SAN FRANCISCO | Salesforce Transit Center - Page 120

SLO · #**2381** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 4:29 AM**

I know its tremendous amounts of money to invest in the Transbay Tower, but right now is the best time to build from a construction cost stand point. Construction cost is down, money is cheap, but unfortunately they have to find tenants. Im hoping to see it happen soon, although I love that 45 Lansing is getting ready, it will be great to see that area fill in.

dr_strangelove · #**2382** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 6:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElDuderino

Demolition Camera

http://transbaycenter.org/constructi...olition-camera

Will traffic be able to flow "under" the new terminal down Fremont, 1st st, etc. or will these streets all be dead ends?

WildCowboy · #**2383** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 2:38 PM**

^^^It will be open on the ground level to permit First and Fremont to flow through.

ElDuderino · #**2384** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 5:12 PM**

yep

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obey

CyberEric · #**2385** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 5:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

^Who knows? The tower and transit center are separate, but related, projects. The site for the transit center is being prepped for construction, which should officially begin later this year. Building the tower is up to Hines, who bought development rights from the city. They will build it when they decide it makes economical sense for them to do so. When that will be is anybody's guess.

Personally, I'm much more excited about the new terminal than the tower. That's the more important project, IMO. In all honesty, I have to say that I'd probably be a little more enthusiastic about the tower had SOM's proposal been selected.

I agree on all counts. The Pelli tower is fine, but it is nothing to write home about, at least in the renderings, perhaps it will be more inspiring "in the flesh."

If you forced me to bet, I'd put my money on it not being built, at least in its current form. This whole thread should probably be moved to another section of the forums.

dr_strangelove · #**2386** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 5:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CyberEric

I agree on all counts. The Pelli tower is fine, but it is nothing to write home about, at least in the renderings, perhaps it will be more inspiring "in the flesh."

If you forced me to bet, I'd put my money on it not being built, at least in its current form. This whole thread should probably be moved to another section of the forums.

Hines won a contest to put a 1000 foot high (+200' crown, which doesn't matter in this case) tower on the site. Why would they build anything shorter, knowing that this would be the tallest tower on the west coast, an instant landmark, which could command the highest rents in western North America, even if it took 20 years to fill it? They would still make out exceptionally well than if the tower were reduced any size and therefore reducing their total leasing space. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a huge amount of office space in one of the most expensive commercial real estate neighborhoods in the country, they are not going to give this one up.

CyberEric · #**2387** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 5:54 PM**

^ I hope you're right.

I was just getting a little disheartened about this project, reading back through pages from 4 or 5 years ago and seeing nothing move forward in regards to the tower. Sorry for the negativity.

1977 · #**2388** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 6:26 PM**

I remember Cesar Pelli saying in a recent article that this tower probably won't be built for another cycle or 2 and that it's design will be tweaked and massaged significantly. While I favored the SOM design, as many did, I think this tower, even in it's current form, would be a beautiful landmark - picture a bright white tower standing 1200 feet, against the blues of the bay and the sky. It would be pretty striking.

peanut gallery · #**2389** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 6:42 PM**

One thing to remember is the Transbay Terminal zoning plan still needs to be approved before any of these proposed skyscrapers get built. I've lost track of the timing of that, but I have to believe it's getting close to the end of the process. Anyone heard news about that lately?

CyberEric · #**2390** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 9:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1977

I remember Cesar Pelli saying in a recent article that this tower probably won't be built for another cycle or 2 and that it's design will be tweaked and massaged significantly. While I favored the SOM design, as many did, I think this tower, even in it's current form, would be a beautiful landmark - picture a bright white tower standing 1200 feet, against the blues of the bay and the sky. It would be pretty striking.

Yeah I hope you are right. I was reading up on the design and it sounds like some smaller design changes may occur, which could be positive. I don't dislike it now, but perhaps some interesting design cues could make it fascinating.

Quote:

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

One thing to remember is the Transbay Terminal zoning plan still needs to be approved before any of these proposed skyscrapers get built. I've lost track of the timing of that, but I have to believe it's getting close to the end of the process. Anyone heard news about that lately?

I just googled it and found nothing recent about the zoning plan. Hmmm.

1977 · #**2391** Posted **Mar 23, 2011, 10:58 PM**

I don't think these have been posted yet...

Some detailed renderings of the park:

Source: http://www.pcparch.com/

Obey · #**2392** Posted **Mar 24, 2011, 12:01 AM**

Damn, thats some fine park.

patriotizzy · #**2393** Posted **Mar 24, 2011, 12:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obey

Damn, thats some fine park.

Hell yeah. It's going to be a photographer's heaven and a beautiful sight-seeing spot!

dr_strangelove · #**2394** Posted **Mar 24, 2011, 4:34 AM**

San Francisco to be global financial hot spot

"San Francisco ranks as one of McKinsey's 25 global "hot spots," with a projected $435 billion in gross domestic product by 2025. With San Jose, it will also be one of the top 25 cities in terms of GDP per head, at $92,000, according to McKinsey's analysis of demographic, income and household trends."

northbay · #**2395** Posted **Mar 24, 2011, 5:06 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1977

I don't think these have been posted yet...

Some detailed renderings of the park:
...

daaaammmn! thanks for posting those pics - i like the bamboo

STR · #**2396** Posted **Mar 24, 2011, 5:22 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr_strangelove

Why would they build anything shorter, knowing that this would be the tallest tower on the west coast, an instant landmark, which could command the highest rents in western North America, even if it took 20 years to fill it?

Because they're looking at a 10 year (max) payback period. If it takes longer than that to pay for itself, then their money is probably better spent elsewhere. Tis the way of the modern economy.

fflint · #**2397** Posted **Apr 8, 2011, 4:02 AM**

A quick snap from yesterday at lunchtime: tabula rasa.

ElDuderino · #**2398** Posted **Apr 8, 2011, 5:58 PM**

question fflint. Did they clear the area where the transbay tower is supposed to go, or just the terminal. from the demolition camera it looks like the tower area has been cleared as well.

fflint · #**2399** Posted **Apr 8, 2011, 9:41 PM**

It's all pretty much clear at this point, just dirt and equipment.

DubbaG · #**2400** Posted **Apr 11, 2011, 10:56 PM**

My shot from a few nights ago.

Never noticed the Deloitte sign there before at 555 Mission.

Imagine a 1000' tower in between the Millennium Tower and 100 First! Can you imagine it? Good, now just keep imagining for like 10-15 years.