SkyscraperPage Forum
Viewing Page 8 of 168
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Development (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=86)
-   -   SAN FRANCISCO | Salesforce Transit Center (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=136300)

AK47KC Oct 22, 2006 10:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFView
Here is a somewhat educated unofficial wild guess based on past information from various sources, but remember that the next official update may be different.

1. 1250' 100 story mixed use tower (1350' - 1375' with crown/mechanical) Transbay Terminal Tower by competition winner - greater than 1000' tall officially
2. 1000' foot 80 story mixed use tower (1075' - 1100' with crown/mechanical) by Renzo Piano - greater than 850', but at least 150' shorter than the tallest tower officially.
3. 850' foot 70 story mixed use tower (925' with crown/mechanical) possibly by competition winner - same height as #2 officially.

Please do not take this too seriously. This is only my best guess based on information from last May - June of 2006.
If that is true, then I can't wait to see it rise! :banana: :banana: :banana: :)

Reminiscence Oct 22, 2006 11:03 PM
Quote:
Not to burst your bubble, but the Transbay Tower plan is subject to some serious modification, as it is in the earliest of stages. No one knows what public reaction could ultimately be. We could end up right back where we started: with an 850 foot tower.
Oh man, I certainly hope not. Not that it would be a huge dissapointment, but its just that we've come so far, and the last time we asked the public, they seemed to back it. They have to do a very good job to explain to the public that this isnt going to be a wall 1500' high, but rather a thin and sleek looking tower that wont block much of the sun or views from the hills. I think thats what people are most concerned about, from the Embarcadero days.

EastBayHardCore Oct 22, 2006 11:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reminisence
Oh man, I certainly hope not. Not that it would be a huge dissapointment, but its just that we've come so far, and the last time we asked the public, they seemed to back it. They have to do a very good job to explain to the public that this isnt going to be a wall 1500' high, but rather a thin and sleek looking tower that wont block much of the sun or views from the hills. I think thats what people are most concerned about, from the Embarcadero days.
1500' now huh? You guys sure do like to play fast and loose with the numbers, don't you? I wouldn't hold my breath until they are U/C.

AK47KC Oct 23, 2006 12:07 AM
Whatever the final height is, I'm happy if one of the towers is at least 305 m, giving SF a well-deserved supertall skyscraper. But anyway if the second tower is a supertall skyscraper as well, that would be awesome!

Reminiscence Oct 23, 2006 12:14 AM
Quote:
1500' now huh? You guys sure do like to play fast and loose with the numbers, don't you? I wouldn't hold my breath until they are U/C.
Heh, no I just put 1500' out of pure exampleness (if thats a word). But I dunno, 1350' and 1500' arent all that far away from each other, at least in the eyes of the nimbys. I'll just wait untill they say something at the meeting.

I think they're suppose to release the agenda for the Friday meeting around Wednesday, but I'm not sure.

BTinSF Oct 23, 2006 12:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFView
It's possible that the tower being designed by Renzo Piano may start construction first, but that's only my guess. This tower seems shrouded in even greater secrecy. The final design, height and construction time of this tower could also surprise us. It should be at least 850 feet tall, and 150 feet shorter than the tallest Transbay Tower.
I have trouble believing this could start before the Millenium Tower is finished because that could really cause chaos on that stretch of Mission St. And also we have 555 Mission going up just up the street.

AK47KC Oct 23, 2006 12:24 AM
The three Transbay Towers taller than 850' (259 m) better have some serious eye candy and light decorations at night to make them stand out. Just like with the case of One Rincon Hill, it would really suck if there was no lighting decor at all for these prominent towers.

Reminiscence Oct 23, 2006 12:26 AM
Since they recognize the Millenium Tower to be a landmark or even anchorage to the Transbay Project, I too would'nt think that any of the Transbay towers would start construction that soon. Perhaps the temporary terminal, but not the towers themselves.

AK47KC Oct 23, 2006 12:46 AM
^^^Unless they are in a rush to generate enough funds to build the new terminal.

SFView Oct 23, 2006 2:12 AM
Renzo's tower starting "before," could mean anytime before Transbay Terminal and Tower begins in 2010. Millennium and 555 Mission should be completed sometime before then.

kenratboy Oct 23, 2006 2:15 AM
SFVIew - sorry, how tall are 'Millennium' and '555'?

SFView Oct 23, 2006 2:38 AM
555 Mission is 482' and Millennium or 301 Mission Street is 645'. If you don't already know, these buildings have their own dedicated threads in the "Highrises" section of this forum.

Reminiscence Oct 23, 2006 3:12 AM
Hmm, I seem to have missed it, but did they ever confirm that Renzo was the architect for one of the 850'+ towers?

AK47KC Oct 23, 2006 10:22 PM
I think a while ago I read in the paper that Renzo said he would design one of the 850' towers, but I don't remember what article.

kenratboy Oct 23, 2006 10:42 PM
Any chance it will be ABOVE 853'/260m (I am sure you know the signifigance of that number)?

AK47KC Oct 23, 2006 10:51 PM
I think that height figure of 850' (259 m) does not include mechanical floors, crowns, etc. so that the Renzo tower would probably break the Transamerica height barrier. You don't need to look far to see an example of this.

briankendall Oct 24, 2006 2:57 AM
I got the strong impression that the Renzo Piano tower was starting at 850' and I think somewhere here mentioned it could go up to 1050' earlier in this thread. It certainly looks to be above 1000' in the conceptual drawings J Church posted originally... and we have to remember the planning department is probably planning it to be taller than 850' but they don't want to freak people out so they just list the lowest height number.

northbay Oct 24, 2006 3:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by briankendall
...we have to remember the planning department is probably planning it to be taller than 850' but they don't want to freak people out so they just list the lowest height number.
yea, i def think this is true. weve got to remember were talking sf, king of nimbyism

kenratboy Oct 24, 2006 3:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by northbay420
yea, i def think this is true. weve got to remember were talking sf, king of nimbyism
But it looks like that is becoming less of an issue - at least an issue that is NOT blocking projects. Thank god, its about time.

Reminiscence Oct 24, 2006 5:24 AM
Like I said, I think people are just scared we'll end up with another wall like we have on Embarcadero. Once people see that it doesnt always have to be like that, then maybe they'll loosen up on the nimbyism and we'll have more towers like this and built more frequently. After all, this is just the beginning of the ripple effect to come.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:39 PM.
Viewing Page 8 of 168
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

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