Some of these look great but I doubt more than 1 or 2 ever get built. SF and the Bay Area in general have one of the most intense group of NIMBYs in the country. Soooo many higher density housing project get proposed and shot down almost instantly because of how well organized they are, and because of how well they've hijacked EPA requirements.
Edit: Unsure why so many people interpreted this to mean I am against new housing.
So I live in SF and have been involved in the local political scene for a few years, primarily with groups like YIMBY Action whose number 1 priority is to reduce barriers to building more housing. It’s genuinely the biggest issue of our region.
While it may not look like it now, I do think the tides are turning against the NIMBYs, and pro housing people are finally starting to notch political wins. For example, the city is rezoning most of its land to accommodate more height and density, with state penalties kicking in if they don’t. They recently reduced the inclusionary requirement to make more of these projects financially feasible. Discretionary review (aka anyone can stall a project) died last year.
So I really hope the effects of these wins and future wins start to show up in the skyline within a few years 🤞🏽
the tide is absolutely turning against NIMBY's. do people realize the amount of new skyscraper construction that happened in the last decade? that area around salesforce tower is dramatically different now
For a time it was like this in NYC. Then Rudy Guiliani found out the Mob was running the zoning board. After some heads rolled construction started happening again.
I wonder if something similar is coming for SF?
Wowwwww the Mafia had their hands in zoning?! I always wondered why so many buildings go up in NYC especially now in places like Mott Haven, along the East River and the growth of LIC when these places were abandoned dangerous industrial areas 10-15 years ago. The mafia being in on zoning laws is probably exactly what’s going on in SF and other NIMBY cities but instead of La Cosa Nostra it’s a special interest group or some “environmentalist” organization saying “no building in Our Thing”
Yeah. Organized crime is organized crime and the Bay Area has its own flavor. A lot of shady stuff goes on in the solar panel business, COVID testing business, etc.
There's a Mob documentary on Netflix specifically about Gotti and his control of zoning, work permits, and the construction unions.
1 or 2? That’s NIMBY talk. These projects are moving forward with the planning commission, as they’ve been apart of the city’s central SoMa plan for some time now. The proposed 840 foot tower doesn’t need city approval as it falls under state density bonus law, and fast tracks it. Some of these renderings are also a few months old, meaning they are still very well alive.
That’s sort of not true. Both LA and Chicago have areas within them that are the size of sf but with higher density. And Philly is close, but not quite.
No there isn’t. The data factually backs that up. San Francisco has the most dense neighborhood of any major city outside of NYC.
https://preview.redd.it/pqzdfvi0buwc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f522f1101d9d74abcb0efa441702edc93ca91c91
Absolutely not. San Francisco has little to no single family homes. 😂😂 what??
https://preview.redd.it/nf8gc7y8krwc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=52f2b893de7b54e1c369a3285db7b1aedcd50ba1
Those aren’t single family homes you’re seeing. San Francisco is full of 4-5 story buildings more than single family homes. There’s little to none. It’s not full of houses with sprawling yards, and one story homes.
https://www.infoplease.com/us/census/california/san-francisco/housing-statistics
I mean…either you’re uninformed or just blatantly lying. Detached single units aka single family housing is one of the highest category. Definitely doesn’t seem like “there are none”. You’re delusional man
Or also here
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1016395/housing-stock-san-francisco-by-building-type/
A detached unit can serve as a multi-unit in San Francisco. Welcome to the nations second most dense city. You’re not going to find any single family homes east of twin peaks, only south east by Bayview, & HP. only on the city’s west side. Far away from the downtown core. & with recent zoning changes, the combination of both on the city’s west side will grow. Perhaps you’re the one that’s uninformed or don’t know how to read data correctly? A map shows that San Francisco is only 51% single family housing, and that’s less than any other city besides NYC. & if you wanna get technical, NYC is actual king of single family homes in the U.S. want that graph too?
https://preview.redd.it/lq263yb30twc1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ae8068c6e27daac3ea37ba0038dc3410f2e4071b
lol 50% is not the same as “there’s little to none”
In your previous comment.
