SAN FRANCISCO | 200 Mission Campus (incl 50 Main and 77 Beale) | 992 FT | 89 FL

[unpermitted_variance]

I think this is a better design. The previous height looked awkward in relation to Salesforce Tower, so I'm glad to see a proposal that creates a more balanced skyline without compromising on the number of units.

Based on Planning's feedback for the project though, I don't expect this to go through without major changes, if it happens at all. Fingers crossed though...

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by unpermitted_variance

I think this is a better design. The previous height looked awkward in relation to Salesforce Tower, so I'm glad to see a proposal that creates a more balanced skyline without compromising on the number of units.

Based on Planning's feedback for the project though, I don't expect this to go through without major changes, if it happens at all. Fingers crossed though...

Yeah it's just a minor drop in height. It does make the skyline more balanced looking with a natural taper, so we'll see what the Planning Dept says. Unfortunately I have low expectations of them.

[pianowizard]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Hines has revised 50 Main to 992 ft

Good, still a supertall (barely).

[MAC123]

Originally Posted by pianowizard

Good, still a supertall (barely).

That's 4 for California.
This one is about the same size as 520 Fifth Ave. #16 in proposed (for nyc).
That's good. Love to see massive stuff go up in San Fran.

[pseudolus]

Odd to talk of a "balanced skyline" with the abrupt drop off at 1 Rincon.

[Hudson11]

I don't think this is going to satiate the local NIMBYs.

[Zapatan]

Perfect, it actually works a little better.

Originally Posted by Hudson11

I don't think this is going to satiate the local NIMBYs.

If it can get approved who gives a damn what they think? How did the taller, neighboring Salesforce Tower come to fruition if the NIMBYs are so unbeatable?

I hope Hines has none of their BS and keeps trying.

[unpermitted_variance]

Odd to talk of a "balanced skyline" with the abrupt drop off at 1 Rincon.

This is bothering me the more I look at the rendering from Dolores Park, even though it's a totally different issue. I don't see the eastern edge of the skyline changing any time soon though, the areas to the right of One Rincon are pretty built out, height limits and NIMBY concerns notwithstanding.

Originally Posted by Hudson11

I don't think this is going to satiate the local NIMBYs.

I don't think that the NIMBYs are going to be the main problem here; a downtown site like this doesn't have a lot of immediate neighbors, although you never know who will take issue. The problem isn't NIMBYism per se but rather that several aspects of the project overstep the zoning and development standards for the site (which you could argue exist to some degree due to NIMBYism). The planners' job is to apply the development standards to the site, so they have some justification for questioning this project. Nevertheless, in the labyrinth of SF and state planning bureaucracy, there may be a way for this to happen. Probably not as currently proposed still.

[tech12]

Agreed that the tower look less out of place, and the skyline looks more balanced, with this drop in height. And I'm glad the number of units stayed the same, despite the height decrease.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

Odd to talk of a "balanced skyline" with the abrupt drop off at 1 Rincon.

Originally Posted by unpermitted_variance

This is bothering me the more I look at the rendering from Dolores Park, even though it's a totally different issue. I don't see the eastern edge of the skyline changing any time soon though, the areas to the right of One Rincon are pretty built out, height limits and NIMBY concerns notwithstanding.

The skyline is going to be extended in that direction if central SOMA is built out as planned. There are several 200'-400' towers planned for the area. There'll still be a drop between One Rincon and those shorter towers, but it will definitely look more "balanced". It'll also link up the main downtown highrise cluster with the highrise cluster in Mission Bay.

[homebucket]

^ Yep, there's going to be this little cluster here in Central SoMa.



https://sfyimby.com/2022/05/project-...francisco.html

[unpermitted_variance]

While I agree that the forthcoming cluster of shorter high-rises in Central SoMa will help even out the skyline to some degree, I expect there will still be a big drop-off from One Rincon, and the new towers won't really be part of the contiguous skyline as they are offset to the south. Ultimately these are frivolous concerns, of course.


And off topic. Bringing it back to the subject at hand, I also like how the new design includes several cutouts that exhibit some of the tower's angled structural beams. It also has more of a well-defined crown. This is definitely an improvement over the previous design, which may have had texture up close but would have just been a skinny box on from a distance.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by unpermitted_variance

While I agree that the forthcoming cluster of shorter high-rises in Central SoMa will help even out the skyline to some degree, I expect there will still be a big drop-off from One Rincon, and the new towers won't really be part of the contiguous skyline as they are offset to the south. Ultimately these are frivolous concerns, of course.


And off topic. Bringing it back to the subject at hand, I also like how the new design includes several cutouts that exhibit some of the tower's angled structural beams. It also has more of a well-defined crown. This is definitely an improvement over the previous design, which may have had texture up close but would have just been a skinny box on from a distance.

Agreed. They not only decreased the height but made a few subtle nice adjustments to the tower as well.

They also made some changes to the shorter tower at 200 Mission, with these so called "air porches" that can open and close. Seems like they're essentially a way to add balconies but recessed rather than jutting out like a deck. Another nice design touch. Still not a fan of how they bloated the midsection though.

[pianowizard]

Originally Posted by MAC123

That's 4 for California.

Wow, your comment got me to realize an interesting stat: California is the only state with supertalls in more than one city! Finally, a skyscraper metric for which New York is not #1!

[MAC123]

Originally Posted by pianowizard

Wow, your comment got me to realize an interesting stat: California is the only state with supertalls in more than one city! Finally, a skyscraper metric for which New York is not #1!

I didn't even realize that no other state had 2 cities with supertalls.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by MAC123

I didn't even realize that no other state had 2 cities with supertalls.

Correct, the US though has seven cities with supertalls.

NY
Chicago
Houston
Philly
LA
SF
Atlanta (kinda?)



Only China has more as a nation. By more I mean more cities with supertalls not actual supertalls themselves, the UAE still edges us out by a bit.

If Austin, Seattle and Miami can get on it we'll have ten supertall cities.

[BuildThemTaller]

Originally Posted by MAC123

I didn't even realize that no other state had 2 cities with supertalls.

Texas is about to join the list. Houston has two supertalls and Austin is about to build its first.

[MAC123]

Unless Upstate NY starts booming it's unlikely NY will be joining that list. But I think it'll be fine. NYC alone has like 17+ proposals currently, with 2 being built and 2 being site prepared. (Though 262 Fifth is probably gonna sit there awhile)

[SFView]

I like the new 992 foot proposal. It works for me. I also like the latest scheme for 200 Mission. Come on Planning. Say, "YES!"

[tech12]

Originally Posted by homebucket

^ Yep, there's going to be this little cluster here in Central SoMa.



https://sfyimby.com/2022/05/project-...francisco.html

There'll be a little bit more to it as well, which you can seen in this view looking in the opposite direction:

Originally Posted by unpermitted_variance

While I agree that the forthcoming cluster of shorter high-rises in Central SoMa will help even out the skyline to some degree, I expect there will still be a big drop-off from One Rincon

Yeah, that's what I said. There will still be a drop, but it'll look more balanced compared to now.

Originally Posted by unpermitted_variance

the new towers won't really be part of the contiguous skyline as they are offset to the south. Ultimately these are frivolous concerns, of course.

I think the central SOMA towers will create a contiguous skyline stretching from downtown to Mission Bay, when viewed from many angles. Of course it won't be nearly as impressive as the forest of high-rises in the Financial District and Rincon Hill, but I think it'll have an impact.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by homebucket

well that looks dope as hell!!!

the SF skyline will truly make a scale jump if all of that happens.

height matters.

btw, should the thread title be updates with that new 992' figure? is that the new official working height for this development?