Plans Submitted for Another SF Skyline-Altering Skyscraper
Who would like another shiny skyscraper offsetting San Francisco’s skyline? Apparently, project developer Crescent Heights does. The Florida-based company’s plans for a 65-story skyscraper feel like another ploy to fleece profit from San Francisco. If built to specs, 10 South Van Ness would be the city’s fifth-tallest building.
Here’s the problem.
You know how Houston and LA think that adding “one more lane” will improve their notoriously bad traffic? That’s how San Francisco looks at luxury housing.
You need only walk through Techie Soma, site of the beleaguered Millennium Tower, to glimpse what this belief system really does. Years after COVID tore the veil from San Francisco’s generous one-percenters, the glass skyscrapers by the waterfront still reflect mostly emptiness. Putting the wealthy first backfired spectacularly and yet our local government keeps going back to developers like a battered spouse. I should know, I was one. It’s possible City Hall was so used to the revenue from selling out San Francisco, it’s all they know anymore.
There’s no guarantee that 10 South Van Ness’ residents won’t bail in the next social crisis. Look at how many wealthy urbanites abandoned San Francisco during COVID. It’s foolish to believe that the people who can afford to live in these spaces intend to serve anyone’s interest but their own. Because money moves, nothing keeps the rich in one place.
The proof is in the wording.
New developments advocate SF Yimby says the tower “will rise 775 feet tall, yielding around 1.5 million square feet of floor area including 18,800 square feet of commercial retail space. Parking will be provided for six cars and 372 bicycles. The project will add 952 units to the city, including 73 units of affordable housing. Apartment types will vary, with 515 one-bedrooms, 408 two-bedrooms, and 29 three-bedrooms.”
Ask yourself who and what this project is serving. Are developers responding to changes in the economy, or adding almost 19,000 more square feet of retail space to a city all but forsaken by brick-and-mortar retail? Is it reasonable to expect the tower will fill with fit, sporty tenants (372 bicycle spaces? Come on), or does it matter? I’ll bet those six precious parking spaces will go to the building’s penthouse dwellers.
Now the fun part. Usually that bit about affordable housing assuages class-conscious concerns, but dig deeper. 73 affordable units have been outsourced to another address entirely. Instead of rubbing elbows with 10 South Van Ness’ rich tenants the riff-raff will live off-site at 1979 Mission. That site, across from 16th Street BART, sits within view but well south of the planned 65-story skyscraper. That development is separate from 10 South Van Ness; it will follow a different development schedule. I wonder which site will see construction start first.
Crescent Heights said they’ll add 73 affordable housing units “to the city.” They didn’t say where.
We need another glass real estate cabinet for the rich about as much as we need Elon Musk back.
And yet that’s precisely what’s happening. Not Musk’s return thank heavens, but more first-class residential highrises designed for a wealthy few. Considering these luxury towers during a housing crisis feels like City Hall is desperate for a bygone San Francisco. What’s worse, it could also mean that our politicians have given up on the city’s long-term health, trading it all for short-term personal gain.
After all, who really benefits from projects like these coming to fruition?
If that isn’t bad enough, 10 South Van Ness is not the only major luxury development in the works. SF Yimby‘s article mentions more. “The potential tallest project is the supertall residential skyscraper at 50 Main Street, followed by the embattled 910-foot Oceanwide Center project and the recently filed residential tower which might rise 844 feet tall at 530 Howard Street.”
I am tired of suffering on behalf of City Hall’s nihilism.
It is well within City Hall’s power to directly invest in its constituents by prioritizing true affordable housing. That they simply won’t do it speaks volumes. I’ll have faith in a San Francisco politician when they commit to long-term, famously unprofitable affordable housing. The working class does everything for this city. Why are we always thought of last, if at all?
Howdy! My name is Katy Atchison and I'm an Associate Editor for Broke-Ass Stuart.
I want to take the time to say thank you for supporting independent news media by reading BrokeAssstuart.com. Supporting independent news sources like Broke-Ass Stuart is vital to supporting our community because it amplifies the voices of a wide variety of diverse opinions. You also help support small businesses and local artists by sharing stories from Broke-Ass Stuart.
Because you're one of our supporters, I wanted to send over a pro-tip.
Our bi-weekly newsletter is a great way to get round ups of Broke-Ass Stuart stories, learn about new businesses in The Bay Area, find out about fun local events and be first in line for giveaways.
If you’d like to get our newsletter, signup right here, it takes 5 seconds.
You Might Also Like