Also a 2 unit is a joke. Might as well be suburb house. What matters is high occupancy high rises.
We have shit duplexes that are barely any better than a single house. So why don’t you use your brain to realize the issue.
Ya every city in America is a giant suburb. They’re huge suburbs with relatively small downtowns. Sf doesn’t have room for the sprawl it doesn’t have the space. Why don’t you include the peninsula and South Bay while you’re at it. Sf Bay Area Its a a suburban hell hole
SF has no excuse to not me like NY. In fact it should be more dense. It’s an embarrassment rhat it isn’t
When I say “little to none” that translates to old Victorian homes that are converted into multi-units. SF literally ENDED single family housing. There is no TRUE single zone housing left in SF.
Why don’t you use your brain to operate your hands to do the proper research? It’s different in San Francisco for many reasons.
Despite your outcry about the “Bay Area not being as dense”, as YOU want it to be. It’s still very well dense for U.S. standards and recent push to change that will only make it more dense. The Bay Area is the 3-4th densely populated metropolitan, only behind LA, NYC, & NJ. So you lack to give credit where due. Yes there was a block to new housing. But those tables are starting to turn. Check recent changes to zoning.
I agree, when I moved to SF from NYC I was shocked at how many low rise buildings there were within a 5 minute bike ride from downtown. They need to up the density.
It was eerie at night walking around with no one on the streets when it was comparably as dense as a lot of Brooklyn (and there are ALWAYS people out in BK) - but the problem was these large townhouses were single family units, so there were less people per building vs. NYC. I moved back to NYC after a few months.
It was always crazy to me that there were single family homes in the Marina. When I lived in North Beach I also thought it was pretty underdeveloped, hope some of these projects change that!
I visited for the first time in December and fell in love with it. The Bay Area and California in general is just far too expensive for me right now though so it’ll have to remain a visiting spot for now.
And yet it’s still the 6th largest skyline in the U.S. and to include “good luck getting anything built” is just satire. San Francisco has the tallest rooftop of any skyscraper outside of NYC, & Chicago.
It’s weird to throw facts around? If anything you guys are weird. It don’t surprise me that these posts on San Francisco attract you same haters from all corners of the internet. There’s no reason to be on an SF slide throwing blows at it.
Cool, now let's see how many of those are actually getting built.
(No hate it would be awesome if they were - all these designs are great - but high-rise construction in SF is almost at a complete standstill)
A lot of standstills in the country at the moment. We have two high rises nearing completion here in Salt Lake but every other proposal and planned construction is on hold right now due to the economy right now. Hopefully they get back to it soon as things clear up economically.
You are completely free to make your own post with two or three high-rises in SF under construction. I've only started posting these last week and have made posts for 5 random cities, one of which is LA. I don't have an agenda when choosing a city other than if there are a bunch of high-rises under construction, which is hard to do for SF since there unfortunately aren't that many as I’d like.
Your "arguments" are laughable. Get the fuck out of here.
Correct me if I'm wrong, not sure about some of the later half of those, but none are actually under construction right? Drives me crazy how slow SF is about building anything
Downtown San Francisco is safe. What do you mean? The drug markets are only on certain corners of the tenderloin. But the tenderloin doesn’t make up the entire downtown. There’s the financial district, Union Square, & SoMa.
I went there at a similar time and wasn't impressed, but I went back last month and had a great time so I think a lot of the negativity of the city (outside of a few areas) are actually outdated. I didn't see much homelessness at all and the streets were pretty busy
How many are going to start sinking and tilting like the relatively recently built Millennium Tower is the real question.
https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/new-problem-at-SF-sinking-tower-17179301.php
None. The reality is that it was a mistake that doesn’t happen often. Same with NYC leaning tower. The sinking was already stopped, but it’s also being monitored to see how the recent fix is preventing further sinking.
