HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


    Sun 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
     
     
  #121  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2013, 11:34 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
They should just turn it into a huge festival, sports and park land. Imagine Burning Man back in the City. Wind yes but more excessive heat or playa dust. Seriously though I've always thought TI's density should be maximized. Parks yes, farms no. I know nothing about the proposed financing or the who has the rights to the land but if the developer can't deliver the product can city force them to hand it over to one that can? Hell why not hand it over to Chinese investors?

Last edited by ozone; Apr 19, 2013 at 5:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #122  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2013, 1:54 AM
mthd mthd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggerhigherfaster View Post
Meh, I never thought the Treasure Island project was such a good idea. Building skyscrapers and 5-10k housing units mixed with "urban farms" on landfill that is relatively unhabited at the moment and trying to minimize/eliminate cars...while providing limited transportation options to/from the island? Seemed more like a pipe dream for city planning academics than anything else

Didn't seem like the brightest idea. Imo, Treasure Island should remain mostly parkland with some housing. If we want dense development, it should be in SF or Oakland
not sure which part is a bad idea. building on available land, which is currently underutilized, maximizing sustainability, or providing a mix of land uses?

there would be direct (and short!) ferry service to within walking distance of hundreds of thousands of jobs in downtown san francisco and access by bus and private automobile bypassing most of the morning rush hour at the toll plaza and macarthur maze.

the developers involved surely don't think it's a pipe dream - remember that this master plan was not created by the city planning department. it was created by a developer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #123  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2014, 9:43 PM
Guiltyspark's Avatar
Guiltyspark Guiltyspark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 937
Any news on this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #124  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2014, 11:38 PM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guiltyspark View Post
Any news on this?
There's been some news lately about radioactive waste still buried in the soil from the island's navy days, but as far as I know there's been no news on the development since the Chinese backed out of the deal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #125  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2014, 2:52 PM
Guiltyspark's Avatar
Guiltyspark Guiltyspark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 937
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech12 View Post
There's been some news lately about radioactive waste still buried in the soil from the island's navy days, but as far as I know there's been no news on the development since the Chinese backed out of the deal.
Ok, thanks for the update.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #126  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2014, 6:05 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,234
It seems the final legal hurdles have been overcome and this should get started late next year. A few snippets from a thorough update of the project from the SF Business Times:

Quote:
But the Treasure Island project has been mired in lawsuits — until now.

After the state Supreme Court finally punted Wednesday on a major lawsuit brought against the Treasure Island redevelopment by a group called Citizens for a Sustainable Treasure Island, led by former Supervisor Aaron Peskin.

----

The city still needs to officially acquire the land from the Navy, which will happen by the start of next year now that the Navy has completed environmental cleanup there, Treasure Island director Bob Beck said.

The team of developers – including Wilson Meany and Lennar Urban – then plan to start work on the demolition and infrastructure on the former Navy site by next fall. Once it's fully completed in about two decades, the full site will include 8,000 residential units, 235,000 square feet of retail, public parks and 500 hotel rooms. One-quarter of the housing units will be affordable.

----

That first phase will include the site's portion that sits on Yerba Buena Island and the part of Treasure Island that borders Clipper Cove. It will include about 500 housing units and retail space.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #127  
Old Posted Jun 9, 2015, 7:06 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,234
This continues to progress. As foretold last Fall, the Navy has transferred ownership to the city. From the SF Business Times:

Quote:


The slow transformation of Treasure Island from a Navy base to San Francisco’s largest housing project turned a tricky corner on Friday when 290 acres traded hands from the U.S. Navy to the city.

The exchange allows for developers Lennar Urban and Wilson Meany to start building infrastructure and streets by next year and construction on the first phase of 500 housing units around Clipper Cove by 2017. Treasure Island and adjoining Yerba Buena Island will eventually have 8,000 housing units (one-quarter to be priced as affordable), retail and 300 acres of parkland.
------------
The Navy base closed in 1997, and the island now has about 2,000 residents and 160 commercial tenants. Land will continue to transfer from the Navy over the next seven years. The Navy will get $55 million over the next 10 years from the city and Treasure Island Community Development.

If all goes right for Lennar and Wilson Meany, over the next couple of decades (even during economic downturns, they say) the former base will be transformed. The development includes plans for houses, a hotel, shared streets and walkways, a market hall and a new ferry building. The developers must get each subphase of development approved before moving forward.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #128  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2015, 4:28 AM
SLO's Avatar
SLO SLO is offline
REAL Kiwi!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California & Texas
Posts: 17,085
Wow, so this must be the first addition to the city of San Francisco, since when?
__________________
'Don't underestimate Joe's ability to f*ck things up' - Barack Obama
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #129  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2015, 1:34 PM
WildCowboy WildCowboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 527
It's not an addition to the city...the city is just gaining ownership of it. Even under Navy ownership, it was part of San Francisco.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #130  
Old Posted Jun 30, 2015, 6:38 PM
Korey Korey is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 183
How about an aerial tram to the ferry building? Tourists would lap it up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #131  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2015, 3:24 AM
kdeff kdeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: SF/LA/DC
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Korey View Post
How about an aerial tram to the ferry building? Tourists would lap it up.
Or a Gondola like Roosavelt Island
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #132  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2016, 1:37 AM
minesweeper minesweeper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 613
Something's finally happening:

Quote:
Construction starts on massive $6 billion Treasure Island redevelopment

Infrastructure work has begun on the $6 billion Treasure Island and Yerba Buena Island redevelopment, one of the largest mixed-use projects in the Bay Area with 8,000 residential units planned.

