SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed

[ByTheBay]

As Phallic a design the Transbay Tower is, the redesign looks ironically like a camel toe. Such a shame SOM lost, smh.

[tech12]

As Phallic a design the Transbay Tower is, the redesign looks ironically like a camel toe. Such a shame SOM lost, smh.

:rolleyes:

How is the pelli tower reminiscent of a dick, but SOM's isn't? The SOM tower is long and skinny too! Isn't that the criteria you're going by? Hell, i guess every downtown in the US is just a forest of giant dicks. As for the slits making it a camel toe...uh, i don't know about you, but i've never seen a four-sided vagina with 4 openings before. Let alone one that's over 1,000 feet tall, and made of metal. Have you?

If you hate the building, fine, but what's with these childish, and bad, genital comparisons? Lemme guess, you were one of the geniuses calling the Transamerica Pyramid "Pereira's prick" back when it was proposed?

[jbm]

On an unrelated note, it appears that a little bit of rebar has been laid at foundry 3. they are not done clearing dirt, but along the western edge, where they have dug deepest, there is definitely rebar laying around, and it appears that some has actually been laid in place.

the same can be said for 1600 market. still clearing dirt away, but on the western edge rebar has definitely been laid. this one might move quick given that its not that big a footprint.

[lz131313]

On an unrelated note, it appears that a little bit of rebar has been laid at foundry 3. they are not done clearing dirt, but along the western edge, where they have dug deepest, there is definitely rebar laying around, and it appears that some has actually been laid in place.

the same can be said for 1600 market. still clearing dirt away, but on the western edge rebar has definitely been laid. this one might move quick given that its not that big a footprint.
you mean foundry 4? 1,2,3 are all done

[WildCowboy]

you mean foundry 4? 1,2,3 are all done

No, it is III. II and IV were the first ones to be built, followed by I.

[lz131313]

No, it is III. II and IV were the first ones to be built, followed by I.

oh yeah well i mean its all the same thing and design. I think they should have made the last building the tallest atleast 20 floors it looks like a campus.

[tech12]

oh yeah well i mean its all the same thing and design. I think they should have made the last building the tallest atleast 20 floors it looks like a campus.

Agreed. Just one of those buildings would look a bit out of place in my opinion, but the development seems even more out of place with three (and soon four) buildings that all look the same. And they unfortunately stand out even more because of their unique curvy roofs, which I never liked much. But, the plus side to that is the new Transbay terminal park will have some extra sun hitting it due to the lack of skyscrapers on that south-middle side, instead of being completely hemmed in by towers and perpetually in shade (which would be pretty cool too IMO, but I like sun as well).

[ByTheBay]

:rolleyes:

How is the pelli tower reminiscent of a dick, but SOM's isn't? The SOM tower is long and skinny too! Isn't that the criteria you're going by? Hell, i guess every downtown in the US is just a forest of giant dicks. As for the slits making it a camel toe...uh, i don't know about you, but i've never seen a four-sided vagina with 4 openings before. Let alone one that's over 1,000 feet tall, and made of metal. Have you?

If you hate the building, fine, but what's with these childish, and bad, genital comparisons? Lemme guess, you were one of the geniuses calling the Transamerica Pyramid "Pereira's prick" back when it was proposed?

Wow, can't take a joke much? What's with the uptightness? I thought San Francisco is a city of 'anything goes' attitude, I should know I grew up there as a kid, though I must admit that was a decade and a half ago so maybe the demographic has changed so much that the city has lost its free spirit nature. I apologize, I will try maintain this response as monotone as possible from further on out to avoid much offense.

I don't hate the Pelli design btw, I just prefer the SOM one. And the outward tapering of the Pelli design versus the inward tapering of SOM achieves the comparisons to said offensive body part. The internet polls did favor SOM by a sizeable margin so a lot of people seem to agree which design is superior. Regardless, I don't consider the current design an eyesore, it's great that San
Francisco is getting a new tallest, it's just a rather unimaginative design that evokes similarities to Hong Kong's IFC. It's just my personal opinion that the city missed an opportunity to go with a more appealing design.

[coyotetrickster]

Wow, can't take a joke much? What's with the uptightness? I thought San Francisco is a city of 'anything goes' attitude, I should know I grew up there as a kid, though I must admit that was a decade and a half ago so maybe the demographic has changed so much that the city has lost its free spirit nature. I apologize, I will try maintain this response as monotone as possible from further on out to avoid much offense.

I don't hate the Pelli design btw, I just prefer the SOM one. And the outward tapering of the Pelli design versus the inward tapering of SOM achieves the comparisons to said offensive body part. The internet polls did favor SOM by a sizeable margin so a lot of people seem to agree which design is superior. Regardless, I don't consider the current design an eyesore, it's great that San
Francisco is getting a new tallest, it's just a rather unimaginative design that evokes similarities to Hong Kong's IFC. It's just my personal opinion that the city missed an opportunity to go with a more appealing design.

Who said the penis was an offensive body part?

The city didn't get a choice in the design. It was the developer who picked the design.

[tech12]

Wow, can't take a joke much? What's with the uptightness? I thought San Francisco is a city of 'anything goes' attitude, I should know I grew up there as a kid, though I must admit that was a decade and a half ago so maybe the demographic has changed so much that the city has lost its free spirit nature. I apologize, I will try maintain this response as monotone as possible from further on out to avoid much offense.


