SAN FRANCISCO | Salesforce Transit Center

[tyler82]

The Pelli terminal is actually quite stunning, at least from the outside. It's very futuristic and sci fi feeling, it reminds me of the Martian space colony in Journeyman

[rajaxsonbayboi]

i would like to write a letter to john king but i really dont know what to say. execpt for that hes a complete idiot!

[BigKidD]

The Pelli terminal is certainly interesting, yet it's the tower that I find underwhelming. At least in regard to SOM's proposed tower that creates a new "iconic" landmark for SF in my opinion.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by rajaxsonbayboi

i would like to write a letter to john king but i really dont know what to say. execpt for that hes a complete idiot!

Tell him what I did--that as a journalist he should at least acknowledge that there are lots of people on the other side of the issue (and many of them can be found right here).

[pseudolus]

According to Curbed SF (sf.curbed.com), today is the deadline for public comment. Email to d&dcomment@transbaycenter.org

Here's mine:

I urge the board to reject the jury's recommendation and instead select the SOM/Rockefeller Group proposal.

1. The board should not base its choice solely on the money offered. The Pelli proposal for 100% office makes a higher money offer possible, but does not conform with the program in the RFP. SOM and Foster should either be given a chance to make a new offer based on all-office, or Pelli should be required to amend its proposal to mixed used. I believe the latter is preferable.

2. There has been much talk about the park in the Pelli proposal. While this looks very attractive, the fact that the park is some 70 feet above the street and accessible only by escalators and a funicular makes me believe that it will not receive enough use to be a lively, comfortable space. Also at such a height it will be exposed to additional wind.

3. I understand that there is concern that the SOM proposal for a double-deck terminal is unworkable. I believe that SOM should be given the chance to modify the terminal, if necessary.

4. One of the objectives is to create a landmark tower. In this respect, the Pelli proposal is the weakest of the three. While my preference is for the lyric beauty of the SOM tower, the Foster tower is also more interesting than the bland Pelli proposal.

5. Whichever proposal is chosen, I believe it is in the city's and region's best interest to build the towers at their proposed heights, rather than be shortened.

E--- J------
26-year SF resident

[Reminiscence]

Great work pseudolus. Today is in fact the last day to comment and make our voices heard, or at least noticed. So I guess now its just a waiting game to see what news comes out. Are we expecting anything to happen or any news to come out before Thusday?

[SD_Phil]

Originally Posted by pseudolus

SOM and Foster should either be given a chance to make a new offer based on all-office, or Pelli should be required to amend its proposal to mixed used. I believe the latter is preferable.

Aren't you here saying that you would prefer it if Pelli's proposal would be accepted but amended instead of SOM and Foster drawing up all-office alternatives?

Maybe you meant that the former was preferable and not the latter?

[SFView]

Here my comment sent to TJPA today:

It would be deeply regretful if the SOM submission for the Transbay Transit Center Competition is not selected. I believe that if given the chance to make adjustments to their tower and terminal design and program, SOM can better suit the needs of transit function, and provide an improved financial package. The tower design alone is a true monumental wonder. SOM’s tower is of ultimate beauty nearly on par with the Golden Gate Bridge for uniqueness, charm, and world class architectural and engineering merit. Furthermore, the money generated by potential interest from building tenants and visitors from around the world would probably be far greater and far sooner for SOM’s design than for any of the other design proposals presented. I urge you not to miss the opportunity to have a structure of such potential significance as an icon not just for San Francisco, but for the entire world.

Note that according to the TJPA website
http://www.transbaycenter.org/TransB...nt.aspx?id=323

Comments from the public will be forwarded to the TJPA Board with the Jury’s recommendation at the September 20, 2007 Board Meeting.

I am not sure how much attention will be given to the large number of comments submitted, and how much effect it may have on the final decision at this meeting. Is it possible, only a small sample of the public comments submitted will be read, or considered? How much weight will public comments have on effecting the decisions of the jury? So far the jury rankings seem fairly consistent for 1. Pelli, 2. Rogers and 3. SOM across the board. Based on the criteria used for ranking each judgment category, could swaying any decisions different for the previous recommendations different from what has be presented be somewhat difficult, unless there is consistent, compelling and overwhelming evidence of public opinion to the contrary?

[hectorant84]

My reponse to Windex66...

