[BTinSF]

http://www.socketsite.com/45%20Lansing%20Street%20View%20Rendering%202011.jpg
Source: www.socketsite.com

http://www.socketsite.com/45%20Lansing%20Night%20Rendering%202011.jpg
Source: www.socketsite.com

450 ft/137 m
45 stories
EHDD Architecture

This project, previously under development by Jackson Pacific Ventures, has now been sold to Turnberry Ltd. for $30 million. Turnberry, best known for ultra-lux condo towers in Florida, Las Vegas and the Bahamas, is planning to use the existing approved design pictured above but to add high end interior finishes bringing the total cost of the project for approximately 305 units to $230 million.

Lansing St. is near the top of Rincon Hill, an approximately 120 ft (maximum) elevated area near the Bay Bridge approaches in downtown San Francisco. This area is currently undergoing a massive transformation into one of highrise housing including this project but also the nearby projects "One Rincon Hill", "The Californian" and "The Infinity" as well as the recently completed "Metropolitan" and several additional planned towers.

[Reminiscence]

I think they need to add some height to this tower, just to make it look more like the rest of the towers that will be in this area.

[FourOneFive]

i think the 450' height is appropriate. The heights of 45 Lansing, 340 Fremont, and The Californian at Rincon Hill (375 Fremont) are all supposed to step up to the top of the hill (i.e. the 641' and 541' One Rincon Hill I and II).

[Reminiscence]

:previous:

Ah I see now, thanks for clearing that up

[AK47KC]

Great, another project for Rincon Hill! :)

[Reminiscence]

Yup, chalk another one up for the blackboard. If this keeps up, we may actually need a bigger blackboard. :psycho:

[briankendall]

Its important to remember that One Rincon Hill started out at 550' and 450'... without much notice they turn out to actually be 641'/541' and 61 or 63 stories/and 49 stories. The planning department postings for these buildings state that they are 450' minus mechanical roof systems... all of these could easily increase the height of these buildings to 500' or more. Plus all the levels that were not accounted for in One Rincon Hill... the town homes... the mezzanine may very well push it higher than 500' which I predict.... No matter what Dean Macris says the planning department would like the south side of SOMA to match the heights... to a degree... of the Transamerica Pyramid on the North, with the tall transbay trio to realign the skyline to the middle. Ingenious.

[Reminiscence]

Well assuming Transbay picks up some more height, and that people wait a while before building another supertall tower, Transbay may very well be the pinnacle of the San Francisco skyline for some 20 or 30 years. So, they better make it good while they're at it.

[FourOneFive]

Its important to remember that One Rincon Hill started out at 550' and 450'... without much notice they turn out to actually be 641'/541' and 61 or 63 stories/and 49 stories. The planning department postings for these buildings state that they are 450' minus mechanical roof systems... all of these could easily increase the height of these buildings to 500' or more. Plus all the levels that were not accounted for in One Rincon Hill... the town homes... the mezzanine may very well push it higher than 500' which I predict.... No matter what Dean Macris says the planning department would like the south side of SOMA to match the heights... to a degree... of the Transamerica Pyramid on the North, with the tall transbay trio to realign the skyline to the middle. Ingenious.

true, this tower will most likely exceed the quoted 450'. i assume the 450' figure is the height of the building to the roof line. san francisco zoning allows for a 10% addition for mechanical equipment. at a minimum, the actual height of the building will be 495'.

[Reminiscence]

After reading all these project, I just ask myself one question. How come few, if any, of these projects come with a spire added?

[kenratboy]

Damn, Rincon Hill is going to be very impressive!

Imagine the view on 80 - a canyon of skyscrapers!

[Reminiscence]

Should be quite a welcome for east bay commuters and tourists alike :)

[kenratboy]

So think about this.

As it is now, you have all the big building at or above Market. There is not much between Market and 80.

Now, Rincon (at 80) is filling in...and Transbay is going to fill in between those areas. BIG changes.

[Reminiscence]

Yup, looks like its going to be a man-made hill of skyscrapers, heh.

[AK47KC]

At least the skyscraper hill will somewhat balance SF's currently leaning skyline.

[Reminiscence]

Yeah, because of that, it should look very pleasing to the eye from places like Treasure Island and the East Bay hills.

[AK47KC]

The skyscrapers on the hill should also be pleasing to the eye a night by at least having their crowns light up (eye candy). The crown for 45 Lansing appears a little similar to the one on the St. Regis tower.

[Reminiscence]

Hmm, if this is the case, then I wont be dissapointed. Hopefully its as bright, if not brighter than St. Regis' is.

[AK47KC]

^^^And have some neon lights as well.

[Reminiscence]

I wonder if they change the color of the lights for periodic purposes such as Christmas of 4th of July. Or, if they dont light them up right away, maybe during these time they will, similar to the way the Transamerica Pyramid does.

[AK47KC]

Yes, some buildings do, like during Christmas time, some buildings change from white lights to red and green. On Transamerica, there is a bright light lit up on 7/4, 11/25 and during the Christmas holidays.