I grew up in SF too. And I'm definitely not uptight (well, aside from this topic I guess), but I think it's stupid to compare skyscrapers one doesn't like to dicks and camel toes, when it barely looks like either one. It's like you have to be intentionally obtuse just to see it as those things. And it was already annoying enough to see 500 people on socketsite and SFgate saying it, just because they didn't have enough reading comprehension skills to understand that "slits" is plural, and that they are on all sides. They had to all knee-jerk react and assume from the crappy render that was available that it was just ONE slit, and it looked oh so much like a dick just because of that, which is already stupid to begin with. And then what do you know...they get a better render, and all of a sudden they see they were wrong, and that the crown actually doesn't look much like a penis head, at all. And there hasn't been a single dick comparison on socketsite since. Because it's a bad comparison. And even if the tower isn't as amazing as SOM's it's still pretty nice, and worthy of more than people going "LOL DICKSSSSS" (and there are several buildings very similar to this around the world...i guess people in big cities world-wide are just blind to the fact that they are building these ugly penis-towers? :rolleyes:). You might as well just compare any skyscraper to a dick at that point. It's silly. So that's my explanation for getting all annoyed over this.

[bluntcard]

500 people suggesting a building looks like a penis is an indication that a lot of people think a building looks like a penis. It isn't lack of creative or mature thinking, it's just a fact. Who would care if it looked like a robot claw or a cigar or a torch? In a city where sexuality is expressed more openly than most cities, people might be most sensitive to a giant endless erection and the ridicule that it would incite. It looks like SF has a boner. Although I personally like this illustration much better than the previous one.

It's a showcase for this amazing city. It should be a centerpiece and flawlessly awesome. It isn't.

[fflint]

It looks like SF has a boner.
San Francisco is a gay rapist menacing America's butthole with this vicious supertall boner! /histrionic anthropomorphism

Is it not enough for the haters to say, once, that they just don't care for the design and leave it at that? It's not like any one of us, or the city, can do anything about the ultimate design's aesthetics.

It's a showcase for this amazing city. It should be a centerpiece and flawlessly awesome. It isn't.
Nobody I know here, inside or outside the real estate development field, thinks this private real estate development "should be a centerpiece" for the city. That's SSP forum-think, not how San Franciscans think about this city. And "flawlessly awesome" is an awfully unrealistic standard for a San Francisco skyscraper.

[bluntcard]

[QUOTE=fflint;5862282)
Nobody I know here, inside or outside the real estate development field, thinks this private real estate development "should be a centerpiece" for the city. [/QUOTE]

Because everybody knows a private enterprise should be able to build any giant, penetrating monstrosity without the opinion or input of the people who will have to live with it forever.

[Gordo]

Hey, has anyone noticed that the Transbay Tower proposal looks like a dick?















;)

...and back to more interesting stuff now - I was out in the Richmond yesterday and noticed a bunch of earth moving equipment parked behind the shuttered Alexandria theater (18th and Geary). I remember a proposal to build some condos behind and turn the theater into a restaurant/retail/theater complex - does anyone know if that is now being kicked off? I haven't seen or heard anything about it for ages, and man, that theater is decrepit.

[lz131313]

Agreed. Just one of those buildings would look a bit out of place in my opinion, but the development seems even more out of place with three (and soon four) buildings that all look the same. And they unfortunately stand out even more because of their unique curvy roofs, which I never liked much. But, the plus side to that is the new Transbay terminal park will have some extra sun hitting it due to the lack of skyscrapers on that south-middle side, instead of being completely hemmed in by towers and perpetually in shade (which would be pretty cool too IMO, but I like sun as well).

Totally agree ! They look like something that would fit in mission bay.... i really dont know why they were all designed the same ! Its a shame since that part of SOMA is prime land and they chose to build that. But yeah it will have more sunshine ! :)

[markermiller]

Gordo... I know what you mean. I was by the old theater the other night, and OMG, it's nasty at night. According to RichmondSFBlog there's a community meeting this coming Friday:


The Alexandria movie theater closed in February, 2004 and since then has sat unused, deteriorating behind cyclone fencing. At times it’s been broken into and used by homeless, and at other times the front entry has been marred by graffiti and garbage. Last June, the theater’s blade sign had to be repaired and painted after high winds knocked portions of it loose.

The theater building has been on the selling block for awhile now, but there is interest in developing the property.

In January 2011, the Historic Preservation Commission heard from developers about plans for the property, which included a 221 seat theater and commercial retail space in the theater building, and a mixed use development on the back parking lot with retail space on the ground floor, residential units above, and underground parking.

And then it got quiet. We didn’t hear anything about the development moving forward and the theater continues to be a blight on the neighborhood.

Recently, Supervisor Eric Mar began asking questions again about the Alexandria and its development plans. It turns out that the development is still underway, though plans have changed since those that were shared in early 2011.

Peter Lauterborn, Legislative Aide to Supervisor Mar tells us, “the theater will stay part theater, part commercial, while the back lot is mixed use, with commercial on the ground floor and residences above.”

Sounds like the same plan, so why the delay? “They have changed the new building significantly in style and that has slowed it down somewhat. They claim the new design should fit in the neighborhood better,” Lauterborn said. He also sent us the rendering above which was provided by the architects.

On Friday, October 12, Supervisor Mar will host a neighborhood meeting about the Alexandria Theater to discuss its current upkeep as well as the revised development plans.

The agenda for the meeting includes a discussion of efforts by the Department of Public Works to keep the site clean in the short-term, and a presentation by the architect and the city planners on the development designs.

The meeting will take place at the Richmond District YMCA (360 18th Avenue) from 6pm until 8pm. You can find out more and RSVP via Facebook (though not required).

http://richmondsfblog.com/2012/09/20/public-meeting-about-the-alexandria-theater-development-oct-12/

[ByTheBay]

Who said the penis was an offensive body part?

