In front of San Francisco’s Historic Preservation Commission tomorrow afternoon, the proposed demolition of the existing one-story industrial/commercial “One $ Store” at 2100 Mission to make way for the construction of a six-story mixed-use development of 29 residential units over ground floor retail and 15 parking spots as envisioned by Stanley Saitowitz/Natoma Architects.
Keep your fingers crossed that the buying power of a buck won’t be considered historic.
Also in front of the Commission tomorrow for discussion, the redevelopment plan for Treasure Island and the proposed development at 800 Presidio.
∙ San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission Agenda: 8/4/10 [sf-planning.org]
∙ 2100 Mission As Envisioned By Saitowitz And Proposed [SocketSite]
∙ The (SOM) Master Plan For San Francisco’s Treasure Island [SocketSite]
∙ The Grand Plans For 800 Presidio Avenue As Proposed [SocketSite]
we have to save a little sixties dreck after we let White Front be torn down.
more seriously, a kind of luxury residential development seems a bit misplaced at 17& Mish.
easy heroin access though
it does look a bit like a spaceship has just landed in the mission. i’m expecting Lady GaGa to walk out of it at any moment…
How is this in any way any business of the Historic Preservation Commission? I guess I shouldn’t be surprised here in SF.
What a F’ing joke! This city never ceases to amaze. haha. Wow, I need a coffee or maybe even a beer after reading this entry.
Is this satire?
jason wrote:
I’m not an architect or architectural historian, but I’m coming around to the opinion that Stanley Saitowitz is just so in love with his cast concrete-and-slab-glass-design motif that he can’t work out anything else, much less anything that looks good in context with the rest of an existing neighborhood. He seems like an egocentric freak and has since Yerba Buena Lofts.
Modernist designs don’t fit in everywhere and shouldn’t be built anywhere that an egocentric architect can find a client with land. jason was on to something with his comment; this proposal looks like a variant of the Borg cube.
Don’t know if planning made a “no prevailing architectural style in the neighborhood” determination, though, so perhaps that’s not a valid objection in this particular part of the mission. I agree that the existing store shouldn’t be considered historic.
“Is this satire?”
If you are referring to the proposed building yes I think it must be. How else can you desribe that proposed monstrosity!
Saitowitz sure is a one trick pony. Seen one of his ponderous, cold, sterile designs and you’ve basically seen them all. Talk about being stuck in a rut.
The Historic Preservation Committee was voted in a couple years back by the citizens to replace the previous entity which was more limited in its scope. SPUR came out against the proposition stating that the new HPC’s powers would be too wide ranging, and having this project in front of them could be a manifestation of that prediction.
But does anyone out there know if this project would have been seen by the previous historic review committee?
Here’s the link:
http://www.spur.org/goodgovernment/ballotanalysis/Nov2008/propj
All projects within the Eastern Neighborhoods plan have to go before the HPC until the historic resources survey of the eastern neighborhoods is complete. This is just part of the process to protect possible historic resources that have not yet been studied/identified. It does not mean that this site is historic nor does it mean that it will be deemed historic. This is just part of the current process when building in the Eastern Neighborhoods.
I’m fine with Saitowitz’s architecture being cold sterile monotonous concrete slabs (although I would never live in them).
what I dislike is that the early renderings make them look light and airy. they almost look as though they are made of glass. then you see Godzilla-sized pieces of concrete.
=====
as for the $ store.
I find these types of stories humorous, because I RARELY hear anybody on the street talk about how these types of properties are historic… and yet they take so much public time to resolve. San Franciscans are muy loco.
I’ve wondered about this: under the Mills Act, you can get a big discount off your property tax if your house is deemed historic. If this shack is historic, then every Victorian/Edwarian out there is historic. That means a bunch of home owners with no intention of changing the facade or expanding the properties can get their houses certify as historic and get up 50% off their tax? Why wouldn’t they do it? Why aren’t more people go this route? Probably I’m missing something.
Which picture is the proposed project design??
Thanks xyz for explaining that everything needs to be reviewed by the HPC in this area regardless. I hope that this consumes no more than two minutes of the committee’s time. And I hope the survey is completed soon so this madness comes to an end.
I like the proposed building. It gives me a fuzzy feeling, but not warm.
Just proves that time and time again SF’ers will vote for more bureaucracy without really know what they are signing up for.
This town is mired in analysis paralysis.
Who’s the developer?
IMHO, what makes older neighborhoods interesting is the mix of architecture, not uniformity. I applaud any opportunity to mix it up, as San Francisco obsession with “fitting in” with the neighborhood is just another form of NIMBYism.
Thanks xyz for providing context. It is entirely reasonable for a city to protect historic structures. It makes sense that they are requiring review, however cursory, for all projects until the survey is complete. I seriously doubt the HPC is going to be holding this project back.
I also value an architectural mix in the City and look forward to seeing modern structures getting built that accentuate and complement our neighborhoods.
That said, I am certainly tiring of this design, and it frankly gives a could shoulder to the surrounding neighborhood. All for modern, not so much in for a repeat of the 60s brutalism.
Clearly the historic preservation committee – who has completely halted the north beach library branch renovation with its declaration that the 50 year old bookshelves are historic – will not hold this project back.
