Sexy Time Development Take TwoSeptember 18, 2018
Plans to raze the recently shuttered Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality building at 1523 Franklin Street and construct a decidedly modern building designed by Alan Tse and Charles Chan Architectural Studio upon its corner parcel have been abandoned.
But plans to redevelop the site are moving forward.
And as newly rendered by RG-Architecture for JS Sullivan Development below, a setback six-story addition to the building’s shell, which would be renovated, could now rise up to 84 feet in height upon the parcel, with seven full-floor condos (six three-bedrooms and one four) over a 650 square foot café space fronting Franklin Street and a basement garage for six stacked cars, assuming a variance from having to provide a rear yard, as mandated by San Francisco’s Planning Code, is approved next week.
The addition has been designed with the anticipation of additional neighborhood infilling in mind.
Building permits have been requested and triaged. And yes, we’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.
Comments from Plugged-In Readers
That looks very good! I’m glad they opted to not go for the contrasting orange-panel design.
7 units, with near-1:1 parking, one flat block from Van Ness. A lot to be depressed about from an urbanist point of view.
There are 22 bedrooms and 6 parking spaces. Would you be happier if there were 22 one-bedrooms with 11 parking spaces?
No he wants no cars because he is an “urbanist.” He wants to force people to use Muni, a well known means of inducing misery.
If riding Muni is a “means of inducing misery,” how would you describe the prodigious planetary pollution and urban and human destruction caused by your transportation choice? Induced misery on a global scale?
I love my fossil-fuel burning cars! Yes, I own two, just a couple of blocks from this spot. Ride in peace, brother. Long live internal combustion.
As to HST’s response, is being proud of polluting any different than the rare cigarette smoker displaying pride (and ignorance) in defending their actions of smoking in the presence of their own children? We choose to pollute. It seems misplaced and sick to be proud of poisoning our planet and fellow humans. Peace.
nothing is worse than driving anywhere near this location.
its a very low parking to bedroom ratio
This looks great! I love that they are opting to keep part of the fabric of the city that already exists while adding a cool new modern element.
I love the aesthetic. And, sure, this is a super luxury development but it’s still a cool addition to the neighborhood.
Quite sad that the original design got canned and we get these two clashing architectural styles being mashed together.
It looks like a 1974 Costa Mesa building for lawyers’ and doctors’ office.
The blank wall is particularly purty!
“something new is erecting itself on top of the old”
saving old facades is a great idea, when it’s done well. Here, well…looks like the two buildings never even shook hands, let alone met…
So a set-back on Franklin but none on the much narrower Austin St.
Families need new housing too. It’s going to take Building housing at all prices AND kinds to help solve the crisis so I see this as a part of that piece (a 500 unit building on this site would also have a much larger impact but oh well)
Yes. “Families” will be living here. *eyeroll*
If this was a development at something other than the high-end (did you see that these are seven full-floor condos?) than I would agree that it would be a reasonable incremental contribution to solving the crisis. The problem that the supply siders seem to willfully ignore is that housing is not being built “at all prices and kinds”, instead every project is targeted at buyers at the top 2% of the income distribution.
So is the solution to not build ANY housing? Almost all brand new housing will be high end housing due to the amazing costs and extra burdens imposed on development. Without massive subsidies, that is. And if a project gets massive subsidies, people here will complain about THAT, too.
No, Brian M, we are not limited to the two options of building luxury housing or building no housing at all, that is a great example of the textbook argumentative fallacy of the false choice. In this specific instance, we could incentivize the developer to build smaller, denser units which would house more people instead of a measly seven full-floor condos.
Aww, I liked the old design. That was sexy. This is not sexy at all.
UPDATE: Sexy Time Redevelopment Closer to Reality
Comments are closed.