Having broken ground at the end of 2016, the 55-story tower and two podium buildings rising along Folsom Street, on Transbay Block 8 between Fremont and First, are now expected to be ready for occupancy in the second quarter of 2019.

As designed by Fougeron Architecture, the two podium buildings will yield 80 below market rate apartments which will be managed by the Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation and be made available to families earning up to 50 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI). The podiums are expected to be construction complete in April of 2019.

And as designed by OMA (Office of Metropolitan Architecture) for Related California, the 55-story tower rising at the corner of Folsom and First, behind the podium fronting Fremont, will yield 118 condos over 350 apartments (70 of which will be offered at below market rates) and should be ready for occupancy in May of next year.

Keep in mind that an operator for the downsized grocery store space at the base of the development , which Whole Foods had been eyeing, has yet to be secured.

And if a lease hasn’t been inked at least 12 months prior to the anticipated completion date of the grocery store space, Related can seek approval from the City to reprogram the 12,500-square-foot space for another use. We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.

30 thoughts on “Timing for New 55-Story Tower and Podiums on Transbay Block 8”
  1. I always liked this one for the alley connecting Folsom and a new block of Clementina that will dead-end just south of Fremont. Combined with the new block of Clementina recently completed between Fremont and Beale, we can actually start to see some of the decades-old elements of the Transbay plan coming together.

  2. Changes comes slowly and then suddenly: I believe 2019 will be an eye-popping year where a few amazing projects will live and completely transform the east of the city:

    – Multiple buildings around Transbay center will be finished
    – Central Subway going live at end of 2019
    – Chase Center opening doors around Sept/Oct 2019
    – New HQs for Uber, Dropbox etc. coming to full capacity in Mission Bay

    There might be other projects I missed and everything is subject to delays. However, I remain excited about seeing whole neighborhoods transform in from of my eyes.

    1. The prime contractor on the Central Subway says it won’t open until Spring 2021. Only the SFMTA is still sticking with the claim of 2019.

      1. After an hour-long commute at 6pm last night on the T-line from Hudson to Powell, the central subway can’t come fast enough. Unfortunately, we’ll still have to deal with the debacle at 3rd/4th and Channel St. That being said, I’ve been working with MTA for 2+ years on speeding up the T-line on 3rd w/ signal priorities etc and they still say that’s at least 12 months off “because it’s very complicated”.

        If signal priority/timing takes 3+ years, My bet is at least 2021-2022 for opening of the Central Subway.

        1. Thanks Bayview_Rising, that’s valuable information (I am glad to hear that SFMTA is actually _doing_ something about that intersection). Though, of course, I wish they had found the money to tunnel the T-Third over to Mission Bay and entirely avoid that cluster.

        2. If the Chase Center opens for the 2019/2020 season and there is no Central Subway in place for another 2-3 years, SOMA and Mission Bay will be traffic nightmares on 41 nights of the year. Add to that all the new peeps working at Salesforce Tower, new Facebook location, Uber HQ and Dropbox HQ and you get the picture.

          1. it will actually probably be traffic nightmare regardless. That’s because since T is surface on 3rd they will likely have to block traffic to allow trains to get through – more trains via central subway probably means more blockages. Since chase center is on bay side of 3rd and nearly every vehicle will be crossing 3rd at some point. It would not surprise me to see them make 3rd no through traffic during events similar to what happens in san jose along light rail line by levi stadium.

          2. it’s already a traffic nightmare. Those Ford GoBikes are really the way to go in the SoMa/MB/SouthBeach microhood.

          1. One of the tracks shares space with cars, so cars frequently block T. The signal there needs to hold the green long enough to flush all the cars out of the way. Alternatively, maybe remove the left turn onto Berry. If you need to go there, then take T, Walk, Bike, or just have your Lyft take you via the traffic circle.

  3. Not to quibble – well, OK, it’s quibbling…but it’s ON TOPIC quibbling – but why say “two podium buildings” if only one is going to have a tower above it? Isn’t that the qualification that makes something a “podium”? We don’t talk about the thousands of “podium buildings” out in the Avenues or the Mission.

    1. Agree. And I don’t get why the city okayed these so-called “podiums” at so short a height—for all affordable housing, couldn’t we at least do 15-20 stories?!

        1. The several other all-affordable projects that are in multi-year delays. When something is moving along, we should maximize its density—neighbors have been blocking affordable projects all over SF.

          1. That didn’t answer my question. Developers are required to build X amount of BMR units per project. If that number produces two podiums of 80 units, who is going to pay for the additional units in order to “maximize density”?

          2. @Hunter – I’m not sure if that that money is just “sitting there” and available to use. I have to imagine most of it has been earmarked for other projects.

            I agree that more density here would be great for BMR housing. I’m just don’t if the money is there for it, or if The City can just partner up with an existing project.

    1. I don’t know, we’d have to see floorplans and interior renderings to get the complete picture. While Koolhaas has produced his share of stunt architecture, my impression is that OMA/AMO’s core competency is in creating great interior spaces and not so much exterior skins.

    2. I don’t really get the design logic of the cutouts on the bottom half. In concept it’s a reversal of the top setbacks, but why does it take that form?

      1. Frisco – pretty sure the form is strongly inspired by OMA’s smaller, earlier unbuilt NYC tower design, 121 East 22nd Street (stepping in for the top half of the tower and the inverse for the bottom)…

  4. If I remember correctly OMA had released a prior design that was actually quiet stunning but they watered down the design, probably due to financial constraints.

    1. “The v formation does not conform to the neighborhood character. We request all birds fly in an unorganized fashion, clumpy fashion.”

  5. UPDATE: The Block 8 tower has been dubbed “The Avery” and the sales office for the 118 condos will open this summer, with occupancy “as early as spring 2019” (as plugged-in people knew to expect).

Leave a Reply

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