The San Francisco Planning Department has published a notice of conditional Project Eligibility for Assembly Bill 2011 Approval of the proposed 25-story mixed-use tower at 11-15 Marina Boulevard, San Francisco. The state law now mandates a final decision by August for the nearly 800-unit development and Safeway replacement along the city’s affluent northern waterfront. Align Real Estate, a prominent local developer, is the project sponsor.
15 Marina Boulevard sidewalk view, rendering by Arquitectonica
The applicant is streamlining the approval process through Senate Bill 330 and Assembly Bill 2011, also known as the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022. According to the notice, now that AB 2011 approval eligibility has been determined, the “Planning Department must complete any necessary design review within 180 days of application submittal,” i.e., early February this year. The city now has until the first of August to complete the design review and publish the Notice of Final AB 2011 Approval.
Details of the project have changed in several notable ways, including reduced parking capacity and changes to unit sizes. The 297-foot-tall structure is expected to yield just under a million square feet, including 721,120 square feet of housing, 63,220 square feet for the replacement grocery store, and 161,020 square feet for the subterranean garage.
15 Marina Boulevard showcasing the new grocery store entrance, rendering by Arquitectonica
The tower will include 790 rental apartments, of which 86 will be deed-restricted as affordable to very low-income households. Apartment sizes will vary, with 255 studios, 333 one-bedrooms, 119 two-bedrooms, and 83 three-bedrooms. The car garage will provide 164 retail parking spaces and 197 residential parking spaces. Additional storage will be provided for 362 bicycles.
Starting last year, Align Real Estate has collaborated with Safeway on several mixed-use redevelopment projects across San Francisco and one in San Mateo. Beyond their grocery projects, the firm is pursuing high-density and mid-density projects in the Mission District, SoMa, Livermore, and Walnut Creek.
Since we’ve started coverage in San Francisco, Align has completed several projects, including the Fitzgerald, the 26-story Otis, and 1028 Market Street in San Francisco, the two-towered MIRO in San Jose, and a collaboration on Santa Clara Agrihood. Align’s biggest proposal, a Cube-capped 62-story tower at 620 Folsom Street, designed by Arquitectonica, was put on hold in 2023.
15 Marina Boulevard landscaping plan, illustration by Arquitectonica
15 Marina Boulevard vertical elevation, illustration by Arquitectonica
Arquitectonica is also responsible for the design of the Marina Boulevard tower. Renderings by the Florida-based firm show a swooping tower with floorplates arched around the podium-top courtyard facing towards the bay. The massing distinguishes two towers rising from the shared podium. The western tower will reach 20 floors high and 242 feet tall, with the eastern tower rising up 25 floors to a 297-foot pinnacle. The podium-top courtyard includes a lap pool deck, pavilion areas, a yoga space, fire pits, and a multipurpose lawn.
Demolition will be required for the existing 1959-built structure, a modernist facility designed by Wurster, Bernardi & Emmons, featuring a mosaic art piece on the eastern exterior. The roughly 2.6-acre property is located along Marina Boulevard between Buchanan Street and Laguna Street. Future residents would overlook Fort Mason and Gashouse Cove and get direct views of the Golden Gate Bridge.
15 Marina Boulevard, image via Google Satellite
Construction is estimated to cost around half a billion dollars, with an unknown anticipated start date.
Subscribe to YIMBY’s daily e-mail
Follow YIMBYgram for real-time photo updates
Like YIMBY on Facebook
Follow YIMBY’s Twitter for the latest in YIMBYnews
Love to see it.
The NIMBY posters I saw posted about on poles was too funny. And after seeing the one poll of majority Marina residents IN FAVOR of the project, this just needs to happen.
This is the kind of building I would EXPECT to see by the waterfront of a worldclass city.
Additionally, this project would likely bring online more affordable units than possibly ever before in this neighborhood.
What poll? Can you plz share a link or point a guy towards a thing.
I’m struggling to backpedal on the article. But around 60% was the “for” result. Take it with a grain of salt, since it’s not a source that’s popping up.
But in other news, screw people like Teri!
I hope this project, as well as Align Real Estate and Safeway’s other proposals comes to fruition!
Great to see. The neighborhood needs housing.
This must be an anti-housing pay-op.
Yes!!
I just don’t understand why everyone thinks that when you build huge monstrosities such as this in SF that people will not own cars and will use public transport or bicycles. And I know that if I could afford a place with an unimpeded view of the Golden Gate Bridge I would be irritated that there would be ultra low income people being able to have that same view without having worked hard to afford it – to basically have it handed to them. I guess I am really, truly a NIMBY. Currently fighting low income housing in my area that has NO public transportation, no medical services, no police or fire, no jobs, and 18 miles from the BART station.
Every morning it’s going to be a swarm of Teslas, Rivians, and Land Rovers issuing forth from the garage. Leave no Tech Bro behind is what I always say.
Public transit? What’s that? It must be for the poors. But the Marina, the “White Rez,” is already like that, so who cares?
TL;DR – Hates housing for poor people.
Saved ya folks.
Hey folks – I’m thinking about proposing legislation that mandates anyone making under $100K/year has walls placed in front of their windows, and that those windows also be smeared with the excrement of their fellow poors and effluent from the nearest Superfund site. Anyone with me?
This fool moved away from all the “riff raff” a minute ago, as they claimed. Somehow, they must still be mustering the energy to NIMBY-fyi neighborhoods they haven’t lived in for decades.
Oh, and they don’t live in their neighborhood either. Probably too poor to live here.