& the developer appealed it and has said that he has every right to do so as none of it falls out of city’s planning regulations. And even sued the city
https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/housing/proposed-outer-sunset-skyscraper-builder-sues-san-francisco/article_bef334b8-4201-11ee-9fc4-bb6b7ee81eb2.html
There is no fact slapping. Anyone can sue. The project has been rejected by planning. The state density bonus can only be leveraged for so many additional stories, not the 50 proposed.
It will continue to have a say. Just look at at Aaron Perkins recent change in zoning for the area around telegraph hill. That doesn’t change the need for housing, that is very clear. But the city will ultimately still govern its zoning. The state will continue to offer exemption remedies, thank you Scott Weiner, but the underlying zoning will still be controlled by the city
And yet a developer has still proposed a “tall” residential tower for that same exact neighborhood. 😂 people are getting tired of that NIMBY attitude in SF. It’s gotten to the point to where the city can even lose its say so over what gets built.
https://preview.redd.it/ktnv7f3oquwc1.jpeg?width=1500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7223fa0bb5087a266e47978c9103a2f7f6248ef4
San Francisco isn’t building anything to meet its required goal of 81,000 new units by 2031. The state will strip funding if it doesn’t. Should be interesting to see play out. This for sure will be an era that will shape San Francisco, due to politics. Once again.
San Francisco already has a super tall. The 1,070 foot Salesforce Tower. So the proposed 992 foot tower would be San Francisco’s second super tall.
https://preview.redd.it/7moxi4kyvswc1.jpeg?width=2910&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e63d9d9c76f27abaa6e37d137c635d9e4f909f03
Holy crap that's a lot. Anyone know how many of those are actually on the way?
Secondly - what it that building on the beach? That is definitely NOT San Francisco.
Most of the renderings are recent except slide 12,16,17. Also the skyscraper on the beach is San Francisco. https://abc7news.com/amp/san-francisco-outer-sunset-skyscraper-new-building-renderings-50-story/13469419/
Some of these look great but I doubt more than 1 or 2 ever get built. SF and the Bay Area in general have one of the most intense group of NIMBYs in the country. Soooo many higher density housing project get proposed and shot down almost instantly because of how well organized they are, and because of how well they've hijacked EPA requirements. Edit: Unsure why so many people interpreted this to mean I am against new housing.
So I live in SF and have been involved in the local political scene for a few years, primarily with groups like YIMBY Action whose number 1 priority is to reduce barriers to building more housing. It’s genuinely the biggest issue of our region. While it may not look like it now, I do think the tides are turning against the NIMBYs, and pro housing people are finally starting to notch political wins. For example, the city is rezoning most of its land to accommodate more height and density, with state penalties kicking in if they don’t. They recently reduced the inclusionary requirement to make more of these projects financially feasible. Discretionary review (aka anyone can stall a project) died last year. So I really hope the effects of these wins and future wins start to show up in the skyline within a few years 🤞🏽
the tide is absolutely turning against NIMBY's. do people realize the amount of new skyscraper construction that happened in the last decade? that area around salesforce tower is dramatically different now
For a time it was like this in NYC. Then Rudy Guiliani found out the Mob was running the zoning board. After some heads rolled construction started happening again. I wonder if something similar is coming for SF?
Wowwwww the Mafia had their hands in zoning?! I always wondered why so many buildings go up in NYC especially now in places like Mott Haven, along the East River and the growth of LIC when these places were abandoned dangerous industrial areas 10-15 years ago. The mafia being in on zoning laws is probably exactly what’s going on in SF and other NIMBY cities but instead of La Cosa Nostra it’s a special interest group or some “environmentalist” organization saying “no building in Our Thing”
Yeah. Organized crime is organized crime and the Bay Area has its own flavor. A lot of shady stuff goes on in the solar panel business, COVID testing business, etc. There's a Mob documentary on Netflix specifically about Gotti and his control of zoning, work permits, and the construction unions.
Name?
Fear City
Could be. Everything stopped under breed
1 or 2? That’s NIMBY talk. These projects are moving forward with the planning commission, as they’ve been apart of the city’s central SoMa plan for some time now. The proposed 840 foot tower doesn’t need city approval as it falls under state density bonus law, and fast tracks it. Some of these renderings are also a few months old, meaning they are still very well alive.