The city didn't get a choice in the design. It was the developer who picked the design.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm only going by memory but what I recall was that the city leaders were the ones who voted on the winning bid to design the Transbay Terminal/Transbay Tower and the developer was later chosen. Due to the costs associated with the SOM proposal, the city chose the Pelli proposal to expedite the project in order to attract a developer due to that proposal's lower projected costs, therefore going with the safer and less daring design. It was intended to be a decision merited on functionality, but the catch to that was the tower was supposed to project an iconic signature look for the city and Pelli's design fails to achieve that I believe since it looks somewhat like a carbon copy of similar designs.

I don't mean to beat a dead horse but...

I didn't mean that the penis is an offensive body part, what I meant was I didn't intend to offend people by mentioning it.

In response to tech12:
Architecture that is iconic in nature are typically inspired by various physical forms in our environment. For example Beijing's bird's nest (self explanatory), Sydeny's opera house (Sails), TransAmerica pyramid (a pyramid), the Shard (a shard of glass), etc. There's even a skyscraper in Thailand that looks like an elephant and was intended to do so. Obviously comparisons will be made towards similar aesthetics. Most skyscrapers don't look like penises because penises don't have square edges at the top which how most skyscrapers are designed (boxy), but when it looks like a penis people will think it looks like a penis just the way people think the TransAmerica pyramid looks like a pyramid. There happen to be a few skyscrapers that do, such as the Gherkin and Torre Agbar. It is what it is! Had it been a building intended to be less iconic, then it probably wouldn't stir so much strong opinions but this thing will be front and center of the city's skyline. Again, I don't hate the design, it's symmetrical which I like, I'm not a huge fan of all these assymetrical skyscrapers that are being plopped up in various cities around the world just for the sake of dramatizing their respective skylines. I actually think it's rather sleek and a positive tilt towards modern 21st century architecture that San Francisco should embrace, I just don't see it as iconic, unless the design will make it infamous. But hey, even the Eiffel Tower in the beginning had it's fair share of naysayers!

[fflint]

Haters gonna hate, and hate, and hate and hate!

[caramatt]

Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm only going by memory but what I recall was that the city leaders were the ones who voted on the winning bid to design the Transbay Terminal/Transbay Tower and the developer was later chosen. Due to the costs associated with the SOM proposal, the city chose the Pelli proposal to expedite the project in order to attract a developer due to that proposal's lower projected costs, therefore going with the safer and less daring design. It was intended to be a decision merited on functionality, but the catch to that was the tower was supposed to project an iconic signature look for the city and Pelli's design fails to achieve that I believe since it looks somewhat like a carbon copy of similar designs.


You are wrong in fact. The teams were comprised of paired developers and architects from the get-go. The most important thing in the board of supervisor's eyes was how much each team would be willing to pay for the land the tower would be built on, which in turn would pay for the construction of the terminal. Hines offered the most for the land by a large margin, and they were chosen as the developer - along with their predetermined design by Pelli Clarke Pelli. The city could care less about how much the tower was going to cost the developer, it was more interested in the cost of the terminal and the amenities it offered to the city. Incidentally, SOM's proposal placed third in the final recommendations.

I for one am pumped about Pelli's tower going up, assuming that it still has the funding to do so. I think it'll look great on the skyline.

[Nexis4Jersey]

Alot of Cesar Pelli buildings look like Dicks....

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/GoldmanSachs2.JPG/682px-GoldmanSachs2.JPG

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/HK_International_Finance_Centre_200809.jpg/576px-HK_International_Finance_Centre_200809.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/Zurichtoren_Den_Haag.JPG/576px-Zurichtoren_Den_Haag.JPG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C3%A9sar_Pelli

[tech12]

lol...well, i guess some people just see dicks everywhere.

[edwards]

http://sfist.com/attachments/SFist_Jay/meier-one-van-ness-tower.jpg
http://www.socketsite.com/One%20Van%20Ness%20Aerial%20Rendering.jpg
http://www.socketsite.com/One%20Van%20Ness%20Elevations.gif


The gorgeous proposed condo tower at the foot of Van Ness Avenue, dubbed One Van Ness, has moved one step forward toward becoming a reality with a more fully fleshed out design proposal. Architect Richard Meier, famous for his modern white forms and especially for the Getty Center in Los Angeles, designed the building, which features a sculptural, diaphanous white glass skin wrapping the building.

http://sfist.com/2012/10/11/richard_meier-designed_one_van_ness.php
http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/10/details_for_the_starchitect_designed_tower_dubbed_one_v.html (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/10/details_for_the_starchitect_designed_tower_dubbed_one_v.html#comments)

[ElDuderino]

:previous: I forgot about that beauty. Hopefully all goes well. Mid Market is going to look totally different in a few years. It will have it's own mini-skyline :tup:

[tech12]

:previous: I forgot about that beauty. Hopefully all goes well. Mid Market is going to look totally different in a few years. It will have it's own mini-skyline :tup:

It already has a mini-skyline, it'll just be a better and larger mini-skyline. And speaking of the civic center skyline, as of 2007, the city was apparently planning on raising heights limits all around the intersection of Van Ness and Market, as part of the Market-Octavia plan, though I'm not sure what the progress on that has been since then. Here's an old conceptual rendering of a 400' tower for 10 South Van Ness (where there's currently a Honda dealership), which is right across the street from the 1 Van Ness tower:

http://www.socketsite.com/10%20S%20Van%20Ness%20Massing.jpg
http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2007/10/san_franciscos_market_octavia_neighborhood_plan_moves_f.html

If anything like that gets built there, that would be great. And the location of the goodwill headquarters, at the corner of Mission and South Van Ness, is another potential spot for a future 400' foot tower, apparently.

