1810 Webster Street Oakland Site Aerial

Speaking of Lennar, the company’s plans for a 224-unit apartment building to rise up to seven stories in height across the three Downtown Oakland parking lot parcels at 301 19th Street, 1750 Webster Street and 1810 Webster Street, a one-acre assemblage collectively known as the 19th and Harrison Street site, are pushing forward.

In addition to the 224 units, the proposed development includes 3,700 square feet of retail space at the corner of 19th and Harrison and a ground-floor garage for 219 cars and 129 bikes, behind which you can see the top of the 1700 Webster Street tower to rise.

19th and Harrison Street Oakland Rendering

And having just received an exemption from having to complete a lengthy environmental review, Lennar is aiming to break ground on the 19th and Harrison Street project in the third quarter of 2017 and finish construction by the end of 2019.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Notcom

    While preserving the (rather) smallish, narrow building @19th/Webster, it seems. Wondering if they tried to acquire it and couldn’t : while it’s nice to preserve the few older buildings in the area, I would think the resulting irregular shape makes the construction somewhat more costly, if only a little.

    (And a side note: the site used to be a drive-in , so probably $$$ of hazmat remediation… from soaked -in burger grease 🙂 )

    • Posted by Matt of Uptown

      I believe design constraints foster creativity and innovation. The pre-war buildings will last far beyond our current resource allocation issues.

  2. Posted by curmudgeon

    Actually even odder that it doesn’t include an adjacent parking lot. But regardless, this is a very well located project. Snow Park and adjacent Lake Merritt frontage on Lakeside Drive will be going into construction later this year on a project that will continue the transformative rehabilitation of Lake Merritt from previous work at 12th Street and the Boathouse.

    • Posted by Sierrajeff

      I like this area of Oakland, and its shocking what an underdeveloped ghost town it is – close to the lake and parks, close to BART, even easy access to freeways if you need to drive where BART doesn’t go. Regardless of Oakland’s other ills in other neighborhoods, it’s bizarre that this area around between the lake and downtown isn’t a highly desirable showpiece neighborhood.

      • Posted by Victoria Fierce

        The cost of development far outweighs any return investors might get on new construction. It costs millions of dollars in “community benefits” packages and little-to-no guarantee that you’ll make it through the process alive after negotiating.

        It really sucks, yah.

  3. Posted by Casey Hildreth

    Nearly one-to-one parking, two blocks from BART. Sigh.

    • Posted by curmudgeon

      Yes, bummer. But at least it’s taking out a lot of surface parking. Talk about a poor use in downtown Oakland.

    • Posted by Matt of Uptown

      I think it just means this was conceived before Oakland began loosening parking requirements.

      • Posted by woolie

        A pre-app for a tower filed this week proposes 0.4 parking.

    • Posted by condoshopper

      it’s kind of funny if you’re implying that BART is sufficient for getting one around, as if it were a great system; and that it’s optimal to live in oakland without a car.

      • Posted by anona

        We have this new thing called Uber, try it.

        • Posted by Willow

          Where do all the Uber drivers park their cars? I guess they don’t get to live in Oakland…

          • Posted by Sierrajeff

            Right – and not to mention the cost (far more per mile to pay for Uber than to operate a car, if you regularly operate a car (i.e., if it’s not just a weekend use)), and shuffling off the externalities to others. This whole “just use Uber” crap is what’s making me turn increasingly anti-hipster, I’m just tired of the smug shoulder-shrugging that rejects the notion that what is a solution for one person is not necessarily a solution for another.

          • Posted by Jake

            All of the Uber drivers I’ve used to get me around SF CBD congestion told me they live in the east bay.

          • Posted by curmudgeon

            Sierrajeff, you are correct that – on average – the cost of Uber would be more expensive than vehicle ownership overall. But if you are walking or taking transit to work anyway (as many of us do), you can take a lot of Uber trips to equal the total cost of vehicular ownership, which can approach 10K per year depending on the expense of your car, your car storage costs, etc.

          • Posted by anona

            Um, not in a place right next to a subway stop?

          • Posted by anona

            Seriously, SierraJeff? The point is that places right next to multi-billion dollar pieces of transit infrastructure should be allowed to cater to people who don’t need to regularly operate a car. If you’re taking BART to work every day, that means that you only need a car for non-regular trips. That’s my situation, and it’s quite easy to use Uber a few times a week, still spending only a few hundred bucks a month on rides yet never needing a car of my own. This is what we should allow. If the market says nope and still wants to build loads of parking, great.

  4. Posted by Sassy

    I’m happy to see the numerous surface parking lots in downtown Oakland get built upon but I’m disappointed many projects are only 8 stories and less, especially at the sites close to or between BART stations. While the higher cost of high-rise construction doesn’t provide the bigger investment return at the moment it seems like a missed opportunity when thinking 5-10 years down the road.

  5. Posted by Some Guy

    lot of plans going on in Oakland, not that many shovels hitting the ground. dollars to donuts says they’re going to get this approved and all ready to go, then put it on ice until the next cycle comes around.

    • Posted by HousingWonk

      Pretty much. There are office projects in downtown Oakland that were approved LAST business cycle (pre-Great Recession) that still haven’t started construction. The massive Oak to Ninth housing project which was also approved LAST business cycle, just a few months ago finally filed plans for its first apartment building, which if we are to believe the puffery from Signature, will open in 2018.

      Meanwhile, former Mayor Jean Quan’s marginally employed Ivy League offspring continues the Oakland shakedown of developers who can barely make these projects work on a good day.

      • Posted by curmudgeon

        You’re right about office projects, but there a bunch of housing projects being developed. No towers yet, all midrise. Doubtless many projects will be approved and not built in this cycle. I’m betting no towers will break ground, but I’d love to be wrong.

    • Posted by M

      Agreed, most of the construction dollars are going into SF. Why build in Oakland for a lower profit margin when you can get $1000/sq. ft. or more in the city? The problem is the cost to build is the same but the prices are lower. I think its also why the projects out at Candlestick Point have been sitting for so long.

      • Posted by curmudgeon

        This is a thread hijack, but they’re actually building like crazy right now at the Shipyard (which is also controlled by Lennar, so could be considered the same project as Candlestick Point). It seems like they’re about wrapping up their current work though, and I’ve been wondering what’s next on their agenda. Would love to see something on Socketsite about that.

    • Posted by oaktownbrown

      For the past few weeks or so they’ve been digging what I assume to be an underground parking lot for a mid-rise at 8th and Broadway, what was formerly a parking lot.

  6. Posted by Nick yale

    It’s a year later and the entire area of downtown Oakland is a bee hive of construction of office ,mid and hirise office ,demolition of old parking lots and under utilized buildings. Truly the biggest boom since Oakland ‘s glory days before world war ll

Add a Comment

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