SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//index.php)
-   City Compilations (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//forumdisplay.php?f=87)
-   -   SAN DIEGO | Boom Rundown, Vol. 2 (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum//showthread.php?t=126473)

Derek Aug 6, 2007 7:03 AM

:jester:


Wouldn't that be something.

Derek Aug 6, 2007 7:04 AM

Seriously though, it's worse than the current NBC if you ask me.

HurricaneHugo Aug 6, 2007 7:30 AM

I still hate the Irvine tower.

bushman61988 Aug 6, 2007 9:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HurricaneHugo (Post 2993365)
I still hate the Irvine tower.

AGREED. Those renderings, while really cool, did absolutely nothing for this tower. It's still a f****** box!!! A Pretty filler tower that does NOT belong on THE most prominent site on our bayfront...Shame, SHame Shame. It'll be there forever while the phony architects try to pass it off as "Timeless".... I.M. Pei and Irvine can Suck my timeless cock!!!

eburress Aug 6, 2007 4:00 PM

^^ Unfortunately, I don't think there's much more anybody can do with the height limit the way it is. I've warmed to the building a little and think it probably is relatively timeless (unlike some, this won't look dated anytime soon), but it is a HUGE letdown for those of us who were expecting a "signature" tower.

Derek Aug 6, 2007 5:56 PM

I was expecting a lot more.

ShekelPop Aug 6, 2007 6:00 PM

I have to disagree with some of your negative feelings on Irvine's 700 tower, given the following:

1) Not a Twin Tower
2) No fins or other sea-like protruding edges
3) Not a build-by-number glass building that should be in Anaheim or Dallas
4) Doesn't look like a penis
5) Not a Hotel
6) Not a municipal project
7) Not Manchester development

the above criteria clearly demonstrates this is technically the finest currently-proposed office tower in the city

CoastersBolts Aug 6, 2007 7:01 PM

The only thing I'm looking forward to regarding 700 West Broadway is that it is an office building. Had it been yet another unnecessary condo tower it would have been embarrassing seeing a darkened tower standing at such a prominent site every night. At least with an office structure, it will stand out at night by being illuminated.

eburress Aug 6, 2007 7:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShekelPop (Post 2993851)
I have to disagree with some of your negative feelings on Irvine's 700 tower, given the following:

1) Not a Twin Tower
2) No fins or other sea-like protruding edges
3) Not a build-by-number glass building that should be in Anaheim or Dallas
4) Doesn't look like a penis
5) Not a Hotel
6) Not a municipal project
7) Not Manchester development

the above criteria clearly demonstrates this is technically the finest currently-proposed office tower in the city

All excellent points, although I would suggest that San Diego should consider itself lucky if it were to ever receive some of Dallas' build-by-number glass towers!! :)

SDCAL Aug 6, 2007 7:38 PM

:frog:
Quote:

Originally Posted by ShekelPop (Post 2993851)
I have to disagree with some of your negative feelings on Irvine's 700 tower, given the following:

1) Not a Twin Tower
2) No fins or other sea-like protruding edges
3) Not a build-by-number glass building that should be in Anaheim or Dallas
4) Doesn't look like a penis
5) Not a Hotel
6) Not a municipal project
7) Not Manchester development

the above criteria clearly demonstrates this is technically the finest currently-proposed office tower in the city

true, I especially like that it will be an office tower, it just seems like it represents a bow to conservatism and blandness on the part of world renowned architects who could have done so much better. I wonder how much of the plain design was done just because it is SD and how much different the building would have been if IM Pei and partners were tasked with a prominent signature tower in LA or SF or Seattle. Height is a hinderance but I would think such esteemed architects would have been able to create the "wow" factor in the design itself knowing it they would not be able to achieve it based on height.