[homebucket]

Both these towers look great. I could see this area becoming like a mini Midtown Manhattan to the Financial District. Now if only SF could develop towers lining Golden Gate Park as well, it could further the Manhattanization process.

[lz131313]

Both these towers look great. I could see this area becoming like a mini Midtown Manhattan to the Financial District. Now if only SF could develop towers lining Golden Gate Park as well, it could further the Manhattanization process.

IKR! wouldnt that be amazing !! it would be exactly like central park ! but tbh that will never happen unless a 7.0+ earthqauke flattens the area other than that dont see it coming soon.

[tech12]

IKR! wouldnt that be amazing !! it would be exactly like central park ! but tbh that will never happen unless a 7.0+ earthqauke flattens the area other than that dont see it coming soon.

Agreed, there's very little chance of that happening, aside from some kind of apocalyptic event levelling the current buildings (and even then I'm not sure it would happen). But as much as I'd like highrises lining the park, I really like how things are now as well.

Instead I'll just stay excited about all the new highrises that may actually get built: the towers planned for the Transbay/Rincon Hill area, the stuff planned for 4th street, extending from Yerba Beuna Gardens to Mission Bay (which would max out at potentially 400' by the Caltrain station), the stuff planned for Mission Bay (which would also potentially max out at around 400', in seawall lot 337), and the stuff planned for mid-market/civic center.

SF's skyline is gonna be seeing some significant changes. I just hope it doesn't take too long for it to all happen. And I really hope the several 700'+ towers proposed currently actually get built. I would hate for every single new tower over the next decade or two to be under 600 feet tall, aside from the transbay tower.

Unfortunately though, it seems like there will be little chance of new highrises north or west of market street/downtown. I would love too see some ~200 foot towers along geary and lombard (with a few taller ones too). I'm thinking towers mostly of the same scale/size as the new CCSF tower in Chinatown/downtown, which IMO seems to mix well aesthetically with the adjacent low rises. Hell, build some highrises along 19th avenue too. And extend BART and/or the Muni subway to the richmond and down 19th as well. It sure is fun to imagine things that will never happen, lol.

[lz131313]

Agreed, there's very little chance of that happening, aside from some kind of apocalyptic event levelling the current buildings (and even then I'm not sure it would happen). But as much as I'd like highrises lining the park, I really like how things are now as well.

Instead I'll just stay excited about all the new highrises that may actually get built: the towers planned for the Transbay/Rincon Hill area, the stuff planned for 4th street, extending from Yerba Beuna Gardens to Mission Bay (which would max out at potentially 400' by the Caltrain station), the stuff planned for Mission Bay (which would also potentially max out at around 400', in seawall lot 337), and the stuff planned for mid-market/civic center.

SF's skyline is gonna be seeing some significant changes. I just hope it doesn't take too long for it to all happen. And I really hope the several 700'+ towers proposed currently actually get built. I would hate for every single new tower over the next decade or two to be under 600 feet tall, aside from the transbay tower.

Unfortunately though, it seems like there will be little chance of new highrises north or west of market street/downtown. I would love too see some ~200 foot towers along geary and lombard (with a few taller ones too). I'm thinking towers mostly of the same scale/size as the new CCSF tower in Chinatown/downtown, which IMO seems to mix well aesthetically with the adjacent low rises. Hell, build some highrises along 19th avenue too. And extend BART and/or the Muni subway to the richmond and down 19th as well. It sure is fun to imagine things that will never happen, lol.
Agree with everything you have said , but then again the 1906 quake aswell as the 1989 brought along major changes and lots of new construction. Imagine the Embarcadero Highway still existant? what a nightmare that would be ! lol good riddance. And yeah i dont see any major changes in the NORTH/WEST Market area since its 'historic' (well some of it is) I would like to see mid-rises in the place of parking lots along embarcadero on the northern site near Levi's plaza. TBH 8Washington would have benefited the Embarcadero greatly , but what can you do.... There is hope for Mid-Market though, CITY PLACE is a done deal and should be completed by late 2015-16

[Jerry of San Fran]

ONE VAN NESS AVENUE - As Proposed
I was away for 3 days in Costa Mesa & am catching up with the news. Glad to see the proposed stunning architectual building at Van Ness & Market is still in the news. Being one block away I take a particular interest in it.

55 NINTH ST.
Tonight I see the concrete pour is happening for the foundation.

[Nexis4Jersey]

lol...well, i guess some people just see dicks everywhere.

My mind was pretty clean when I noticed it :P...but I pointed it out to my friends and they see the same thing...

[1977]

New specs and renderings of the Warriors Arena by Snohetta were unveiled today:

http://www.nba.com/warriors/sf?venue

[easy as pie]

http://i.imgur.com/65b87.jpg
see dedicated thread. (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=199507)

[lz131313]

http://i.imgur.com/65b87.jpg
see dedicated thread. (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=199507)

MIND FUCKING BLOWNED ;O :worship:

[Grantenfuego]

That is fantastic. Love it, love it, love it.

[CityKid]

I wasn't sure if these had been posted here already, but here goes. The Richmond District Blog (http://richmondsfblog.com/2012/10/11/more-details-on-alexandria-theater-development-public-meeting-on-friday-night/) has some newer renderings of the Alexandria Theater development on 18th and Geary. Looks like it will make for some nice infill.

http://richmondsfblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/alex1.jpg

http://richmondsfblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/alexandria.jpg

[1977]

:previous:Thanks!


Also, the new Target at Geary and Masonic is underway:

Target Puts Bull’s-Eye on Geary Location in San Francisco

Even as Swinerton Builders celebrates the grand opening of San Francisco’s first CityTarget at the Metreon, the general contractor has begun interiors work to ready the second city location at Geary Boulevard and Masonic Avenue.