Windex66... His or her pointless quibbles. Nimbys... their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. Windex is obviously an old fart that does not welcome change. After all it's the same naysaying people that paraded around the Transamerica Pyramid in the 70's. The Transamerica Pyramid is a legend, and a monument to San Francisco. Windex is clueless and obviously LOVES the dingy run down streets of SOMA. Windex will NEVER be satisfied with anything. He/she is a blathering idiot and is well past the help that normal anti-depressant's are able to provide. The only things that could help this loathesome, insane and pompous creature are a constant supply of methaqualone or a full frontal lobotomy. There is no point in arguing with geriatric nimbys, Windex and his or her ilk are loons and will bitch about everything, no matter what the scenario. Nimbys, after all, are loud mouthed liberal boors. You buy into left wing nimby propaganda you're mouth piece for it.

[hectorant84]

I called TJPA yesterday, left a message. They returned my phone call this morning. Was informed they would forward my message to the board. I expressed support for SOM.

[tyler82]

Originally Posted by hectorant84

My reponse to Windex66...

Windex66... His or her pointless quibbles. Nimbys... their only fallback argument at this point is that they're really stupid. Windex is obviously an old fart that does not welcome change. After all it's the same naysaying people that paraded around the Transamerica Pyramid in the 70's. The Transamerica Pyramid is a legend, and a monument to San Francisco. Windex is clueless and obviously LOVES the dingy run down streets of SOMA. Windex will NEVER be satisfied with anything. He/she is a blathering idiot and is well past the help that normal anti-depressant's are able to provide. The only things that could help this loathesome, insane and pompous creature are a constant supply of methaqualone or a full frontal lobotomy. There is no point in arguing with geriatric nimbys, Windex and his or her ilk are loons and will bitch about everything, no matter what the scenario. Nimbys, after all, are loud mouthed liberal boors. You buy into left wing nimby propaganda you're mouth piece for it.

WINDEX66 name is Mariam Weinstein, she is 60 years old and lives in San Anselmo and Fairfax (Marin County) for the past 30 years. She is a graduate of New College in SF (Yah, the same "college" that is getting their accreditation taken away). Just bring this up and she'll leave you alone

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by Reminiscence

I guess now its just a waiting game to see what news comes out

Given the differences in the monetary offers, I will be truly shocked if the Pelli/Hines proposal does not win. For that reason I focused my own email to the TJPA on just urging them to build what they build tall and bold and letting them know that the NIMBY voices they hear are not the only voices.

In truth, I don't dislike the Pelli design and if it were the only design we had seen, I'd love it. So now I just want to see them go forward and build it without whacking it down to something resembling a 3-story Victorian (just kidding, but San Franciscans know what I'm saying).

And as everybody involved in this understands, IF we can get something, anything, taller than the pyramid built, that barrier will be broken forever and more tall designs will have a chance.

[pseudolus]

Originally Posted by SD_Phil

Aren't you here saying that you would prefer it if Pelli's proposal would be accepted but amended instead of SOM and Foster drawing up all-office alternatives?

Maybe you meant that the former was preferable and not the latter?

I meant that, whichever tower is selected, it should be mixed use.

[oak-sea]

I'm excited to get whatever is chosen built. When the three designs were released I was so excited about all 3, eventually settling on SOM as my favorite. I'm just glad that this project is moving forward. Build it and other great buildings will follow. In 10 to 20 years I'll look back and remember the Pelli tower as the one that broke the ceiling. Way to go SF!

[BTinSF]

So the question is, if we get a brand new shiny expensive transit center, do the homeless get to move in right away and start sh*tting on the floor? What's to stop them?

Guards, homeless form odd kind of community at Transbay Terminal
C.W. Nevius
Monday, September 17, 2007

If all goes according to plan, by 2014 a glittering, towering Transbay Transit Center will be erected in the heart of San Francisco. Designers say the tower will not only be a transportation hub, but send a message as a symbolic gateway to the city.

As opposed to what the ramshackle 68-year-old terminal building says now - welcome to San Francisco and watch where you step.

A well-known homeless refuge, the current Transbay Terminal is the first sight bus passengers see of the city. But newcomers are more likely to worry about what is under their feet.

"The homeless pee on the floor, and they defecate on the floor," says security patrol captain John Dunn. "We'll see them standing there doing it, and there's nothing we can do but keep walking."

That probably sounds like another version of a familiar tale. An ineffective and overworked security force finds itself unable to cope with an unsolvable social problem. The homeless take over, leave a horrible mess, and no one does anything.