The building is VERY OC - - I used to work up in Irvine and this seems like an exact replica of the Irvine Companies office towers in OC, in fact the whole NBC complex strikes me as being very Irvine-ish

ShekelPop Aug 6, 2007 8:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDCAL (Post 2993999)
:frog:

true, I especially like that it will be an office tower, it just seems like it represents a bow to conservatism and blandness on the part of world renowned architects who could have done so much better. I wonder how much of the plain design was done just because it is SD and how much different the building would have been if IM Pei and partners were tasked with a prominent signature tower in LA or SF or Seattle. Height is a hinderance but I would think such esteemed architects would have been able to create the "wow" factor in the design itself knowing it they would not be able to achieve it based on height.

The building is VERY OC - - I used to work up in Irvine and this seems like an exact replica of the Irvine Companies office towers in OC, in fact the whole NBC complex strikes me as being very Irvine-ish

I'm glad you brought up these two items - the wow factor, and those Irvine towers. I was thinking about the same thing just now. I realized during my lunch that we shouldn't have ever expected any wow factor at all, because if you've seen those Irvine towers (the ones by spectrum apply, but especially those at 405 and Jamboree) then you're familiar with Donald Bren's notoriously specific design and color palate. Although he recently stepped down from Irvine Co.'s day to day operations, I'm fairly certain he controlled the design of the 700 tower because of its textbook design and color. Its one thing for Irvine Co. to purchase existing towers that break from his tastes, but an Irvine Co. original is sure to conform to his preferences, and he will never deviate from those, thus the reason all Irvine Co. constructed office towers in Irvine are essentially variations on the same theme. My most recent conclusion being that we were fooled by Pei Cobb's involvement and failed to realize its basically a Donald Bren designed building, which isn't awful, but surely not anything that would WOW us.

I also agree with your OC sentiment on the NBC complex in general, I also can't shake the feeling of that OC-ish office tower facing Harbor.

IconRPCV Aug 7, 2007 5:56 PM

Lane field
 
Actually the development I am most excited about is Lane Field. This site, more than any other, is the most "Front Porchish" in the city, think all those cruise ship disimbarkers, and what is it that greets them, an ugly parking lot and a portable building doubling as a tourist info center. They can't build that site quick enough for me, it is totally embarissing as it is now. I only wish they could raze those horriblly garish Holiday Inns next door as well.

obendega Aug 7, 2007 8:26 PM

I am so with you on those Holiday Inn buildings.

That is a prime location and they are hideous.

mongoXZ Aug 8, 2007 2:10 AM

We should send the people at Manchester and The Irvine Company these pictures of what a real signature tower/development looks like.

San Francisco Transbay Terminal

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1243/...da517618_o.jpg

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/9...a2cvd6wik8.jpg
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/1623/dsc01107go3.jpg

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/08...ansbay0708.jpg

eburress Aug 8, 2007 2:56 AM

^^ Although even that beauty of a building would look like a turd once you adjusted its height down to the point that it would be allowed in downtown San Diego.

Derek Aug 8, 2007 3:22 AM

I don't like that design actually.

Crackertastik Aug 8, 2007 6:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek loves SD (Post 2996808)
I don't like that design actually.

irregardless, its a signature tower, not a box pretending to be a signature tower.

I honestly don't think san diego could have a signature tower, because to me it is supposed to stand out, stand alone, either taller or extremely unique. the height limitation restricts it completely.

eburress Aug 8, 2007 4:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crackertastik (Post 2997075)
irregardless, its a signature tower, not a box pretending to be a signature tower.

I honestly don't think san diego could have a signature tower, because to me it is supposed to stand out, stand alone, either taller or extremely unique. the height limitation restricts it completely.

I agree. Given our limitations, I think signature towers are practically impossible here. :(

SDCAL Aug 8, 2007 4:46 PM

^I like the SF building design, the street level rendering looks cool
i agree that if that same design was brought down to 500 it would look like shit

Derek Aug 8, 2007 6:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crackertastik (Post 2997075)
irregardless, its a signature tower, not a box pretending to be a signature tower.

I honestly don't think san diego could have a signature tower, because to me it is supposed to stand out, stand alone, either taller or extremely unique. the height limitation restricts it completely.

Good point.


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:21 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.