Target replaces a Mervyns department store that closed in 2010 in a two-story location originally constructed for Sears. Materials procurement has begun, and construction begins in earnest at the start of next year, said Andrew Holden, a Swinerton senior vice president and manager of its interiors division in San Francisco. The second CityTarget is expected to open a year from now.
Source and article: http://news.theregistrysf.com/target-puts-bulls-eye-on-geary-location-in-san-francisco/

[1977]

And it looks like Block 9 in the Transbay District is getting some significant interest from developers:

Developers lining up for block 9 in San Francisco's Transbay District

Developers are jockeying up to take on block 9, the Transbay District parcel in San Francisco that is slated for 580 units of market-rate and affordable housing.
The Successor Agency to the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency — can we please get a new name for this government organization? — recently held a workshop where prospective developers could ask questions about the project.
Builders in attendance included Meg Spriggs of AvalonBay, Steve O’Connell of Grosvenor, Glen Ceridono of BRE Properties, Don Lusty and Julia Bennett of Related California, Drew Sullins of Jackson Pacific, and Eric Tao of Avant Housing.
While all of those developers have built in San Francisco, an interesting new name popped up: Westbank Propeties from Vancouver. Westbank has built more than $10 billion of projects, mostly high-rise residential and hotel developers in Vancouver, Calgary and Toronto, Canada.
The nonprofit developers attending the block 9 meeting include Mid-Pen, Bridge Housing, Chinatown CDC, and TNDC.
Proposals are due Dec. 12.
Transbay block 9 is a 31,000-square-foot site on Folsom Street between First and Essex streets. The project will include a 400-foot tower and a shorter podium building. At least 20 percent of the units must be affordable to families earning less than 50 percent of the area median income, currently $51,500 for a family of four.
Source and article: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/10/developers-lining-up-for-block-9-in.html

[colemonkee]

^ There has to be a back story behind Don Lusty and Julia Bennett.

[easy as pie]

westbank is probably canada's best developer, and at least vancouver's, without question. if they're (or he, since it seems mostly to be a story of the principle, the awesomely flamboyant ian gillespie) interested in moving into sf, i could see it working really well, as he's come up in vancouver's ultra regulated environment. i could also see him trying to land the project by going way over the 20% affordable mark.

[tech12]

That's some exciting news. I take it that the other Transbay parcels are likely to get this kind of attention too, as long as the economy doesn't go down the shitter or anything.

[tech12]

The Transbay Tower has been approved:

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/10/proposed_1070foot_transbay_tower_approved_to_rise_by_pl.html

And no one really seems worried about the fact that Hines hasn't paid yet. Here's what Socketsite has to say about that:

The chance that Hines will fail to complete the purchase and that the Pelli Clarke Pelli design would be shelved? We'd put that at well under one percent.

[NOPA]

Great! All we need now is for it to get built (and in my opinion another ten or so 1000+ ft towers, but thats never going to happen)

[tech12]

Great! All we need now is for it to get built (and in my opinion another ten or so 1000+ ft towers, but thats never going to happen)

Yeah, I don't see any more 1,000' towers getting proposed any time soon. Hopefully the 915' tower on 1st street, and the 700' and 750' towers in the Transbay redevelopment area get built. As much as I like the fact that the Transbay Tower will be a supertall, I think it's going to look kind of lonely if it doesn't have any other taller buildings nearby.

[timbad]

a few random things...

750 Second St (behind Momo's across from AT&T Park) looks about finished, and I still like it. as seen from King:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8191/8130186792_7b7f14e4cd_b.jpg

the decking is going in on Brannan St Wharf (adjacent to future Warriors Arena). looking south:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8054/8130189338_f716bd4466_b.jpg

they're still working on the southern end:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8193/8130167677_5bea872b4e_b.jpg

closer up of the south end:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8044/8130161575_1dd5dd169b_b.jpg

and, I had missed this (http://www.dental.pacific.edu/News_and_Events/News_Archive/Major_Renovations_Start_on_Future_SoMa_Campus_Structure.html) - the UOP Dental Building has started its conversion over on Fifth St:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8191/8130164275_3be11112cd_b.jpg

[viewguysf]

Good catches and updates timbad--thanks! I also like 750 Second and am glad to see the dental school forging ahead.

[1977]

I thought (was hoping) 350 Mission would start sooner, but this is good news none the less:

Kilroy Realty Corp. CEO John Kilroy reiterated that his company will build speculatively at two San Francisco sites, a $285 million investment that will add 575,000 square feet of space in SoMa and the South Financial District.
In an earnings call, Kilroy said that construction would start in the first quarter of next year on 350 Mission St., a 400,000-square-foot, 27-story office tower across from the Transbay Terminal. The second development, 333 Brannan St., will break ground in the fourth quarter of 2013, assuming city approvals are secured by then.
In a third quarter earnings call, Kilroy said he had never seen a stronger commercial leasing market than currently exists in San Francisco. “I’ve been doing this business probably longer than most people in the REIT world ... and I can tell you I do not believe in the trees growing to the sky. But I have never seen so much visible demand from such a diverse group of people as I have seen in San Francisco and the Bay Area right now.”
Kilroy said that they are already talking to more than one large tenant about taking all of the 350 Mission St. building, which is designed by Skidmore Owings & Merrill and will be San Francisco’s first LEED platinum ground-up office tower.

Article: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/11/kilroy-ceo-says-san-francisco-market.html

[spyguy]

AVA at 55 Ninth
http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/5812/201210311312511.jpg

[1977]

Oh, and here's a rendering of 333 Brannan as mentioned in the article above:

http://www.kilroyrealty.com/uploads/propertyImages/329BrannanStreet731201212008PM.jpg
Source: www.kilroyrealty.com

And a flyer (http://www.kilroyrealty.com/uploads/RecentAquisitionPDFs/829201283331AM333%20Brannan%202.pdf) with additional renderings.