[Reminiscence]

Hopefully, you'll still be able to actually see it too, what with all the other towers going up around it, they might actually block the building from some people's view.

[BTinSF]

I wonder if they change the color of the lights for periodic purposes such as Christmas of 4th of July. Or, if they dont light them up right away, maybe during these time they will, similar to the way the Transamerica Pyramid does.

At Christmas, they do the Empire State Building in red/green.

[Reminiscence]

I doubt 45 Lansing will look anything like The Empire State Building will, but at least its a start :)

[BTinSF]

I doubt 45 Lansing will look anything like The Empire State Building will, but at least its a start :)

Aw, and I was looking forward to this on Rincon Hill:

http://store1.yimg.com/I/mcmahanphoto_1867_64818562

;) ;)

[northbay]

^ is christmas here early this year? i say, just make it all green. hehe, greeeen

[kenratboy]

Well...this is San Francisco...do they allow Christmas there?

:p

[AK47KC]

^^^Uh..... I guess so.

I don't think they are going to go as far as to light up the whole building in green or whatever color there is. They usually do that on commercial towers. As for residential towers, usually, the crown has some neon lights, and/or other eye candy on it at night.

[kenratboy]

I was being a bit tongue and cheek ;)

[Reminiscence]

If they made the dimensions of the tower light up like Embarcadero, that would be nice. But I dont know how good it would be if its the only tower doing that though.

[BTinSF]

If they made the dimensions of the tower light up like Embarcadero, that would be nice. But I dont know how good it would be if its the only tower doing that though.

It's not the only one. Another that has substantial crown lighting is the St. Regis condo/hotel at 3rd and Mission. I'm pretty sure there are others but I don't go to a vantage point (like the Bay Bridge) at night often enough to notice recently.

[Reminiscence]

If they actually used St Regis as a model, it would come out preety nice. I just hope they dont hit delays like they did with St. Regis.

[AK47KC]

^^It probably won't. Residential projects usually take two years to complete. I think why St. Regis took soooooo long to finish was because there was the historical William's building that had to be renovated along with the construction of the tower. In addition, there is a museum inside the lower levels the tower and lobby, which have unusual floor plates and heights since they have to be incorporated into the historical structure that couldn't be demolished. Least to say, the historical Williams building dragged the project on for five long years.

[BTinSF]

It wasn't the Williams Building. St. Regis intentionally slowed the construction so the market would be better when their units went on sale. Also, they obsessed endlessly about the interior finishes, intending their hotel to be the classiest in town (St. Regis is Starwood's top brand).

CMI Project Manager John Seymour says the St. Regis building required major flexibility in both the design and installation phases. A long delay at the onset of construction, after the tragic events of September 2001, brought about some needed changes by the time construction resumed three years later. The owners hired a new designer to update the interiors, and pushed the project to fast track.

Source: http://www.cmihvac.com/St.Regis.html

[Reminiscence]

Business huh, well, I guess you cant blame them for wanting more of it. If that was the case, then I dont think there will be any danger after all. The market right now looks good for a while.

[AK47KC]

So I guess this means that the project will be completed in 2-3 years, yes! :)

[Reminiscence]

So I guess this means that the project will be completed in 2-3 years, yes! :)

Heh, looks that way. Me, I'm being catiously optimistic, because you never know when they will hit a wall, and then oh no ... here we go again.

[BTinSF]

:previous: This is now a Turnberry project. Turnberry is not known for hitting walls and they have immense resources. They will do the project on whatever timetable they have internally set, but I would expect it to move forward fairly promptly.

[Reminiscence]

Actually, the fact thats its now a Turnberry Project is what I think gives people more hope that all with go smoothly. I guess its just normal paranoia that makes it feel like some problem is waiting.

[AK47KC]

So will this project break ground soon or will it do so in 2007?

[Reminiscence]

So will this project break ground soon or will it do so in 2007?


Well, last I heard about it, it is scheduled for completion sometime in 2008. So, I would be led to believe that it should break ground sometime in early 2007.

[AK47KC]

I guess it should be late 2008 when it is complete if they start in 2007, since these projects need like two years, unless they work three shifts.

[Reminiscence]

Yeah, too bad they only mention the year and not the month or even season of the year.

[BTinSF]

I don't know why I forgot to post this here back when it first appeared but here it is:

Miami cash to produce skyline flash
Turnberry to pump $230M into 'exotic' condo tower
San Francisco Business Times - September 15, 2006
by J.K. Dineen
Turnberry Associates, a name synonymous with the glitz and glamour of Las Vegas and Miami's South Beach, is planting its flag on Rincon Hill.

The South Florida-based developer has paid $30 million for 45 Lansing St., a parcel near First and Harrison streets entitled for 305 units.

Turnberry President Bruce Weiner said the project would cost $230 to $240 million, including land, and would be the most upscale development the new neighborhood has seen, with "exotic" marble baths, Italian Snaidero cabinetry, Gaggenau cooking appliances, Jacuzzi hydrotherapy tubs with built-in TVs, Individual security systems, and 12-foot penthouse ceilings. He said prices have not been set, but compared it to the Turnberry Ocean Colony project in South Florida, which is priced between $1.8 and $4 million per unit.