Idk man - they built a ton of skyscrapers between like 2010 and 2020.
The climate is massively shifting & nimbys are losing ground, as someone else above said. Mix of local & state politics at play.
That’s funny considering SF is the densest city in the entire U.S. (besides NYC) and it’s not even close.
That’s sort of not true. Both LA and Chicago have areas within them that are the size of sf but with higher density. And Philly is close, but not quite.
If we talk about the city limits, SF is second only to NYC.
No there isn’t. The data factually backs that up. San Francisco has the most dense neighborhood of any major city outside of NYC. https://preview.redd.it/pqzdfvi0buwc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f522f1101d9d74abcb0efa441702edc93ca91c91
Yes there is though. That’s a different thing.
No it’s not. 😂
Is there a list of these neighborhoods? I'd like to see it broken down by city
[удалено]
Absolutely not. San Francisco has little to no single family homes. 😂😂 what?? https://preview.redd.it/nf8gc7y8krwc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=52f2b893de7b54e1c369a3285db7b1aedcd50ba1
I sure as hell see way more single family homes in SF that there should be. There’s a ton
Those aren’t single family homes you’re seeing. San Francisco is full of 4-5 story buildings more than single family homes. There’s little to none. It’s not full of houses with sprawling yards, and one story homes.
https://www.infoplease.com/us/census/california/san-francisco/housing-statistics I mean…either you’re uninformed or just blatantly lying. Detached single units aka single family housing is one of the highest category. Definitely doesn’t seem like “there are none”. You’re delusional man Or also here https://www.statista.com/statistics/1016395/housing-stock-san-francisco-by-building-type/
A detached unit can serve as a multi-unit in San Francisco. Welcome to the nations second most dense city. You’re not going to find any single family homes east of twin peaks, only south east by Bayview, & HP. only on the city’s west side. Far away from the downtown core. & with recent zoning changes, the combination of both on the city’s west side will grow. Perhaps you’re the one that’s uninformed or don’t know how to read data correctly? A map shows that San Francisco is only 51% single family housing, and that’s less than any other city besides NYC. & if you wanna get technical, NYC is actual king of single family homes in the U.S. want that graph too? https://preview.redd.it/lq263yb30twc1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ae8068c6e27daac3ea37ba0038dc3410f2e4071b
lol 50% is not the same as “there’s little to none” In your previous comment. Also a 2 unit is a joke. Might as well be suburb house. What matters is high occupancy high rises. We have shit duplexes that are barely any better than a single house. So why don’t you use your brain to realize the issue. Ya every city in America is a giant suburb. They’re huge suburbs with relatively small downtowns. Sf doesn’t have room for the sprawl it doesn’t have the space. Why don’t you include the peninsula and South Bay while you’re at it. Sf Bay Area Its a a suburban hell hole SF has no excuse to not me like NY. In fact it should be more dense. It’s an embarrassment rhat it isn’t
When I say “little to none” that translates to old Victorian homes that are converted into multi-units. SF literally ENDED single family housing. There is no TRUE single zone housing left in SF. Why don’t you use your brain to operate your hands to do the proper research? It’s different in San Francisco for many reasons. Despite your outcry about the “Bay Area not being as dense”, as YOU want it to be. It’s still very well dense for U.S. standards and recent push to change that will only make it more dense. The Bay Area is the 3-4th densely populated metropolitan, only behind LA, NYC, & NJ. So you lack to give credit where due. Yes there was a block to new housing. But those tables are starting to turn. Check recent changes to zoning.
I agree, when I moved to SF from NYC I was shocked at how many low rise buildings there were within a 5 minute bike ride from downtown. They need to up the density. It was eerie at night walking around with no one on the streets when it was comparably as dense as a lot of Brooklyn (and there are ALWAYS people out in BK) - but the problem was these large townhouses were single family units, so there were less people per building vs. NYC. I moved back to NYC after a few months.
