390 1st Street Site

With the public hearing for the proposed 14-story development to rise on the northwest corner of First and Harrison, a prominent Rincon Hill parcel currently occupied by a Union 76 gas station, scheduled for March 24, a plugged-in source delivers the latest renderings for the building.

390 1st Street Design 2016 Corner

Dubbed “Modera” and designed by TCA Architects for Mill Creek Residential, the proposed 390 1st Street development still totals 180 apartments, but the unit mix now includes 57 studios, 50 one-bedrooms, 68 two-bedrooms and 5 three-bedrooms over a garage for 90 cars.

390 1st Street Design 2016

And the building’s café on the corner has shrunken to 348 square feet in size.

UPDATE: A bonus perspective of the development’s Lansing Street facade and open space for the residents within:

26 thoughts on “Development to Replace Rincon Hill Gas Station Closer to Reality”
  1. Why should it look like a preserved historic building at the base, with a modern glass tower rising above?

    This is silly. Please design a coherent, good building. Not fakery.

    1. It doesn’t look like what you’re describing. Many modern projects have a base different from the top.

    2. I agree that a lot of the forced-facade-preservation buildings look ridiculous, but I don’t think this new construction building has that problem. This is lovely and is designed in 2 parts for functional and aesthetic reasons rather than please NIMBYs. The top floors have better views and so the walls of glass and balconies are most important. The top also adds a modern touch, while the base has more classic look and charm that people can better appreciate from street level.

  2. I love this development, but can’t help but note that the latest version largely eschews balconies and completely on the bay-viewing east face. The architect’s aesthetic statement? But what of the residents the next 50 years who would likely miss such an amenity? I understand the client has the ultimate say but to what extent should initial considerations of design rule over the long term function of the life of the structure? Certainly an issue which extends beyond this particular project.

    1. I’d much rather have the square footage of a balcony inside my unit rather than sitting unused (except for storage) on the outside.

  3. I love that Harrison and first look like bucolic greenways in these renderings. Building looks fine, but I still don’t know why you’d actually want to live in that part of town (aside for the views). You’re basically living in a near constant state of freeway onramp gridlock. Not a lot of san francisco character over there.

    1. Simply: because this is the part of SF that has been zoned for housing. That’s what this city has become. Not even Western SOMA can get upzoned, so people have to live by all the exhaust.

    2. You might be surprised to learn that thousands of people live in that neighborhood already. Different people like different things.

        1. I’ve ridden up it on occasion. It’s not that steep and actually less steep than the route I ride up to the Golden Gate bridge.

          Given the amount of car traffic though, I doubt I’d want to ride up it often.

        1. In a nation that spent a trillion bucks on the “liberation” of Iraq and Afghanistan, that is quite a bold statement.

  4. I would change the top design as it make the building look indecisive in what its should be. The bottom as the warmth and charm of San Francisco of the yesterdays, however the top has that look that seems to be encroaching the city personally. If I was a Borg yes then it would be ok as a person it just lackluster.

Leave a Reply

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