February 3, 2010
A New Flag Flying For 638 Nineteenth Street At Third
A plugged-in tipster catches the new "New City Homes" flag flying for 638 19th Street at Third (along with a placeholder property site). As was noted in November, nearing re-completion with 19 residential units averaging 1,400 square feet and 2-3 commercial units coming soon.
∙ The Re-Redevelopment On The Corner Of 3rd And 19th Streets [SocketSite]
∙ 638 Nineteenth [638nineteenth.com]
∙ The Corner Of 3rd And 19th Streets: A Reader Asks (And So Do We) [SocketSite]
First Published: February 3, 2010 11:30 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
What a stellar exterior. I didn't know Sears aluminum siding could be used on such a large project. The top has that classical "crane operator's room" look to it that really reminds one of the glory days of SF architecture.
Posted by: lolcat_94123 at February 3, 2010 11:42 AM
I'm glad to see our city's scrap metal recycling program is live and thriving.
Posted by: Rincon Hill Billy at February 3, 2010 12:14 PM
I love the location but am afraid of the construction, considering its history. Does anybody know what future owners should expect? Would this building suffer more problems than one that didn't have to be redone partway through construction?
Posted by: Jeremy at February 3, 2010 12:18 PM
I too am puzzled by the use of corrugated metal in current architecture.
it has been traditionally used in shanty towns and farm/industrial buildings. I'm not sure why it's being pulled into residential architecture (even some so-called "luxury" buildings). To me, it envisages poverty.
what next, incorporating outhouses?
I do like roofs that are made out of that material, especially in a rainstorm. but you'd better like the sound of rain falling if you have that!
at least they've finally painted the red parts red.
1400 sq ft isn't anything to sneeze at either. any details of how many bedrooms they'll have?
Posted by: ex SF-er at February 3, 2010 12:20 PM
I see quite a few new projects with non-corrugated metal sheet that don't look too good once wind and heat has taken its due. They buckle, bend. A very cheap look.
Corrugated metal is simply a way to avoid this. Still a cheap and ugly solution.
Posted by: wow at February 3, 2010 12:25 PM
in most cities 3rd street and 19th street are parallel.
Posted by: resp at February 3, 2010 12:30 PM
I do like roofs that are made out of that material, especially in a rainstorm.
Any other comments out there from someone with a metal roof. I'm looking to redo my roof next year and put on solar panels. The 'once in a lifetime' aspect of a metal roof is appealing (though costly). Also, if you've got strong opinions about three tab versus architectural singles, I'd love to hear them.
Posted by: EBGuy at February 3, 2010 12:49 PM
Green roofs are the best possible option. Nearby foliage makes solar more efficient by bringing the temperature down.
Posted by: Mole Man at February 3, 2010 1:07 PM
re: metal siding: it's an appropriate material for some residential projects; can be inexpensive, pre-finished and lasts a long time. yes, the aestheitics is not "victorian'grandma-colonial-marthastewart" thank god, and a good choice for many urban residential projects. think of it as a fresh use for a simple, industrial cladding.
re: metal roofs/shingles: yes, a metal roof can be costly..especially a copper standing seam; other pre-formed metal roofs are not..they can make sense under solar panels. so can asphalt shingles with some having warranties of 30+ years now. 3 tab vs. "architectural" really are not different. both can have solid warranties..depends on the look you want..don't forget to do a lot of online research first.
Posted by: noearch at February 3, 2010 1:23 PM
That's one ugly building!
Posted by: Osservatore at February 3, 2010 2:03 PM
think of it as a fresh use for a simple, industrial cladding.
Well, some people love industrial. There are places where you work and places where you live. The 2 tend to merge for many of us though. Others like to keep the 2 separate to keep their sanity. Like architects who make money selling concrete/metal/glass fantasies but live in 100-year old redwood ;)
This building is pretty ugly from that picture. I subscribe to the gravel processing facility analogy. I can picture the conveyor belt coming out of the top floor unit.
Posted by: wow at February 3, 2010 2:48 PM
Very ugly and cheaply done...especially considering how nice the two new buildings are at 3rd and 18th.
I certainly would not consider this building (knowing it's history) without a steep discount from prices of similar units in the area.
I thought these were originally being constructed as rentals...anyone know whether that's still the case?