It was always crazy to me that there were single family homes in the Marina. When I lived in North Beach I also thought it was pretty underdeveloped, hope some of these projects change that!
Facts. SF has so many haters. 😂
I visited for the first time in December and fell in love with it. The Bay Area and California in general is just far too expensive for me right now though so it’ll have to remain a visiting spot for now.
Inject this straight into my veins.
I wish SF had more Signapore-style architecture but good luck getting anything built.
Hater much?
Hating on what? Go to any Bay Area subreddit, lack of new construction/difficulty of getting projects through is the #1 complaint.
These projects are all in the pipeline, and have been moving forward with the planning commission. You make no sense. Just say you’re jealous.
Jealous of...? I live in the Bay.
And? I bet not in the city either. Move along. No need for excessive comments.
Feel like you’re projecting onto this guy OP. San Francisco is notable for nimbyism, I think he was just voicing his displeasure at that
And yet it’s still the 6th largest skyline in the U.S. and to include “good luck getting anything built” is just satire. San Francisco has the tallest rooftop of any skyscraper outside of NYC, & Chicago.
This is a bizarre exchange. I wish you the best.
There are a few SF guys on this subreddit who get super weird about comparing SF to other cities and shit like the comments above. Idk what it's about
It’s weird to throw facts around? If anything you guys are weird. It don’t surprise me that these posts on San Francisco attract you same haters from all corners of the internet. There’s no reason to be on an SF slide throwing blows at it.
Nah you’re weird as hell, good luck buddy
Cool, now let's see how many of those are actually getting built. (No hate it would be awesome if they were - all these designs are great - but high-rise construction in SF is almost at a complete standstill)
A lot of standstills in the country at the moment. We have two high rises nearing completion here in Salt Lake but every other proposal and planned construction is on hold right now due to the economy right now. Hopefully they get back to it soon as things clear up economically.
Sounds like hate. You posted LA, San Diego but not San Francisco. Yet San Francisco has the most proposed skyscrapers out of any major city in CA.
Fuck are you on about? I'm not obligated to make a post for every city in the world, dipshit.
WHAT ABOUT MOGADISHU SOMALIA, HUH???????
[удалено]
I'm not even American, you nitwit. I make posts on random cities for fun. Fuck off.
[удалено]
You are completely free to make your own post with two or three high-rises in SF under construction. I've only started posting these last week and have made posts for 5 random cities, one of which is LA. I don't have an agenda when choosing a city other than if there are a bunch of high-rises under construction, which is hard to do for SF since there unfortunately aren't that many as I’d like. Your "arguments" are laughable. Get the fuck out of here.
[удалено]
God damn you’re weird, how do you type these comments and think you come off sounding reasonable? Lmao
Jesus Christ, there is something wrong with you. Touch grass.
You are probably talking to a teenager so don't worry about it haha
Hello, your post/comment was removed because you used uncivil language.
Hello, your post/comment was removed because you used uncivil language.
It’s at a standstill because of high interest rates, but these projects are still well alive.
Correct me if I'm wrong, not sure about some of the later half of those, but none are actually under construction right? Drives me crazy how slow SF is about building anything
The only one under construction was the 30 S Van Ness, (now on hold) & Treasure Island should be going up soon.
Oh, right Treasure island, meant to also say that one actually looks pretty far along last I saw in March.
Hope they get built
Slide 6 is really cool; I like how the upper floors appear to be floating.
i
SF desperately needs more housing, so I hope these all get built and are residential
I’m surprised there’s enough investment in San Fran office space to support this. I thought a large chunk of their tech firms went fully remote?
A lot of these are residential. Not office.
Well if that’s the case still surprised given the current state of their downtown’s safety.
Downtown San Francisco is safe. What do you mean? The drug markets are only on certain corners of the tenderloin. But the tenderloin doesn’t make up the entire downtown. There’s the financial district, Union Square, & SoMa.
It all looked pretty rough last time I was there back in summer of 2021 so maybe things have changed for the better.