[peanut gallery]

Thanks for the updates timbad and spyguy. Here are a couple others:

1285 Sutter:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8187/8146268808_5252916b36_b.jpg

Rendering from about the same angle:
http://www.loopnet.com/xnet/mainsite/HttpHandlers/attachment/ServeAttachment.ashx?FileGuid=FB77330C-64FD-48EF-84EA-87CDFFA95D77&Extension=jpg&Width=631&Height=421
Source: LoopNet (http://www.loopnet.com/Listing/15782642/1285-Sutter-St-San-Francisco-CA/)

1800 Van Ness:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8047/8146266730_d6eb2ae4e8_b.jpg

Which is supposed to look like this:
http://www.socketsite.com/1800%20Van%20Ness%202-thumb.jpg
Source: SocketSite (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2011/10/1800_van_ness_the_revised_designs_for_98_units.html)

[timbad]

Oh, and here's a rendering of 333 Brannan as mentioned in the article above...
And a flyer (http://www.kilroyrealty.com/uploads/RecentAquisitionPDFs/829201283331AM333%20Brannan%202.pdf) ...

ooh, I like that one, and I hadn't even heard that one was coming down the pike - thanks on both counts '77! that stretch of Brannan (and Stanford Alley) could use some livening up, which it looks like this will do nicely.

[timbad]

Thanks for the updates timbad and spyguy. Here are a couple others:

1285 Sutter...

1800 Van Ness...



thanks pg, I'd forgotten about those, both of which should help Van Ness feel more like the grand boulevard it should be

[1977]

Some new renderings of 2558 Mission:

http://www.kwanhenmi.com/Images/projects/2558mission/2558mission01.jpg
Source: www.kwanhenmi.com
http://www.kwanhenmi.com/Images/projects/2558mission/2558mission07.jpg
Source: www.kwanhenmi.com

More here (http://www.kwanhenmi.com/projects/otb/2558mission.html).

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

thats pretty damn interesting. i like it. lot of good infill midrises going up in SF right now

[Mojeda101]

thats pretty damn interesting. i like it. lot of good infill midrises going up in SF right now

I wish our city had such activity XD

OT: Glad to hear the Transbay is approved and ready to go. Let's see which tower claims tallest of the west, that or Wilshire Grand in LA. Wonder which is finished first >=D I plan to visit this city in a month and I'll be sure to stop by a few of the construction sites to see all the activity in SF :tup:

[Jerry of San Fran]

On the way to buy some Rolling Rock for a friend I took a couple of pictures from Laskey Street (or alley). In the background is a view from left senior housing, Crescent Heights North at 10th & Market Streets (35 or 37 stories - not sure) & Market Square being completely renovated (home of Twitter, 3 floors, and other tech companies).

Because of the major changes in the neighborhood we are already getting new businneses - a candy store in the 1400 block of Market St. & a beer/wine bar Polk at Market/Fell Sts.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8210/8167526541_3fe27277c1_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8167526541/)
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8167526541/]

[Jerry of San Fran]

A view from Laskie St. In the background is a view left to right, of Market Square on Market St., the Archstone Fox Plaza (currently for sale except for the business floors) and the new headquarters for Dolby Sound. My apartment in the Fox Plaza is the 3rd floor from the top, obscured by the blue cement pumper crane.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8060/8167558060_36dd83ebbb_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8167558060/)
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8167558060/]

[tech12]

340 Fremont has been redesigned/improved:

http://www.socketsite.com/340%20Fremont%202012.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/340%20Fremont%202012%20Rear.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/340%20Fremont%202012%20Podium%20-%20Street.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/11/340_fremont_scoop_refined_design_and_far_fewer_parking.html


And a building permit has been issued for 45 Lansing, so construction will probably be starting pretty soon:

http://www.socketsite.com/45%20Lansing%20Night%20Rendering%202011.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/45%20Lansing%20Rendering%202011.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/11/permit_issued_for_39_stories_and_320_condos_at_45_lansi.html

[timbad]

I was disappointed not to see more of the landscaping finished at Rincon Green (on Harrison, across the street from ORH2), but I did notice that it looks like they'll get fancy sidewalks:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8064/8177884899_b2dd2c3baa_b.jpg

... and I was by SF General on Saturday to see how things are coming with the new building:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8204/8174263753_492c013dcf_b.jpg

looking south along Potrero, for context with the older wings:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8203/8174291594_42da627fc8_b.jpg

and north:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8204/8174293890_9abe2fecd2_b.jpg

[1977]

Nice timbad. Thanks.

tech12 - so happy to see Handel Architects refined the design. Looks much better!

[Jerry of San Fran]

As of 11/18/2012 the building is about 1/3 of it's final height. We are wondering what effect the building will have on the notorious wind at this intersectioin when the building is complete. Already I can see a difference with shade in the first block of Polk Street. I do not think that the sun will shine again on that stretch of Polk Street.

I believe the candy store that opens Monday & the beer/wine bar opening in a few months is the direct result of retail moving into the neighborhood due to the construction across the street - welcome changes.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8485/8197666039_cb6430d61b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8197666039/)
Crescent Heights 11-15-12 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8197666039/)

[easy as pie]

yeah, leave it to the ny times to rub it in... http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/realestate/big-deal-in-san-francisco-life-without-starchitects.html

[San Frangelino]

Three Tower Project between Harrison Street, Second and Third.

Cresleigh Development is proposing to construct three towers on the south side of Harrison Street between Second and Third. The application calls for a 478,000-square-foot office building, a 406,000-square-foot residential tower and a 300-room hotel along the south side of Harrison.

