HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture


    Salesforce Tower in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • San Francisco Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
San Francisco Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2721  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 11:34 PM
don116 don116 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFSkyline View Post
So far, so good on the building's profile. Some of the renderings make the taper look too severe and pointy near the top. The slope we're seeing now looks good to me.
I agree. Anxiously waiting to see how the crown turns out. The thinner, more sleek, the better. If its bulbous, too round, then it will definitely look bad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2722  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2017, 12:12 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 16,405
It looks great and it's gonna look fine. The closer to completion the crown gets the clearer it becomes it's gonna look like BoyInTheCity's projection:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2723  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2017, 5:03 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
It looks great and it's gonna look fine. The closer to completion the crown gets the clearer it becomes it's gonna look like BoyInTheCity's projection:
Which was what again?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2724  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2017, 5:05 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 16,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozone View Post
Which was what again?
What I posted again just above.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2725  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2017, 7:48 PM
don116 don116 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
It looks great and it's gonna look fine. The closer to completion the crown gets the clearer it becomes it's gonna look like BoyInTheCity's projection:

I'm guessing/hoping the crown will be a lot more angular than that projection.

This rendering from the salesforcetower website also hints that the crown will be a bit more 'pointy'.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2726  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2017, 8:22 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 16,405
^^I don't think that difference would matter to anyone but you.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2727  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2017, 8:30 PM
don116 don116 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
^^I don't think that difference would matter to anyone but you.
?

Yeah screw attention to detail. Who cares right? Just a building.

You can clearly tell that the second level of inner-crown they just put up is more arched than the projection.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2728  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2017, 9:59 PM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,044
Actually, from an architectural or design standpoint; proportion, balance and composition is of upmost importance. After satisfying the needs of the client and budget, and designing within all site and code constraints, the architect is left with creating the best design they are able. From what I understand of the design concept and believe will be the outcome, Pelli's design and shape for the crown should be just about right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2729  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 4:25 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 16,405
^^These matters are all very subjective and all one has to do is read these pages to discover that 5-10 people will have 5-10 opinions about what is right and 5-10 ranges for what might be "good enough". My range for "good enough" on this subject (but perhaps not on others) is pretty wide. I'm willing to go with the architect's vision and the client's wishes on something like how "pointy" a building crown should be and even on whether my opinion, as one of 800,000 San Franciscans, should even matter much. Doesn't mean I won't have an opinion of perfection, which I may express, but I don't really expect it to matter much. "He who pays (and he who regulates), says."

By the way, I may as well also say that the power the SF approval process gives to individuals and groups who are niether paying nor charged with regulating in the name of the public to influence designs has a lot to do with why we have so much mediocrity. We need a louder voice in this town for letting the architect do it his (or her) way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2730  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 7:03 AM
Citizen's Avatar
Citizen Citizen is offline
Flatiron
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: San Francisco, California
Posts: 153
I can't help but wonder how difficult window washing will be on Salesforce Tower. I'm very curious, considering the amount of segments and the depth of the curtainwall. Thanks in advance and my apologies if this has already been covered. Side note, this thing fires off a massive glare at sunset. It was blinding me while stuck in bridge traffic last night.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2731  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 7:25 AM
don116 don116 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
We need a louder voice in this town for letting the architect do it his (or her) way.
We need a louder voice to make them DO BETTER. My friend, a Rice U. Architecture graduate, says San Francisco is known as the city where the world's best architects design their worst buildings.

Look at all the plain cubes that sprouted up in Mission Bay, SoMa, even old financial district.

Developers are always conflicted between maximizing square footage on the project (thus the cubes/rectangle/block shaped buildings) and not getting it done at all due to pure opposition.

I've actually shown up to planning commission meetings demanding better architecture, and it has resulted in developers having to go back to the drawing board. One example is 330 Townsend:

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...-caltrain.html

It will be the 2nd tallest building in central soma, and SCB wanted to do some horizontal glass boilerplate that stretched one full block. I said that design was unacceptable for such a prominent tower in the area with that height. I also mentioned that a good comparison or goal would be to do something like what they have Chelsea, manhattan; lots of beautiful, mid-rise modern architecture there.

