Planning Commission Orders Revisions for Condo Project at
Market & Buchanan

This drawing of the planned mixed-use development at 1960-68 Market St. shows the current design of the project which the Planning Commission asked to be modified.
(drawing courtesy of Arquitectonica)

By Jaime San Felippo

The SF Planning Commission has given developer Brian Spiers four weeks to make adjustments to the design of his proposed eight story mixed-use condominium building that will occupy the corner of Buchanan and Market streets, currently the home of a rundown gas station.

The April 16 planning meeting was attended by several community members that expressed concern about the proposed building’s contemporary design, questioning if the design is a good fit for the historic Market Street corridor area.

The planned U-shaped building falls under the blanket of the Market & Octavia Neighborhood Plan. It will stand at a height of 85 feet and be home to 115 residential units and provide 91 off-street parking spaces in two levels of underground parking.

“This design, while not historic in its articulation, employs high quality materials and design features that respect the desire for new developments to be tastefully done,” said Spiers. “The design enhances the pedestrian experience and incorporates many architectural features to create a rich facade along Market Street.”

According to Spiers, the design of the project deliberately adjusts the massing of the building to create interest and mitigate the appearance of a large massive facade. The building is a series of interlocking volumes that create opportunities for a variety of balconies and terraces. In addition, further articulation of the interlocking volumes is created by incorporating zones of vertical and horizontal patterns.

With the requests made by the Planning Commission to make the building a little softer and more natural fit for the neighborhood, Spiers said he will go back to the drawing board with Los Angeles-based architect firm Arquitectonica, to tweak the design to appease the commission as well as neighbors.

“We are looking at adding additional vertical elements to the building to enhance the fine grain appearance of the architecture that is lively and full of movement,” said Spiers. “I’ve never built something this contemporary before, but I just think this is a great design that will suit that corner.”
Spiers will go before the Planning Commission again at the May 21 regular meeting with an updated design.

David Troupe of the Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association (DTNA) was at the meeting and was pleased with the outcome.

“I am in favor of the development there, but am opposed to the design,” said Troupe. “It’s a beautiful design in the wrong location. We want the developer and architect to work with us (DTNA) and other neighborhood groups to refine the design to better fit the location.”

Troupe said he is hopeful Spiers will reach out to community members for input.

Also in attendance at the meeting were residents of 65 Hermann St., located at the rear of the proposed development site. Residents of this building have been dismayed since seeing the specifics of the 85-foot building. They are concerned that the building will block their view, and that the new building will be only about 15 feet away from their own front windows blocking out sunlight that warms their units.

Sally McDonneld, president of the 65 Hermann Street Homeowners Association, said she is disheartened that Spiers is requesting variances from the Planning Commission to build as close as 13 feet away from her building at one end of the north side and 18 feet on the other.

“No one has approached us and asked how this might affect us,” said McDonneld. “We’re not big activists and don’t know how to fight this. The commissioners did not seem to have a problem with our complaints and we realize we have no right to a view, but we wish they would protect our environmental rights to air and sun.”

McDonneld also pointed out that the development is contradictory to the Market & Octavia Plan, which focused on maximizing space between buildings.

“We’re not the ‘not in our backyard complainers,’” said McDonneld. “We just want to be able to enjoy the environment. The commission wants to please the majority and the majority does not live here and does not understand.”

Copyright 2009 Castro Courier