Weiner called the emerging neighborhood at Rincon Hill a natural fit for the deluxe builder, which has developed or owns more than $5 billion worth of hotels, resorts and condominiums in Florida and Las Vegas, including the Residences at MGM Grand in Las Vegas and Fontainebleau in Miami Beach.

The Rincon Hill marks Turnberry's first venture in California -- but not the last, according to Weiner. The company has a history of investing heavily in select markets, and Weiner said San Francisco would be no exception.

"We have big plans for California overall and San Francisco fits our model," he said. "We like world-class cities and San Francisco is certainly one of them."

Weiner said the company had been searching for sites in San Francisco for a while and was drawn to the Rincon Hill location as well as the fact that the site already had planning approval from the city for a 40-story tower.

"We liked the design, the views, and the neighborhood is really coming along," he said. "It's going to be a great place to live and work."

The seller was Jackson Pacific Ventures, a San Francisco firm headed by developer and architect Ezra Mersey, who co-designed the project with Chuck Davis of EHDD.

Mersey said he picked Turnberry because the company has the means and experience to pull the project off.

"Their entry into San Francisco is very good for Rincon Hill's continuing evolution, and another vote of confidence in highrise, downtown residential -- near transit, jobs and amenities," said Mersey. "Turnberry has shown the experience, skills and resources to successfully implement the project Jackson Pacific has created at 45 Lansing St."

A work in progress
Located next to a Union 76 gas station and a block from the Bay Bridge on-ramp, it would be hard to confuse 45 Lansing -- or any site on Rincon Hill -- with the neon energy of the Vegas strip or South Beach's mix of surf and celebrity. But the neighborhood is evolving quickly. The residential tower planned for 45 Lansing is one of seven approved highrises expected to sprout on Rincon Hill during the next three to four years. In addition to the 45 Lansing development, the emerging neighborhood will include Tishman Speyer's 656-unit the Infinity; Urban West Associates' 709-unit One Rincon Hill; Fifield Development's 432-unit the Californian; and a site at 340-350 Fremont St. entitled for 380 condos, also owned by Jackson Pacific.

Of the seven, construction has begun on the first tower of the Infinity and One Rincon projects. Both will ultimately have two towers. While neither building will be ready for occupancy until early 2008, sales offices for both developments opened in the spring and are reporting phenomenal business, with One Rincon nearly selling out and the Infinity with 100 reservations and 75 condos in contract.

Weiner said Turnberry was already sold on Rincon Hill before hearing numbers from the Infinity and One Rincon Hill. "That was good to hear, but we were in the process of acquiring the site before those sales offices opened up," he said.

A softening market
Yet despite the robust sales at the two Rincon Hill projects, San Francisco's real estate market is seeing a noticeable softening. Since Labor Day active listings for condominiums in the city have jumped 21 percent, according to Adam Koval, who tracks the market on the real estate web site SocketSite. Weiner said the slackening is fully expected and healthy. He said the 15 percent to 20 percent price increases of the last three years were "unnatural" and that "unless interest rates are in the double-digits, business will be good." He also said that 60 percent of Turnberry buyers pay cash for their units.

"We have been through this before over the past 40 years. Our end of the market, the upper tier, is usually the last to slow down and the first to pick up," he said. "You have to look at these things as long term propositions. If you're looking six months out it's hard to take our business very seriously."

He said Turnberry owners in Las Vegas and Miami have already expressed a desire to own in San Francisco.

"We're selling a lifestyle and we're selling service found in a four- or five-star hotel," he said.

Carl Shannon, a managing director at Tishman Speyer, said Turnberry's investment is "testament to the market's depth."

"They are an outstanding organization. We know them well and welcome them to town," said Shannon.

He added that the fact that so many buyers are willing to make hard deposits 18 months before the Infinity will be delivered speaks for itself.

"You can read all the press you want about how national housing market is slowing down but in San Francisco, we continue to see strong fundamentals," he said.

Planning Director Dean Macris said Turnberry executives have yet to come in and talk to the city. He said the Mersey/EHDD design had "a nice modern look to it that works well with the other design emerging on the hill."

Weiner said the design's exterior would not change, but the interiors would be revised somewhat. In particular, he said Turnberry market research has indicated a higher demand of two- and three-bedroom units than the plan currently calls for. "There is a niche that is not being filled right now," he said.

Mersey said Jackson Pacific would continue to focus on developing other projects, including its 200-unit tower at One Hawthorne St. in the South Financial District.

Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/18/story1.html

[Reminiscence]

It may be old, but its good news nevertheless. Hopefully this attracts more names like that to Rincon Hill :)

[AK47KC]

Well, I guess around Rincon Hill, since all the sites available are snatched up already in a flash. Maybe south of I-80?

[BTinSF]

Well, I guess around Rincon Hill, since all the sites available are snatched up already in a flash. Maybe south of I-80?

