In 2005, San Francisco’s Planning Commission approved the demolition of the single-story concrete warehouse at 144 King and granted three years to commence construction of an 11-story, 130-room hotel with no off-street parking on the site.
In 2008 the approval was extended until September 2011. And tomorrow, the project sponsors seek another three year extension to start construction by September 2014.
Hopefully since its such an old proposal, they’ll have changed the design to something less soul-crushingly bland by 2014.
But this is the city that landscapes in trash bins.
It’s an odd place for a hotel. Maybe once Mission Bay is more developed it will make sense.
^Across the street from a MLB ballpark is an odd place for a hotel? Um, ok.
I’ve got it. They need to call this the “Leave Your Car At Home” Hotel. That ought to resolve the nonexistent financing issue.
I like the proposed look. Bricky — slightly old-world New Montgomery meets ballpark. Not seeing anything wrong with design. The city needs quiet, well designed background buildings — otherwise all the look-at-me buildings will cancel each other out and the city becoming will feel contrived, always trying too hard, uber, and disingenuous. And, this is a perfect location for a hotel — Mission Bay corporate, new hospital, ballpark fans — all big drivers for a hotel.
Lack of on-site parking won’t hurt this hotel’s business because it is so close to lots of transit including Caltrain a block away. Valet parking will probably be offered to guests who want to drive.
I find the most vibrant beautiful neighborhoods in SF to be full of “look at me” buildings- Haight Ashbury and the Alamo Square areas.
Wonder if it will use the name faux-brick fascade as the condos next door.
“I find the most vibrant beautiful neighborhoods in SF to be full of “look at me” buildings- Haight Ashbury and the Alamo Square areas.”
Point well taken, but all the side streets of ASP are lined with solid, lovely apartment buildings which don’t call attention to themselves, but were built for quality quiet living. The confections on the Park work because they are surrounded by many streets of good solid housing stock.
Well that’s my take on it in any case.
As for faux bricks, probably — sheets of look-alike brick. Don’t know what’s worse flim-flam plywood siding or fake brick.
Did the architect also design the iPad game “Tiny Tower”? 🙂
I’m seriously considering changing my nom de plum to faux brick. But I’m not there yet. Way too much faux stucco still in play.
How is it that anyone can afford to put a project on hold for almost 10 years? Doesn’t that signal that the financing isn’t really there and the project/investment is unstable?
“Wonder if it will use the name faux-brick fascade as the condos next door.”
Don’t forget about the huge structure across the street completely covered in faux brick (or lick-and-stick brick as architects like to call it).
“I find the most vibrant beautiful neighborhoods in SF to be full of “look at me” buildings- Haight Ashbury and the Alamo Square areas.” Point well taken, but all the side streets of ASP are lined with solid, lovely apartment buildings which don’t call attention to themselves, but were built for quality quiet living. The confections on the Park work because they are surrounded by many streets of good solid housing stock. Well that’s my take on it in any case. As for faux bricks, probably — sheets of look-alike brick. Don’t know what’s worse flim-flam plywood siding or fake brick.
Anyone know when construction will be complete? And if the thruway from Townsend to King will still be operational for autos? I use parking garage next door and they have blocked allweyay off meaning it takes me 10 minutes extra to get home now.