And there is something to that unpleasant view. I was in the terminal at 8 a.m. Monday. Thirty to 40 homeless men slumped on wooden bus benches. Some had bags of belongings, and some had nothing more than a heavy coat. We walked through once, went in to talk to the security patrol, and by the time we came back there was a pool of what appeared to be urine on the floor. We hadn't been gone 10 minutes.

Charles Drew, homeless and a Transbay Terminal regular, sat on a bench outside in the sun, and tried to explain.

"When one of us messes up," Drew says, "it looks bad for all of us. I tell them, 'Captain Dunn could spend his whole shift screwing with us.' But he doesn't. He gives everybody a chance."

Dunn, a 74-year-old retired military man, is a pragmatic fellow. He and his partner, Sgt. Joyce Black, a petite 60-year-old woman, have been given the bare bones of a policy. It is one part bureaucracy and two parts legal loopholes.

"We have met with California Highway Patrol about this many times," says Caltrans facilities manager Damien Harris, who is in charge of the terminal. "The problem is that there is no ordinance that says they can't be there. As long as their feet are on the ground and they are sitting up, we pretty much can't do anything about it."

Given that, it is the job of Dunn and Black to make the policy work.

"If their feet are on the floor," says Dunn, "we keep walking."

An odd little social agreement has emerged. Dunn and Black work the margins, enforcing the rules but without spite, while the homeless men (they are almost all male) cut the guff when told to sit up.

"You'd be surprised," says Dunn, who has worked the terminal for 10 years. "Some of these homeless people bristle up to us, and the others will say we are OK."

It is not, Dunn says, a job for everybody.

"When I first got here, I thought I was going to throw up," says Black, who has been at the terminal for seven years. "My stomach couldn't take the smell. But I decided, I don't care if they are nasty and stanky, they are still human beings."

All in all, it is not a satisfying state of affairs for anyone. We watched well-dressed commuters coming through the station, glancing at the men slumped on the benches and then looking away quickly.

"It's a very poor situation," says Harris. "It's like a merry-go-round. The homeless leave and then they come back."

Meanwhile, the down-and-outers are spending the day trying to get some rest while sitting up on a wooden bench. They're exhausted because they have been walking around the city all night.

"I don't sleep at night," says Drew, who admits he is a recovering crack cocaine addict. "A friend of mine got burned up just a few blocks from here. I'm 40 years old and I think my job is to keep myself safe."

So he hangs around the bottom floor of the bus terminal, hoping to pull together money for a Jack in the Box meal. And Dunn and Black try to work with the reasonable ones and ignore the crazy or malicious visitors.

"We're not cops, and we don't try to be cops," Dunn says. "It is not our job to clean this up. It is our job to endure this."

That sounds pretty grim. And when someone pees on the floor, it is. But against the odds, and with a little effort, Dunn, Black and some of their homeless visitors have formed a little community in this mess.

"I don't really have a family," Drew says. "Captain is my family. Joyce (Black) is my family."

I've been trying to decide. Is that the saddest thing I've ever heard, or the most uplifting?


Sound of

Have something to say about homelessness and vagrancy at Transbay Terminal? Call (415) 777-6268 to comment for an Open Mic podcast on sfgate.com.





Who's responsible for Transbay Termina

-- Agency: Caltrans

-- Official: Damien Harris, facilities director

-- How to reach them: (510) 286-6084

C.W. Nevius' column appears regularly. His blog, C.W. Nevius.blog, can be found at sfgate.com. E-mail him at cwnevius@sfchronicle.com.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg.../BAOBS820J.DTL

[HarryBarbierSRPD]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

Given the differences in the monetary offers, I will be truly shocked if the Pelli/Hines proposal does not win. For that reason I focused my own email to the TJPA on just urging them to build what they build tall and bold and letting them know that the NIMBY voices they hear are not the only voices.

In truth, I don't dislike the Pelli design and if it were the only design we had seen, I'd love it. So now I just want to see them go forward and build it without whacking it down to something resembling a 3-story Victorian (just kidding, but San Franciscans know what I'm saying).

And as everybody involved in this understands, IF we can get something, anything, taller than the pyramid built, that barrier will be broken forever and more tall designs will have a chance.

When the three proposals first came out, I was completely behind SOM and strongly hoping that they would be picked to create San Francisco's new architectural icon (as you can see from my avatar.) Now that I have had some time to think about the results of the jury revealing their unanimous support for Pelli, after being a bit upset for quite some time, I too am just hoping that we will at least get to have a 1200'+ tower in our city, regardless of who designs it. I'm no longer losing sleep over SOM possibly not winning the competition, I'm just hoping that we'll be lucky enough to actually get something supertall in our skyline at all...