See http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=118914

[botoxic]

Still no progress on this project, which is approved to become the third tallest of the Rincon Hill skyscrapers. Below is a picture taken yesterday morning of the existing 45 Lansing Street, to be demolished for the new building. The sign in the window is dated March 2006 and gives notice of a City Hall meeting to discuss demolition and replacement of the brick structure. :shrug: Oh yeah, and there's One Rincon climbing in the background. ;)

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2012-30/S4010014.jpg

[BTinSF]

^^ If you would read what's been posted above, you would see that the project was purchased by Turnberry in October with plans to redesign the interior in a more upscale mode. It is extraordinarily unlikely that that could or would have been done to the point that construction would get underway in 2 months. Such things are likely to take at least 6 months and then probably require some consultation with the Planning Department and other city bureaucrats even though the exterior design is not supposed to change. I look for construction to begin possibly by the end of 2007 but not much before that.

[botoxic]

I figured that with Turnberry unlikely to sell the project to another party, if they were 100% committed to building 45 Lansing, they might proceed with the demolition of the existing building. However, if the internal revisions require a re-review with the City, I can certainly understand why they'd want to wait until the new plans are approved.

Here's a rendering of how the project looked as envisioned by Jackson Pacific, since the picture in the first thread is no longer visible:

http://www.reubenlaw.com/art/pj_45lansing.jpg
(from the website of Reuben & Junius, a real estate law firm)

[BTinSF]

BizTimes reports the revised design ("tweaked" by Swedroe and Associates) Turnberry requested was approved by the Planning Commission on March 15 and Turnberry is gearing up to start construction.

From Planning Commission minutes March 15:
45 Lansing Street - south side of Lansing Street on a through lot that also fronts Harrison Street, between First and Essex Streets, Lot 059 in Assessor’s Block 3749 - Request under Planning Code Sections 309.1 and 827 for the amendment of previous approval for Determinations of Compliance, and exceptions to allow greater than one parking space for every two units, to provide off-site open space in lieu of on-site, and for dwelling unit exposure. The subject property is located within the RH DTR (Rincon Hill Downtown Residential Mixed Use) District with a 65-X/400-R Height and Bulk designation.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

[botoxic]

This is GREAT news - the most excited I've been about a new construction start since 555 Mish.

For some reason, I'm obsessed with closing the "Rincon Hole" - my name for the space that currently exists between One Rincon and Infinity (see pic below) - and tying One Rincon into the "Downtown Mound" once and for all. The second towers of both projects will go a long way towards this goal, but 45 Lansing is the icing on the cake. Now, if only we'd hear some good news about the two Fremont projects (340 & 375)...

Maybe I'll make my way down there either this weekend or next to see if any signs of demolition have begun. :)

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/210/457269598_1c3767c759_b.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/210/457269598_1c3767c759_b.jpg

[Reminiscence]

Perfect. I've been waiting for months to hear some good news about this project. Now its finally ready to take off, and what a great addition to the skyline it shall be. :)

By "tweaked", has the design changed at all, or are we just looking at minor changes that should only be visible to the concentrated eye? Either way, I'm waiting for a more detailed rendering. :)

Oh and PS: Thats a nice picture.

[BTinSF]

^^^Yes, the design supposedly improves views of the "hills" (Twin Peaks, Mt. Davidson) and the Mission Corridor and includes a "seamless prism of glass on the northeast corner running from the base to the top of the tower". You'll have to use your imagination--I couldn't find any new renderings.

[colemonkee]

That's one hell of a picture.

[Reminiscence]

^^^Yes, the design supposedly improves views of the "hills" (Twin Peaks, Mt. Davidson) and the Mission Corridor and includes a "seamless prism of glass on the northeast corner running from the base to the top of the tower". You'll have to use your imagination--I couldn't find any new renderings.

Ah yes, I see you've posted that information on FourOneFive's SF Projects forum. Thanks for looking anyways. If Turnberry says construction is iminent, then we should have updated renderings pretty soon. :)

[BTinSF]

^^^I'm guessing they must have provided something to the Planning Dept. but I can't find anything. I looked at Turnberry's site and the sites of all the architects whose names I could find associated with the project: HKS Architects, Swedroe & Associates and EHDD.

By the way, I just noticed that another change is the building has gone from 305 units to 227, presumeably by making the units bigger. Recall what Turnberry said last fall:

Weiner said the design's exterior would not change, but the interiors would be revised somewhat. In particular, he said Turnberry market research has indicated a higher demand of two- and three-bedroom units than the plan currently calls for. "There is a niche that is not being filled right now," he said.

This may explain the need to get the Planning Commission to approve more than 1 parking spot for every 2 units--if they had 1 for every 2 at 305 units (i.e. 152 spaces) that's roughly 1 for every 1.5 units at 227 units. And, of course, Turnberry's high-end buyers, often looking for a second (or third or fourth) home or pied-a-terre, are probably more likely to want a space than somebody making San Francisco their primary residence.

