Hines and Invesco have partnered to purchase 41 Tehama Street, the Transbay District parcel which was originally approved for development up to 31-stories and then “supersized” last year.
The 41 Tehama site is now entitled for a 35-story residential tower to reach a height of 360 feet, with up to 418 units inside. And according to the Business Times, the sale price for the parcel was “around $48.5 million or about $116,000 per buildable unit.”
Plans for the Arquitectonica designed building include 700 square feet of retail space on the ground floor and 241 parking spaces below. The open space at the base of 41 Tehama will connect to the future Oscar Park.
Its going to have amazing views , that is unless any of the other building along Tehama are appoved for significant increases in height
700 sq. foot of retail? I wonder what will move into such a luxurious space
starbucks
Why so short? 360′ is really piddly for this spot.
I’m just stoked about the clear bus ramps! Those things are gonna be sweeeet!
Yeah, this is the renderingn to beat all renderings. But I’m sure someone will step up here to defend it…
aren’t those invisible ramps the same ones in the earlier post with the miniature bay bridge tower supporting them ?
Yes, you can see the “mini bridge” in the first photo of this post (left-middle)
I don’t object to the bridge per se. But it does look really odd, plunked in the middle of a built area like that. I don’t think I can recall another viaduct or bridge in an urban environment such as this that has a tower rising above (as opposed to just a trust or cantilever construction).
There’s that new one in Jerusalem. A different kind of cityscape, but still stuck into the middle of the existing built area.
And it looks real cool (been there.)
Don’t forget, bridges go over land too (not just over water.)
As for this bldg- narly dude!
Here’s a specific question on this project, and also a general one, for you experts: where these new multi-unit buildings are going up as rentals, what’s your expectation as to whether or not they stay that way? I know all of these buildings are mapped as condos. I’ve heard some buzz that people are being told the buildings will convert in “3 to 5 years” – which I thought is maybe the length of time for the statute of limitations to run on claims vs. the developer?
Most equity investors that I know insist on a 10-year prohibition on condo conversion (in a recorded instrument, no less).
I don’t get it. Most residential tower are built/sold as condos, so the investors can get their money back out. Especially in an expensive and hot sales market like ours (where I doubt these things will cash flow positive anyways.)
I think I will stay in Noe Valley and look at it all from afar (or at least from the J car)
Welcome to the bus station! Anon will greet you with bitter roots and roads to nowhere…
Whether or not a building converts to condos or stays rentals depends on a number of things, but especially who financed it. Some people are in the condo business; some people are in the apartment business. Different businesses. Institutions in the apartment business may be looking for a place to park their capital for several decades and don’t want to pull it out. Others depend on sales to be whole. Just depends….
Be it condos where a lot of the investment is returned early on, or apartments that allow insane levels of long term return , its still going to be a spire in the middle of low lying buildings ,
where are the other new residential towers will be clustered among other towers this one will be a block radius of buildings no higher then 10 stories
Yeah, and 3 blocks away will be a tower over 1,000 feet tall. So, not really an issue.
this is one big ugly wall of glass.
Taste is relative, I think it’s one of the better SoMa designs.