View Single Post
Old Posted May 27, 2006, 7:04 PM
FourOneFive FourOneFive is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,911
Originally Posted by plinko
^This thread isn't about that building, how many times are we going to have to see the same rant? Get over it!

Regardless...this is going to to be fun project to watch develop...

One of the largest arguments against towers in SF are related to shadows, but the interesting thing is that since this is in SoMa, the shadows cast are going to be over only office buildings most of the time. Shouldn't effect too many residences. Does San Francisco have a 'solar ordinance' that cuts down building height relative to what's allowed by zoning?

Can't wait to see the renderings from Twin Peaks and hills to the north saying things like: 'It blocks my view of the Oakland Hills!' Remember the Rincon Hill masterplan and the bullshit renderings the NIMBY's produced? (had towers shown probably 1.5 times the height they actually were proposed to be).

Is there a map yet of which blocks this will be on?
the map of which blocks these towers will be on is at the top of this page.

As for shadows, san francisco does have prop k from 1984 which outlaws buildings from shadowing open spaces owned by the san francisco park and rec. the only open spaces that could possibly be affected are the parks lining the embarcadero (i.e. justin herman plaza). interestingly, 301 mission's EIR showed that it would shade these same parks at certain times during the year, but the planning commission and board of supervisors still approved the tower anyway.

although these towers would exceed the existing height and bulk limits, it appears as if new codes would be adopted that would allow these towers.
Reply With Quote