[Reminiscence]

The original plan called for 45 floors and height of more or less 450'. I didnt think that 10' per floor was enough for this tower when they announced it. My best guess is that in addition to the extra space, they've decreased the number of floors. Although I would like it, I dont see it likely the tower itself has been upgraded in total height.

[briankendall]

I had always thought it was to be 40 floors. On the planning poster outside I read last year that it was a 400' tall tower with 50' mechanical on top for a total of 450'.

[BTinSF]

^^^The zoning is for 400' at its location (see above--it's a 400-R height/bulk zone). I can't remember (or never knew) if the original entitlements included an exception for height, but I'm not sure how firm that 450 ft. ever was (it may well have included the HVAC equipment on the roof which I think could add an extra 10% or 40 ft. and still comply with the zoning)--or the 45 floors either. I just counted the floors on the rendering and I get 40 plus what could be either 2 or 3 penthouse floors on top or possibly that's just the screen for the HVAC equipment. Anyway, I've seen nothing to suggest the height has changed from what it was; just that in going ultra-luxe, Turnberry wanted significantly larger units. Going from 305 to 227 takes it down from an average of around 8 units per floor to about 6, using 38 floors of units plus a ground floor lobby and a second floor for amenities (management office, commons room etc.. That seems to me consistent with what would happen if you added a bedroom to quite a few of the units as Turnberry suggested it would do and made them overall more spacious. In their Las Vegas towers, the smallest units are 1550 sq. ft (and they go up to 9000)--I doubt the original developer didn't plan for some units smaller than that.

[Reminiscence]

http://www.reubenlaw.com/art/pj_45lansing.jpg

450 ft/137 m
45 stories
EHDD Architecture

This project, previously under development by Jackson Pacific Ventures, has now been sold to Turnberry Ltd. for $30 million. Turnberry, best known for ultra-lux condo towers in Florida, Las Vegas and the Bahamas, is planning to use the existing approved design pictured above but to add high end interior finishes bringing the total cost of the project for approximately 305 units to $230 million.

Lansing St. is near the top of Rincon Hill, an approximately 120 ft (maximum) elevated area near the Bay Bridge approaches in downtown San Francisco. This area is currently undergoing a massive transformation into one of highrise housing including this project but also the nearby projects "One Rincon Hill", "The Californian" and "The Infinity" as well as the recently completed "Metropolitan" and several additional planned towers.

The first post of this thread (which, curiously enough, was posted by BT ;)) is where I got the 45/450' from.

[BTinSF]

The first post of this thread (which, curiously enough, was posted by BT ;)) is where I got the 45/450' from.

Right--and I got it from the "Compilations" thread started by Four One Five. He'll have to tell us where he got it. But I now think it may have been wrong (or changed at some point).

[Reminiscence]

I recall this post from FourOneFive long ago, but things have likely changed since then:

true, this tower will most likely exceed the quoted 450'. i assume the 450' figure is the height of the building to the roof line. san francisco zoning allows for a 10% addition for mechanical equipment. at a minimum, the actual height of the building will be 495'.

[mthd]

I recall this post from FourOneFive long ago, but things have likely changed since then:

a minor correction - the planning code in general does not allow 10% for mechanical equipment, it allows 16'. the rincon hill SUD allows 10%. in other parts of the city there is the 10% upper tower extension, which is different and not for mechanical equipment.

[BTinSF]

The article:

Turnberry set to go on 227-unit Rincon tower
Turnberry is gearing up to start construction on its 227-unit 45 Lansing St. project, likely to be the third of the six razor-thin luxury condo towers on Rincon Hill.

Turnberry has hired Swedroe Architects and HKS to tweak the design. Swedroe has been designing Turnberry's towers for 30 years. On March 15, the San Francisco Planning Commission unanimously approved the revised design. The reconfigured west façade offers better views of the hills and Mission corridor.

"The design features a smooth, seamless prism of glass on the northeast corner that extends from the base to the top of the tower," said Mark Donahue, design director of HKS Architects.

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2007/04/16/newscolumn1.html?t=printable

[colemonkee]

^ "razor thin"? Whatever happened to "wafer thin"? :D

[BTinSF]

I walked by to see if there was any sign of construction yet. There wasn't. The building being demolished appeared empty but that's all. Maybe in the fall . . . .

[Reminiscence]

I also did not notice any major changes or notices. I'm begining to wonder what Turnberry conciders to be "gearing up".

[BTinSF]

"Gearing up" is a highly complex operation. At some point it has to involve hiring a contractor, arranging for steel and concrete (which are both in short supply these days), a crane (also in short supply), getting permits and so on. It clearly takes months--or even a year or so. Sometimes, though, they go ahead with demolition and site prep before the other things are ready--that was all I was hoping I might see signs of today.

I am also hoping for a new rendering to appear somewhere--on Turnberry's web site or that of one of their architects--but so far I can't find any.

[kenratboy]

If anything knocking down an abandon building limits your liability and probably lowers your insurance.

[rocketman_95046]

If anything knocking down an abandon building limits your liability and probably lowers your insurance.

