View Single Post
  #1146  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2007, 5:24 AM
tyler82's Avatar
tyler82 tyler82 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SAN FRANCISCO
Posts: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reminiscence View Post
Good question. I'm actually not sure if this was directed at a specific proposal, but I recall hearing them say something similar to this about Skidmore's proposal. I could be wrong of course, that "them" I refer to could be John King .
Rem- yes they were referring to Rogers'. It even says so right before they start bashing it. They actually like the SOM design but it's just too "BIG" for little old hippie granny San Francisco, oh yeah, and they're not selling out either, but instead trying to create a really great product.

It is kind of hard to bash the planning peeps for accepting a "sell out" when they desparately need money to get anything done. But then again I wonder, why do they need to tunnel under the city for the CalTrain tracks at all? Why not just relocate and build the new transbay center at the current terminus at 4th and King streets, saving millions if not billions of dollars? The infrastructe is already there, there are already two MUNI LRV lines that go right there, versus zero at the current 1st and mission zone. Someone in this forum argued this in the past, and I remember screaming WOLF because transbay is at such a better, central location, but when you really look at it, it would make more sense economically to just build the new station where the caltrain already is. But then we probably wouldn't get a cool huge tower, so then I"d have to change my mind on that one
Reply With Quote