A development partnership of Lennar Urban (NYSE: LEN), Kenwood Investments, Stockbridge Capital Group and Wilson Meany started work last week, which will include demolition of 40 existing structures, new roads, utilities and parks. The first phase will include around 2,100 residential units, up to 500 hotel rooms and 90 acres of parks, built on around 45 acres on Treasure Island's western shoreline and the 80-acre Yerba Buena Island.

[...]

Vertical construction of new housing could begin by next year, starting with around 250 townhomes on Yuerba Buena Island, followed by 400 to 500 units in midrise buildings of four to five stories on Treasure Island, said Loke. The entire 8,000 residential units are expected to be built out over the next 10 to 15 years, depending on market demand, said Loke.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #133  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2016, 1:52 AM
hruski hruski is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 165
Anyone know how many years this will exist before it's underwater?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #134  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2016, 4:22 AM
Kumdogmillionaire's Avatar
Kumdogmillionaire Kumdogmillionaire is offline
Development Shill
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 1,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by hruski View Post
Anyone know how many years this will exist before it's underwater?
The Bay is a relatively easy place to keep safe from rising sea levels. Places like Miami should be more concerned
__________________
For you - Bane
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #135  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2017, 8:04 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Treasure Island development prepares to evict hundreds
BY ADAM BRINKLOW SEP 25, 2017, 8:51AM PDT

Treasure Island, the artificial land mass with some of San Francisco’s best views, will see new development over the next four years, bringing thousands of homes and related businesses to the area . . . .

The first phase will include 2,100 new homes and should be done sometime in the next two or three years, but the entire thing won’t wrap up until 2030 or so.
https://sf.curbed.com/2017/9/25/1636...pment-eviction

Finally!?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #136  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2017, 3:58 PM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
Nope, not even close:

"Last year, the Business Times reported that the first phase of around 250 townhomes on Yerba Buena Island could start construction this year.

"That’s now been pushed back to 2019. The first homes could be completed by 2021, said Robert Beck, director of the Treasure Island Development Authority.

“'Infrastructure construction permits have been delayed because the developer is requesting numerous design modifications, which are being considered by various city agencies,' said Public Works spokeswoman Rachel Gordon."

https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranc...-treasure.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #137  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2017, 5:59 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
^^See post #8768 at http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...24868&page=439

"Mayor Ed Lee plans to issue an executive directive this week to speed up approvals"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #138  
Old Posted Mar 8, 2018, 11:48 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Treasure Island, SFO sinking as sea levels rise
Arizona, Berkeley researchers measure coastal depression via satellite
By Adam Brinklow Mar 8, 2018, 9:01am PST

. . . a new paper published Wednesday in the peer-reviewed publication Science Advances suggests that previous projections downplayed the likely scenario by overlooking certain eccentricities of the land itself.

The paper by Manoochehr Shirzaei (head of Arizona State University’s Radar Remote Sensing and Tectonic Geodesy Lab) and Roland Bürgmann (a planetary scientist at UC Berkeley),”Global climate change and local land subsidence etc,” uses a sensitive satellite network to measure coastal conditions and claims that previous projections underestimated flood risks in certain Bay Area regions by as much as 90.9 percent.

Here’s a few takeaways about the real lie of the land, at least as Bürgmann and Shirzaei have it:

“Most of the Pacific shorelines and areas adjacent to the San Francisco Bay are subject to subsidence at less than ~2 mm/year. Portions of Treasure Island, San Francisco, San Francisco International Airport, and Foster City are subsiding as fast as 10 mm/year.”

In fact, the shifting conditions of some of this land would still create flood risks even if sea level rise stopped entirely: “Even if SLR was completely halted, LLS [local land subsidence] alone would put 45 km square at risk. Thus, a much larger area will be affected by inundation once the effect of LLS is taken into account, especially for the more modest SLR scenarios” . . . .
https://sf.curbed.com/2018/3/8/17096...climate-change
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #139  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2018, 5:18 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
I’ve always thought the grandiose development plans for TI were risky at best and extremely foolish at worst.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #140  
Old Posted Mar 9, 2018, 6:45 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by viewguysf View Post
I’ve always thought the grandiose development plans for TI were risky at best and extremely foolish at worst.
It's simpler for me. I'd never want to live there simply because of the access, whether by Bay Bridge (which is almost continuously gridlocked these days) or ferry. I was working there at the time of the quake in 1989 and saw the sand boils and what happened to the building where I worked as well as all the utility pipes buried in the causeway between Yerba Buena and TI (they all broke).

Much of this can be mitigated by engineering but the cost is bound to be huge.
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 > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:37 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.