[plinko]

I've been reviewing the scores and the jury criteria for the projects and as an architect who has been through (and lost all) similar (albeit MUCH MUCH smaller scale) competitions I'd have to say that it's quite likely that we aren't seeing the whole story here.

The design is 50% yes, but the development team including ALL of the design consultants outside of just the architects are considered. Maybe the jury has individual or collective bias against some of these consultants. That alone could drop 20-30 points off a design.

Hines is a developer who gets EVERYTHING done. Any project type, anywhere. For decades. Can you say that about the other two developers? I don't know that answer (not enough information).

While SOM and Rogers have sexier towers and even terminals, are they expensive? Do they have MORE potential for cost over-runs than something that's a little more run-of-the-mill? Arup (with Rogers) may be THE most innovative structural engineers out there...but can they hit a budget?

My point is that the jury judging has ALOT more to do with the project team make-up, relationships, money, and past performance history than simply, is it a kick-ass design?

SOM may very well have put forth the most aesthetically pleasing and iconic design, may have presented their case better than the others, etc, etc, and still have been deducted major points because their project delivery was more cloudy, their project team a little less experienced or less favored by the city (I'm talking about everybody, even the acoustical and ADA consultants). The truth is, we may never know.

In the end it may be JUST about money and land values, but after reading the jury criteria, the architect in me begins to wonder if it's a little deeper than that.

========================================================

That being said, I for one would simply like to see any of these three proposals built. I don't care what the final height is, but as long as its the city's tallest and iconic, the actual height is splitting hairs. It's a great project that's been a long time in the making.

While I prefer SOM's tower and Rogers' terminal, the Pelli design is at least moderately visually interesting. He's a great architect, no doubt about that, and I've seen MOST of his major works in person (Canary Wharf being the most notable exception). With regard to Pelli's tower, I think it'll be tall, slender and an underwhelming piece of architecture. I don't think it'll be iconic. Having recently seen 2IFC in Hong Kong in person I have to say that it lives up to its reputation as being just a tall slender tower. Nothing special, nothing over the top, nothing memorable. I remember thinking as I stood at the base that it would be far more interesting if there were TWO of them (you know, that whole WTC dynamic). BTW, 1 and 2 IFC in Hong Kong bookend a major transit terminal Central HK. The program for said terminal is remarkably similar to that of the Transbay project. The engineers for the terminal were Arup. Who was SOM proposing to use?

Just my 10cents...

I'll take that unbelievable SOM entry experience over this anyday:

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by plinko

Do they have MORE potential for cost over-runs than something that's a little more run-of-the-mill?

Your point is understood but just to note, with regard to the tower itself, the deal is structured such that any cost over-runs would be a problem for the developer, not the TJPA. The TJPA is just selling the land to the developer and entitling the project. I believe, though, that over-runs on the terminal would be a TJPA problem since that is actually TJPA funded.

With regard to the unknowable factors, that's what surprises me. SOM is a local firm--the only one--and Craig Hartman has gotten a lot of great local press as the architect of the Oakland Cathedral of Christ the Light. Big recent write up just on him in the SF Business Times which I posted.

[plinko]

^Yes, Hartman has an amazing reputation and design ability (I'd work for him in a second if I ever chose to move up there). That being said, who are all of the OTHER consultants being used? What experiences do they have working with the City of SF? How have they all performed budget-wise in past projects? My point was that its not JUST the architecture firm. It has to do with everybody involved. That old cliche about a chain and a link?

I understood before about tower cost over-runs being the responsibility of the developer. My concern was actually the terminal. Which one is ready for Design Development? The SOM terminal that apparently has major circulation issues? Or the Rogers terminal that has just a couple? Or the Pelli terminal that has virtually none? I'm generalizing here, but just 'going back and fixing it' is no small or inexpensive endeavor for the SOM team.

They are all great architects. The jurors know this. They are going to go by track record, functionality, and economics (not necessarily in that order). To the jurors, the tower is likely only relevant in terms of location and revenue generation.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by plinko

The SOM terminal that apparently has major circulation issues?

Yes, I think this is what really killed SOM. You could tell at the original presentation that the AC Transit guy on the TJPA was NOT happy about that. I was hoping there would be a "fix" that wouldn't keep them from winning but apparently not.