Yea but you still need a permit and hundreds of $Ks to demolish and despose of the building... you just dont do those things prior to having all your ducks in a row... If they applied for demo and building permits on March 15th, how long do you think it will take the city to approve all the docs?;)

I wouldnt expect anything to happen until September. Then it will be full speed ahead.

[roadwarrior]

Yea but you still need a permit and hundreds of $Ks to demolish and despose of the building... you just dont do those things prior to having all your ducks in a row... If they applied for demo and building permits on March 15th, how long do you think it will take the city to approve all the docs?;)

I wouldnt expect anything to happen until September. Then it will be full speed ahead.

So, September? Do you think this will coincide pretty closely with the beginning of construction at the Californian at Rincon Hill? Currently, their website says a Nov 2007 construction start date, but its been pushed back before.

How about the resuming of construction on the 2nd Infinity tower and the 2nd One Rincon tower. Do you think we'll see all 4 buildings going up at approximately the same time? I wonder if this would cause any headaches as the builders sort of take up each other's space.

[rocketman_95046]

So, September? Do you think this will coincide pretty closely with the beginning of construction at the Californian at Rincon Hill? Currently, their website says a Nov 2007 construction start date, but its been pushed back before.

How about the resuming of construction on the 2nd Infinity tower and the 2nd One Rincon tower. Do you think we'll see all 4 buildings going up at approximately the same time? I wonder if this would cause any headaches as the builders sort of take up each other's space.


Don’t ask me. I’m simply throwing wild, uneducated guesses out into the wind like everyone else ;)

[BTinSF]

So, September? Do you think this will coincide pretty closely with the beginning of construction at the Californian at Rincon Hill? Currently, their website says a Nov 2007 construction start date, but its been pushed back before.

How about the resuming of construction on the 2nd Infinity tower and the 2nd One Rincon tower. Do you think we'll see all 4 buildings going up at approximately the same time? I wonder if this would cause any headaches as the builders sort of take up each other's space.

At the risk of going off-topic for a second, I don't think there's any delay with the second Infinity tower. They appear to be trying to finish the midrise parts of that building which contain the amenities so that they can let people move into the first tower at the earliestr opportunity but they will resume working on the second tower as soon as that's accomplished, I'm sure.

The Californian is more problematic. So may be the One Rincon second tower. Turnberry has the resources and the history of moving ahead with projects (such as in Las Vegas and Miami) in spite of current market conditions because they realize conditions may be totally different by the time the project is complete in 2+ years. Also, they are aiming at the highest end of the market where buyers are less affected by issues with mortgages and such (many buyers pay cash). I'm not sure the builders of these other projects are so bold. Whether they proceed may depend on how sales are going at comparable buildings like The Infinity (we know the first Rincon Tower is nearly sold out).

[BTinSF]

The existing 45 Lansing building has a demolition permit in the window on the Harrison St. side dated May 23, 2007. It contains the usual "work must begin within 90 days" language. So it's looking more and more like both 45 Lansing and 375 Fremont will actually start construction in the autumn.

Does anyone know for sure if the new 45 Lansing will include the lot at the corner of 1st and Harrison where there is now a gas station?

[FourOneFive]

The existing 45 Lansing building has a demolition permit in the window on the Harrison St. side dated May 23, 2007. It contains the usual "work must begin within 90 days" language. So it's looking more and more like both 45 Lansing and 375 Fremont will actually start construction in the autumn.

Does anyone know for sure if the new 45 Lansing will include the lot at the corner of 1st and Harrison where there is now a gas station?

it will not include the gas station.

[roadwarrior]

it will not include the gas station.

I wonder if all the residents of the new buildings will band together to weed out the shady characters that frequent the gas station. I can't even pump gas there without getting panhandled. It doesn't seem like the owners care and I'm wondering if most of these people frequent the area because the homeless shelter (while technically closed) is still standing and obviously inhabited. As much as I like this area and see all the potential, this is one element that needs to change for it to live up to its potential.

[briankendall]

Yes, I have wondered that same thing about the vagrants in the area who happen to be without a home and how all the new tenants paying a million dollars are going to deal with the problem. The vagrants are not there because of the closed homeless shelter though. There are simply a lot of places to panhandle and sleep, such as in the abandoned doorways of 375 Fremont and especially around the freeway on and off ramps down the block. Once 45 Lansing and 375 Fremont starting ramping up on construction and especially when they are complete the area will begin changing and people won't be hanging out.

[roadwarrior]

Actually, its not just the doorstep around 375 Fremont. I live nearby and I've seen people go into the "abandoned" building through side entrances. Someone tried to prevent this by boarding up a side, but I see that some of the homeless people have broken the boards. I'll be glad to see the shelter razed, even if construction doesn't start immediately.

I agree that once all of these places are demolished, that there will be less places to hide out. Another problem, however, is that the gas station owners at the 76 station don't really seem to care that homeless people are harrassing their customers. I personally think that I can handle it myself, but I'm often uncomfortable when my fiancee needs to buy gas herself, especially at night.

