SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed

[coyotetrickster]

Originally Posted by kenratboy

Not odd at all - I am actually thinking and trying to use logic. Nobody gets anywhere without thinking and questioning what they hear and see. Not saying it is wrong, but skeptical that there would be such a small price difference for what seems like a significant amount of difference.

And like everything (especially press releases), there is often more than meets the eye. Of all places, this forum is used to hearing vague or not hearing known information at all from developers, agents, etc. (for example, lots of discussion about what is happening with some of the Sacramento projects, they are keeping a lot of information secret).

Being skeptical is one thing - saying something is outright false is another - I plead guilty to the former.

Actually, having spec'd green construction materials/techniques for the Gap's San Bruno project several years ago, there is a consistent 2/3% material cost over standard high-rise construction. All materials have gone up in price with the demand from India and China, and the market for green/certified materials has expanded, so the price difference is fairly constant.

The savings doesn't come in construction, it comes in quick approval for product to get on the market. It's in the middle of the press release, btw... That's Tishman's primary motive for green cert.

[kenratboy]

Thanks for the info.

[CityKid]

Just to give an idea as to how close these sites are to another, I took out my dinosaur camera during my lunch break. These are as of January 11, 2007:



In this photo behind the green fence is the site of 555 Mission where they appear to be excavating. Behind it in the distance is the ever growing South Rincon Hill Tower. Off to the Left is the Infinity II close to topping out (if i'm not mistaken).



Taken slightly to the left of the first photo, we still see the Infinity II now towards the right. Off to the left is the site of the Millenium Tower. And I assume the parking lot in the middle will be the site of 535 Mission considering the midrise to its right is 545 Mission and the one story to its left is 525 Mission. (Can anyone correct me if i'm wrong?)

[Reminiscence]

Now that we're in a new year, the front page should be updated with the new proposals to avoid confusion. Many of the projects under construction right now will be finished only to give way to new projects with iminent groundbreaking, perhaps in the next couple of months. Imagine, next year in 08' we may see Transbay in the "under construction" section

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by CityKid

I assume the parking lot in the middle will be the site of 535 Mission considering the midrise to its right is 545 Mission and the one story to its left is 525 Mission. (Can anyone correct me if i'm wrong?)

You aren't wrong.

[botoxic]

Originally Posted by CityKid

Just to give an idea as to how close these sites are to another, I took out my dinosaur camera during my lunch break.

I know - there's one intersection, either Howard & Fremont or Howard & Beale, where you are no more than two blocks away from Infinity, One Rincon, and Millenium and have great views of all (except Millenium is slightly blocked by a row of trees, but that won't be for long).

Anyway, here are some miscellaneous shots I've taken over the past few weeks of buildings that don't have a thread of their own:

Ritz-Carlton Residences


Foundry Square

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by botoxic

here are some miscellaneous shots I've taken over the past few weeks of buildings that don't have a thread of their own

As I have occasionally explained, I leave town in the winter to escape the dreary rain (of which there doesn't seem to be so much this year) and flu-packed Muni busses--right now I'm in Tucson having just got back from Florida and New Orleans. But there are a number of smaller and threadless projects I'm interested in: (1) Symphony Towers; (2) the project on the east side of the 800 block of Van Ness (next block to Symphony Towers); (3) the project at Polk & Geary; (4) Fillmore Renaissance; (5) 1 Polk St.("The Argenta"); (6) the project on Gough near Market (starts with an "A"--can't remember the name). None of these are really highrises but all will make a large difference in their neighborhoods which happen to be in or near my neighborhood. If any of you camera-wielding folks happen to be passing by any of these sites, shots would be much appreciated since I crave knowing how things there are progressing between now and when I return around May 1.

Anyway, thanks botoxic for what you've been doing.

[kenratboy]

I have to say the Ritz-Carlton project is a really awesome construction site to see first hand (being built over the old building, the location, etc.)

[Reminiscence]

Ritz-Carlton looks like its reached its maximum height, only the exterior looks are left to develop.

[The_Analyst]

I took advantage of the cold but clear skies yesterday (1/13/07, it was 'only' 45 degrees!) to take a few snapshots so here are a few vantage points I haven't seen lately plus a couple projects on Van Ness for BT.

One Rincon and The Infinity from Treasure Island

The Bay Bridge Skyway portion nearly complete. Now, just 6 more years for the rest of it.

The Infinity from the Bay Bridge

Apologies for the quality of the next 3 of Symphony on Van Ness. I was driving and thought it prudent to avoid crashing while snapping pics through the windshield.



This last one is farther north on Van Ness. I did not see any sign of the name of it. I think the cross street was Greenwich, just a block or two from Lombard.

