SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed - Page 43

roadwarrior · #**841** Posted **Jul 20, 2007, 10:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fflint

340 Fremont will be happening, has a slightly updated rendering from the one on the first page here (although it will still disappoint many) and is still slated for 440 ft. and 40 floors.

Can you post the rendering or at least provide the link where we can find it? Any word on an expected construction date for this?

fflint · #**842** Posted **Jul 20, 2007, 10:04 PM**

No, sorry, I can't. Let's just say it crossed my desk today.

PBuchman · #**843** Posted **Jul 21, 2007, 1:12 AM**

Could these be the updated renderings???

Taken from http://www.grubb-ellis.com/services/IIG/IIG-PropDetails.aspx?PropID=657
The site also has a brochure available on the project.

pseudolus · #**844** Posted **Jul 21, 2007, 3:35 AM**

"entitled development opportunity"=current owners backing out?

roadwarrior · #**845** Posted **Jul 21, 2007, 5:10 AM**

I think on a stand-alone basis, it looks nice. However, is it just me or does it look strikingly similar to both The Californian and 45 Lansing? I think we may be in danger of having the Vancouver problem, of having lots of residential high rises, but that they all look identical.

viewguysf · #**846** Posted **Jul 21, 2007, 5:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadwarrior

I think on a stand-alone basis, it looks nice. However, is it just me or does it look strikingly similar to both The Californian and 45 Lansing? I think we may be in danger of having the Vancouver problem, of having lots of residential high rises, but that they all look identical.

I agree--it would be nice if we could intersperse residential, office, hotel, etc. buildings a little more too along with more varied architectural styles.

BTinSF · #**847** Posted **Jul 21, 2007, 8:18 AM**

I'm having trouble putting fflint's "will be happening" together with the advertisement by Grubb & Ellis of an "entitled development opportunity". The latter certainly does tell me it's for sale which further tells me the current owner doesn't plan to proceed.

On the other hand, I certainly like the curved glass fascade, but with full knowledge a new developer could well massage the design further.

Reminiscence · #**848** Posted **Jul 21, 2007, 9:32 AM**

I also like the curved glass, something I had not seen before in the previous renderings. However, I wish they did something to modify the roof of the structure. Something to give it a slope would be nice.

viewguysf · #**849** Posted **Jul 21, 2007, 4:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reminiscence

I also like the curved glass, something I had not seen before in the previous renderings. However, I wish they did something to modify the roof of the structure. Something to give it a slope would be nice.

I thought the same thing; it looks like a boxy mechanical penthouse on the south side.

roadwarrior · #**850** Posted **Jul 21, 2007, 4:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BTinSF

I'm having trouble putting fflint's "will be happening" together with the advertisement by Grubb & Ellis of an "entitled development opportunity". The latter certainly does tell me it's for sale which further tells me the current owner doesn't plan to proceed.

On the other hand, I certainly like the curved glass fascade, but with full knowledge a new developer could well massage the design further.

Yeah, but it doesn't mean the project is dead or postponed indefinitely. I wouldn't expect it to go up in the next 2 years anyway, given the fact that 3 other highrises right nearby will be under construction. Didn't we just have a similar thing about a year ago with 45 Lansing? It only took a little while for Turnberry to swipe it up and they're about to start construction there.

northbay · #**851** Posted **Jul 21, 2007, 5:31 PM**

sick renderings!

CityKid · #**852** Posted **Jul 22, 2007, 12:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadwarrior

I think on a stand-alone basis, it looks nice. However, is it just me or does it look strikingly similar to both The Californian and 45 Lansing? I think we may be in danger of having the Vancouver problem, of having lots of residential high rises, but that they all look identical.

Not to say that they look bad, but they do look like cheaper versions of the St. Regis.

BTinSF · #**853** Posted **Jul 22, 2007, 3:49 AM**

^^^If only the St. Regis had that much glass anywhere--even if it wasn't curved (which none of the St. Regis is). Personally, I don't understand why people like the St. Regis.

roadwarrior · #**854** Posted **Jul 22, 2007, 10:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by BTinSF

^^^If only the St. Regis had that much glass anywhere--even if it wasn't curved (which none of the St. Regis is). Personally, I don't understand why people like the St. Regis.

Well, I personally like the modern, plush interior of the St. Regis. While the exterior is "ok", I tend to sway towards the positive, given its interior arrangements. I guess my opinion is also swayed by the fact that I've stayed at the St. Regis in Washington DC and by comparison, ours is amazing.

BTinSF · #**855** Posted **Jul 25, 2007, 12:28 AM**

Once again, I want to defend the Ritz residences a little bit. It seems obvious that the architect wanted to put up something with upscale finishes but plain enough not to compete with or detract from the glorious deYoung Building. In that regard, most of the pictures seen here don't show the actual surface of the addition which appears to be something like terra cotta and textured so that, in real life and up fairly close, it looks a lot more interesting than most of the pictures I've seen suggest:

Note the texture:

It actually reminds me a lot of some of the "blond" brick buildings I saw put in as a child in the 1950s and I suspect that may have been the architect's intention--something to contrast with but also coordinate with the red brick of the deYoung.

tyler82 · #**856** Posted **Jul 25, 2007, 1:10 AM**

Interesting how the bay windows of (most) newly constructed buildings have turned into square shapes instead of the traditional half hexagon shape...

viewguysf · #**857** Posted **Jul 25, 2007, 3:56 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyler82

Interesting how the bay windows of (most) newly constructed buildings have turned into square shapes instead of the traditional half hexagon shape...

Those are just corner windows, not bay or box windows that there are many examples of in the City.

Hello also BT! I join the chorus of praise for the pics you've once again provided in the threads. I have to say thought that IMO, your first pic above amply demonstrates that this looks like a highrise low income housing project perched on top of a handsome classic building. I think it's hideous--color, shape, style and all.

BTinSF · #**858** Posted **Jul 25, 2007, 4:52 AM**

^^^From a distance and in most pics it does, but my point here is that in a low-income project the material would be stucco or something. You can only really appreciate up close and personal that this is something classier. I'm not sure exactly what the material is. Given the texturing, it could be some kind of preformed concrete I suppose (not unlike the fake brick on Hills Plaza) although, as I said, it looks denser and smoother than that--almost like a terra cotta.

tyler82 · #**859** Posted **Jul 25, 2007, 4:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by viewguysf

Those are just corner windows, not bay or box windows that there are many examples of in the City.

Are those not bay windows on the east facing side of the hi rise portion?

murrax · #**860** Posted **Jul 26, 2007, 1:20 AM**

I don't see the flashing overhangs on the Ritz Carlton like in the rendering , pity really as it would give a tiered effect to the addition . I liked the color and texture of it when I saw it in person . It turned out better than I feared.