[BTinSF]

^^^Most of the problematic buildings on Fremont and 45 Lansing are coming down soon, but, once again, I still haven't seen a demolition permit for the building on the corner of Fremont and Harrison (I think it's 399 Fremont--the current 375 Fremont is NOT on the corner). What I did see was the plywood pried loose so that people could enter the building and squat.

And when I walked up there, there was a crazy derelict "directing" traffic on the corner. :rolleyes:

[roadwarrior]

^^^Most of the problematic buildings on Fremont and 45 Lansing are coming down soon, but, once again, I still haven't seen a demolition permit for the building on the corner of Fremont and Harrison (I think it's 399 Fremont--the current 375 Fremont is NOT on the corner). What I did see was the plywood pried loose so that people could enter the building and squat.

And when I walked up there, there was a crazy derelict "directing" traffic on the corner. :rolleyes:

I checked this morning and you are correct. I see 2 demolition signs for 375 and 385 Fremont, but not one for 399 yet. Of all the buildings to demolish, 399 would be the one I'd target first. I wouldn't mind it so much if they just built the Californian at 385 and 399 and converted 375 to upscale lofts, sort of like at 300 Beale, but it doesn't appear that this is the case. I wonder if 399 is about to get a demolition sign as well, or if the Californian will now be built on 375-385, along with that other empty lot adjacent to 375. It would be ironic if the Californian were built and 399 Fremont were still standing and an ugly, problematic eyesore.

[briankendall]

Thanks BTnSF for the clarification of addresses. I've mentioned a couple times here that I walked by the buildings there on Saturday 5/25/07 the day after the demo notices were posted. There was a demo notice posted on the Harrison Street side of 399 Fremont when I walked by that day (I've been referring to it here as 375 Fremont but realize it was posted on 399.) The permit must have been pulled down by someone quickly thereafter. Either way its coming down soon and it will be so great to see those building demolished once and for all.

[roadwarrior]

Thanks BTnSF for the clarification of addresses. I've mentioned a couple times here that I walked by the buildings there on Saturday 5/25/07 the day after the demo notices were posted. There was a demo notice posted on the Harrison Street side of 399 Fremont when I walked by that day (I've been referring to it here as 375 Fremont but realize it was posted on 399.) The permit must have been pulled down by someone quickly thereafter. Either way its coming down soon and it will be so great to see those building demolished once and for all.

That's reassuring....I must admit that I didn't notice this until 4 or so days after the notice was placed.

About the other empty plot of land, wouldn't that be cleared for 325 fremont? I remember seeing old renderings of this building in the proposal stages and I think it was to be about 25 floors and nice looking. However, I don't think anyone has talked about this building over the last 2-3 years, so I'm wondering if that has changed.

[roadwarrior]

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/MainSite/Listing/Profile/ProfileSE.aspx?LID=14338715&linkcode=1070&sourcecode=1lww2t006a00001
This is a rendering I found for 325 Fremont, but its pretty old, so who knows?

[FourOneFive]

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/MainSite/Listing/Profile/ProfileSE.aspx?LID=14338715&linkcode=1070&sourcecode=1lww2t006a00001
This is a rendering I found for 325 Fremont, but its pretty old, so who knows?

In addition to 325 Fremont, it looks like the developer of the adjacent 333 Fremont is trying to unload their entitlements too.

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/Looplink/Profile/Profile.aspx?LID=14842519&stid=/brokers/colliersmn

I doubt we'll see either one of these project completed anytime soon.

As for 45 Lansing, it will be exciting to see this building rise alongside 375 Fremont, and the second phases of One Rincon Hill and the Infinity.

[roadwarrior]

Will they be able to fit 333 and 325 Fremont next to each other? It seems like a fairly small space for 2 large buildings.

[roadwarrior]

According to Socketsite, the demolition work at 45 Lansing began yesterday.

[roadwarrior]

I walked by during lunch break to confirm. The demolition crew is moving extremely fast and I'd estimate that they've already demolished about 75% of the structure! At that rate, they should be done by today, COB.

There is a lot of debris to clean up, but I'd expect that to be done by the end of the week.

[Reminiscence]

Thats great news, thanks for making sure! I cant wait to see some updated renderings (or at least renderings of larger size) :).

[Reminiscence]

Delete -- Double Post

[FourOneFive]

Thats great news, thanks for making sure! I cant wait to see some updated renderings (or at least renderings of larger size) :).

i agree. i checked the websites of turnberry, swedroe architects, hks, and ehdd architects, and none of them had renderings of the project. i wonder if we email one of them if they'll release more renderings to the general public.

[BTinSF]

Will they be able to fit 333 and 325 Fremont next to each other? It seems like a fairly small space for 2 large buildings.

Sure. 333 isn't that large--its a midrise--and 325 wouldn't be as large as the buildings at the top of the hill either--20 stories the link says which makes sense--it should be roughly the size of the shorter tower at the Metropolitan.

[BTinSF]

In addition to 325 Fremont, it looks like the developer of the adjacent 333 Fremont is trying to unload their entitlements too.