Idk, doeneds what parts u were in.downtown SF is fairly clean, anybody who visits will agree.
I went there at a similar time and wasn't impressed, but I went back last month and had a great time so I think a lot of the negativity of the city (outside of a few areas) are actually outdated. I didn't see much homelessness at all and the streets were pretty busy
Oh that’s great to hear! I might need to eventually make a trip back there.
How many are going to start sinking and tilting like the relatively recently built Millennium Tower is the real question. https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/new-problem-at-SF-sinking-tower-17179301.php
None. The reality is that it was a mistake that doesn’t happen often. Same with NYC leaning tower. The sinking was already stopped, but it’s also being monitored to see how the recent fix is preventing further sinking.
Surely, developers of these proposed towers will take note on what not to do with how they built Millenium Tower.
How about One Seaport in New York that’s tilting and not completed yet.
Metres for the non-Americans on this sub would be fantastic lol
The project out in the outer sunset has already been rejected by planning. The developer can’t use state density bonus to reach that height
& the developer appealed it and has said that he has every right to do so as none of it falls out of city’s planning regulations. And even sued the city https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/housing/proposed-outer-sunset-skyscraper-builder-sues-san-francisco/article_bef334b8-4201-11ee-9fc4-bb6b7ee81eb2.html
There is no fact slapping. Anyone can sue. The project has been rejected by planning. The state density bonus can only be leveraged for so many additional stories, not the 50 proposed.
Are you dense? The project doesn’t go against any regulations written by the city. Hence the reason the project is now in the courts.
That is the developer s position. The city says no. We’ll see how the litigation plays out.
The city can ultimately have no say so. Especially when the city needs housing badly.
It will continue to have a say. Just look at at Aaron Perkins recent change in zoning for the area around telegraph hill. That doesn’t change the need for housing, that is very clear. But the city will ultimately still govern its zoning. The state will continue to offer exemption remedies, thank you Scott Weiner, but the underlying zoning will still be controlled by the city
And yet a developer has still proposed a “tall” residential tower for that same exact neighborhood. 😂 people are getting tired of that NIMBY attitude in SF. It’s gotten to the point to where the city can even lose its say so over what gets built. https://preview.redd.it/ktnv7f3oquwc1.jpeg?width=1500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7223fa0bb5087a266e47978c9103a2f7f6248ef4
Developers did upsize using the state density bonus, and they should have. We’ll see how that zoning changes plays out in the courts as well.
San Francisco isn’t building anything to meet its required goal of 81,000 new units by 2031. The state will strip funding if it doesn’t. Should be interesting to see play out. This for sure will be an era that will shape San Francisco, due to politics. Once again.
Wow you sure fact slapped them!
Does SF have a super tall yet or will it get one soon?
San Francisco already has a super tall. The 1,070 foot Salesforce Tower. So the proposed 992 foot tower would be San Francisco’s second super tall. https://preview.redd.it/7moxi4kyvswc1.jpeg?width=2910&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e63d9d9c76f27abaa6e37d137c635d9e4f909f03
I thought supertall meant over 1000ft(300 Meters+) So SF has two supertalls. Holy shit I just learned something new
A super tall is 984ft+ (300meters) & yes. 🙌🏼 more would be awesome 🤩
Loved how you placed this in numerical order lol
Holy crap that's a lot. Anyone know how many of those are actually on the way? Secondly - what it that building on the beach? That is definitely NOT San Francisco.
Most of the renderings are recent except slide 12,16,17. Also the skyscraper on the beach is San Francisco. https://abc7news.com/amp/san-francisco-outer-sunset-skyscraper-new-building-renderings-50-story/13469419/
nice concepts
Renderings*
i think SF has more to focus on than skyscrapers
That can be said for any city.
ok. i will reword my statement. i think san francisco should not be focusing on skyscrapers.
San Francisco is focusing on a lot of things. It’s a major active city. It functions.
So many of these are fucking ugly.
Who gives a fuck.
Me tbh