[Reminiscence]

The last picture does not look like anything I've heard of. It doesnt look like anything in the Under Construction section, so I'm guessing its not that big of a deal. I could be wrong however.

[San Frangelino]

I always like it when I see 4-7 story buildings going up in the neigborhoods apart from downtown. It helps me imagine a distant future where san francisco boast Parisian densities.

Thanks for the updated pictures.

This last one is farther north on Van Ness. I did not see any sign of the name of it. I think the cross street was Greenwich, just a block or two from Lombard.

[WonderlandPark]

The Bay Bridge isn't supposed to be done until 2013? wow.

45 is balmy, I was out in 19 degree air this morning shooting around Portland this morning.

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by Reminisence

The last picture does not look like anything I've heard of. It doesnt look like anything in the Under Construction section, so I'm guessing its not that big of a deal. I could be wrong however.

It is what it is. I saw them clearing the site last year and I appreciate the progress photo. You can now get a good idea of the size and configuration of the building. It's not "tall" because Van Ness has a 40' height limit (buildings can go taller with a setback in some areas), but what does it take to make you think something is a "big deal" anyway? I think this is important infill construction for Van Ness Ave. which is an important SF street.

By the way, that "City Homes from the $300,000s" sign on Symphony Towers intrigued me so I looked at the web site: http://www.symphonytowerssf.com/floor_plans.html . For "the $300,000s" I assume you get one of these very small-looking studios (I mean they haver what looks l;ike a love seat in the living area--not evena full-sized sofa).

[BTinSF]

Originally Posted by WonderlandPark

The Bay Bridge isn't supposed to be done until 2013? wow.

No. The skyway portion is essentially done but they are just starting the suspension span and ramps. The politicians spent years fighting over whether to go with the cheapest design (no suspension span at all) or something more elegant (and expensive) and elegant finally won out. If we don't have another quake killing lots of people before it's done, the next generation will eventually be glad we didn't go with cheap.

[WonderlandPark]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

No. The skyway portion is essentially done but they are just starting the suspension span and ramps. The politicians spent years fighting over whether to go with the cheapest design (no suspension span at all) or something more elegant (and expensive) and elegant finally won out. If we don't have another quake killing lots of people before it's done, the next generation will eventually be glad we didn't go with cheap.

So, when will it be done then? I know about the suspension vs viaduct issue, has the date been pushed to 2013? I also know the approach is essentially done, but that does not make a complete bridge.

[kenratboy]

I guess all the work for Treasure Island will be a real chore. Obviously they cannot close the old bridge, yet they need to build the new one right to the tunnel - then transition from old to new in phases. Just an amazing amount of work.

[Reminiscence]

Originally Posted by BTinSF

It is what it is. I saw them clearing the site last year and I appreciate the progress photo. You can now get a good idea of the size and configuration of the building. It's not "tall" because Van Ness has a 40' height limit (buildings can go taller with a setback in some areas), but what does it take to make you think something is a "big deal" anyway? I think this is important infill construction for Van Ness Ave. which is an important SF street.

Not to impose on this development, by all means no. When I said "big deal" I meant in comparison to more grand scale projects such as Rincon Hill, Infinity, or Millenium Tower. If you block this area out, and only look at Van Ness, then yes, it does become quite significant because of the restrictions and overall building style.

[Reminiscence]

Originally Posted by WonderlandPark

So, when will it be done then? I know about the suspension vs viaduct issue, has the date been pushed to 2013? I also know the approach is essentially done, but that does not make a complete bridge.

From what I know and from what I've read, the date for traffic to begin to flow on the new span is Late 2013. Even after they install the suspension tower, they still need to add the network of cables. Then the Yerba Buena and Treasure Island Transition Links, the Oakland Touchdown, and overall finishing touches on the bridge before they can call it complete. Even after all the political controversies are dealt with, you still have to deal with the fact that they have to do all this within such close proximity to the existing bridge and while not disrupting live traffic, quite the daunting task.

[northbay]

Originally Posted by Reminisence

Not to impose on this development, by all means no. When I said "big deal" I meant in comparison to more grand scale projects such as Rincon Hill, Infinity, or Millenium Tower. If you block this area out, and only look at Van Ness, then yes, it does become quite significant because of the restrictions and overall building style.

i cant say too much cuz i havent paid any attn to the development on van ness (i never go on that pain-in-the-ass road), but from the picture it did look significant.

there's more to a development then SIZE, theres the quality of the development and the question as to whether it "benefits" the city. All big developments aren't "good", there's a lot of sucky skyscrapers out there. There is still a very important need in cities for smaller developments, such as the one pictured. I would love to see the corridor improved by the finished product.

Infill, imo, is almost always good. as San Frangelino mentioned, being more like paris is a good thing.