April 2008

Developers Bid to Makeover Parking Lot Adjacent to AT&T Park: Port of San Francisco Reviews Proposals to Lease China Basin Seawall Lot 337

By Kerry Fleisher

    Four teams are competing to develop a rough-hewn parking lot just south of AT&T Stadium, known as China Basin Seawall Lot 337.  The 16-acre lot is one of the nation’s largest undeveloped urban parcels near the heart of a major city center.  After issuing a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) last fall, the Port of San Francisco is currently reviewing draft development proposals.  The Port’s hand-selected Citizen Advisory Task Force will make its recommendations early this month, after which the Port will short-list the most qualified teams to submit their final proposals by the end of April.
    Seawall Lot 337’s unique characteristics — a massive swath of landfill-turned-open space adjacent to San Francisco’s Mission Bay shoreline — prompted the Port to split its review process into two stages so as to elicit maximum community input.  The Port also created the Citizen Advisory Task Force to help vet proposals.  The Task Force consists of seven community members who hail from various government agencies, architectural firms and neighborhood groups, including the Potrero Boosters.
   “It’s an open blank slate…,” said Diane Oshima, the Port’s Assistant Deputy Director of Waterfront Planning, who’s delighted about the amount of public feedback the Port received after last month’s public workshop.  “This process is tailored so developers could come forward with initial ideas for public review.”
   The four teams of architects, civil engineers and investors are vying for an exclusive 75-year lease with the Port.  Seawall Lot 337 is part of the Port’s “Infrastructure Financing Districts,” an area that — in accordance with a 2007 City law — will generate tax revenues to be reinvested into public and capital improvement projects along the Southeast San Francisco waterfront. 
   The Port’s Seawall Lot 337 vision statement released last fall prioritizes open space along the waterfront and stresses the development of mixed land use that’s financially sustainable, environmentally-sound, and capable of generating significant tax revenues.  The Port also wants development to match the area’s historic character; avoid conflict with Pier 50 vessel berthing; enhance the Bay Trail; preserve wildlife; and promote a transit-first policy while creating a dense public parking network to serve the nearby population and those attending events at AT&T stadium.  
  The four development teams submitted highly divergent proposals, each attempting to meet the Port’s criteria through varying configurations of residential and commercial units and open space.  Each team is comprised of three equity partners; most have enlisted outside consultants with expertise in building design, land use, historic preservation, landscaping, engineering, and community outreach.
   The Federal Development, Lehman Brothers, and Construction Management and Development, Inc. team has previously invested in the Port of San Diego and Resort at Del Rey Oaks in Monterey.  Federal Development is a Washington D.C.-based, privately held real estate company which has partnered with cities, government agencies, and transit authorities both domestically and abroad.  Their team includes CP Wang, the architect behind Taipei 101, the world’s tallest building.
Federal Development’s plan condenses mixed office and entertainment spaces into three high-rise buildings, supplemented by a border of small retail shops along Third Street.  Their plan includes five to seven acres of open space; a 170-room hotel; a 2,500 square foot performing arts center; 25,000 square feet of entertainment and retail; and 432,000 square feet of office space.  Underground parking would create an inclined slope beneath several of the 18 to 22 floor buildings.  The buildings would be set back from the water’s edge, creating a sprawling green space that could be used for sports or concerts.  According to the team, building vertically rather than in clusters reflects the fact that “open space is the driving philosophy.”  The team is also contemplating swapping one tall building for two mid-size structures, and is open to wind power generation, water taxis at Pier 48, and floating pools.  Public feedback at last month’s workshop about the proposal revolved around loss of views from Potrero Hill.
   Kenwood Investment, Boston Properties, and Wilson Meany Sullivan, each with equal equity splits, are operating under the slogan “Art 1st San Francisco.”  They’ve previously invested in the Ferry Building, Treasure Island, and 5 Times Square in New York City.   The team’s plan would divide the lot into a gridiron of city blocks, with low-rise residential units separated by mid-block courtyards; one green, renewable-energy tower by the northwest corner; and open space by McCovey Cove, with tangles of promenades and pedestrian walkways in between.  The plan features 400,000 square feet of office space; 1,100 residential units; 67,000 square feet of retail/gallery; two above ground garages with 1,500 shared parking spaces; and five acres of open space.
   The team focuses on “art as a destination,” specifically “environmental art,” and emphasizes its commitment to affordable housing and artist studios within walking distance of public installation space.  Their green tower would function on wind turbines, and the plaza would include kinesthetic windscreens.  Neighbors questioned the team’s ability to ensure affordable housing for artists, and many expressed interest in moving the tower to a different portion of the lot, away from the northwest waterfront. 
Build Inc., UrbanGreen Devco, and Cherokee Company refer to themselves as
the local guys, given that several team members live in Potrero Hill and have been involved with the community for years.  The team is responsible for Homes on Esprit Park in Dogpatch, Parcel P at Oak and Octavia streets, and the 800 High Street Condominiums in Palo Alto.  The Build Inc. team brought together a half-dozen architects to collaborate on a blueprint that promotes a porous network of buildings, pathways, and open spaces that’s designed to appeal to diverse audiences.  They propose to split the lot into two triangles, which would act to accentuate South-of-Market water views.  The plan features seven acres of open space; one green tech/clean tech incubator; two utility towers; 450,000 square feet office space; 100,000 square feet of neighborhood retail; 905 condos; and an array of local artisan shops on Pier 48.
    The team proposes to utilize three underground parking garages to maximize open space, and opted to place two eight story condos in the lot’s center.  Their guiding principles are to be “authentic,” promote bottom-up development, and actively engage with the community.  During last month’s meeting, one resident expressed concern about the loss of views when looking down Channel Street, while others petitioned for more detail on the team’s financial capacity to execute such a sizeable project.
    The San Francisco Giants, Cordish Company, and Farallon Capital Management have financially-backed such sports stadiums as AT&T Park and Ballpark Village in St. Louis.  Farallon, a San Francisco investment firm, owns other Mission Bay parcels.  The team’s plan consists of bigger blocks funneling to smaller blocks on the lot’s periphery, a performing arts venue capable of hosting upwards of 10,000 people, and an emphasis on outdoor recreational activity near McCovey Cove, complementing AT&T Park.  The team proposes 400,000 square feet of retail space; a 60,000 square foot music hall; 100,000 square feet of event/flexible space; 790,000 square feet of office space; and 875 condo units.
    The San Francisco Giant’s team recommends removing a portion of the northern section of Terry Francois Street to widen their proposed five and a half acre park.  They also plan to lease space to both local and national retail stores, such as Walmart.  Several audience members expressed concern that the team’s proposal could create a duplicate Pier 39, and others questioned the team’s track record with union workers.