted by jlasf

    A few suggestions:
    In addition to a music venue, how about a multi-plex movie theater? The entire Mission Bay could use one in that neighborhood.
    Use some of the greenspace to create a baseball practice diamond. One would think the Giants, of all people, would suggest that. It would be cool to have a softball game across from the Ballpark.
    And how about a line of cafes overlooking the water? Sort of Belden Alley-sur-mer.
    And, yes, better architecture. Since Calatrava
    dropped out of the Transbay competition, why not
    get him for this tower. This area could use a
    landmark building.

  15. Posted by Joe

    Why bother with the design.
    Most San Franciscans would rather hire Thomas Kinkade as the master architect.

  16. Posted by SFhighrise

    Two words, “freakin’ awesome”
    I just love how this part of town is becoming the new place to be. Don’t get me wrong, I like going to older neighborhoods, but this is giving people an opportunity to have all of the amenities of other areas (and more), yet live in a nice newer building, rather than all of those run down, older buildings, where you can hear EVERYTHING.

  17. Posted by Jim

    Where are 41,000 baseball fans supposed to park?

  18. Posted by SFhighrise

    Jim,
    The point is to get more people out of their cars. With the terminus of Caltrain, along with Muni rail stations and a ferry stop, making it more dificult to park is not the end of the world, as far as I am concerned.

  19. Posted by 170Buyer

    No, seriously… where are the baseball fans going to be parking?

  20. Posted by viewhater

    Imagine the great view you will get of the ballpark and, um, the Rincon towers from here:.
    http://bay01.imagebay.com/bay.php?view=28102_1rincon.jpg

  21. Posted by SFhighrise

    The new project is going to have underground parking, which the Giants are currently analyzing how much is required. Read the article more carefully.

  22. Posted by Brutus

    To the parking folks – there will be parking here, and there are currently thousands of parking spots already there within a few blocks at UCSF and towards downtown. This won’t be a parking apocalypse.

  23. Posted by Me

    Now they’re going to charge $50 for parking at nearby garages….oh wait…they already do.

  24. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    The market should determine the cost, convenience, and availability of parking. Certainly a surface parking lot is not the best and highest use of SWL 337.

  25. Posted by Zig

    Where do fans at Fenway and Wrigley park?
    Before they built the thing many were declaring it would be a disaster because there wasn’t enough parking and people wouldn’t ride PT
    Sort of silly now with the its success
    Why should the Port be supplying parking for the Giants? If they care enough they can pay a market price and develop parking lots but they don’t because people will figure it all out as they always do

  26. Posted by hhatmm

    “MAKE NO little PLANS; THEY HAVE NO MAGIC TO STIR MEN’S BLOOD”
    I ain’t feel’n the magic.
    Looks like the twin of Moscone Center or the extension of UCSF campus. Another real estate performa generated design.
    They should minimize the housing component. Mission Bay is already zone heavily for housing. Seems like a politically move to satisfy local hot buttons. Area is zone SHORT for large retail and services.
    Design needs injection of hormones to truly be fabulous like a bold stroke to extend Seawall 337 development with nearby Piers and adding some landfilling to enlarge or round out park…
    Bring in some really good designer, not the local winner of SimCity. I second the motion on Calatrava or some other “Iconic” starchitect…but that’s all wishful dream as hardly any developer can afford them unless you build 10 Rincon Towers on seawall 337 to subsized them!!!!! Oooh badddd thought.
    nevertheless, make no small plans…

  27. Posted by Bigplans

    The density doesn’t bother me, but the Port must make sure a WORLD CLASS architect is chosen. We need waterfront-defining, put-SF-on-the-map architecture. What gets built around town is so bland and conservative. Let designers design and see what happens!! Be BOLD SWL 337 developers!!

  28. Posted by Louis

    NONE of the proposals appear to have distinguished architecture of any kind. One can only hope that these proposals get an extraordinary level of review for planning and design before they move forward– and thre message they need to do better.
    Many qualified and experience developers took a pass on this because of the preception that the Giants have it tied up — And the Giants are encouraging this preception in order to keep down the competition. For a project of this size the experience and talent brought to the table so far is very modest-both on the lead- developer side and on the architect side.
    Having a small cast of bidders with some weak members will also greater depress the potential land value offered. The Giants may be hoping for this; others have to hope the Port understands this dynamic, and can get the value the city deserves.
    As frame of reference– look at the competition currently in new York for the West Side Rail Yards, wehere the results are considered a disaster.
    http://gothamist.com/2007/11/25/west_side_rail.php

  29. Posted by Robert

    C’mon folks, there is literally no way to tell from these preliminary bird’s-eye renderings whether or not the architecture is “world class” – do you have some secret document with a greater level of detail than we are all seeing?
    Please, let’s not just make things up.

  30. Posted by prospectivesomabuyer

    Theaters and night clubs along the T-line? This could turn out to be the hangout spot for all the not-so-savory people from Sunnydale and Bayshore?
    That would do wonders for the property prices around there.

  31. Posted by Juan Pardell

    I think they should phase in the development and build a sports arena so the Warriors can return to San Francisco for their home games. After all, there lease in Oakland ends in a few years.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles