Cloudy and windy with periods of rain. High 56F. Winds S at 25 to 40 mph. Chance of rain 90%. Rainfall near a half an inch. Winds could occasionally gust over 40 mph..
Tonight
Becoming partly cloudy after some evening wind and rain. Low near 50F. Winds SSW at 20 to 30 mph. Chance of rain 80%. Winds could occasionally gust over 40 mph.
Rendering of the project proposed at Oyster Point in South San Francisco.
A potentially sweeping development aiming to transform the South San Francisco waterfront is again changing hands, as another company acquired rights to build along Oyster Point.
Kilroy Realty announced Monday, June 4, it is spending $308 million to purchase 2.5 million square feet of entitlements from Oyster Point Development, which attempted to build office space and housing at the 40-acre site.
The new property owner plans to build 11 office and laboratory buildings accommodating the city’s booming biotech industry at the property abutting Oyster Point and Marina boulevards, according to a press release.
City Manager Mike Futrell said he believes the new owner will ultimately bring forward a state-of-the-art project furthering South San Francisco’s reputation as the life science industry’s premier destination.
“We think it is a good arrangement for the city and its residents and we are confident Kilroy will deliver on all the open spaces, parks, beaches and public amenities as well as bringing world-class life science buildings to South San Francisco,” he said, referencing the community benefits offered through the site’s development agreement.
Rendering of the project proposed at Oyster Point in South San Francisco.
Under terms of the most recent deal, Kilroy Realty will inherit the obligations of the work started by Oyster Point Development following the company’s acquisition of the site from Shorenstein in 2016.
A subsidiary of China’s Greenland real estate investment group, Oyster Point Development paid $171 million for the expansive site abutting city land with an eye on building millions of square feet of commercial space as well as housing. The housing units would have been the city’s first east of Highway 101.
The residential development proposal was met by resistance from representatives of the life sciences industry though, with claims residents living in the area could make it less attractive to businesses.
In face of the opposition, Oyster Point Development announced earlier this year it was indefinitely pausing the push for building the planned 1,200 units to re-evaluate its stake in South San Francisco.
For his part, Futrell acknowledged the housing issue was a turning point in the fate of the site.
“Once the residential application was withdrawn by Oyster Point Development, talks accelerated and Kilroy purchased the entire development,” he said.
Those talks were established by the foundation laid when Kilroy purchased a portion of the development rights to the early phases of construction late last year. Under the agreement, Oyster Point Development planned to do the infrastructure work around the area and Kilroy would complete the first planned phase of commercial development. Kilroy also recently purchased another corporate property along Oyster Point to grow its presence nearby.
Recommended for you
With the company already invested in the project, Futrell said he believes the new owner and city officials would continue to work seamlessly through the building process.
“We do have a working relationship with the staff at Kilroy, which started last year when they came on the scene,” he said.
A rendering of the project proposed near Oyster Point Marina and Park in South San Francisco.
Courtesy of Oyster Point Development
The company’s chairman and CEO John Kilroy expressed his enthusiasm for the development in a prepared statement.
“Kilroy Oyster Point is a significant opportunity to expand our West Coast life science platform in a prudent and disciplined manner,” he said. “It offers all the advantages we look for in new development — a strong location in a world-class market serving a dynamic industry with all the services and amenities required to attract today’s young, urban innovative workforce.”
Futrell said he is confident in the company’s ability to deliver on its vision.
“They typically own and hold long term the buildings they build. And they take great pride in architecture. So I look for them to redesign slightly the development into something that is architecturally iconic and unique,” he said.
In the immediate term, Futrell said it is reasonable to expect the new property owner will focus on finishing the ongoing infrastructure work then construct at least two new commercial buildings.
He added talks for housing at the site are not completely off the table but, for now, officials are looking to proactively calm the traffic congestion which could be invited through such a sizable commercial development.
Construction at the site will include improvements designed to allow shuttle and bus access, as well as better routes for bikes, pedestrians and other alternative forms of transportation, said Futrell.
With the significant amount of work ahead on the horizon, Futrell said he is certain the correct development partner was identified to push the massive project ahead.
“Kilroy will step into the shoes of Oyster Point Development to continue the project and we are very excited to have Kilroy as a partner in South San Francisco,” he said.
What has happened with Oyster Point is a complete and utter moral travesty. As far as I am aware, we have a housing shortage and not a biotech office space shortage. The clear and present priority for all new development should be housing. To put the prospects of much-needed housing aside in order to do the bidding of the biotech giants and of realty behemoth Kilroy is rank moral cowardice. While “public” officials work to fatten the likes of Kilroy who have already profited mightily from the housing crisis, homelessness, underhousing, and mass displacement continue to reach record levels. Shame on any elected officials who go along with this incredibly offensive misuse of Oyster Point. Vote them out!
South San Francisco, with "Cap'n Mike Futrell" at the wheel, looks to push-along another enormous and predictably-difficult project.
I wish I knew what makes Futrell and his futurian cohorts feel the city can manage the consequences of this construction job when they can't even maintain a tiny, 69-year old bridge without bringing traffic on US101 to its knees? When residents can't get from downtown (Grand Ave.) to El Camino Real (the main drag) unless they spend 5+ minutes at traffic stops - more during peak traffic hours? A city so ill-served by transport that it must operate a under-utilized free shuttle making fifteen circuits of the city Monday-Friday, but can't get kids to school without backing up traffic twice a day?
Imagine - there are presently three ways in and out of the east-side (I'm not counting the foolish ferry): Oyster Pt. Blvd, East Grand, and Utah. During commute hours you risk spending six minutes to drive 100 feet on those thoroughfares. Now the city proposes adding another thousand cars? Not to mention allowing construction workers to blithely stop traffic whenever it seems convenient (for them).
Yup! Cap'n Mike and his crew of incompetents haven't shown the ability to manage a game of tag. Now they want us to believe another complex and enormous project will just be fine and dandy for us all...
Considering the City slapped huge sewer feeslast year for long term residents and lowered them for new development speaks to the disregard the city leadership has for the community, and the sewer costs will rise again. They ignore the realties of new building: old infrastructure. We have old streets, old sewers, old planning, but they want to cram more housing. We are a small town, we can't be everything to everyone. You'd think the City was running out of money, but the opposite is true. The City enjoysy a healthy income thanks to 3 Costcos and decent property tax, but it's not enough for them, unlike neighboring cities: San Bruno who could use an infusion of revenue and considering a sales tax. I hope they dont as I will shop in San Francisco like they avoid shopping in SSF. The government has to stop raising the cost of living with taxes because they can't solve the problems. Cities sell land and tell developers to build, but incredibly short sighted closly looking at the realities of new building.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(3) comments
What has happened with Oyster Point is a complete and utter moral travesty. As far as I am aware, we have a housing shortage and not a biotech office space shortage. The clear and present priority for all new development should be housing. To put the prospects of much-needed housing aside in order to do the bidding of the biotech giants and of realty behemoth Kilroy is rank moral cowardice. While “public” officials work to fatten the likes of Kilroy who have already profited mightily from the housing crisis, homelessness, underhousing, and mass displacement continue to reach record levels. Shame on any elected officials who go along with this incredibly offensive misuse of Oyster Point. Vote them out!
South San Francisco, with "Cap'n Mike Futrell" at the wheel, looks to push-along another enormous and predictably-difficult project.
I wish I knew what makes Futrell and his futurian cohorts feel the city can manage the consequences of this construction job when they can't even maintain a tiny, 69-year old bridge without bringing traffic on US101 to its knees? When residents can't get from downtown (Grand Ave.) to El Camino Real (the main drag) unless they spend 5+ minutes at traffic stops - more during peak traffic hours? A city so ill-served by transport that it must operate a under-utilized free shuttle making fifteen circuits of the city Monday-Friday, but can't get kids to school without backing up traffic twice a day?
Imagine - there are presently three ways in and out of the east-side (I'm not counting the foolish ferry): Oyster Pt. Blvd, East Grand, and Utah. During commute hours you risk spending six minutes to drive 100 feet on those thoroughfares. Now the city proposes adding another thousand cars? Not to mention allowing construction workers to blithely stop traffic whenever it seems convenient (for them).
Yup! Cap'n Mike and his crew of incompetents haven't shown the ability to manage a game of tag. Now they want us to believe another complex and enormous project will just be fine and dandy for us all...
Considering the City slapped huge sewer feeslast year for long term residents and lowered them for new development speaks to the disregard the city leadership has for the community, and the sewer costs will rise again. They ignore the realties of new building: old infrastructure. We have old streets, old sewers, old planning, but they want to cram more housing. We are a small town, we can't be everything to everyone.
You'd think the City was running out of money, but the opposite is true. The City enjoysy a healthy income thanks to 3 Costcos and decent property tax, but it's not enough for them, unlike neighboring cities: San Bruno who could use an infusion of revenue and considering a sales tax. I hope they dont as I will shop in San Francisco like they avoid shopping in SSF. The government has to stop raising the cost of living with taxes because they can't solve the problems. Cities sell land and tell developers to build, but incredibly short sighted closly looking at the realities of new building.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.