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

[The_Analyst]

For those that can't get out to see the Bay Bridge, here's a wider angle shot from Treasure Island. As you can see, the skyway portion on the left still leaves a gap to reach Yerba Buena Island (on the right) so the new span will fill that space. Because the tunnel through Yerba Buena will be used for the new bridge, a temporary bridge needs to be built to the south to enable traffic to flow while they take down the portion of the existing bridge deck that connects to the tunnel and replace it with the new bridge connection. The level of complexity and organization all that requires is really quite amazing. Not to mention the entire SF side approach being torn down and replaced all while keeping traffic flowing. Caltrans seems to be lousy at cost controls, but construction-wise, they appear to manage the projects pretty well.
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/images/011307baybridge2.JPG
Now here's a few more on Van Ness. You can better see here how Symphony Tower relates well (sizewise) with surrounding buildings. It is a little farther up the hill so looks taller from this perspective.
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/images/011307Symphony4.JPG
A little farther up the street, this is another example of that "Parisian" feeling (or it could also be reminiscent of Washington D.C.).
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/images/011307vanness2.JPG
And lastly, this is a wider view of the new mid-rise on Van Ness (on the left) and how it also fits in nicely with the neighborhood. This is nearer to the north end of Van Ness which is a little quieter with buildings more in the 2-8 story range.
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/images/011307vanness3.JPG

[tyler82]

Here is an image I found of what the new skyline is shaping up to look like.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/155/359648153_e8d0b6e868_b.jpg

[northbay]

^ that pic is beautiful!

[botoxic]

Profuse apologies in advance for ruining such a beautiful shot, but I couldn't resist using my extremely rudimentary photo editing skills to augment the SF skyline with just the buildings currently under construction - One Rincon, Infinity I (or II - whichever it's going to be), and Millenium. I did my best to base the scale on existing buildings and/or level of current construction. From this angle, I suspect One Rincon will look about the same height as Millenium despite the difference in base elevation because it is further away.

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-07/SkylineRevised.jpg

[tyler82]

Here's my stab at it...

http://homepage.mac.com/tyler82/newskyline.jpg

[kenratboy]

Very cool!

Now imagine what Transbay will look like!!!

[JRinSoCal]

That picture is F-ing gorgeous and the skyline is only getting better!!

[kenratboy]

And Transbay will be kinda in the middle of that 'valley', but closer to the right side?

[tyler82]

Transbay will be just to the right of Millenium tower in that photo

[Reminiscence]

Anybody care to take a stab at it with all the approved and proposed projects (including Piano and Transbay) in addition to what we have here? I would do it myself, except I lack the necessary tools to do so.

[J Church]

Official render, from back when they were talking 1000' and (2) 850':

http://sfcityscape.com/forum/transbay_towers/view_from_treasure_island.jpg

[CardinalStudent]

Taken Sunday, January 14th.

Argenta

http://aycu20.webshots.com/image/8539/2002460954526434801_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002460954526434801)

800 Block of Van Ness

http://aycu16.webshots.com/image/11055/2002499884376694406_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002499884376694406)

Polk & Geary

http://aycu25.webshots.com/image/9584/2002460814079061782_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002460814079061782)

Fillmore Renaissance

http://aycu26.webshots.com/image/9945/2002493071404994472_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002493071404994472)

The Hayes SF

http://aycu09.webshots.com/image/7408/2002465856255841146_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002465856255841146)

SoMa Grand

http://aycu04.webshots.com/image/10763/2002454597667344226_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002454597667344226)

InterContinental Hotel

http://aycu16.webshots.com/image/7775/2002485902763146237_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002485902763146237)

http://aycu24.webshots.com/image/8223/2003858550514192962_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2003858550514192962)

Ritz-Carlton Residences

http://aycu05.webshots.com/image/9844/2002486769584369886_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002486769584369886)

555 Mission

http://aycu30.webshots.com/image/7669/2002493640906970509_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002493640906970509)

Millennium Tower

http://aycu29.webshots.com/image/10548/2002489598122973492_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002489598122973492)

Foundry Square I

http://aycu02.webshots.com/image/10161/2002925741772727971_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002925741772727971)

The Infinity

http://aycu35.webshots.com/image/7794/2002993244782438467_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002993244782438467)

http://aycu11.webshots.com/image/10370/2002910762211420567_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002910762211420567)

One Rincon Hill

http://aycu10.webshots.com/image/10489/2002986593791978003_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002986593791978003)

http://aycu03.webshots.com/image/7802/2002985554062946628_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002985554062946628)

631 Folsom

http://aycu19.webshots.com/image/10138/2002999192075989281_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002999192075989281)

[Reminiscence]

Great pictures CardinalStudent, you are quite the photographer :)

Infinity is looking great as always, and I'm glad to see the first glass on the midrise as well, topping off of the first tower is iminent now.

Millenium looks as slow as ever, but we're getting to the threshold where they'll build faster and faster, so thats good news.

One Rincon has been making great progress, I suspest they are getting close to the halfway mark en route to the top.

Intercontinental looks about the same, but even so its looking nice. As for the rest of the projects, they're looking good too. Nice to see other development for a change :)

[BTinSF]

Parisian feeling? :D

http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/images/011307Symphony4.JPG

I'll keep that in mind when I leave my building which is the one on the far left--but I have to admit it'll be a new experience. ;)

Many, many thanks for the photos--to everyone--in any case.

[WonderlandPark]

Oh man, that view of the Ritz-Carlton is extremely disappointing, looks to be the cheapo precast concrete curtain wall. BLEH. Looks like a cheap '80's tower.

http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002486769584369886

[kenratboy]

Oh man, that view of the Ritz-Carlton is extremely disappointing, looks to be the cheapo precast concrete curtain wall. BLEH. Looks like a cheap '80's tower.

http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2002486769584369886

Wait until it is done, I saw some renderings and it looked pretty good.

[Reminiscence]

I think Ritz-Carlton will be one of those "Two-Face" buildings (like the Batman villain ... if that helps you) where it looks good from one side and bad from another. If thats the case, make sure we only photograph it from the good side, heh.

[CardinalStudent]

Is this better?

http://aycu15.webshots.com/image/8854/2001629660899961271_rs.jpg (http://allyoucanupload.webshots.com/v/2001629660899961271)

[Reminiscence]

You didnt have to go through the trouble of posting up another picture just because of that, but thanks a lot anyways, heh. I still say it looks better from this angle, but thats just me.

[tyler82]

I don't think the Ritz Carlton is turning out that bad. It's going to look a helluva lot better than what was there

Old:
http://www.mikehumbert.com/1/OldChrncle.jpg

New:
http://www.ritzcarlton.com/resources/rcc_san_francisco_2.jpg

[BTinSF]

Oh man, that view of the Ritz-Carlton is extremely disappointing, looks to be the cheapo precast concrete curtain wall. BLEH. Looks like a cheap '80's tower.



The great part of this project is the apparent restoration of the original fascade of the old part of the building and I suspect they made the new addition purposefully kind of bland so as to draw attention to the old.

[CityKid]

Foundry Square
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2012-30/S4010038.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2012-30/S4010039.jpg

What on earth is that? I pass by it all the time and have always wondered.

[tyler82]

Is the Millenium tower strictly residential condos? I was always under the assumption that it was an office tower until reading the Millenium Partners' website.

One thing I really like about all these new hi- rises is the openess they [will] create at street level. While driving by the Millenium today I saw that the corner of Howard and 1st has support beams in open air at the street, allowing people to walk freely through them "under" the building, creating more space for pedestrians etc. This also looks to be the case with Infinity as well. What I really liked about downtown New York was the wide sidewalks, it seems a lot of them in SOMA are very narrow which could be a problem in the future when the area explodes in density.

[SFView]

Ah..., sidewalks? Take a look here...

Transbay Streetscape & Open Space handout (PDF), 11MB- from April 20, 2006 meeting:

http://sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/sfra/Projects/Final%20TCAC%20Mtg%2004-20-06%20handout.pdf

[pseudolus]

Is this a change? The beginning of this thread shows a 14-story building approved for this(?) corner.

From "Newspaper Notice for San Francisco Planning Department for January 19, 2007."

"2006.0584KXCV: 1407-1435 Market Street and 17-70 10th Street, southwest corner, Lot 041 (a portion of the former Lot 039) in Assessor’s Block 3507: The proposed project is (1) the demolition of the existing office buildings and surface parking lot and (2) the construction of two buildings sharing a common base and containing approximately 719 dwelling units, approximately 19,000 square feet of commercial space, and a garage with up to 668 parking spaces. The taller north tower will be 35 stories and approximately 352 feet high, and the shorter south tower will be 19 stories and approximately 220 feet high. The project requires review under Section 309 of the Planning Code for compliance and exceptions, conditional use authorization, and variances from certain requirements of the Planning Code. The project site is within the C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 200-S and 320-S Height and Bulk Districts.

For further information, call Michael Li at (415) 558-6396 and ask about Case No. 2006.0584KXCV."

http://sfgov.org/site/planning_index.asp?id=25756

[briankendall]

Very interesting post about 10th and Market being 19 and 35 story towers now. I thought the original proposal was three towers between 14 and 24 stories. I thought the taller tower was in the back though and the shorter tower on the north. I didn't think the planning department wanted the taller towers on the market side. Like at the Trinity Plaza project. Anyone know? Or maybe they changed the rules at planning when they rezoned the area around Van Ness and Market for all the possible 400' towers. Anyone know if its still going to be senior housing. Wondering if that changed too.

[tyler82]

is that cool funky looking building blocks style complex with the hole in the middle still going in the Trinity area? I really like the design of that one!

[coyotetrickster]

is that cool funky looking building blocks style complex with the hole in the middle still going in the Trinity area? I really like the design of that one!

Not unless folks call Supes Jake McGoldrick and Sophie Maxwell and tell them to butt out.

[sfgiants]

u should take more pictures of 690 Market St Jobsite.

[Reminiscence]

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/1117/ritzcarltonwm9.jpg

http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/4140/somagrandyp5.jpg

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/139/somagrand2cn6.jpg

http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/244/somagrand3tx9.jpg

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/7849/somagrand4fj6.jpg

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/106/somagrand5ei6.jpg


As the rich get richer, the livin' gets easier

By Carol Lloyd, Special to SF Gate

Friday, January 26, 2007

After a long run of rampant price increases, the once lofty world of condo sales has recently come down to earth. The years of double-digit gains are over and appreciation of San Francisco condos isn't even keeping up with inflation.

But to twist an old cliche: Fear of penury is the mother of invention.

Lately, developers have been innovating on the condo concept like it's a Starbucks beverage. Grande? Foam or no foam? Soy, 2 percent, caramel, peppermint, raspberry? Most of the new products -- like the fractional condominiums of the Ritz Carlton and the ultra-luxury condos planned for Rincon Hill -- capitalize on the abundant resources of the richest of the rich.

By introducing San Francisco to its first fractional condominiums, the Ritz Carlton Club and Residences (on sale now and slated to be finished in November) have discovered what one might consider an unlikely niche. Sometimes referred to as high-end time shares, fractional condos allow people to buy a percentage of the property -- say, 1/12 -- which gives them access to the property one month out of the year.

"It's really an alternative to a second home," says Robert Van Dijk, the project manager, who adds that many of their new buyers are local residents who are buying a downtown getaway in a city in which they already live or live very close to. Used as lodging for out-of-town family or guests as well an urban escape, a fractional condo offers people a relatively affordable (yet still luxurious) substitute for the $1 million-plus pied-à-terre. Instead, buyers spend more than $250,000 for 1/12 of a two-bedroom condo. Van Dijk says they are especially attractive to those who have already bought second homes only to have them sit empty most of the year. "It's about leisure living," he explains. "It's for people who want all the services and luxuries that come with the Ritz Carlton, but they don't want the burden of a second home."

But out of a sea of innovative offerings, there is one luxury condo development that isn't chasing the ultra-affluent clientele. Billing itself as the city's first "lifestyle condo," the Soma Grand (also on sale now and open in the fall) is a stylish, green-glass, 22-story tower of 246 condominiums next to the wild modernist Federal Building at Mission and Seventh streets.

"Everyone's heard of the Four Seasons and the St. Regis," explains Chip Conley, founder of Joie de Vivre Hospitality, which teamed with AGI Capital and TMG Partners on the project. "But Soma Grand is for the rest of us." With prices ranging from $500,000 for 704 square feet to over $1 million for a 1,600-plus three-bedroom, two-bath on an upper floor, this development isn't actually affordable to a lot of "us," including yours truly. But compared to other downtown projects, the Soma Grand can't be considered especially pricey, either.

According to Conley, what's unique about these mid-priced condos are their high-end amenities. "We offer residents the benefits of a boutique hotel, minus the hotel and the luxury prices," he says.

Indeed, Joie de Vivre will deliver an unusual array of services rolled into the HOA fees, including bimonthly housecleaning and "turn-down service," as well as a 24-hour concierge available to help with everything from coordinating handymen and hiring a dog-walker to arranging for someone to troubleshoot a broken computer.

"A lot of us want people to take care of us, but we don't have the time to arrange that," explains Conley. "Many people in San Francisco are more time-starved than money-starved, so the Soma Grand is designed to help people with their lives."

Conley has shown a preternatural sense of "what people want" from the perspective of design and pampering. He began his company 19 years ago after renovating the run-down Phoenix Hotel in the Tenderloin into a swank haven for hipsters and visiting artists. Since then, the company has become known for its eclectic design and careful attention to personal service, growing into the largest boutique hospitality company in California, with about 30 hotels across the state.

Conley says that because Joie de Vivre now has a staff of 2,500, with many teams of housekeepers and maintenance people in the city, the company can afford to include housekeeping and other potentially expensive services as part of the HOA fee. It's this bulk bundling, he says, that makes the concept of high-end amenities affordable.

And what exactly does he mean by "lifestyle"? Talking to Conley, it seems to be a quintessentially San Franciscan cocktail of dark-roast caffeine, creature comforts and spiritual sweating. The lobby will offer 24-hour Peets Coffee and herbal teas for residents and their guests. The building's fifth floor is dedicated to a swimming pool, a sun deck, and a fitness center, which includes a day spa, a yoga studio, a meditation garden, a fire pit and a club room. Soma Grand also boasts a public sculpture garden, a private roof garden and a "unique and sophisticated restaurant." Conley says the company plans to host monthly wine tastings, yoga classes and other "lifestyle" events.

Indeed, the coddling of the condo world seems to be a wave that has only begun to change the fabric of the inner-city living. Once leisure was associated with rural retreats -- moving to the country house, the winery, even the small historic town. Now developers are finding there's a rich vein of passion and cash for living downtown as long as it is accompanied by enough luxuries to offset the grime, crime and hassle. At the Ritz Carlton, the fractional owners receive twice-daily (!) housekeeping and an amenity called "provisioning," which involves the hotel staff unpacking your belongings and filling the fridge with your favorite food before you arrive.

[sfcity1]

There is a nice article with diagrams and pictures in the SanFrancisco Magazine about the makeover of South of Market Street (old industrial section and railroads). South of Market is being transformed into a Mini-Manhattan with futuristic buildings, 1000+ footers, advanced bullet trains, etc. I am only able to paste this excerpt from the magazine.

http://www.sanfranmag.com/home/letter_from_the_editor

The boom this time

The word that’s appeared most often in this magazine during the six-plus years I’ve been editing it has got to be boom. First, no surprise, was the dot-com boom and then the wait for the next boom—and all the while home prices kept booming. With apologies for perpetuating boom fatigue: now comes San Francisco’s high-rise boom.

In “San Francisco 2020” writer Barbara Tannenbaum charts the extraordinary impact of the towers and condo complexes scheduled to rise over two full miles of the city’s eastern rim, from the Ferry Building to well south of the ballpark. For a half-century San Francisco had the physical form of a middle-aged city, hemmed in by water and destined to slowly break down, gracefully if we were lucky. The population was 775,000 in 1950; even at the height of the dot-com boom, it officially got to only 776,000 before dropping precipitously again. Well, now we’re near 800,000 and the coming neighborhoods will put us well above that.

What’s amazing to consider is that, unlike its hell-bent predecessor, this boom is choreographed, a three-way fox-trot between city planners, developers, and the market. Occasionally, a politician has broken in—master builder Willie Brown to will Mission Bay into existence, supervisors Chris Daly and Aaron Peskin to twist the arms of Rincon Hill developers. Yet everyone who matters in this city of political haters is moving in the same general direction. It’s the new “Kumbaya”: let’s all plan high-rises together!

The common ground that allows such compromise, as Chris Smith finds in his profile of Peskin (“Captain of the Skyline”), is that the land was largely empty. Even as the preservationist board president will gladly box the ears of any landowner who crosses him, when it comes to underdeveloped land he is happy to let private developers and their bankers gamble billions of their own dollars on creating glossy housing for tens of thousands of mostly wealthy new residents and workers—as long as the city gets what it needs out of the deals.

As the son of a developer, I’m under no illusion that the comity or the real estate market will hold forever. Still, barring epic world disaster, this march is likely inexorable. The developers are mostly Monopoly players on a world scale, like Miami Beach mogul Don Peebles and Tishman Speyer, which just bought 80 acres of prime Manhattan land in one of the biggest deals ever. These outfits are betting on the city’s long-term élan. They have the resources to switch a project’s uses from luxury condos to apartments or offices, or to wait the market out a few years if necessary. I think of the development as a tanker making its way across the bay. It slows but doesn’t turn back.

It’s natural given recent history to look ahead for the proverbial bust, to predict, for example, Blade Runner–like parking wars staining city life in the years before the plan’s new subways and trains are scheduled to arrive. Yet the untortured way we’ve come to the brink of a bold new skyline that makes economic, aesthetic, and even transportation sense gives me pause. Naysaying may not be called for this time. Pore through our provocative and, I think, definitive New City Rising report and tell me if you disagree: rather than doom, the headline word to tie to this boom could be bloom. Or even zoom. 

Bruce Kelley,
Editor-in-Chief

:D :yes: :cheers:

[botoxic]

u should take more pictures of 690 Market St Jobsite.

Ritz-Carlton
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010068.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010070.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010071.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010073.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010075.jpg

Foundry Square
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010041.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010042.jpg

Jewish Museum
This is a hard site to photograph, because the barrier wall is a good 10 feet high.
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010078.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010079.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010080.jpg

[San Frangelino]

Febuary's cover of San Francisco Magazine. It states that the city is going thru its biggest boom since 1906. I havent gone thru the article in it's entirety yet, but it looks to cover more than just the Transbay/Rincon areas.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/152/376044218_9483db22ec_b.jpg

[damitdud]

try and get a scan of that as soon as you can. that article looks fantastic

[sbarn]

Febuary's cover of San Francisco Magazine. It states that the city is going thru its biggest boom since 1906. I havent gone thru the article in it's entirety yet, but it looks to cover more than just the Transbay/Rincon areas.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/152/376044218_9483db22ec_b.jpg

Wow!!! If all this were to be built, San Francisco would definitely have one of the best skylines in the U.S. :cheers:

[JRinSoCal]

AMAZING! San Francisco will have the 3rd tallest skyline in the US.

[CityKid]

I think Webcor made a boo boo on the date of this update:

Foundry Square 1

January 2006

Foundry Square Building 1 is rapidly approaching Level 8 and will be completely poured by the first week of February. Currently, there are 9 sub-contractors working in the lower levels, and by mid February the installation of the building’s plant-precast architectural concrete panels will begin.

We have also received the first delivery of the curtain wall system which includes glass for Levels 1 through 3.

http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/foundrysquareb1january2007d1170117890.jpg
http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/foundrysquareb1january2007a1170117852.jpg
http://www.webcor.com/auto_images/large/foundrysquareb1january2007f1170117907.jpg

[Qaabus]

How tall are those proposals?

[BTinSF]

[IMG]Indeed, Joie de Vivre will deliver an unusual array of services rolled into the HOA fees, including bimonthly housecleaning and "turn-down service," as well as a 24-hour concierge available to help with everything from coordinating handymen and hiring a dog-walker to arranging for someone to troubleshoot a broken computer.



Having been President of the HOA in a large building--larger than SOMA Grande--and one that offers many such services, when I read that list, the first thing that pops into my head is the question, "How much is the monthly HOA fee and what guarantee is there it won't have to be raised pretty quick after the developer (who may be temporarily subsidizing it) departs?" All these services have to be paid for. There are basically two ways to do it: (1) Have the HOA contract for such things as the concierge and make their service availabel to everyone or (2) Let them operate in the building as an independet business, providing their service to the residents for a fee they set (or negotiate with the HOA). It can also be done as a combination with the HOA providing space, utilities and so forth in return for lowered fees for the services. But if the "fee for service" option is chosen, especially in a building marketed as being 'affordable to the rest of us", there's the risk not enough people will want to pay for things like "turn down service" and the supplier of that service won't be able to make a profit--and will leave. On the other hand, if the HOA contracts for it and the service is available to every resident at no or low cost, the real cost will have to be covered by the HOA fees.

When I read this sort of thing about a building still under construction, I take a lot of it with a grain of salt. If all that service could be provided at a reasonable cost, more buildings would do it. The first things a highrise needs are janitorial service and security and, in a city like SF, even those things are expensive. The first argument is whether to go union or not. Union is, of course, more expensive, but if there are union members among the residents (in my building, we had one guy who played in the SF Symphony and was a strong union guy), they will raise a rucus if the Board tries to hire non-union serive providers. There's also the fight about whether to employ the people in-house or contract out for janitorial and security services. My point is just that whatever services and arrangements for them exist in the mind of the developer are likely to be very transient and go by the boards when the real world intervenes.

[BTinSF]

How tall are those proposals?

To quote JChurch in another thread ( http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=114324&page=20 ):


Good lord.

1200'
1200'
1200'
900'
900'
850'
850'
800'

... all within a few hundred feet of one another. Am I missing anything?


It should be emphasized, by the way, for those who haven't been following the SF scene, quite a few of those buildings in white on the magazine cover are not "proposals" but either under construction (Infinity, Millenium, One Rincon Hill, Intercontinental Hotel) or approved and near starting construction (Californian, 45 Lansing, 350 Fremont). Those catalogued by JChurch, which are mostly part of the TransBay Terminal project and the tallest buildings pictured on the cover, are indeed still just proposals but several are presently being designed (including what may be the tallest--by Renzo Piano).

[mthd]

Very interesting post about 10th and Market being 19 and 35 story towers now. I thought the original proposal was three towers between 14 and 24 stories. I thought the taller tower was in the back though and the shorter tower on the north. I didn't think the planning department wanted the taller towers on the market side. Like at the Trinity Plaza project. Anyone know? Or maybe they changed the rules at planning when they rezoned the area around Van Ness and Market for all the possible 400' towers. Anyone know if its still going to be senior housing. Wondering if that changed too.

the plan which was originally approved had a 320' office tower on market street, a 200' workforce housing tower on 10th street, and a 14 story senior housing tower on mission street. the parcel changed hands and the office tower became residential. the original housing buildings were being redesigned but i haven't heard what became of them.

the area around van ness and market has not been rezoned yet - it's still a study, and i *think* the residential tower was already approved (or rather, the change from office to residential and the associated change in massing.)

[WonderlandPark]

Would this be correct? Not so sure on the lower towers:

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Nav/sanfrancisco_b.jpg

[WonderlandPark]

I see a mistake, I mistook the Intercontinental for the apartments next to the Federal Bldg.

[San Frangelino]

Lovely idea Wonderpark.

I think I notice one possible mistake though. To the left of the "Signature Transbay Terminal Tower" which is currently being designed under the design competition, there is the Palace hotel Tower. Then directly to the left of that tower is another tall tower. I believe that is the 3rd tower under the Transbay Terminal Plan and should be highlighted in red. One of the three parcels they want to upsize to 850 ft to pay for the terminal. The Renzo Piano tower is directly right of the "Signature Tower" and is a 5 tower project, with two thin towers at 1200 feet high' That is the other of the three parcels.

[WonderlandPark]

Update

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Nav/sanfrancisco_c.jpg

[San Frangelino]

:tup: Brilliant!...that is, if I advised you right.

[kenratboy]

This is kinda a dumb question - but at this point, what are the odds of seeing a 1000'+ building or two in DT SF under construction in the next ~5 years? Is this almost a given, or are we just hoping?

[Reminiscence]

I tried my best at identifying some of the towers here. I dont think they've included 350 Fremont St in there yet, thats another 800 foot proposal.

http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/6760/sfmagazinetd5.jpg

[rocketman_95046]

^great job...I guess that they are also missing 45 Lansing.

:slob:

[BTinSF]

the plan which was originally approved had a 320' office tower on market street, a 200' workforce housing tower on 10th street, and a 14 story senior housing tower on mission street. the parcel changed hands and the office tower became residential. the original housing buildings were being redesigned but i haven't heard what became of them.

This was on the agenda of the Planning Commission yesterday:

Case No. 2006.0584KXCV: 1407-1435 Market Street and 17-70 10th Street, southwest corner, Lot 041 (a portion of the former Lot 039) in Assessor’s Block 3507: The proposed project is (1) the demolition of the existing office buildings and surface parking lot and (2) the construction of two buildings sharing a common base and containing approximately 719 dwelling units, approximately 19,000 square feet of commercial space, and a garage with up to 668 parking spaces. The taller north tower will be 35 stories and approximately 352 feet high, and the shorter south tower will be 19 stories and approximately 220 feet high. The project requires review under Section 309 of the Planning Code for compliance and exceptions, conditional use authorization, and variances from certain requirements of the Planning Code. The project site is within the C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 200-S and 320-S Height and Bulk Districts. Source: http://sfgov.org/site/planning_index.asp?id=25756

the area around van ness and market has not been rezoned yet - it's still a study, and i *think* the residential tower was already approved (or rather, the change from office to residential and the associated change in massing.)

According to this article, it was hoped the Market/Octavia Plan, which calls for rezoning the market/Van Ness area, was to be approved by the Planning Commission last December. Not sure if that happened but that would put it before the Board of Supervisors now:

Filling up Market-Octavia
Neighborhood plan fuels first building project
San Francisco Business Times - November 17, 2006
by J.K. Dineen
Najib Joe Hakim
Brian Spiers has signed up a "starchitect" for a pioneering condo project at the site of an old Union 76 station.
View Larger
For six years local builder Brian Spiers has carefully watched the Market-Octavia plan wend its way through the city's seemingly endless planning process.

Now the plan is on the brink of passing, and Spiers is poised to be a pioneer in the new wave of housing development the zoning changes are expected to spur.

Spiers has acquired a prominent 22,000-square-foot lot at the corner of Buchanan and Market streets for between $9 million and $11 million. Currently a Union 76 gas station, the parcel is one of several along Market Street the plan identifies as a top priority for the Market-Octavia area.

The Market-Octavia plan aims to create a transit-oriented neighborhood with dense housing over retail and streets that that cater to walkers and bikers. The plan covers 379 acres including Hayes Valley, a portion of Mid-Market and Mission Dolores and part of Duboce Triangle. The plan, could result in 4,400 more housing units over the next 20 years, allows taller buildings near Van Ness Avenue and Market, but reduces heights in residential neighborhoods like Hayes Valley. It allows for three 400-foot towers clustered around the intersection of Market and Van Ness.

"There are a lot people waiting for this plan to go through -- they don't want to submit anything under the old zoning," he said.

Spiers has hired Miami-based design super star Arquitectonica to design an eight-story, 115-unit building on a sloped lot stepping down from the tan art deco apartment building above on Buchanan Street. Arquitectonica is more often associated with high-profile statement buildings like Tishman Speyer's Infinity project on Rincon Hill, but Spiers was referred to the firm by another builder and he was thrilled it said yes.

"The Planning Department wants good design and I hired Arquitectonica because I wanted to give them good design," said Spiers. "If you go up and down Market Street, this is one of the most visible sites. It is an important corner within the plan."

Spiers, a former carpenter, last year finished a 28-unit mixed-use project at 270 Valencia St., next to the old Levi Strauss factory.

The plan requires ground-floor retail along Market Street between Noe Street and Van Ness Avenue. Spiers has 220 feet of frontage along Market Street and plans to build a restaurant and two retail spaces. Spiers owns two bars in the city, including the Lucky 13, just up Market Street from the site. He said he would have loved to have had the new plan in place for the Valencia Street project because it would have given him 15-foot heights on his ground floor retail, instead of 10.

Chris Foley of Polaris Group brokered the land deal and will market the condo project when it is done. He said that Spiers, a Sunset District native, was determined to build a "pioneering project under the plan."

"He wants to really build an incredible, world-class building, which is why he hired a killer designer," said Foley. "It is going to cost him a lot of money, but he wants to be proud of the building and for the city to be proud of the building."

Lead Market-Octavia planner John Billovits said he hopes the Planning Commission will approve the plan Dec. 7 and move it to the Board of Supervisors by Dec. 14.

He said it's been satisfying to see developers like Spiers come forward plan-consistent projects.

"The plan is about more than just buildings, it's about neighborhood building," he said,

J.K. Dineen covers real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

Source: http://albuquerque.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/11/20/story6.html?t=printable

[BTinSF]

Reminiscence: I think what you have labeled "SF Federal Building" is actually SOMA Grand. The Federal Building can be seen next to it appearing to be completed. Also, what you have labeled 535 Mission is not but rather is the project on Howard next door to Foundry Square III (which is on the southwest corner of 1st & Howard)--I can't recall the address but I'll see if I can dig it out.

I don't think 535 Mission is depicted.

[BTinSF]

^^^Here we go--it's 524 Howard:

A 23-story building designed by HellerManus, 524 Howard St. was approved in 2000 and put on ice after the tech boom soured. On a mid-block site between First and Second streets, the project will include 202,000 square feet of office space. Swinerton is the contractor.

With rents rising rapidly in the south financial district, it's time to dust off the plans, said Nader Shah, senior VP of Higgins Development Partners.

"We believe the market has come back and we'll be taking a hard look at it in the first half of 2007," he said.

Higgins, based in Chicago, developed the 820,000-square-foot Yahoo headquarters in Sunnyvale and the Hyatt Center, a 47-story tower in Chicago.

The building at 524 Howard St. would be its first project in San Francisco.

Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2007/01/08/newscolumn1.html?t=printable

[tyler82]

anybody got pics of the progress of the california academy of sciences building in GGPark? this one should be the most interesting out of any others, with the full on garden rooftop

[BTinSF]

^^^They do--on their web site: http://www.calacademy.org/newacademy/

http://www.calacademy.org/newacademy/images/progress/latest.jpg

http://www.calacademy.org/newacademy/images/progress/1planetarium_dome_and_piazza.jpg

http://www.calacademy.org/newacademy/images/progress/1rainforest_and_piazza.jpg

http://www.calacademy.org/newacademy/images/progress/1skylights.jpg

[tyler82]

Oh man I can't wait for this one! The living rainforest and live roof park will be just spectacular.

[Reminiscence]

Attempt at an accurate update (thanks to BTinSF for the corrections :)):

http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/4583/sfmagazine2fy3.jpg

I'm not sure what the rest of those towers are, I'm guessing some are part of the Transbay Plan, but the rest are unknown.

[mthd]

your update looks correct now...

the pair of cruciform towers to the 'right' of 201 folsom on the image is a mistake. the three plain rectangular boxes in the foreground (one directly in front of millenium, and two in front and left of that) are the 550', 450', and 300' towers from the transbay plan. the three boxes right below where you've written '524 howard' are also sites identified in the transbay plan - 400', 550', and 300' in the original plan. these are among the sites being considered for additional height...

projects from this thread not shown include 45 lansing, 535 mission, the 690 market st addition, 631 folsom, argenta/bovet place/1 polk, and a bunch of other litle ones.

the ones labeled 340 and 375 fremont are not quite right in the rendering either.

[botoxic]

50-88 First Street
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-04/S4010048.jpg

350 Mission Street
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010047.jpg

177-183 Fremont Street
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-04/S4010034.jpg

[botoxic]

Does anyone have any info on 829-831 Folsom (between Fourth and Fifth)? A quick search online revealed a Board of Supervisors proposal to allow at this site an 85-foot structure with a dwelling unit density greater than one per 200 square foot of lot area, but that's all I could find...

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-04/S4010008.jpg

[kenratboy]

Talk about a confined site!!!

[BTinSF]

Er, what's happening at 177 Fremont? Demolition will kind of ruin the mini-park next to and behind it.

Regarding 829 Folsom:

From the Planning Dept.:

829 FOLSOM STREET - south side between 4th and 5th Streets, a through lot to Shipley Street; Lot 091 in Assessor's Block 3752. Request for Conditional Use authorization under Planning Code Sections 157, 207.5, 263.11, and 271 to construct an 85-foot-tall, nine-story building exceeding bulk limits, for a mixed-use development with up to 70 dwelling units, up to 5,000 gross square feet of ground floor retail commercial space, and a 62-space parking garage exceeding accessory amounts. A rear yard modification is sought under Section 134(e) to provide rear yard open space within an inner court and on a 7th floor setback of 10-15 feet along Shipley Street.

Sounds to me like they are building something very like Symphony Towers (but shorter--ST is 13 stories).

By the way, did you happen to pass SOMA Grand? Last fall it looked like they were clear a lot across Mission St. Anything doing there?

[Reminiscence]

177 Fremont? Isnt that site of that 800' building they just announced, or plan to announce?

[BTinSF]

^^^Oh, yeah:

Some of the tallest building proposals include a 1,200-foot-tall tower at 50 First St., which famed architect Renzo Piano is in line to design, a building of 850 feet proposed for 350 Mission St., and a building as high as 800 feet discussed for 177-187 Fremont St. Another application has come in for constructing a 675-foot building at 2 New Montgomery St. An international competition is also under way to design the new Transbay Terminal and an adjacent tower on city land as high as 1,200 feet that could become one of the tallest buildings on the West Coast.

Well, goodbye mini-park (at least for a while).

[briankendall]

I thought the mini park was deeded to 199 Fremont St. Thats the tower that you enter from an alleyway like entrance on Fremont. 177-83 are the two buildings that Botoxic took. I think it just includes those two buildings and not the mini-park. Its not a very big site at all. Definitely a slim 800' tower there.

[Reminiscence]

To my knowledge, briankendall is right. The site is limited to those two small buildings. However, that site will put that tower literally right next to the Transbay Terminal, which may or may not be a problem. As for the park, it will certainly be affected, but I dont think they're going to wipe it off the map, if anything they should make it larger.

Did anyone actually see any demolition going on here, or a notice of some kind notifing that something is planned? Seems to me like its way way too early for them to even annouce something at this time.

[mSeattle]

SF is crazy. wow!

[briankendall]

When I went by it there was no notices up about any project there. I think there is just some discussion at this point. The only thing I saw is I think the Webcor construction office for 301 Mission is in the 177 Fremont storefront.

[Reminiscence]

Right. Thats what I expected. As far as I know, 177 Fremont is just that, a proposal. Outside of that article posted a few days ago, I havent heard anything else regarding it.

[CardinalStudent]

From Feb. 16th

Arterra

http://aycu27.webshots.com/image/9786/2001295074327924344_rs.jpg

631 Folsom

http://aycu32.webshots.com/image/10471/2001237293073295151_rs.jpg

One Rincon Hill

http://aycu19.webshots.com/image/12378/2001298285874335005_rs.jpg

http://aycu28.webshots.com/image/10547/2001255409161474871_rs.jpg

The Infinity

http://aycu14.webshots.com/image/9853/2001214151655818231_rs.jpg

http://aycu35.webshots.com/image/9834/2001261383339332739_rs.jpg

http://aycu06.webshots.com/image/10605/2001239776008981516_rs.jpg

http://aycu23.webshots.com/image/12622/2001245866859198406_rs.jpg

http://aycu34.webshots.com/image/9353/2001271088795769412_rs.jpg

Millennium Tower

http://aycu14.webshots.com/image/11653/2001244533144203950_rs.jpg

http://aycu37.webshots.com/image/11596/2005306478609113624_rs.jpg

555 Mission

http://aycu13.webshots.com/image/11652/2005320305908247143_rs.jpg

http://aycu34.webshots.com/image/12153/2005339082771265800_rs.jpg

Ritz Carlton Residences

http://aycu29.webshots.com/image/10308/2005325197435502540_rs.jpg

http://aycu16.webshots.com/image/11495/2005324467743386619_rs.jpg

InterContinental Hotel

http://aycu33.webshots.com/image/10712/2005392084793502573_rs.jpg

http://aycu08.webshots.com/image/10367/2005381532504451307_rs.jpg

SoMa Grand

http://aycu04.webshots.com/image/10163/2005375389801167545_rs.jpg

http://aycu28.webshots.com/image/11267/2005328193102600863_rs.jpg

Argenta

http://aycu18.webshots.com/image/12057/2005369224300504449_rs.jpg

Symphony Towers

http://aycu25.webshots.com/image/10744/2003505680791391481_rs.jpg

800 Block Van Ness

http://aycu31.webshots.com/image/12430/2003539281772695646_rs.jpg

Polk & Geary

http://aycu13.webshots.com/image/10252/2003572773762463354_rs.jpg

The Hayes SF

http://aycu35.webshots.com/image/9914/2003563520709982992_rs.jpg

Foundry Square I

http://aycu17.webshots.com/image/9376/2003598696191209014_rs.jpg

[BTinSF]

^^^Thanks ever so much for including the smaller projects I've asked about. They may not be big and pretty but since they are in my "hood" and I'll be walking past them every day when I get back, they matter as much to me as the tall guys.

[Reminiscence]

Superb pictures, absolutely outstanding. All the projects are coming along very nicely. I see they've added the brace for the top of the first Infinity tower, and that they've reached street level for the second Infinity tower. The glass on Intercontinental looks sleeker and sharper every time theres an update. Millenium still going pretty slow, but we're getting there. And One Rincon still changing every time I see it, very very nice. Plus all the small projects are making nice progress.

[BTinSF]

all the small projects are making nice progress.

Except, curiously enough, The Hayes. That one seems like it's really going up slowly. Foundry Square I has been just about topped out since thy've put a couple floors on The Hayes--and FS I is taller.

PS: That Intercontinental is one sexy building!

[Reminiscence]

Except, curiously enough, The Hayes. That one seems like it's really going up slowly. Foundry Square I has been just about topped out since thy've put a couple floors on The Hayes--and FS I is taller.

PS: That Intercontinental is one sexy building!

Oh yes, they've outdone themselves with Intercontinental, it actually looks better than in the rendering, in my opinion.

Sadly, I havent been able to monitor progess too well on many of these projects, even the major ones. Its even worse now that I'm in Chicago, which is why I usually get excited when people post pictures updating progress going on around the city. I'll be able to see them first hand in Mid-March though :)

[CardinalStudent]

The Hayes SF posted a schedule on the fence. I don't remember the details exactly, but I think they are aiming for 2 floors/month... topped out around April maybe?

[San Frangelino]

888 Seventh Street http://www.liveat888.com/ I think is worthy of an update as well. Sadly, this is the best image I could get online.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/137/397663104_dc5e95010c_o.png

http://www.dbarchitect.com/work/housing/affordable/www-20109/20109_kingstreet_w800.jpg

Also for those unaware; The nearby "Potrero Projects" website has been expanded. The project with the Whole Foods at the bottom.http://www.thepotrero.com/

[tyler82]

The thing that bothers me about some of these new multi- use developments is that some of the retail vendors on street level can be very chucky cheesified.
Take, for example, the cafes and restaurants around the Moscone/ yerba buena area and third and folsom. There is a cheap, unauthentic feel to some of these places with their neon signs and suburban chain store look that makes the area really boring.
Maybe it's that a lot of the people who live here are "new money" who lack class and sophistication and their neighborhoods reflect that.
Hopefully these new developments will bring new and unique shops restaurants and soul to the city instead of the same old Cold Stone Creamery types. Otherwise the area will be inhabited by walking zombies and turn into another *gasp* Marina district Lombard Street.

[botoxic]

I ran several errands today in areas that afforded me some nice SF skyline views, so I took the ol' camera along:

Dolores Park
Look carefully to spot SoMa Grand, Intercontinental, Infinity, and One Rincon:
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-17/IMG_0144.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-17/IMG_0153.jpg

Davies Medical Center
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-17/IMG_0155.jpg

Corona Heights:
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-17/IMG_0158.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-17/IMG_0165.jpg

[kenratboy]

Great update!!! :tup: :tup: :tup:

[tyler82]

You can also see the Ritz Carlton in this pic

Dolores Park
Look carefully to spot SoMa Grand, Intercontinental, Infinity, and One Rincon:
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-17/IMG_0144.jpg

[BTinSF]

The thing that bothers me about some of these new multi- use developments is that some of the retail vendors on street level can be very chucky cheesified.
Take, for example, the cafes and restaurants around the Moscone/ yerba buena area and third and folsom. There is a cheap, unauthentic feel to some of these places with their neon signs and suburban chain store look that makes the area really boring.
Maybe it's that a lot of the people who live here are "new money" who lack class and sophistication and their neighborhoods reflect that.
Hopefully these new developments will bring new and unique shops restaurants and soul to the city instead of the same old Cold Stone Creamery types. Otherwise the area will be inhabited by walking zombies and turn into another *gasp* Marina district Lombard Street.

Well, I live in a "mixed use" building. On the ground floor is a Peet's Coffee, a Books Inc., a Max's Cafe, a sushi restaurant, a mom/pop deli, a florist, a UPS store and a movie theater. That mix probably tells you the building but I see nothing wrong with it and I have had some familiarity with efforts to lease the retail space over the years. I know the management prefers interesting independent merchants, but what are they supposed to do if nobody like that wants to rent vacant space? There are only so many great independent retailers wanting to open up at any one time. And no neighborhood wants a bunch of vacant store fronts. So better another Quiznos and Starbuck's than no retail and blank walls or grafittied up window glass along the street.

By the way, maybe I'm an unsophisticated rube with no class, but I love Yerba Buena. I think it's turned out great and should get better with time, especially when the final bit of it, the Mexican Museum and possibly another highrise on the 3rd/Mission corner, is put in place.

[LWR]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
The original article can be found on SFGate.com here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/02/25/MNG2DOATDN1.DTL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, February 25, 2007 (SF Chronicle)
TOWERING EXPECTATIONS/S.F.'s new federal building challenges ideas of what a government high-rise should look like -- its humane design is green, dazzling
John King, Chronicle Urban Design Writer


San Francisco has never seen a tower like the federal building about to
open at Seventh and Mission streets.
Neither has the United States.
No other tower in America is shaped so resolutely by the desire to create
a healthy environment for workers while reducing the use of energy and
natural resources. And no other high-rise so casually defies expectations
of how a tower "ought" to look.
The result is both daunting and dazzling, up to and including the
stainless steel panels that fold over the broad concrete frame like some
immense origami whim.
Like it or not, this is architecture at its provocative best. The 18-story
structure and its four-story annex show how buildings fit together. They
demonstrate that simple materials can be used in fresh ways, and they prod
you to think about how design and the environment are linked.
The complex includes the annex that sits at a right angle to Mission
Street and a plaza framing a small cafe building at the corner of Seventh
and Mission. But the attention-getter is the tower -- a slab parallel to
Market Street that's 345 feet wide, 240 feet tall and 60 feet deep.
The south-facing wall is draped in panels of perforated stainless steel, a
theatrical sunscreen that seems to ripple and snag as it careens toward
the plaza. The northern facade is entirely different: It could almost be
mistaken for a scaffold as floor-to-ceiling glass spreads out behind a
taut grid of metal catwalks and 55 thin rows of opaque glass fins.
Crowning all this are steep folds of perforated steel that form a hollow
cone held in place by V-shaped trusses. The panels hide rooftop mechanical
systems and accentuate the slab's height, tapering from east to west.
The federal building is even more conspicuous because nearby blocks are
low; it becomes a billboard of contemporary design looming large in views
from Interstate 80 and Nob Hill. It provides a blunt finale to the view
through Civic Center from the steps of City Hall.
If they'd had a choice, city planners wouldn't have allowed either the
slab or the imposing design, because the complex sits across Seventh
Street from the U.S. Court of Appeals building, a Beaux-Arts landmark from
1905. But city zoning doesn't apply to federal projects.
Nor could local planners veto the federal decision to choose
experimentation over elegance by awarding the $144 million project to
architect Thom Mayne of Santa Monica, whose firm Morphosis was joined by
the San Francisco office of Smith Group as executive architect.
Mayne's trademark is monochromatic drama, and here it's stretched to
skyline scale. Tucked inside, though, is a truly humane building shaped by
environmental considerations.
The slab is thin enough for daylight to penetrate into each floor of the
tower. The dimensions also allow for cross-ventilation with operable
windows. The glass fins on the north facade serve the same purpose as the
theatrical veil: They keep direct sunlight away from workers, filtering
out heat and glare.
The approach isn't completely radical -- climate considerations shaped
buildings for centuries until technology made it possible for towers to be
hermetically sealed cocoons. But it is expected to keep the building's
energy use 50 percent below the target for new federal buildings.
The tower also nudges workers to exercise. Most elevators stop only at
every third level, forcing employees to use stairs for part of the journey
(one elevator is available for people who need it). To make the climb
enticing, wide staircases march past collegial atriums and stop at
protruding picture windows.
This attention to environmental details helped Mayne and Smith Group win
the job, according to Maria Ciprazo of the General Services
Administration. "They brought the idea 'why can't you enjoy where you
work' and pushed it from there," said Ciprazo, the federal architect
overseeing the project.
Mayne was also hired because of the GSA's laudable "Design Excellence
Program." Started in 1994, it seeks out fresh talent for federal projects
and lets each region choose the firms it wants.
When Mayne was selected in 1999, he was little known except among
architectural insiders. No longer. Morphosis has completed a series of
highly praised public projects and is now at work on a jazz center for New
Orleans and a Paris high-rise that would rival the Eiffel Tower in height.
In 2005, he became the first American in 14 years to receive the Pritzker
Architecture Prize, the profession's highest honor.
The federal building shows that Mayne hasn't toned down his designs for
larger clients.
Take those perforated steel panels that filter sunlight and serve as
thermal buffers. They could have been a simple parallel veil hung
alongside the tower. Instead they cascade from the roof and then rear back
at the plaza's edge, exposing trusses and bolts.
And the elaborate crown atop the slab has nothing to do with
sustainability. It's architectural bravado abetted by Ove Arup & Partners,
the project's engineering firm.
What's exciting about Mayne's recent work is that the bravado comes with
an imaginative social conscience.
The obvious example in San Francisco is the emphasis on sustainable
design, but there's also an effort to make the new federal building feel
like it belongs to all of us.
Given 9/11 and other attacks on government buildings, Mayne could only go
so far; security concerns leave their mark on the design. There's
windowless concrete where buildings face sidewalks. The thick glass at the
Seventh Street entrance is blast resistant.
The low bars of concrete scattered along the edge of the plaza are places
to sit -- and car-repellent barriers.
Even so, the 1,700 workers who begin moving in this week aren't the only
people who'll have access to the site. The plaza is a public space, one
that's sure to be closely monitored. Underneath the final tumbles of
sunscreen are a child care center and an auditorium that will be available
for community meetings.
Most spectacular of all is the 11th floor "skygarden," a box-shaped space
that's three stories high and open to the air. It will be accessible to
anyone willing to go through the airport-like security detectors at the
tower's entrance.
Not all the flourishes at Seventh and Mission pay off, to be sure.
One problem is that the perforated sunscreen seems heavy; during much of
the day it looks more like a dull blanket than a sleek veil.
Another miscalculation is the roof of the cafe, which is topped by a
tangle of trusses and panels.
The idea was for the veil to leap across the plaza, and from above it
looks fine. Up close? You'd think a giant robotic spider landed on the
cafe and is about to pry it open.
Inevitably, the federal building stirs comparisons with the M.H. de Young
Museum in Golden Gate Park that opened in 2005 -- another adamantly modern
building by winners of the Pritzker prize.
That museum by Swiss architects Jacques Herzog and Pierre de Meuron is
equally unorthodox at first glance, but it's more refined and low-key.
Mayne's design revels in putting raw materials on show.
But both buildings make the same point: There's more to architecture than
endless replays of the past.
San Francisco's character is rich and rooted. It also has been redefined
from day one by immigrants and cultural trends. The city only grows
stronger by exposure to fresh ideas -- including buildings that make you
look twice, and make you think hard.

E-mail John King at jking@sfchronicle.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 SF Chronicle

[BTinSF]

^^^Might as well include some of the photos that ran with the article for those who can't look out the window (like me--until May):

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_fed_p4a0010.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0009_kr.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0034_kr.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0028_kr.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0067_kr.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0097_kr.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0092_kr.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0077_kr.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0041_kr.jpghttp://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0017_kr.jpg

THE question: Could this make having to go in for a tax audit something to look forward to?

[BTinSF]

By the way, what be that crane in the foreground?

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/02/25/mn_federal25_0009_kr.jpg

[Reminiscence]

I know SOMA Grand is in the background. Not sure about the front though, should be a minor project at best, I forget what street thats on.

[LWR]

By the way, what be that crane in the foreground?

First, thanks for posting the photos that go with the note :cheers:, and second...

I think that by the time anyone gets to the site of an IRS audit, they won't even remember what the building looks like (not unlike getting married). :whip: and :jester:

[tyler82]

Well, I live in a "mixed use" building. On the ground floor is a Peet's Coffee, a Books Inc., a Max's Cafe, a sushi restaurant, a mom/pop deli, a florist, a UPS store and a movie theater. That mix probably tells you the building but I see nothing wrong with it and I have had some familiarity with efforts to lease the retail space over the years. I know the management prefers interesting independent merchants, but what are they supposed to do if nobody like that wants to rent vacant space? There are only so many great independent retailers wanting to open up at any one time. And no neighborhood wants a bunch of vacant store fronts. So better another Quiznos and Starbuck's than no retail and blank walls or grafittied up window glass along the street.

By the way, maybe I'm an unsophisticated rube with no class, but I love Yerba Buena. I think it's turned out great and should get better with time, especially when the final bit of it, the Mexican Museum and possibly another highrise on the 3rd/Mission corner, is put in place.


I didn't mean to imply any snobbery it was just my anger coming out towards the dot commers who have ruined some parts of the city by running out the creative artsy types and bringing in a suburban mentality. I know a lot of people in the area who are very "san francisco" and urban.

In regards to Yerba Buena, I agree that what it offers on the inside is great, but the outside is an eyesore and urban planning gone wrong. You can't even get inside the park from most of the area on the sidewalks, and once your in, it's a maze to be able to find your way out. I find myself walking around in circles just to figure out how to get beneath the bridge I just walked across. I think we could have done a lot better in the aesthetics department, and what we got was very "average" compared to the renovating of projects around the same era such as City Hall, AT&T Park, and the Embarcadero. It's just the area around Yerba Buena that is really beige and concrete and bland.

I don't think all of it is this bad, though. THe new stuff going up around the CalTrain and AT&T Park is very modern, urban, clean, and beautiful. I just hope all these new construction is thought out well at the street level and isn't a big mad dash to get something up just to make money, destroying our city's soul in the process.

[BTinSF]

I didn't mean to imply any snobbery it was just my anger coming out towards the dot commers who have ruined some parts of the city by running out the creative artsy types and bringing in a suburban mentality. I know a lot of people in the area who are very "san francisco" and urban.

In regards to Yerba Buena, I agree that what it offers on the inside is great, but the outside is an eyesore and urban planning gone wrong. You can't even get inside the park from most of the area on the sidewalks, and once your in, it's a maze to be able to find your way out. I find myself walking around in circles just to figure out how to get beneath the bridge I just walked across. I think we could have done a lot better in the aesthetics department, and what we got was very "average" compared to the renovating of projects around the same era such as City Hall, AT&T Park, and the Embarcadero. It's just the area around Yerba Buena that is really beige and concrete and bland.



Just so ya know, MIT says you're wrong:

Yerba Buena Gardens, San Francisco

Yerba Buena Park is built on top of San Francisco's Moscone Convention Center. Above is a waterfall dedicated to Martin Luther King.

Yerba Buena Center is an 87-acre, 12 block, mixed-use development that extends from Market to Harrison streets, Second Street to west of Fourth Street. It is located adjacent to the San Francisco downtown office and retail district, which is north along Market Street. Formerly known as the "Tenderloin District" (ed. note--hey, they're from Boston and obviously not perfect)-- Yerba Buena once consisted of dilapidated hotels, commercial, and industrial buildings suitable as the setting for a Dashel Hammet novel. In 1947 legislation was passed to create the Yerba Buena Redevelopment District, one of the first urban renewal districts in the United States.

Today, museums and other cultural attractions occupy 20 acres at the core of the district. These facilities surround a five-acre rolling green park that is actually the roof of the city's 500,000-square-foot Moscone Convention Center, constructed underground. Last year, 270 outdoor events -- performances, concerts, exhibits of all kinds -- were programmed in the Yerba Buena green, making it a year-round destination for the city. The balance of the district has been developed as luxury hotels and commercial retail, including 3,750 apartments, half of them affordable. According to Robert Campbell of The Boston Globe, Yerba Buena is the perfect example of three things: the power of long-range integrated planning, the need to feed a public space with activity from its edges, and the importance of programmed activity to give richness to the life of that space. It's also an example of the need for maintenance: $2.5 million a year is spent, including full-time security.

Concept

The Yerba Buena Garden is based on the idea that construction of new cultural facilities and public open space can transform a blighted district and bring economic development. Kenzo Tange completed the original master plan for the district, working with Gerald M. McCue and Associates. Fumihiko Maki designed the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts. James Stewart Polshek designed a new theater complex adjacent to the arts center. The architecture firm of SMWM designed the Zeum -- a multiplex complete with an Imax theater, and an electronic games entertainment center. The central green connects restaurants and cafes to the performing areas and the entrances of other buildings.

Lessons

Yerba Buena is an example of long-term planning leading to neighborhood revitalization and urban design success. Creation of the Redevelopment Authority put a strong client in place, which could be held accountable, whether the outcome was a success or a failure. Yerba Buena is self-sustaining, deriving income from development of land it controls to offset the cost of community facilities, including the operation and maintenance of public open space. The project also demonstrates the need for public open space to be surrounded by commercial activity and housing.

These case studies were researched and written by Zhan Guo and Alex-Ricardo Jimenez of MIT, under the direction of Thomas J. Piper of the Department of Urban Studies and Planning. They examine a series of urban open space projects with particular lessons for Boston as it decides the future of the land freed up when the Central Artery moves underground.

I agree with them, by the way. I like the things about Yerba Buena that you don't--the fact that it's not entirely open to the surrounding streets and the pathways are complex enough to offer the chance to get a little lost in a space that's only 2 city blocks and surrounded by highrises (although I can really no longer get lost since I go there several times a week).

On the other hand, I find the part of Mission Bay north of Mission Creek that you are talking about to be cold and I don't much like the scale. I think the buildings should have been either lower (like other SF residential neighborhoods) or taller (like a real city highrise neighborhood). Furthermore this is absolutely the land of Quiznos, Starbucks and multipe banks (except the Safeway that got forced into the project when somebody realized there was no real supermarket anywhere around their new "neighborhood").

Love the ballpark itself, though.

[fflint]

Rincon Hill from the top
Moving up in San Francisco: The Transamerica Pyramid is higher at 853 feet -- but even now, with the tower still not finished, every other building north of Los Angeles is lower

Carl Nolte, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, March 2, 2007

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/03/02/ba_rincon00147_mk.jpg
Vincente Roman, project engineer for Bovis Lend Lease, the contractor, walks along the top of the giant crane used on One Rincon Hill in San Francisco

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/03/02/ba_rincon00258_mk.jpg
Jaimie Rubio uses a joystick-like control in the crane to maneuver large building materials into place for workers far below

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/03/02/ba_rincon00555_mk.jpg
Crane operator Jaimie Rubio inside the small control cab; he says he has trained himself to use the bathroom as little as possible

Jaimie Rubio, who is 54 years old, does the heavy lifting for One Rincon Hill, the $290 million project that will be the tallest residential building in the West when it is completed next year.

Rubio is one of two tower-crane operators working for Bovis Lend Lease, the principal contractor at One Rincon. He works in a tiny enclosed cab, smaller than an office workstation, at the top of the crane, virtually at the top of San Francisco.

His blue-and-yellow crane stands next to the One Rincon tower and above it, like a giant mechanical bird hovering over the steel and concrete construction site.

The One Rincon tower is more than 500 feet high now, counting the concrete core that was built first. When it is finished, the top of the 60-story building will be 641 feet high. It will be a landmark tower, right next to the Bay Bridge, and a monument to the men and women who built it.

Julie Ann Linsley, who runs one of the elevators -- called hoists -- says she can see the tower from her home in Oakland. "It looks cool,'' she says, "It looks exhilarating. There's a lot of energy on this job."

To get to his workplace, Rubio rides a hoist attached to the outside of the building. He gets off at the 30th floor, then climbs over some piping and crosses to a plank a dozen feet long to the open steel frame of the crane. A series of ladders leads straight up.

Then he climbs, hand over hand, up 24 rungs of a steel ladder, to a platform. There are seven more platforms, 192 rungs on the ladders in all. At the top is a shorter ladder leading to the spot where the crane's arm pivots. Here the operator must scramble up over the steel pivoting mechanism to the top, to the crane's arm and control cab. Below is nothing but air and the cold wind of late winter. The view is breathtaking.

The city is at his feet. The towers of the Bay Bridge, 526 feet above the bay surface, look like scale models. The other high-rises of San Francisco are off to the north. He can almost look the massive, dark brown Bank of America building in the eye. The Transamerica Pyramid is higher at 853 feet, but every other building north of Los Angeles is lower.

Up here, the world is bounded on the east by Mount Diablo, capped with snow, and the Farallon Islands, 27 miles out in the Pacific. From his perch, 659 feet above the top of Rincon Hill, 759 feet above sea level, Rubio can see the curvature of the Earth.

"Don't look down at the top of the tower, whatever you do,'' he tells a visitor to his aerie, nodding toward the tallest part of the building under construction, nearly a hundred feet below his perch. "It'll scare the s -- out of you.''

The top of the tower, now about 540 feet above First Street, is what he's there for. The crane's job is to move steel and concrete forms from the ground up to the top of the tower, where the work is going on. The crane operator essentially runs a winch that pulls a cable traveling on a trolley arrangement over a long arm.

The whole arm can swivel; there is hook at the end of the cable to pick up loads, a winch and a motor at the other end with a counterweight.

This crane has a capacity of 31,00o pounds at the tip of the crane arm, 35,800 pounds with the load positioned closer to the center of the crane.

The crane can be jacked up as high as is necessary -- as the building moves higher, the crane moves up with it. These cranes were invented in Germany in 1949; the technical name for them in German is turmdrehkran.

One man, guided via radio by workers stationed below, runs the whole rig.

It takes timing, skill and experience to run the crane. Every operator has to be certified by the state; the candidate has to take a course in operating the crane, then pass a written test. "You have to develop an experience with loads and how to handle them,'' Rubio says, "but it is more about experience than knowing the physics of it.'' You have to have a feel, he says, you have to know what you are doing.

It is a key job: Bay Area crane operators belong to Local 3 of the Operating Engineers, who say minium pay scale is about $38 an hour, plus overtime and benefits. Good crane operators are much sought-after, and some are paid over scale.

Rubio deflects questions about pay. "It's a living,'' he says.

He points to the men working below -- a group of iron workers setting up re-enforcing steel bars to receive a pour of concrete. The ironworkers, who climb on the steel like circus acrobats, are called "rod busters."

Rubio moves the crane slowly, swinging it so the arm moves counterclockwise, swinging concrete forms onto the top of the tower and moving them into place. He operates the crane from a high-backed leather swivel chair, using two joysticks.

"They are the ones who do all the work,'' Rubio says, nodding at the workers far below. "I just pull the joystick. I follow their orders.''

That might be true, but others say the crane operator has a big role. "Everything rotates around them,'' says Gary De Renzi, one of the business agents for Local 3. "There's no break up there.''

The operator is paid an hour of travel time -- half an hour up the ladder and half an hour down. There is no latrine high in the sky; bottles do the job.

Rubio has no one looking over his shoulder, so he wears a Giants T-shirt and moccasins instead of the steel-toe shoes common on construction jobs. A small wooden shelf is built into a corner of the tiny cab, where he keeps a newspaper to read during slow parts of the day. It is like the nest of an eagle up there.

"Comfort is the name of the game,'' he says.

The main problem is wind. "Nothing stops me but the wind,'' he says. State rules say tower cranes can't be operated in steady wind of more than 35 mph, and Rubio says he had something like that on Tuesday, with rain. One gust, he says, got up to 59.6 mph on his wind gauge. "As soon as I landed the load, I rolled it up and called down. I said, "See ya.''

There is always danger moving heavy loads with mechanical equipment. Rubio hasn't had an accident on the One Rincon job, but when he was working a tower crane building the W hotel at Third and Howard streets in 1998, he had a bad accident.

"I had 19,300 pounds on the load, and as I was moving it up, I heard this big loud pop -- POW! -- and it started to go down.''

The axle on the winch had broken, and the cable was uncontrollable. "I'm like, 'Oh, my God!' You know the expression, you see your whole life go before your eyes? Well, it's true.''

The load, the whole 19,300 pounds, roared down, hit the roof of the firehouse next door and went right through into the sleeping quarters of the firehouse. "I thought I'd wiped out a whole company of firemen." Rubio says. As it turned out, the firehouse was empty. Nobody was hurt.

But Rubio still sees that ruined firehouse -- "a mark like a cookie-cutter in the roof,'' he says, and hears the crack of the winch breaking.

"Want to see what the winch looks like?'' he asked a visitor, then leads him out of the cab, onto a steel mesh catwalk 650 feet above First and Harrison streets.

"Don't look down,'' he says.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One in an occasional series on the construction of a high-rise on San Francisco's Rincon Hill. For additional photos and previous stories about One Rincon, go to sfgate.com/Rincon.

[botoxic]

Skyline from Potrero Hill
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0236.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0244.jpg

Count the cranes!
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0246.jpg

Mission Bay
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0251.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0252.jpg

One Rincon already appears to be the tallest building from this part of the City:
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0253.jpg

Lots of Boats!
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0259.jpg

Foundry Square
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0277.jpg

They've added a strip of the bronze-colored cladding, which will compliment its silver twin across the streeet:
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0278.jpg

Jewish Museum from Yerba Buena
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0287.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0288.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0289.jpg

[Reminiscence]

Nice shots, thanks for sharing them :)

One Rincon is really begining to stand out and so is Infinity, too bad Millenium still has a while to go before it becomes visible. Cant wait to see them in person.

[kenratboy]

botoxic - if this were elementary school, and I was the teacher, you would get a gold star next to your name for that post. Outstanding, thanks!

Question - are we going to see anything really tall north of Market?

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

fantastic updates! SF is looking great.

[mthd]

Question - are we going to see anything really tall north of Market?

the tallest building currently proposed north of market is only ±410 feet - but it is on a 200 foot tall hill. whether it makes it through approvals at that height or not, only time will tell. i'm not aware of any opportunity sites for anything really tall north of market.

[BTinSF]

^^^What that? I wasn't aware there was even anything that tall--or much at all, really. I believe there's a project on Bush and another to add height to a building on California, but nothing that'll change the skyline that I know of. So anyway, what's 400 ft from the top of a 200 ft hill (which hill?)?

[BTinSF]

By the way, thanks again botoxic and especially for the rarely seen Jewish Museum which looks further along than I expected.

PS: The new server seems to have an editing bug (as well as a smiley bug).

[botoxic]

Perhaps Cathedral Hill Plaza II, proposed for 1333 Gough (at Geary)?
I've seen 390' floating around for this 30-story proposal, so 410' doesn't seem out of the question.

[mthd]

^^ yep that's the one. the draft initial study is being published in a few weeks. until then the sponsor isn't releasing any info.

[BTinSF]

^^^Oops. That's my hood. Guess I'll have to go over to the Planning Department and complain about it (anybody got Sue Hestor's phone #?). :justkidding:

By the way, if that gets built and the new HUGE Pacific Med Center (not tall but real big) ever gets built on Geary between Van Ness and Franklin (where Cathedral Hill Hotel is now), that'll be quite a little area.

[Reminiscence]

^^^

You scared me for a bit there, heh.

I too had forgotten all about 1333 Gough, and also the new CPMC tower. Theres nothing really tall in that area, so they should stand out (a la Intercontinental and Federal Building). Also, building these on top of a ~200' hill, should make it look like ~400-600' buildings.

[kenratboy]

^^^Oops. That's my hood. Guess I'll have to go over to the Planning Department and complain about it (anybody got Sue Hestor's phone #?). :justkidding:

You should be OUTRAGED! How dare they do ***something*** that you might even ***notice*** Wanting to build a building in one of the most important cities in the world, who do they think they are!!! The nerve of these people! :D