January 11, 2011
1080 Sutter: As Conditionally Approved In 2009 And Refined In 2011
Conditionally approved by San Francisco’s Planning Commission pending a few design refinements at the end of 2009, the surface area parking lot at 1080 Sutter is set to become an eleven story, mixed-use building with 35 dwelling units (including 23 three-bedrooms) over ground-floor retail and 31 parking spaces (including two car share).
The proposed refinements to the rendering above which the developers hope will satisfy Planning’s request to "[decrease] the void-to-mass ratio of the proposed façade" and "[create] more interest in the design of the top two floors":
A metal projecting sunscreen was added at the 10th and 11th floors; The fascia was thickened between the 11th floor and the roof; and The windows were narrowed by 4 inches from a width of five feet, four inches to five feet.
The garage entry has also been moved from the east portion of the building to the west.
And as the site looks today (more or less):
∙ 1080 Sutter Street Design Modification Review [sfplanning.org]
First Published: January 11, 2011 11:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Sort of preferred the original rendering which showed a gesture towards the very well built & handsome buildings on Sutter and in the Tenderloin. This however looks sort of cheap, bland and forgettable -- and as encouraging as it is to have investment in this area - we could do better.
Also a good self-assured design doesn't really need afterthought add-ons such as metal projecting awnings. It might just be the angled balconies combined with the awnings which take away from the overall facade.
Posted by: invented at January 11, 2011 12:32 PM
"It might just be the angled balconies combined with the awnings which take away from the overall facade."
I actually like both elements. It adds some visual interest without being too much of a distraction. The gray and white color palette is very safe but overall I think this could be a nice building if quality materials are used.
Posted by: Willow at January 11, 2011 1:29 PM
Who is going to finance a 13 story project right now?
Who would buy these units in the Tender Nob?
Posted by: tony at January 11, 2011 1:45 PM
They don't need to build it right now, just get their entitlement approved.
It is a pretty good strategy : acquire entitlements when the economy is down because there's more political support for adding to the tax base. Then take the slow road towards actual construction so the product enters the market on a sunnier day.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at January 11, 2011 1:55 PM
Can't help but notice that the ceiling heights are significantly lower than its neighbors. This seems to be typical of modern buildings. Is there a reason for this, apart from maximizing the number of stories in a height-limited area?
Posted by: Al at January 11, 2011 9:18 PM
^^^ Shorter people in the future? Anyone here remember the line from Genesis' "Get 'Em Out By Friday"?
"This is an announcement from Genetic Control. It is my sad duty to inform you of a 4 ft. restriction on humanoid height."
Posted by: Dan Clark at January 12, 2011 11:23 AM
Ah yes, Genesis from way way back.
I'll bet this development has the minimum 8' ceiling height as opposed to older buildings which went for taller rooms. No doubt this decision is driven by economics.
The shortest ceiling heights have been in converted unwarranted space staged as bedroom or office space. These really should be staged as storage space. When people over 6' tall need to duck in a room then it shouldn't count as living space.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at January 12, 2011 12:20 PM
i know these guys.Deep pockets,very little bank money needed.
Posted by: sjmac at January 12, 2011 5:48 PM