SAN FRANCISCO | Salesforce Transit Center

[peanut gallery]

Malcolm is now onsite, so I'm thinking that excavation for the west end of the terminal is either underway or about to be.

Notice the cement truck and pumping rig to the right:


The crane on the left is lowering sections of the large tubes you see in the foreground. The crane on the right was moving them over into position for the other crane:


From other side of the project:

[BTinSF]

City releases ambitious Transbay Terminal proposal
John Coté,John King, Chronicle Staff Writers
Thursday, November 19, 2009
(11-19) 15:43 PST San Francisco -- The recession hasn't stopped San Francisco's city planners from thinking big.

The Planning Department released an ambitious set of proposals today to turn the blocks around the Transbay Terminal into a commercial and transportation centerpiece of the region over the next two decades.

The 145-acre "Transit Center District" would redraw San Francisco's skyline with a half-dozen towers taller than almost any in the city, including one stretching at least 100 feet higher than the Transamerica Pyramid. The plan would widen the sidewalks and narrow the streets around a rebuilt terminal. It also would reroute most Bay Bridge commuter traffic outside the pedestrian-oriented district . . . .

The plan promotes creating "an elegant skyline ... with its apex at the Transit Center" by allowing the Hines tower to rise 1,000 feet in terms of occupied space. Another 200 feet would be allowed for mechanical equipment and sculptural flourishes so long as they cast minimal shadows.

To ensure "that this building be the crown of the skyline," the plan also would require it to climb at least 950 feet . . . .

Source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...M8R8.DTL&tsp=1

[BTinSF]

San Francisco’s Draft Transit Center District Plan



The Planning Department's draft Transit Center District Plan ( http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfi..._Draft_WEB.pdf ) is now online for the rectangle around the Transbay Terminal bounded by Market, Steuart, Folsom, and mid-block between 3rd and New Montgomery Streets on the west.

In addition to establishing a 1,000 foot height for the proposed Transbay Tower, the plan raises the height limit for six other sites to exceed the current 550 foot ceiling.



The five Core Goals of the plan:

1. Build on the General Plan’s Urban Design Element and Downtown Plan, establishing controls, guidelines, and standards to advance existing policies of livability, as well as those that protect the unique qualities of place.

2. Capitalize on major transit investment with appropriate land use in the downtown core, with an eye toward long-term growth considerations

3. Create a framework for a network of public streets and open spaces that support the transit system, and provides a wide variety of public amenities and a world-class pedestrian experience.

4. Generate financial support for the Transbay Transit Center project, district infrastructure, and other public improvements.

5. Ensure that the Transit Center District is an example of comprehensive environmental sustainability in all regards.

Highlights to come.

Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...rict_plan.html

[BTinSF]

The new skyline:


Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/1...market.php?o=2

[northbay]

looks good. im kinda disappointed they didnt go with 1200 ft tho for the tower

[peanut gallery]

I love that the rendering shows Natoma as a pedestrian promenade. But I haven't heard that that is in the plan, nor is it indicated in the maps. It would be nice though.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by northbay420

looks good. im kinda disappointed they didnt go with 1200 ft tho for the tower

They did! 1000 ft occupied + 200 ft ornamental/mechanical etc. (think wind turbine) allowed. But what's new is the minimum of 950 ft. I've never heard of SF imposing a height MINIMUM before. That means Hines (or whoever because I still won't be shocked if Hines sells their interest) can't scream "recession" and try to build something smaller and cheaper.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

I love that the rendering shows Natoma as a pedestrian promenade. But I haven't heard that that is in the plan, nor is it indicated in the maps. It would be nice though.

That has always been in the plan--turning Natoma into a pedestrian-only street with shops and other pedestrian retail on the ground floor of the terminal on the Natoma side. I don't want to go back through this thread and find the original renderings or descriptions, but I remember it being there, at least as an option.

[northbay]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

They did! 1000 ft occupied + 200 ft ornamental/mechanical etc. (think wind turbine) allowed. But what's new is the minimum of 950 ft. I've never heard of SF imposing a height MINIMUM before. That means Hines (or whoever because I still won't be shocked if Hines sells their interest) can't scream "recession" and try to build something smaller and cheaper.

wow. that sounds too good to be true. thanks for correcting me

[SFView]

Also from http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfi..._Draft_WEB.pdf
another view - this time from the Bay Bridge showing no added crown(s).



The extra 200 feet on the top of the Transbay Terminal Tower is being fairly encouraged. It will be interesting to see how the potential shadow impact on Justine Herman Plaza will effect the design.

[AndrewK]

that is odd that they have that building on the corner of 2nd and natoma as being torn down to the frame of the first two stories. i guess its to make the entrance of the alley look more inviting?

[peanut gallery]

Originally Posted by AndrewK

that is odd that they have that building on the corner of 2nd and natoma as being torn down to the frame of the first two stories. i guess its to make the entrance of the alley look more inviting?

IIRC, they need to remove it for the underground rail connection.

BT - thanks for the info. Guess I've just forgotten about it, although now I vaguely recall that something like that might be done to Minna - probably just mixing it up.

There is a small condo building that I believe has first floor or underground parking on Natoma. I wonder what they plan to do about that.

[BTinSF]

Here's the Rogers design. Note the tree-lined Natoma with little red specs I think are supposed to be umbrellas over tables for al fresco dining:



You can see it even better here:

Here on the SOM design, Natoma also seems to be pedestrian but without the trees:

I looked through the first 70 pages of the thread without finding the rendering of Natoma-as-ped-mall I remember but a lot of those old image links now no longer work. I did start to wonder whatever happened to Tyler82, though.

PS: Note this rendering of the "unoccupied" top 200ft of the Pelli tower design:

[peanut gallery]

So you did decide to go back through the thread -- thanks for the detective work. It seems pretty clear and I like it!

[Reminiscence]

Looks like I've been gone for too long. I'm glad they're finally pushing for a "reform" if you will, on the layout. Looks pretty good for me, and I too am surprised to see a minimum of height, it almost sounds too good to be true. Anywho, I like what I see so far. Can't wait to start seeing early signs of activity on site

[The North One]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

i really liked this one the best

[HarshLiving]

I like what I hear so far. But like most things in life, only time will tell.

[viewguysf]

Originally Posted by HarshLiving

I like what I hear so far. But like most things in life, only time will tell.

Yes, how true, but it looks like it will be a l-o-n-g time.

[nequidnimis]

Originally Posted by The North One

i really liked this one the best

Yeah, me too, but we were in the minority.

[peanut gallery]

I didn't realize there would be need for this much eminent domain action for the terminal. It's a shame for these folks that the development that would otherwise be a huge improvement for their businesses will end up killing them in their present location instead. I hope they can all make a successful move.

From the SF Public Press:

New transit center to displace SoMa neighbors
By Angela Hart
Dec 11, 2009

Business owners and residents in the path of San Francisco’s ambitious, new $4.2-billion transit-center redevelopment are voicing frustration that part of the neighborhood is being pressured to relocate. They include not only eight parking lots, but 26 other businesses and at least 24 live-work lofts.

...

Some small-business owners are conflicted. They say that while the project may be good for the city and for the region, it’s bad for their livelihoods. The nation’s struggling economic climate has taken a financial toll, they say, and it’s difficult to relocate when there’s no financing available. Moving will make it hard to sustain their current clientele...

Continue reading here.

The map answers a question I had about turning Natoma into a pedestrian lane: Access to parking at the small condo building won't be an issue as the building will be gone. We knew the building at Howard and Second would be demolished, but I had no idea that entire block would be gone. Also, I remember over a year ago there was much discussion about the possible demolition of the buildings on the southeast corner of Howard and Second. Apparently, those are all going too.

PS: Sorry about the size of the map.