Read the article here.. (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/11/unknown-developer-seeks-13-million.html)

It's also been reported here Socketsite (http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/11/big_plans_for_harrison_street_between_second_and_third.html)

http://www.socketsite.com/Cresleigh%20Harrison%20Site%20.jpg

I see a fight over shadows on South Park.

[tech12]

I'm excited about his development, and the Central Corridor project in general (http://www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=2557). Can't wait to see some renders.


I see a fight over shadows on South Park

I doubt it, seeing as South Park is south of the towers. The Earth would have to flip on its axis for those towers to cast shadows on south park ;). Due to the fact that we're in the northern hemisphere, the sun stays in the southern part of the sky, and shadows will only be cast northwards.

Though on second thought, I wouldn't put it past idiot NIMBYs to argue that shadows would magically land there somehow.

[tech12]

We finally have a new render for 41 Tehama:

http://www.socketsite.com/41%20Tehama%20Rendering.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/41%20Tehama%20Plaza.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/41%20Tehama%20Site%20Plan-thumb.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/41%20Tehama%20Position.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/11/41_tehama_the_revised_design_and_timing_scoop.html#comments

It's designed by Arquitectonica now, not SOM. Looks kind of boring and boxy in my opinion, though at least it's shiny. The design would look a little better/less stubby if it were at 550' instead of chopped down to 342', but it could be much worse too.

[Jerry of San Fran]

tech12 - I agree with you, not somehing to write home about.

[Jerry of San Fran]

I took this picture November 26th. This is the south facade of the complex. I'm alarmed by the dark color & design. Hopefully the 10th Street & Market Street face will be a lot more friendly. There is a grey building across the street at Polk & Market Streets - we don't need another one. The artist's rendering I had seen in the past presented a light colored building.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8197/8222841434_bd1509a9e0_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8222841434/)
Img_0729 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8222841434/)

[fflint]

From what I can tell, the Market Street side will be mixed--some of the dark stuff, some more glassy stuff. Here are the renderings for comparison:

http://handelarch.com/images/projects/location/san-francisco/10th-market/1.jpg

http://handelarch.com/images/projects/location/san-francisco/10th-market/2.jpg

http://handelarch.com/images/projects/location/san-francisco/10th-market/3.jpg

Source: Handler Architects (http://handelarch.com/projects/location/san-francisco/-10th-market-residences.html)

[easy as pie]

now we're talking: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2012/11/29/supervisor_ceqa_changes.php

moreover, appeals would be even more limited on large sites (over 5 acres), just in time for the basketball stadium.

[tech12]

now we're talking: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2012/11/29/supervisor_ceqa_changes.php

moreover, appeals would be even more limited on large sites (over 5 acres), just in time for the basketball stadium.

Nice! I hope it gets passed...the NIMBYs are probably going to raise hell over it.

[1977]

Planning Department .pdf for 41 Tehama (http://commissions.sfplanning.org/cpcpackets/2008.0801EVX.pdf).

[timbad]

...the NIMBYs are probably going to raise hell over it.

yep! (http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2012/11/29/were_watching_the_planning_commission_debate_about_revising_ceqa_so_you_dont_have_to.php)

[Jerry of San Fran]

A milestone. The construction of the 12 story part of Crescent Heights facing Market Street has reached the top floor.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8205/8231045961_3742acb86d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8231045961/)
10th & Market Sts. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antinous/8231045961/) by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/antinous/]

My photograph next to Handler Architeck drawing

[tech12]

New renders and info for 181 Fremont have been released:

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2012/11/the_latest_skyscraper_scoop_181_fremont_redesigned_and.html#more

Having been waylaid by the market, the project is now making its way back through planning, but the proposed steel framed tower has been downsized to 52 stories reaching 700 feet with a decorative screen reaching to 745 feet and a spire to the 802-foot mark

As proposed, the tower would contain a subterranean garage for 200 cars; 2,000 square feet of retail; 404,000 square feet of office space on floors 3 to 35; 74 condos on floors 38 to 52; and 7,000 square feet of residential amenities and a two story open air terrace around the building for residents on level 36.

A bridge to the elevated City Park atop the future Transit Center extends from floor 5.


http://www.socketsite.com/181%20Fremont%202012%20Rendered.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/181%20Fremont%202012.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/181%20Fremont%20Site%20Rendered.jpg

[Jerry of San Fran]

Tech12 -Thanks for the update. Nice looking. I do find the pinnacle to be a bit sharp to my taste- ouch!

[fflint]

I love 181 Fremont--that's one cool proposal.

[mongoXZ]

Reminds me of Bank of Hong Kong Tower

http://library.thinkquest.org/07aug/01291/chinabank.jpg

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

looks fantastic. thats a beautiful rendering.

[viewguysf]

I love 181 Fremont--that's one cool proposal.

Me too--I agree. Build it without shortening or VE'ing it! :yeahthat

[LMich]

181 Fremont is looking nice! This is exactly a style San Francisco could do well with in its skyline. It looks very moder and very sharp, but without being pretentious. I'm getting a bit bored with deconstructivism.

[tall/awkward]

Lots of nice new renderings on this thread!

If I had any talent, I would update the pictures on the SF building diagram...