The consensus from PC was they needed to produce a "more innovative and expressive design for the project overall that reflects the prominence that this building will have in the neighborhood and on the skyline".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2732  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 7:33 AM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,283
Let architects be architects.

don's post reminds me of one of my favorite books, "The Fountainhead."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2733  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 8:18 AM
don116 don116 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakamesalad View Post
Let architects be architects.

don's post reminds me of one of my favorite books, "The Fountainhead."

Yeah let's architects express themselves with beautiful waterfront designs like this one in MIssion Bay



Jeez it would have been a nightmare if someone urged them to do something less plain and monotonous on one of the last few undeveloped waterfront parks in the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2734  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 8:29 AM
don116 don116 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 119


Hard to tell from this photo, but there seems to be a strip of lights (maybe LED?) along the base of the crown. Could this be part of the art light installation? Doesn't look like construction lighting to me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2735  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 9:57 AM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,044
I have attended many design review meetings, and know people personally on both sides of the table. Yes, quality design is subjective. Yes, there are varying opinions, just as they are here. The review process can be difficult as a result. Generally, I find that the more people like a design, the better it is. Unfortunately, sometimes the final result doesn't always result in what more people like. Rather than getting into a long discussion of the many various reasons how a design can be effected through the process, I think we are rather lucky with we are getting lately in San Francisco. Some of it is quite good. ...And yes, that is just my subjective opinion. I can only guess if it would agree with popular opinion. ...Oh, and design isn't always the most important thing why a building gets built a certain way. Naturally, here on this forum we often place more importance on design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2736  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 10:06 AM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by don116 View Post


Hard to tell from this photo, but there seems to be a strip of lights (maybe LED?) along the base of the crown. Could this be part of the art light installation? Doesn't look like construction lighting to me.
Maybe what we thought is a walkway is actually a lighting truss?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2737  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 6:05 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 16,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by don116 View Post
My friend, a Rice U. Architecture graduate, says San Francisco is known as the city where the world's best architects design their worst buildings.
Which happens precisely for the reason I said: Whatever the architect may wish to design, in SF he knows it won't happens until multiple "neighborhood activists" and others with no prticular qulifications to judge, all seeking their own version of "better", have their say and likely too much influence over the final product. It winds up being the architcture of th least offensive. Architects and developers must ask themselves, "Why bother?"

For once, I want the architect's version of "better"--the best he thinks he can do--and I don't care about any private citizen's opinion on some personal "better" idea. That includes private citizens on this site.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2738  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 6:07 PM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 2,828
Quote:
Originally Posted by don116 View Post
Yeah let's architects express themselves with beautiful waterfront designs like this one in MIssion Bay



Jeez it would have been a nightmare if someone urged them to do something less plain and monotonous on one of the last few undeveloped waterfront parks in the city.
you know that building has been there since the 1920s, right?

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2739  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 6:10 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 16,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFView View Post
Maybe what we thought is a walkway is actually a lighting truss?
I have thought all along it's something to do with lighting. Perhaps a truss to support lighting, perhaps a walkway to access lighting for maintenance or some other purpose.

My other thought when it appeared only on the lowest level of the crown was an access walkway for window washing cranes but they don't need 2 or 3 levels of that so that pretty much leaves lighting as the most likely option.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2740  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2017, 6:25 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 16,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by timbad View Post
you know that building has been there since the 1920s, right?
I'm beginning to think he doesn't know and probably doesn't know about Bauhaus architecture either.

Consider this Bauhaus dormitory in Dessau, Germany. Classic for following function. And, except for the balconies, similar to the port building writ smaller.


https://www.we-heart.com/2013/10/22/...sslau-germany/

But note the railroad tracks running right in front of the SF port building. It was not intended to be any sort of showpiece but a basic, functional structure. Still, it has served a variety of useful purposes for almost 100 years. Hard to ask more than that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:15 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.