The Mission wouldn’t be the Mission if you got rid of all the discount / thrift stores. I don’t know what it would be, but it wouldn’t be the neighborhood I enjoy today.
I like the design. This part of Mission street is so dreary. It needs something to inject some freshness and energy.
A little tall in my books. I walk by the beautifully renovated Flour & Water building and lament the excessive height of the surrounding condos that makes F & W look like a dollhouse.
That design would be a perfect background for another entry in http://www.unhappyhipsters.com
sjbrown someone should pass a law and do something
Man would that be awesome on that corner!
Well
More stanley sameness……..when will he think of something new, thought he was modern.
Maybe the city will determine that we should have design standards versus guidelines, cannot keep replicating the same box with fins all over town, isn’t that what they did in the past, lots pf stucco boxes.
Anyway, same as uaul, nothing new…at least it must be profitable to use the same design and concept everywhere….
Dude
re “I am certainly tiring of this design” etc.; please consider how many of the Saitowitz projects have actually been constructed. I’ll give his work the benefit of the doubt until I see more of his work in the real world rather than in a virtual one.
The thign about Saitowitz buildings is that they are at least spread around. A cluster of them in the same neighborhood would soon get boring.
There are enough dollar stores on Mission. As others have already said, this building would be a welcome addition to mix it up.
Agree with Jimmy, Saitowitz’s designs are starting to become essentially Hipster Tract Homes (I’m trademarking that!).
Look at renderings for 1234 Howard vs. 1601 Larkin vs. 555 Fulton vs. 1028 Natoma.
And then “Pine Street” (1527-1545 Pine) vs. what 1234 Howard actually looks like vs. this proposal.
Apparently his own Borg cube-like designs have assimilated each other.
“That means a bunch of home owners with no intention of changing the facade or expanding the properties can get their houses certify as historic and get up 50% off their tax? Why wouldn’t they do it? Why aren’t more people go this route?”
It’s not necessarily simple. You are making contractual obligations under the Mills Act, and you have to make sure you can meet those contractual obligations. For example, not only can you not change the facade, but you are required to actively maintain and repair the property itself. This sounds simple, but if you’re short on money one year, it could be a problem. If you have to petition to end your Mills Act contract or it’s canceled for breach, you must pay a penalty of 1/8 of the fair market value of the house, although that seems like an odd one for enforceability.
There are also upfront costs. You have to get an architect to review the property and identify why it’s historic. And you also have to submit either a restoration/maintenance plan or a complete list of what has been restored/maintained.
Having a Mills Act contract can also create problems when you sell. While some people may see historic designation as a benefit and see it as increasing the value (especially with the lower taxes), others will not, since you have much less flexibility with the property and have contractual obligations with respect to the property. The Mills contract does transfer to a new buyer automatically, so someone would have to pay the penalty if the new buyer didn’t want it.
I believe under a prior version of the Mills Act, you were actually required to make your house open to the public for historic tours, although I don’t know anything about the mechanics of that.
@marten: I hear what you’re saying, but let’s be clear. The condos surround the Flour + Water building are built up to the allowable and current height limit. The owner is simply exercising their right to build that height. It is allowable. Perhaps, in your mind, it makes the little restaurant building look like a “dollhouse”, but is that a bad thing? I don’t think so. It actually makes the dollhouse stand out more as a unique part of our Victorian architecture. And so what? Does it harm the building? Does it make the corner any less livable? Does it affect the quality of the food in that restaurant? How does the height of the adjacent buildings actually harm you?
I do wish people could articulate more clearly why something is wrong. Just cause you don’t like it doesnt mean it’s a bad thing for the neighborhood. A variety of both styles and height limits adds a great amount of diversity to the character of a neighborhood.
Sanity reigns.
Project was unanimously approved. Good things happen when board members are professional designer.
Hipsters will now be able to expose their undies to the druggie SRO dwellers 1/2 block away.
While I don’t always like the work of Saitowitz, I’m still pleased this project is going ahead and that dreadful ugly one story block building will go away.
The problem of the Historic Preservation Commission is that they are charged with only optimizing one value: historic preservation. While a worthy value, there are many other values in the community which the Planning Commission is charged to balance: provision of housing, economic development, neighborhood character, quality of life, environmental sustainability, etc. etc. The HPC is charged to trump all these values for one value only. It wasn’t too hard in a case like this, but there are many other potential cases where one value will overtake all others. Not a good idea.
Stanley Saitowitz time has come and gone, how can developers keep hiring him. He pulls the same crap out of his drawer every time. Does the man have an original thought?
No one gets fired for hiring a recognized name in architecture no matter what kind of crap he keeps churning out.
OK OK. Let’s settle this once and for all.
Saitowitz and anit-Saitowitz gangs all meet at the corner of 17th and Mish 3am Friday morning for a rumble. Losers treat winners to burritos and also have to shut up about Stanley on SS for 12 months.
^ the Saitowitz Crew armed with steel straightedges, and the anti-Saitowitz gang armed with strips of crown molding. Bring it!
@James: Epic! 🙂
Shadow, shadow (casting monstrosities)
upon the wall (street, trees, sun kissed earth)
who is (from south africa? and hates sun?)
the architect (don’t make me SAY IT)
I detest (I saw something nasty in the woodshed)
most of all?