Kaiser Permanente’s Potrero Hill MOB Rendering

While reaching 84-feet and raising the hackles of “Save Lower Potrero Hill”, Kaiser Permanente’s proposed Potrero Hill Medical Services Building at 901 16th Street is actually five levels topped by mechanical screening over a three-level basement garage.


Behind the medical office building, “Kaiser Green” would grow:


And as plugged-in people know, across the street to the north the six-story Daggett Place will be rising along with the one-acre Daggett Park. Plug in tomorrow for the details and early designs for the residential project proposed to rise to the south along 17th Street.

21 thoughts on “Designs For Kaiser’s Proposed Potrero Hill Medical Services Building”
  1. Excellent infill development. Its the same scale as residential buildings that will be built along 16th street no matter what a few Potrero Hill NIMBYs say. Kaiser is not affiliated with UCSF and there is no reason for them to be on the other side of 280.

  2. I swear this city’s idiotic planning department would approve a poop if it just tacked on a bay window and called itself a parklet.

  3. 1. Don’t care about the NIMBYs — your lovely view of 280 will be blocked, oh the horrors.
    2. Again, can we ever get a single innovative building design in SF. Ever?
    3. Whoever made these renderings — lay off the heavenly, halo-like uplighting on image 1.
    4. We live in a city, buildings go up.
    5. Here’s a challenge — let’s start an true SF [Pritzker] Prize. Who’s in?

  4. This makes a lot of sense for the area. I don’t agree that the area is a dump. It has a lot of great character and in many ways remains a nice pocket of peacefulness. Arch Paper, Bottom of the Hill, Connecticut Yankee, CA Caster, etc. are irreplaceable.
    I come through this area almost every day, and I can only say that I hope it will continue to develop in a careful way as it is truly a vital link between the Mission and downtown.
    Parking is a huge consideration down here. Are there any stats on what this proposal offers for parking?

  5. Speaking as a PH resident – although I don’t think this would be the most ideal use of space on 16th, it would definitely improve the area. Unfortunately, development and density is a necessity in a city like SF so residents will have to deal with it (and yes that means parking becomes more of an issue).
    I would say however, that if my views were being blocked, I would have a problem with that as well (hey I’m just saying!).
    Would rather see new housing pop up in that area but an anchor business like Kaiser is not so bad as well. Hopefully this improves public transportation in my nabe as there really isn’t any for the time being.

  6. this is a good addition to the neighborhood and a sorely needed facility for Kaiser patients. traffic will be a legitimate concern, though. by 2015 there will be almost 5000 more UCSF employees working just down the street.

  7. Perfect use for this site next to the freeway
    There is plenty of space in this area for housing nearby but not next to the freeway

  8. I disagree with your comment about developing next to the freeway. Daggett Park will be next to the freeway – which is right across the street – and will sell well once it comes online. Also looks nice due to the layout that is proposed. So you would need a creative design team.
    Agree with your comment, however, about plenty of space in the nabe but we all know how easy it is to bring new developments online.
    Regardless, any new development there is good for me.

  9. Look closely, the rendering shows Mississippi Street as a one way heading towards downtown, with no street parking. How does one get back to Mariposa? Is this proposed as well, or just a mistake?

  10. Call it NIMBYism, that’s fine. That’s what it is. But some of us moved over here many years ago because we like the funky warehouses and small businesses. Just because a building is new, doesn’t automatically make it desirable. I like exciting, new architecture, but I also would like a building that fits in with my ‘hood. First blush, it’s just a big building. Not much to get excited about. Roof is under-utilized (I’d guess that will change- hope). Love that they buried the parking. And it’s not blatantly oversized. But yes, scale matters on this side of 280. I understand that area is going to continue to change, just know for some of us who actually live & work over here, that there is a character to the area (may not be your flavor but) which is not always enhanced by a big, shiny, new, blocky building. OK, -that said – I’ll try to get more excited about this addition to the hood. Looking forward to seeing the Daggett project happen.

  11. Okay…
    Who is the realtor who came up with “lo po?”
    As a hill resident, I have very little interest in joining the fight to protect the view$ for nimby property owners.
    We have serious issues on the hill. Violent crime, toxic cleanup,:transportation.
    The perceived threat to your lifestyle and prop values are just not that important.

  12. After reading the Opinion piece by Art Agnos in Friday’s (2/8/13) Chron, which favors a Bayview site, I was curious to see a rendering of the building, because my Kaiser clinic in Campbell offers so many services in a relatively small, 2-story building. However, I forgot that SF doesn’t have much room for outdoor parking, so a lot of the proposed PH building will be devoted to that, thus the height.
    Hey, how about two Kaiser clinics — PH and Bayview!

  13. The Potrero site is more central to the eastern 1/2 of the city. Typical that Agnos and his Potrero neighbors are trying to cloak their NIMBYism as concern for the Bayview.

Leave a Reply

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