Hi Teri,
I’m only 30 but inherited $20 million from my parents. Technically, I could also afford one of these units without having worked very hard for it. In fact, I wouldn’t have worked at all. And that basically goes for many of my friends in tech who got lucky and hit it big with an IPO payday. There’s no correlation between how hard you work and how much money you have. Getting lucky is what counts.
nice reminder with good examples
There are two major bus routes that serve the Safeway Marina, the 30X and the 43 Masonic. There are also plenty of businesses in the surrounding neigborhood that need workers.
Housing is a right, not a privilege, and your feelings that low-income people don’t deserve it sounds like a you problem—talk with your therapist about it. Also, surprise, many low-income people do work very hard for a living.
Ship it
The more NIMBYs complain, the more evidence that this project is needed for San Francisco.
I’m curious about what the south/east/west (non-Safeway entrance) elevations will look like. Will there be any other commercial space, or community space at the ground floor? What will the residential entrances look like?
Couldn’t endorse this enough. It will be an iconic center for the community.
Build it.
The fact that we have this kind of proposal a few blocks from a project that couldn’t pencil out a 4 story condo and is now sadly planned to be a single story “commercial space” is ludicrous.
I’m curious to see how the commercial loading/waste management will be handled here. At the current Safeway, the loading occurs along the Buchanon Street side; maybe that will continue for the new tower? Also, think it would be good to dedicate some curb space to passenger pickup/drop-off (maybe along the North Point side?). Looking forward to seeing more details on how the ground floor along the non-Safeway sides will look/work, and what if any sidewalk changes will need to be implemented. Those curb cuts along Laguna probably go away. Anyway, cool looking project.
I like the gap between the towers to allow views as well . We have to balance preserving views and the obvious need for hirise housing to address affordability at any level. Again this is not Sausalito or Carmel .
San fransico is tryin to be a world class city when the lost it decades ago.its got to get rid of the drig addicted bums, trash garbage first before trying to bring elegance back.
Jane, you are so right! I worked for PacBell in SF back in the 80s. I commuted via BART, which was clean/lovely/efficient, and enjoyed hanging out in SF regularly. Now we steer clear of it and BART.
Yeah, SF was amazing before we failed to build enough housing to meet demand, leading to the homelessness and and degraded city services that you are talking about. The YIMBYs are the ones trying to solve those problems at the source. If “drug addicted bums” were the problem, SF housing would be cheap! The problem is not enough housing.
Imagine complaining about a problem and the solution to it at the same time lol
Sorry folks, I am a NIMBY. I was born in Oakland and was raised in El Cerrito – right next to Richmond. My parents finally moved away when the grocery stores in El Cerrito hired armed security guards. And this was in 1994. Richmond bled into El Cerrito and everything deteriorated. I am a firm believer in working hard having its rewards. Sorry, but I went to school with generations of welfare recipients. People sucking off the government. And it continues to this day. Generations of them.
Awww piss off mate.
Seriously, you’re in the wrong echo chamber. And it’s so sweet your kind is dying off.
“Sorry, but I went to school with generations of welfare recipients. People sucking off the government. And it continues to this day. Generations of them.”
That might have something to do with how expensive housing is in this region. Which might have something to do with how little of it there is available.
This project would be fine in Las Vegas or Dubai , it is much too large and gaudy for this location. I know we need more housing but for low and moderate income folks,
Not sure many could afford a unit here.
“The tower will include 790 rental apartments, of which 86 will be deed-restricted as affordable to very low-income households.”
It’s so funny to see people saying things like “This project would be fine in Las Vegas or Dubai , it is much too large and gaudy for this location”. This is the literal definition of NIMBY.
The city has its chance decades ago to upzone in a slow organic way, but the NIMBYs said NO. Which plunged us into a housing crisis that forces developers to build bigger buildings like this. When NIMBYs fight low-rise 4-plexs with the same vigor as they do skyscrapers, the smaller builders will often yield to the pressure. The only thing that can be built now is massive developments backed by teams of lawyers who are willing to take years to fight off NIMBY opposition. So now that’s all that gets built.
Dubai? Vegas? Get real. This is not a 100-story tower with flashing neon.
There are already many existing much taller residential towers in SF than this proposal. Residential towers of this size have been built in SF for *many* decades.
A grim parking lot with a dull big-box grocery store adjacent to it is hardly something to shed tears over losing (and a new grocery store will be built with the residential tower). If you love the existing building, move to any old suburb to find something similar, but it is not anything that shouts uniquely San Francisco.
“This project would be fine in Las Vegas or Dubai”
As if San Francisco isn’t also a world-class city
“it is much too large and gaudy for this location”
It’s 297 feet tall in a city where the tallest existing building is 1070 feet and the tallest proposed building is 1225 feet. In a state experiencing one of the worst housing shortages in the world
“I know we need more housing but for low and moderate income folks, Not sure many could afford a unit here”
Which is exactly why more housing is needed
Not much sympathy for the NIMBY property owners clutching their pearls, but that is truly a monstrosity. A miami condo type building with no sense of context. Really ugly.
The yes or no question is irrelevant until the engineering dilemma is solved. The location is on vulnerable landfill. For this tower to be stable long term, the foundation will need to be driven down to bed rock or it could be another Millennium Tower debacle or worse. If the project does not include this costly foundation, who will be responsible for the mess after the next liquefaction triggering quake?
One of the suggested solutions published by the Association of Engineering Geologists is to just maintain an insurance policy to cover the damage. If that’s the kind of solution that this development is relying upon, then San Franciscans should not stand for it.