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/Looplink/Profile/Profile.aspx?LID=14842519&stid=/brokers/colliersmn

I doubt we'll see either one of these project completed anytime soon.

As for 45 Lansing, it will be exciting to see this building rise alongside 375 Fremont, and the second phases of One Rincon Hill and the Infinity.

In accordance with what's happening in Mission Bay (see the BizTimes article about AvalonBay taking over a third site there I posted on that thread), perhaps AvalonBay, which owns the nearby Avalon Towers, or some other rental developer will be interested in moving forward with these projects. I wouldn't be disturbed if more rental housing (vs. condos) were put in the mix on Rincon Hill.

[Reminiscence]

Socketsite.com confirms "Site Prep" has begun:

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/1527/45lansingdemotw4.jpg

-- "Paul Hwang of Skybox Realty captures the demolition of 45 Lansing. Cater-corner to One Rincon Hill, 45 Lansing is slated to become 305 uberluxury condominiums (“the most upscale development the new neighborhood has seen, with “exotic” marble baths, Italian Snaidero cabinetry, Gaggenau cooking appliances, Jacuzzi hydrotherapy tubs with built-in TVs, individual security systems, and 12-foot penthouse ceilings”) in a 40-story tower."

[roadwarrior]

In accordance with what's happening in Mission Bay (see the BizTimes article about AvalonBay taking over a third site there I posted on that thread), perhaps AvalonBay, which owns the nearby Avalon Towers, or some other rental developer will be interested in moving forward with these projects. I wouldn't be disturbed if more rental housing (vs. condos) were put in the mix on Rincon Hill.

That would be a brilliant idea. Not only would it get the area developed more rapidly, but they could always convert it over to condos in the future, if market dynamics change.

[roadwarrior]

Socketsite.com confirms "Site Prep" has begun:

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/1527/45lansingdemotw4.jpg

-- "Paul Hwang of Skybox Realty captures the demolition of 45 Lansing. Cater-corner to One Rincon Hill, 45 Lansing is slated to become 305 uberluxury condominiums (“the most upscale development the new neighborhood has seen, with “exotic” marble baths, Italian Snaidero cabinetry, Gaggenau cooking appliances, Jacuzzi hydrotherapy tubs with built-in TVs, individual security systems, and 12-foot penthouse ceilings”) in a 40-story tower."

Thanks, I saw this too, but I'm too lazy to open a Flickr account and save the picture. Too bad you can't just upload pictures from your desktop.

[BTinSF]

Walked by this afternoon. There's a street-use permit posted reserving the street in front of the site for "construction" for the next 2 months (through 8/7). It sure doesn't look like it's going to take 2 months to finish the demolition--I watched them and my guess is if they weren't trying to salvage the brick, they'd have the old building down now. Anyway, the need for street use for 2 months suggests to me that they are going to proceed with work beyond demolition--maybe even excavation. The company doing the present work and to whom the permit was issued is Cannon Constructors and I checked their site but nothing helpful there.

[Reminiscence]

Walked by this afternoon. There's a street-use permit posted reserving the street in front of the site for "construction" for the next 2 months (through 8/7). It sure doesn't look like it's going to take 2 months to finish the demolition--I watched them and my guess is if they weren't trying to salvage the brick, they'd have the old building down now. Anyway, the need for street use for 2 months suggests to me that they are going to proceed with work beyond demolition--maybe even excavation. The company doing the present work and to whom the permit was issued is Cannon Constructors and I checked their site but nothing helpful there.

Thanks for the observations BT, information on this project sure is hard to come by these days. Hopefully once they've really got into it, they'll give it its own webpage. Your guess would be my best guess as well, they will probably continue with excavation and be ready for foundation laying within 3 months, at least thats what I hope.

[Reminiscence]

Socketsite.com confirms "Site Prep" has begun:

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/1527/45lansingdemotw4.jpg

-- "Paul Hwang of Skybox Realty captures the demolition of 45 Lansing. Cater-corner to One Rincon Hill, 45 Lansing is slated to become 305 uberluxury condominiums (“the most upscale development the new neighborhood has seen, with “exotic” marble baths, Italian Snaidero cabinetry, Gaggenau cooking appliances, Jacuzzi hydrotherapy tubs with built-in TVs, individual security systems, and 12-foot penthouse ceilings”) in a 40-story tower."

Refering back to my post, I seem to be a little confused by the information given. It states it will be a "40-story tower" and shall have "12-foot penthouse ceilings." My questions is if all the levels will have 12 feet of clearance. If so, would that mean that the tower's total height would be roughly 480 feet?

[BTinSF]

^^^It may not be 40 stories any more. Turnberry has reduced the number of units rather significantly (from the about 305 units to 227) by making them "larger". Perhaps that also involved raising the ceiling heights and therefore the floor heights. I'd be surprised if the overall height of the building changed much but it could have fewer, taller floors.

Rereading what you posted above, it appears "Paul Hwang of Skybox Realty" missed that reduction in the number of units, but the most recent articles in the BizTimes mention it.