CFAH

San Francisco Seawall Lot (SWL) 351

An update from Frederick Allardyce (President of the Barbary Coast Neighborhood Association) on the proposed development of Seawall Lot 351 (and by extension, the proposed 8 Washington Street Project):

This lot probably is the most valuable parcel (individually or by $ per square foot) not only in the Ports portfolio, but perhaps in the entire city. The success of the Port’s development of this parcel, may lead the Port into successfully developing the other [seawall] lots north of Market Street, which still have State Lands Use Zoning (which does not allow residential use). This parcel has been proposed as the central portion of a 170 unit luxury condominium project, of which many of the proposed units would sell for higher than any of the units at the Millennium ($2,000 to $3,000 per sq ft).

The Ports first hearing on this project was Monday, April 14th at which several hundred interested parties came and participated in a “neighborhood” analysis of the various possible uses” of this parcel and other parcels on the Waterfront. The SF Planning Department, which led 9 different discussion groups at the meeting found that the vast majority (some groups as high as 85%) wanted SWL 351 to remain as “Open Space and or Recreational”. Of the over 150 in attendance only 1 voted for an 84 foot tall building (which is 52% higher than the 55 ft tall Embarcadero Freeway). The vast majority wanted recreational facilities and a new bus system from the Ferry Building to the existing parking at the Alcoa Building (One Maritime Plaza) and the Embarcadero Center that could replace the possible removal of parking adjacent to the Ferry Building.

Any guesses as to the makeup of those 150 interested parties and what “interests” they represented?

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by zzzzzz

    Yes, and I’m sure the 150 in attendance demanding a recreational facility on this site are willing to pay for it.

  2. Posted by jamie

    WWVD – What Would Vancouver Do?

  3. Posted by LP

    The Port is going to have a very hard time getting its “value” out of this site, given the sentiment at the meetings.
    unless theres some political leadership on this – dont know heere that will come from – prediction that this site stays undeveloped.
    tradeoff for keeping open space is letting port infrstructure decay even more.

  4. Posted by Mole Man

    Roller coaster! 😀

  5. Posted by yup

    The city that knew how.

  6. Posted by Michael E

    Nothing will be built. But my two cents is that the tennis club should go. Why does the city give a sweetheart deal on some of the best land in the city to a private tennis club? Does that make any sense at all? There are so many better uses for that entire area. But with Peskin, nothing will happen.

  7. Posted by Suspiry

    “Voting” at that meeting was like voting in Florida in 2000. Don’t pay it much mind, even though it brought war and depression by 2008. The 84′ guy was bringing comic relief to a rigged game.
    Be thoughtful, when FOGG (the connected & highly effective Tennis & Swim Club lobby) writes “open and/or open recreational space,” they mean private open space for a private club, not public space for residents, tourists, people watchers.
    One way to think about the 14 April meeting is that most of the people present actually want development of SWL 351, but not as a “wall” of 84′ condos.
    Reasonable people now negotiate.

  8. Posted by Snooney

    Do remember that the meeting was stacked with FOGG reps and their agenda-minded ilk–by as much as 98%. They’ve managed to intimidate anyone opposed to their Luddite thinking. They want “no change.” “Keep it as it is.” “Make it open space.” None of them has any idea of economics. How do they think the Port can gain income from any of their ideas? If the 8 Washington project is kept to a discreet height and rebuilds the Club with more or less the same amenities, it will do a great deal to improve the appearance of the area — not to mention the frontage along The Embarcadero, which currently exposes an ancient ivy-covered fence adorned with dog feces.

  9. Posted by Snooney

    Do remember that the meeting was stacked with FOGG reps and their agenda-minded ilk–by as much as 98%. They’ve managed to intimidate anyone opposed to their Luddite thinking. They want “no change.” “Keep it as it is.” “Make it open space.” None of them has any idea of economics. How do they think the Port can gain income from any of their ideas? If the 8 Washington project is kept to a discreet height and rebuilds the Club with more or less the same amenities, it will do a great deal to improve the appearance of the area — not to mention the frontage along The Embarcadero, which currently exposes an ancient ivy-covered fence adorned with dog feces.

  10. Posted by phil

    WWVD = podium and slender tower.
    I agree with Michal E – the tennis courts should go.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles