HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive


 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #501  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2007, 6:05 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,150
Found on flicker, posted by Stephanie Booth:


http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1361/679727917_cd27b58cea_b.jpg
     
     
  #502  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2007, 10:47 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,071
Looks to me like they are working on the 28th floor (I start getting cross-eyed trying to count floors sometimes). If so, they seem to have speeded things up some. The mat for the midrise section DID get poured over the weekend and so work on that part should be intensifying, starting with a second crane going up soon.
     
     
  #503  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2007, 8:01 PM
SFObserver's Avatar
SFObserver SFObserver is offline
Sunrise in The City
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 64
Photo from 7/09/07

     
     
  #504  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2007, 8:03 PM
tyler82's Avatar
tyler82 tyler82 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SAN FRANCISCO
Posts: 561
Great pic.
I think I tracked down and found the building contractors for this one:

     
     
  #505  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2007, 10:07 PM
SFObserver's Avatar
SFObserver SFObserver is offline
Sunrise in The City
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 64
Photo from Tuesday, 7/10/2007

Quote:
Originally Posted by BTinSF View Post
Looks to me like they are working on the 28th floor (I start getting cross-eyed trying to count floors sometimes). If so, they seem to have speeded things up some. The mat for the midrise section DID get poured over the weekend and so work on that part should be intensifying, starting with a second crane going up soon.

They poured the 31st floor of the riser on 7/3 and poured the 28th floor deck on 7/6.

The riser forms are sitting at 32 in this pic. They'll probably pour it later today or tomorrow morning.


     
     
  #506  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2007, 5:17 PM
botoxic botoxic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The Mission
Posts: 690
Photos from 07-14



     
     
  #507  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2007, 6:45 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,071
^^^Halfway it looks like.
     
     
  #508  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2007, 7:20 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
Strange. By merely glancing at it, it does not look like a 30 story building. I guess because its incomplete. That glass looks better every time though. Love it.
     
     
  #509  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2007, 11:04 PM
tyler82's Avatar
tyler82 tyler82 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SAN FRANCISCO
Posts: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reminiscence View Post
Strange. By merely glancing at it, it does not look like a 30 story building. I guess because its incomplete. That glass looks better every time though. Love it.
I think because it is clustered around much taller buildings, unlike Intercontinental, which stands our proud. This building is starting to show, though, when driving down the central freeway and from the 280- N into downtown. Once the glass is raised more it will be even more noticeable, and something that we can actually see from outside of Mission and 1st st!
     
     
  #510  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2007, 11:13 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reminiscence View Post
Strange. By merely glancing at it, it does not look like a 30 story building. I guess because its incomplete. That glass looks better every time though. Love it.
It's a 30-story RESIDENTIAL building surrounded by office buildings. With residential construction, you have about 10' per floor whereas with office it's more like 12'. So the present height should compare more with 25 floors on the surrounding buildings. That's why I think ultimately it's supposed to be just a bit taller than 50 Fremont across the intersection which has only 42 stories.
     
     
  #511  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2007, 1:58 AM
mthd mthd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTinSF View Post
It's a 30-story RESIDENTIAL building surrounded by office buildings. With residential construction, you have about 10' per floor whereas with office it's more like 12'. So the present height should compare more with 25 floors on the surrounding buildings. That's why I think ultimately it's supposed to be just a bit taller than 50 Fremont across the intersection which has only 42 stories.
you got it - but office floors are almost always 13' or more in modern steel framed buildings. some downtown office buildings are 14' - e.g. shaklee terraces aka 1 front aka 444 market.
     
     
  #512  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2007, 6:43 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTinSF View Post
It's a 30-story RESIDENTIAL building surrounded by office buildings. With residential construction, you have about 10' per floor whereas with office it's more like 12'. So the present height should compare more with 25 floors on the surrounding buildings. That's why I think ultimately it's supposed to be just a bit taller than 50 Fremont across the intersection which has only 42 stories.
Right, I took that into account. I was driving back from SF State, and it was clearly visible from the Central Freeway, with some glass also visible upon closer inspection. I tried to briefly imagine what it would look like when finished, but traffic made that difficult to do.
     
     
  #513  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2007, 1:14 AM
tyler82's Avatar
tyler82 tyler82 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SAN FRANCISCO
Posts: 561
I thought this building was mix use commercial, residential, and hotel? Am I wrong??
     
     
  #514  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2007, 3:32 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler82 View Post
I thought this building was mix use commercial, residential, and hotel? Am I wrong??
Hey Tyler...

Yes you are because it's completely residential. They're pitching three distinctly different types of residences in their marketing campaign.
     
     
  #515  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2007, 5:02 AM
FourOneFive FourOneFive is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler82 View Post
I thought this building was mix use commercial, residential, and hotel? Am I wrong??
301 Mission was a mixed use project when it was first proposed 5 years ago. Here's a SF Chronicle article on the project from 2002:

58-story skyscraper seeking S.F. approval
Proposal for city's fourth-highest tower

Gerald D. Adams, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, May 18, 2002




(05-18) 04:00 PDT San Francisco -- San Francisco will have a new entry in the skyscraper sweepstakes if a New York development firm has its way -- a 58-story tower that would be the fourth-tallest structure on the city's skyline.

The combination hotel-condominium-office tower would be built next to the Transbay Terminal at 301 Mission St. between Fremont and Beale streets. Topping out at 605 feet, it would be exceeded only by the Transamerica Pyramid at 853 feet, the Bank of America tower at 778 feet and the California Center at 693 feet.

While planners will welcome the prospect of adding housing downtown, environmentalists and slow-growth advocates are likely to express concerns that the building would block views and cast shadows on open spaces.

The $300 million project came to light last week when the Planning Department told the developer, Millennium Partners of New York, that the skyscraper would require an environmental impact report before proceeding through the bureaucracy.

Unlike its three skyscraping rivals, which consist mostly of offices, the proposed 301 Mission tower would include 163 condominiums, 108 rentals and a 136-unit "extended stay" hotel for people who linger weeks rather than days and want kitchens.

Only about 10 percent of the project's 1.06 million square feet would be devoted to offices -- and those would be in a nine-story structure separated from the tower by a three-story atrium.

Millennium Partners is the same group that built a similar but slightly smaller project in Yerba Buena Center, the Four Seasons Hotel and Residence.

The new structure would be built in the area of downtown where zoning laws permit the tallest buildings to go up. Even so, it would exceed the maximum allowable height by 55 feet, requiring special approval by city planners.

The tower would be clad in light-colored glass of "a bluish quality," said Glenn Rescalvo, a spokesman for architect Gary Handel. "We're trying to create something almost crystal-like that plays with the light of the sky at different times of the day."

Former Planning Director Dean Macris, whose bureaucrats drew up the Downtown Plan zoning rules in the 1980s, said the 301 Mission tower would fit neatly into the high-density area and be close to several transit lines. Macris said, "This puts the biggest buildings where they ought to be."

But Sue Hestor, an attorney and one of the city's leading environmental watchdogs, said she was concerned about the effects of a building "so tall that its shadows will go on for many blocks," possibly as far as Yerba Buena Park to the west and Justin Herman Plaza on the waterfront.

Hestor said she also wanted to see whether the tower would hide views of the Bay Bridge, bay and East Bay hills.

Phil Aarons, a principal of Millennium Partners, said neither issue would be a problem.

Because the structure would be "a taller, thinner, more elegant building than one that is shorter and squatter, it preserves very beautiful view corridors," Aarons said.

In addition, Aarons said, his firm has studied potential effects on parks and concluded, "We don't shadow any of them."

Millennium Partners is asking the city to approve 390 parking spaces for a building that would have 271 residential units. That could run afoul of the city's transit-first policy, which discourages new parking structures downtown.

"We're still looking at that," Aarons said.

He isn't worried that the economic slump will make the project less attractive to tenants. His firm is encouraged by its experience with the Four Seasons, where condominiums are priced from $950,000 to $14 million and "have sold strongly."

The Four Seasons condos did sell briskly at first, said Mary Lou Castellanos, senior sales person at Pacific Union Realty. But a lot of people bought and didn't move in, and several units are now on the resale market, she said.

Condos for $1.5 million, $1.275 million and $2.5 million have been on the market for a couple of months, Castellanos said. She said, "We're seeing price reductions in that high-end condo market."

To help the 301 Mission project win approval, Millennium has hired the politically potent law firm of Coblentz Patch Duffy and Bass, which has also maneuvered the Mission Bay project through the bureaucracy for Catellus Development Co.
     
     
  #516  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2007, 5:22 AM
tyler82's Avatar
tyler82 tyler82 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SAN FRANCISCO
Posts: 561
So they added on an extra 40' in the planning process, or is 605' the official height?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourOneFive View Post
301 Mission was a mixed use project when it was first proposed 5 years ago. Here's a SF Chronicle article on the project from 2002:

58-story skyscraper seeking S.F. approval
Proposal for city's fourth-highest tower

Gerald D. Adams, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, May 18, 2002




(05-18) 04:00 PDT San Francisco -- San Francisco will have a new entry in the skyscraper sweepstakes if a New York development firm has its way -- a 58-story tower that would be the fourth-tallest structure on the city's skyline.

The combination hotel-condominium-office tower would be built next to the Transbay Terminal at 301 Mission St. between Fremont and Beale streets. Topping out at 605 feet, it would be exceeded only by the Transamerica Pyramid at 853 feet, the Bank of America tower at 778 feet and the California Center at 693 feet.

While planners will welcome the prospect of adding housing downtown, environmentalists and slow-growth advocates are likely to express concerns that the building would block views and cast shadows on open spaces.

The $300 million project came to light last week when the Planning Department told the developer, Millennium Partners of New York, that the skyscraper would require an environmental impact report before proceeding through the bureaucracy.

Unlike its three skyscraping rivals, which consist mostly of offices, the proposed 301 Mission tower would include 163 condominiums, 108 rentals and a 136-unit "extended stay" hotel for people who linger weeks rather than days and want kitchens.

Only about 10 percent of the project's 1.06 million square feet would be devoted to offices -- and those would be in a nine-story structure separated from the tower by a three-story atrium.

Millennium Partners is the same group that built a similar but slightly smaller project in Yerba Buena Center, the Four Seasons Hotel and Residence.

The new structure would be built in the area of downtown where zoning laws permit the tallest buildings to go up. Even so, it would exceed the maximum allowable height by 55 feet, requiring special approval by city planners.

The tower would be clad in light-colored glass of "a bluish quality," said Glenn Rescalvo, a spokesman for architect Gary Handel. "We're trying to create something almost crystal-like that plays with the light of the sky at different times of the day."

Former Planning Director Dean Macris, whose bureaucrats drew up the Downtown Plan zoning rules in the 1980s, said the 301 Mission tower would fit neatly into the high-density area and be close to several transit lines. Macris said, "This puts the biggest buildings where they ought to be."

But Sue Hestor, an attorney and one of the city's leading environmental watchdogs, said she was concerned about the effects of a building "so tall that its shadows will go on for many blocks," possibly as far as Yerba Buena Park to the west and Justin Herman Plaza on the waterfront.

Hestor said she also wanted to see whether the tower would hide views of the Bay Bridge, bay and East Bay hills.

Phil Aarons, a principal of Millennium Partners, said neither issue would be a problem.

Because the structure would be "a taller, thinner, more elegant building than one that is shorter and squatter, it preserves very beautiful view corridors," Aarons said.

In addition, Aarons said, his firm has studied potential effects on parks and concluded, "We don't shadow any of them."

Millennium Partners is asking the city to approve 390 parking spaces for a building that would have 271 residential units. That could run afoul of the city's transit-first policy, which discourages new parking structures downtown.

"We're still looking at that," Aarons said.

He isn't worried that the economic slump will make the project less attractive to tenants. His firm is encouraged by its experience with the Four Seasons, where condominiums are priced from $950,000 to $14 million and "have sold strongly."

The Four Seasons condos did sell briskly at first, said Mary Lou Castellanos, senior sales person at Pacific Union Realty. But a lot of people bought and didn't move in, and several units are now on the resale market, she said.

Condos for $1.5 million, $1.275 million and $2.5 million have been on the market for a couple of months, Castellanos said. She said, "We're seeing price reductions in that high-end condo market."

To help the 301 Mission project win approval, Millennium has hired the politically potent law firm of Coblentz Patch Duffy and Bass, which has also maneuvered the Mission Bay project through the bureaucracy for Catellus Development Co.
     
     
  #517  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2007, 5:32 AM
rocketman_95046's Avatar
rocketman_95046 rocketman_95046 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SD/SJ, CA, USA
Posts: 1,878
^yes they added 40' since 5 years ago...

both the architect and the contractor say the building will be 645'
     
     
  #518  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2007, 6:21 AM
sfcity1 sfcity1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 144
Love this tower. This and one rincon set new standards for skyscrapers south of market.
     
     
  #519  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2007, 6:39 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by FourOneFive View Post
But Sue Hestor, an attorney and one of the city's leading environmental watchdogs, said she was concerned about the effects of a building "so tall that its shadows will go on for many blocks," possibly as far as Yerba Buena Park to the west and Justin Herman Plaza on the waterfront.

Hestor said she also wanted to see whether the tower would hide views of the Bay Bridge, bay and East Bay hills.
This all sounds so silly now. The building will be only slightly taller than 50 Fremont right across the street and it casts no offensive shadows. Meanwhile, as we all know, there IS a building that blocks views of the Bay Bridge going up and this isn't it.

Once again, Sue Hestor sounds like a fool.
     
     
  #520  
Old Posted Jul 20, 2007, 3:14 PM
nequidnimis nequidnimis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 507
The joke isn't just on Sue Hestor
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:11 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.