Posted by: luvinmissionbay at February 3, 2010 2:55 PM
FUGGLY!!! Years of damaged wood exposed structure would be a cause of concern! Leaks, bowed walls, shoddy construction efforts and a tragic homeowners association! With extreme deferred maintainence costs!!! No thanks!!!
Posted by: Condo-nut at February 3, 2010 3:03 PM
I've watched this project..for the last 3 years!!! I wouldn't buy one...but if ya like it...maybe ya buy it...
Posted by: beer glasses at February 3, 2010 10:59 PM
Corrugated and standing seam metal siding is interesting architecturally precisely because of its industrial, non residential, ummmm humble, associations. Because of these it has an epater le bourgeois quality - evidence of which you are seeing in this thread - that some people love. Those who like it cherish the fact that it horrifies other people.
It also has an interesting texture and can be extremely beautiful when properly installed and detailed on a well designed building.
Badly used and cheaply installed, it's just junk. But that goes for any kind of cladding, stucco, lick-a-brick, faux masonry, what have you.
Posted by: Salarywoman at February 4, 2010 12:50 PM
My take on this was that this was the architect's attempt to reflect Dogpatch's industrial roots (debatable if he/she succeeded).
There are some lofts in the area that have a similar industrial theme.
Trust me, this is 10x better than the previous attempt, which got abandoned a couple of years ago. I was wondering if it would ever be completed.
Posted by: dpsf at February 4, 2010 5:12 PM
I heard these are going to be 3BR units going for around $800K.
At that price, they'd better be huge, like 1800 sq. ft.
Posted by: joh at February 4, 2010 9:26 PM
Those who like it cherish the fact that it horrifies other people.
This is beyond idiotic. The people who fall into this kind of trap deserve their fortune to be plundered by the college-educated con men that are today's avant garde architects.
Posted by: wow at February 4, 2010 10:22 PM
Metal roof/siding is a very high-performing low cost option for building skin. You can spend your construction dollars on either the inside or the outside of a building. I like to live on the insides of buildings myself.
Posted by: OneEyedMan at February 5, 2010 10:07 AM
I have lived almost my entire life under a metal roof and "you'd better like the sound of rain" only applies to shacks in Florida or Hawaii. Everywhere else we use this nifty modern invention called insulation. It keeps the hot inside in winter, outside in summer and is used in noise abatement too.
Living in an area of seismic activity I do not recommend standing seam, In my experience it tends to twist and buckle. In our 2006 earthquake most roofs with new leaks (hard to find = expensive) seemed to be in higher end standing seam roofs. My father-in-law's house came off its 4' pier foundation at one end but the traditional corrugated roof was not damaged at all.
There are many styles of corrugation, we are no longer limited to the traditional wavy curves. Possibly because they overlap they can move a little & give with the shake.
Even the pre-painted ones get shabby and need painting after 10 to 15 years. We are getting ready to replace our 40 year old 6 hip 2 valley roof, it is a one day job for an experienced three man crew. Remove, replace, we haul the old roof, done.
Posted by: h.p.russel at February 5, 2010 10:51 AM
Went and looked at the this past weekend. I think they did a great job on the corner units regarding the layout but man 'o man is the fit and finish very low end! Especially the cabinets--I didn't know there was that low of a low end. The unit I was liking was priced at $849K but for such low end materials, i.e. flooring, cabinets and appliances I would price it more in the low $700K and that's pushing it.
Posted by: mas at March 8, 2010 2:22 AM
They're having a Grand Opening Event this Thursday the 11th from 5-8 pm. Will go take a look for myself...
Have any of the units come out onto MLS yet??
Posted by: DAnnyboy at March 10, 2010 8:45 AM
Their marketing material shows 12 of the 18 homes sold, but the title records show 7 of the "sold" properties to the Developer. And I find it hard pressed to believe that they sold these homes at 100% of LP to the other 5 buyers which the title records show.
Posted by: really???? at September 29, 2010 6:39 PM
I see the five units owned by someone other than Bay City View, LLC: #3, #9, #12, #13, and #15. All did sell at asking. The only double-ended sale was #15 which was bought and sold by Vanguard. For some reason, Redfin flags #13 as not being arms-length.
My guess is that HOA fees were paid by the developer for a while or they got some cash kicked back, although I have no evidence of that. We are talking about units in the Dogpatch going for $750K, even if they are family-size.
Commenters above allude to construction issues. Anyone have insight on that?
Posted by: sfrenegade at September 30, 2010 10:56 AM