[timbad]

was walking beyond (west of) 10th and Market - which has its own thread anyway - once the sun came out this weekend, and here is a quick update on the projects I wandered past (sorry, I am too lazy at the moment to look up street numbers), from east to west:

first, the small one on the corner of Market, Franklin and Page:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8069/8242847561_2d7fe6be51_b.jpg

and the one next to the LGBT Center near Octavia Blvd, from a couple angles:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8345/8242849431_3b639c8bfd_b.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8208/8242838251_2db50a3ae1_b.jpg

not too much to see yet at the one next door to the SF Mint and Safeway:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8067/8243916218_cd0cbd9ec1_b.jpg

kitty corner from there, on the corner of Dolores, the Whole Foods project is rising above street level:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8200/8242839783_7102e52d8b_b.jpg

the gas station on the south side corner of 15th is fenced off, but I didn't notice evidence of activity there:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8200/8243911918_bfd2a58073_b.jpg

kitty corner from there, corner of 15th on the north side, former site of the Thai place, is also fenced but as far as I could tell, inactive:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8347/8242843325_bdb4d11097_b.jpg

this is across from Café Flore, at Noe:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8478/8242844645_d269761e05_b.jpg

[viewguysf]

Thanks for the Upper Market update timbad! Amazing changes are indeed coming to my extended 'hood (I live on the top of Market Street); it will certainly feel more lively, lived in and crowed at times.

[fflint]

This site is already being excavated. It looks like they started right up next to the motel. It's pretty deep already and I saw some big trucks coming up out of the hole the other day. You can see the action a lot better from the 15th Street side. ;)

kitty corner from there, corner of 15th on the north side, former site of the Thai place, is also fenced but as far as I could tell, inactive:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8347/8242843325_bdb4d11097_b.jpg

[CyberEric]

Wow, lots going on around Upper Market, had no idea about some of these.
Remind me, what was in the spot across from Cafe Flore?

[Jerry of San Fran]

Wow, lots going on around Upper Market, had no idea about some of these.
Remind me, what was in the spot across from Cafe Flore?

CyberEric - there used to be a church on the corner of Noe/16th/Market Streets. It is believed an arsonist burned it. It then remained a hole in the ground for over 25 years.

[timbad]

CyberEric - there used to be a church on the corner of Noe/16th/Market Streets. It is believed an arsonist burned it. It then remained a hole in the ground for over 25 years.

thanks for the reminder on the history, Jerry! is that where, in its hole incarnation, the Peace mural was visible?

there is also still a vacant lot (well, it might have Xmas trees on it at the moment) at the same intersection as the two sites on 15th St, on the corner of Sanchez. I forget if anything is in the works for that. I have to say, whoever owns it keeps it in nice condition - as nice as empty can be, that is.

now we just need to get rid of those gas stations at Castro and Market! I know there is a proposal for the one on the north side, but man, does that other one, where the F-line turns around, need to not be there!

info about some of the projects was helpfully collected in this article (http://www.sfgate.com/business/bottomline/article/Construction-boom-beyond-Mid-Market-3639314.php#photo-3075879) earlier this year

[timbad]

This site is already being excavated. ... You can see the action a lot better from the 15th Street side. ;)

thanks fflint!

[timbad]

333 Fremont is no longer the most impressive hole in the City. we could call this the Iceberg Building - I swear they must have built more floors underground than there will be above. but it has now reached the surface, finally:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8060/8245716855_683fa185e7_b.jpg

also a quick look at Rincon Green's front yard in progress. the look of the building itself doesn't excite me at all (are they done with the exterior? is that it?), but I'm more hopeful about its setting (and I do think that archway into the interior is kinda cool):

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8346/8246783602_63dfd431bb_b.jpg

[CyberEric]

CyberEric - there used to be a church on the corner of Noe/16th/Market Streets. It is believed an arsonist burned it. It then remained a hole in the ground for over 25 years.

Thanks Jerry, now I remember the empty lot there (haven't been here 25 years to remember the church ;))

[fflint]

Okay guys, check out the interactive rendering porn on the Transbay website: http://transbaycenter.org/interactive

Amazing!

[Grantenfuego]

I love that funicular type thing in mission square going to the park on top. I really hope that gets built.

[hruski]

I love that funicular type thing in mission square going to the park on top. I really hope that gets built.

Really?
It seems completely impractical to me. It can transport, what, about 8 people at a time to the top of the park? Just use escalators/elevators. Or maybe even stairs (gasp!) like they do on the high-line in NYC.

[Grantenfuego]

Really?
It seems completely impractical to me. It can transport, what, about 8 people at a time to the top of the park? Just use escalators/elevators. Or maybe even stairs (gasp!) like they do on the high-line in NYC.

There needs to be an elevator for wheelchair users and people with mobility issues somewhere. Why not make it a unique one with a bit of a view? Depending on the cost, of course. If it makes sense, go for it.

[hruski]

There needs to be an elevator for wheelchair users and people with mobility issues somewhere. Why not make it a unique one with a bit of a view? Depending on the cost, of course. If it makes sense, go for it.

Because it's bound to be more expensive, less space-efficient, and slower than any other kind of elevator. You can make a glass elevator that goes straight up and down if you want a view.

[fflint]

The funicular is just one of the ways to get up to the park. It's not like there aren't any other ways.

[hruski]

The funicular is just one of the ways to get up to the park. It's not like there aren't any other ways.

If I'm not mistaken, the funicular is the only way to get directly to the top of the park from Mission Square.

[fflint]

Directly? Sure.

Do you think there will be huge crowds seeking entrance to the park from that corner who won't actually enter the transit center? I'm not getting the critique.

[San Frangelino]

The Bay Lights –1,000 out of 25,000 lights are installed!

Check out video of the lights being tested HERE (http://www.rinconhillsf.org/art/the-bay-lights-1000-out-of-25000-lights-are-installed/)!

[tech12]

Sweet! I hope they keep it up permanently, rather than just two years.

[CyberEric]

The Bay Bridge Lights are amazing already! I really hope they stay, one of the coolest projects going right now.