98 Pennsylvania Avenue Site

As we first reported back in 2013, the 12,000-square-foot Potrero Hill parking lot parcel which fronts 17th Street at 98 Pennsylvania Avenue was purchased for $1.4 million and the buyers had drafted plans for a 45-unit residential building to rise up to five stories on the irregularly shaped site which currently provides parking for the Regents Cab Company.

The plans now include 46 units, a mix of 3 studios, 24 one-bedrooms, and 19 two-bedrooms, over a partially underground garage for 31 cars and 46 bikes, with a 3,000-square-foot roof deck surrounded by an eight-foot sound barrier, topped with four feet of Plexiglas.

98 Pennsylvania Elevation

And last week, San Francisco’s Planning Department granted the proposed 98 Pennsylvania Avenue project an Eastern Neighborhoods Plan-based exemption from having to complete a detailed Environmental Impact Report (EIR), clearing the way for the development to break ground on the Western side of I-280, across from the Exchange on 16th Street project, pending the issuance of permits.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Some Guy

    Wow I’d sure be excited to live directly beneath 280. I wonder if any special HVAC filtration systems are required for new construction within a (short) critical distance from freeways.

    On that note, I wonder if SF will be dumb enough to tear down the 280 spur to downtown. As a useful alternate to 101, I imagine traffic on 101 would only get worse if 280 disappeared.

    • Posted by Some Guy

      Though, if 280 does indeed get torn down these units will look like a smart buy, over night appreciation.

      • Posted by Jake

        A 280 teardown could take 10-20 years to happen, if it every does. Unless they plan to go Rip Van Winkle, a buyer here had better be prepared for 150-200k cars a day passing by on 280 and increasingly clogged surface roads.

  2. Posted by DM

    This just can’t be. No lawsuits? No deliberate obstructionism? Oh… it’s been in the works since 2013.

  3. Posted by Pablito

    Wow. I would hate to raise a kid in a building this close to the Freeway.

    Why does our City allow development in these very polluted zones? The Air District recommends planting pine/ redwood trees on lots this close to freeways in order to reduce the pollution on the adjacent neighborhood.

    The City could afford to do so – but it seems it would rather pay lip service to public health instead.

    • Posted by Some Guy

      If I had kids and no other option I would invest in some top-quality air filtration equipment. Many places in the bay area, including SF as far out as 19th ave, and of course all of the east bay, can get pretty nasty smog sometimes.

      I live downwind of the Port of Oakland (yay) and I swear by an IQAir Healthpro series HEPA filter. Set you back a thousand bucks but I’ve done all the homework there is to do on these units, including buying my own laser particle counter to verify it is working correctly, and they are stellar.

      I would trust my kid’s health to one of these running 24/7 inside a well-sealed apt. bldg. Playing outdoors would have to take place at a park at least 1/4 mile away from the freeway.

      PS socketsite thanks for correcting my typo on “ight” in my earlier post in this thread, I noticed that. I type on an iPad screen.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles