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

[LA Kurt]

Originally Posted by fflint

This is a falsehood. San Francisco City officials downplayed the earthquake damage in order to spur redevelopment.

The 1906 earthquake damage was not minimal. It was massive. The fire was massive too look at city hall.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by LA Kurt

The 1906 earthquake damage was not minimal. It was massive. The fire was massive too look at city hall.

Uh, that's exactly what flint was saying, in response to someone claiming that the earthquake damage itself was minimal in comparison to the fire afterwards (the fire may have destroyed more of SF, but tons of stuff was wrecked in the quake too). And the city government did downplay the earthquake damage and death toll so as to not scare investors away.

[Jerry of San Fran]

I got back from Italy yesterday and it is great to see a lot of dialogue & pictures posted on the Skyscraper site while I was away. I spent a week in Bologna with day excursion to Parma, Ravenna and Padua.

I don't know if the book is in print, but I have one called Denial of Disaster. It is a very large format book with tons of information & pictures of San Francisco before the 1906 earthquake, of the damage after the quake and pictures of the fire. It is a very beautiful book. There were many tall buildings that survived the quake but burned. I worked in one for 15 years which survived the quake - the corner of New Montgomery & Mission Streets. The Rialto Building was dynamited in an attempt to stop the spread of the fire, but it was not brought down, it burned & was rebuilt. I went though a scary shake in the early 1970's in that building - it is about 12 stories tall.

[slock]

325 Fremont doesn't seem to have it's own thread, so I'll post here. On 3/13, the project sponsor received a neighborhood plan exemption, moving the project forward in the approval process. I don't have an image account, so hopefully someone can post the picture from page 17 of the linked PDF. It's a great new render in the context of 399 Fremont and 340 Fremont.

http://sfmea.sfplanning.org/2012.1025E_CPE.pdf

[ozone]

Originally Posted by slock

325 Fremont doesn't seem to have it's own thread, so I'll post here. On 3/13, the project sponsor received a neighborhood plan exemption, moving the project forward in the approval process. I don't have an image account, so hopefully someone can post the picture from page 17 of the linked PDF. It's a great new render in the context of 399 Fremont and 340 Fremont.

http://sfmea.sfplanning.org/2012.1025E_CPE.pdf

From what I can tell the design is still the same as reported on socketsite last summer.

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2013/07/the_designs_for_325_fremont_on_rincon_hill.html

[mt_climber13]

I took this from the 325 Fremont planning PDF. Check out the new growing Rincon Hill skyline! Just a few months ago ORH was the only tower visible. (And many more to come that aren't rendered here)

[ElDuderino]

Originally Posted by slock

...I don't have an image account, so hopefully someone can post the picture from page 17 of the linked PDF. It's a great new render in the context of 399 Fremont and 340 Fremont.

http://sfmea.sfplanning.org/2012.1025E_CPE.pdf

[hruski]

^ Striking!

[lz131313]

transbay tower is under construction , i attended a site tour of TT and the PM of the project said it was u/c there was alot of activity on site aswell as 181

[timbad]

Originally Posted by ElDuderino

good lord, it is almost unrecognizable. gives a sense of how dramatically the 'feel' of that part of the city is going to change. a good thing

[minesweeper]

County and metro population estimates for 2013 were released by the Census Bureau today.

Here are the year-over-year estimated changes (2012 to 2013):

• Alameda County (+24931, +1.6%) from 1,553,960 to 1,578,891
• Contra Costa County (+15948, +1.5%) from 1,078,257 to 1,094,205
• Marin County (+2524, +1.0%) from 255,841 to 258,365
• Napa County (+1410, +1.0%) from 138,916 to 140,326
• San Francisco (+10022, +1.2%) from 827,420 to 837,442
• San Mateo County (+8692, +1.2%) from 738,681 to 747,373
• Santa Clara County (+26016, +1.4%) from 1,836,025 to 1,862,041
• Solano County (+4453, +1.1%) from 420,335 to 424,788
• Sonoma County (+4429, +0.9%) from 490,596 to 495,025

• San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward, CA Metro Area grew by 62,117 (1.4%) from 4,454,159 (2012) to 4,516,276 (2013)
• San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metro Area grew by 26,747 (1.4%) from 1,892,894 (2012) to 1,919,641 (2013)

I was kinda hoping SF would tick over 840K in this estimate. The Census revised the 2012 estimate up by +1557, so they may revise the 2013 estimate upwards next year. Maybe we'll see 850K in next year's release?

[fimiak]

If SF keeps growing at this rate we will reach 1 million residents before 2030. Interesting that California's Department of Finance in 2010 said SF will have 877,000 in 2030. I will have to update my signature to these results then. I don't think anyone realizes how much internal migration the bay area has received from the rest of the US.

[mt_climber13]

Crane City:



Linea on Buchanan St.:



8 Octavia St.:

[ozone]

^^^^^ Thanks for all the great photo updates. Man you really got around town!

[Reminiscence]

Coming back home from SFO, I stopped by the ol Treasure Island to take a few pictures. Then I got excited after imagining what the skyline might look like after 3 or 4 years.

[simms3_redux]

In one webcam view there are 8 tower cranes up, with 2 more tower cranes for 400'+ towers UC hidden *just* out of view (350 Mission, 454', and 45 Lansing, ~400-450'), and of course even more within 2-3 blocks of this view. I'm not sure this is being replicated to the same scale in other cities...this isn't just 15-25 floor buildings going up. These cranes are exclusively for 350'+ buildings, some approaching 550'. Pretty soon in this same view there will be cranes up for several 600-1,100' towers.



http://oxblue.com/open/clarkconstruction/transbaytower

[ozone]

Looks like the 350 8th Street project is going forward. They also talk about 2201 Market Street in the Castro (site of the failed Starbucks proposal) now being developed into a 6-story condo. It just keeps coming

http://www.socketsite.com

[mt_climber13]

Originally Posted by simms3_redux

I'm not sure this is being replicated to the same scale in other cities.

Pretty sure New York has SF beat by about 100x.

[simms3_redux]

In a mere 20 city blocks, SF has a plethora of totally different developers building a wide range of uses within a plethora of 350-400+' towers or mega projects (Transbay Terminal and SFMOMA expansion).

NYC will always have more due to its sheer size (not quite 100x more though ), but I don't think even NYC can lay claim to as many different developers putting up as many brand new office, resi and mixed-use towers in as small an area as SF. Not to mention, this area in SF is still plagued by surface lots and low-rises, so it's a totally new look and redevelopment that will transform the skyline. The two big mega projects in Manhattan are Hudson Yards and WTC Redevelopment. The towers are massive. But as a percentage of what's in the skyline already, and in terms of what's surrounding the developments, and in terms of # of developers working on these projects (not to mention WTC is basically a huge office development instead of a mix of uses), they aren't necessarily comparable, even if they are developments that will end up putting more square footage on the ground as a whole.

In some sense, the area of the continuous SF skyline is nearly doubling (especially when viewed from east or west), and it's not like the SF skyline is small - it's actually one of the largest in the country.

Miami has a fair amount of projects going up in a confined area, but fewer individual developers and less of a mix of uses (mostly resi there). Seattle has its moments, but the buildings are much shorter.

[fimiak]

Originally Posted by simms3_redux

In a mere 20 city blocks, SF has a plethora of totally different developers building a wide range of uses within a plethora of 350-400+' towers or mega projects (Transbay Terminal and SFMOMA expansion).

NYC will always have more due to its sheer size (not quite 100x more though ), but I don't think even NYC can lay claim to as many different developers putting up as many brand new office, resi and mixed-use towers in as small an area as SF. Not to mention, this area in SF is still plagued by surface lots and low-rises, so it's a totally new look and redevelopment that will transform the skyline. The two big mega projects in Manhattan are Hudson Yards and WTC Redevelopment. The towers are massive. But as a percentage of what's in the skyline already, and in terms of what's surrounding the developments, and in terms of # of developers working on these projects (not to mention WTC is basically a huge office development instead of a mix of uses), they aren't necessarily comparable, even if they are developments that will end up putting more square footage on the ground as a whole.

In some sense, the area of the continuous SF skyline is nearly doubling (especially when viewed from east or west), and it's not like the SF skyline is small - it's actually one of the largest in the country.

Miami has a fair amount of projects going up in a confined area, but fewer individual developers and less of a mix of uses (mostly resi there). Seattle has its moments, but the buildings are much shorter.

I love SF and definitely support your opinions but NYC has us beat for construction for the next decade and that is without a sliver of a doubt. We are getting plenty of low rises, infill, 400' towers, and a few 700+ foot towers and a single 1k footer. NYC is getting about a dozen super talls, new subways, several new museums, an enormous ferris wheel, and hundreds of minor developments (most arent posted on these boards, even 400' UWS/UES buildings don't even see threads and there are a half dozen of those a year) if we are including queens and brooklyn, that are still mostly larger than SF. NYC is definitely the hottest city in the world, blowing away london, and this is as it should be.

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=27& <--they have many more projects than SSP for NYC