PDA

You are viewing a trimmed-down version of the SkyscraperPage.com discussion forum.  For the full version follow the link below.

View Full Version : SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed



Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

kazpmk
Feb 18, 2006, 9:55 PM
Is there any update on when Rincon Hill will start construction??

second, is construction on the Intercontinental hotel on Hold? emporis changed the status back to approved.

FourOneFive
Feb 19, 2006, 1:22 AM
Is there any update on when Rincon Hill will start construction??

second, is construction on the Intercontinental hotel on Hold? emporis changed the status back to approved.

if i'm not mistaken, both are still under construction. one rincon hill got its final approvals in january, and i think emporis was mistaken because i don't recall the intercontinental hotel ever being on hold.

tech12
Mar 9, 2006, 8:27 AM
this thread needs a bump.

the rendering for 535 Mission arrives:

http://63.240.68.122/FirmFiles/25/images/birds%20eye%20view.jpg

fflint
Mar 10, 2006, 11:10 AM
And here's a rendering of 535 Mission in context:

http://63.240.68.122/FirmFiles/25/images/aerial199%20NM_0441.jpg

northbay
Mar 25, 2006, 11:24 PM
so what? nobody cares about sf anymore?!

Stephenapolis
Mar 26, 2006, 2:33 AM
^ What do you mean anymore? Most of us never have to begin with! ;)

FourOneFive
Apr 4, 2006, 10:47 PM
here's an updated image of 325 fremont:

http://www.loopnet.com/Attachments/6/C/B/6CBF65A7-9247-4DD9-BA94-92E659F664C1_or.jpg

apparently, the original developer is selling the entitlements to the site. hopefully, this site will be combined with the adjacent lot and a new design/ tower will come out of it. although this design is interesting, it's far too short for rincon hill. it should be atleast 300'.

fflint
Apr 6, 2006, 11:26 AM
^A shapely, textural crown topping a tower that could easily pass for an assisted-living tower for the suburban elderly, circa 1966.

ACSF
Apr 7, 2006, 11:27 PM
Is there any update on when Rincon Hill will start construction??

It started in 10/05 I think...so it has been ongoing for about 6 months. I heard today that work is being started on the first floor, and completion is scheduled for the end of 2008.

ACSF
Apr 7, 2006, 11:30 PM
Came across a relatively recent photo of the Watermark, which surely must be opening soon?

first move-ins will be by the end of April

ACSF
Apr 8, 2006, 12:29 AM
Any clue if they've finished construction around the ugly base? I seem to remember there being townhouses planned for ground level or maybe some retail to go around the ugly garage.

Well today I saw that some landscaping is going in around the base of the Watermark (the 2 sides of the building in the parking lot)...hopefully some trees to make it look better. The plan is that eventually the parking lot will be replaced by residential/retail. But who knows when that will be. From what I understand, it will be built in conjunction with the cruise ship terminal, which probably won't begin until 2008 at the earliest.

EastBayHardCore
Apr 8, 2006, 12:45 AM
Thx for the info ACSF, and welcome to the forum :)

slock
Apr 8, 2006, 1:52 AM
I think that with the sales of the Watermark being so brisk, and with the office market improving, construction will start around 2007. I don't see why they would wait so long to begin. Also, the Bryant Street Wharf will be done this year, along with the Rincon Park restaurants, so it's coming together rather nicely.

And South Beach, which had always been kind of mediocre, is really stepping it up and becoming quite the neighborhood. It's residential has gotten a boost from the aforementioned projects, as well as Mission Bay and Rincon Hill. Hopefully something will come of those two empty parking lots on Brannan.

kazpmk
Apr 8, 2006, 9:33 PM
It started in 10/05 I think...so it has been ongoing for about 6 months. I heard today that work is being started on the first floor, and completion is scheduled for the end of 2008.

First floor already?? Does anyone know be chance if foundation work has then already begun and what year foundation work began ? 2005 or 2006?

FourOneFive
Apr 8, 2006, 11:47 PM
I think that with the sales of the Watermark being so brisk, and with the office market improving, construction will start around 2007. I don't see why they would wait so long to begin. Also, the Bryant Street Wharf will be done this year, along with the Rincon Park restaurants, so it's coming together rather nicely.

And South Beach, which had always been kind of mediocre, is really stepping it up and becoming quite the neighborhood. It's residential has gotten a boost from the aforementioned projects, as well as Mission Bay and Rincon Hill. Hopefully something will come of those two empty parking lots on Brannan.

have they begun construction on the bryant street wharf and rincon park restaurants?

rocketman_95046
Apr 9, 2006, 12:05 AM
First floor already?? Does anyone know be chance if foundation work has then already begun and what year foundation work began ? 2005 or 2006?

I just found a webcam... so here is your answer!

http://www.onerinconhill.com/webcam.html

ACSF
Apr 9, 2006, 5:45 AM
have they begun construction on the bryant street wharf and rincon park restaurants?

The brannan street wharf concept design is completed and the cost analysis and schematics are underway.

the rincon restaurants are scheduled to commence construction in June 2006.

FourOneFive
Apr 9, 2006, 4:07 PM
here are some renderings of the proposed 340-350 fremont street tower from the recently published DEIR:

http://static.flickr.com/48/125392145_bcc4d563f0_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/56/125392146_e194f71bd9_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/55/125392147_05852e120d_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/41/125392149_739b363e91_o.jpg

WonderlandPark
Apr 9, 2006, 7:28 PM
Rincon Hill will totally change the skyline from the Bay Bridge, I didn't realize it was right there on the 101.

kazpmk
Apr 11, 2006, 1:51 AM
I looked at the construction cam of Rincon Hill and it doesn't look like there is any activity at the site.

EastBayHardCore
Apr 11, 2006, 1:55 AM
No activity? The existing clocktower has been demolished, as well as the parking garage. They have spent the past few months digging into the hill for the foundation, basement, and presumably the parking garage. There is a crane that has just gone up on the site in the past few weeks. That's quite a bit of activity.

rocketman_95046
Apr 11, 2006, 3:54 AM
I looked at the construction cam of Rincon Hill and it doesn't look like there is any activity at the site.

The cam only updates once per hour so you really need to keep track of where eveything is to notice any changes. But there is plenty of activity, just keep track of which direction the crane is pointing and you will notice plenty of movement during normal business hours.

kazpmk
Apr 12, 2006, 2:17 AM
^ ok. Now I do see the crane moving in different directions.

I was trying to figure out if construction restarted because I want to add it to the USA COnstruction list. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=97974
It is had to tell if actual foundation work began, but there is a structural perimeter wall surrounding most of the site. So this building is definitely UC. I don't know if I should put in on the 2005 or 2006 UC list. I know the tower broke ground in 2005 but I thought the city put the tower on hold shortly after to make sure it was resistant enough to earthquakes. The tower got appoval to start start construction in early 2006. Did construction really stop after the city denied approval??? Is anyone out there that knows when the structural perimeter wall was constructed at the site??? in 2005 or 2006???

http://www.earthcam.net/cams2/onerincon/onerincon.jpg

rocketman_95046
Apr 12, 2006, 4:50 AM
Yes, construction was halted for a time, but the questions were resolved and the city gave the go ahead about a month ago.


As for the exact timing of "construction" maybe someone else knows that.

ACSF
Apr 12, 2006, 7:35 PM
I was living a few blocks away from One Ricon until this February, and I don't think I ever saw construction stop due to questions from The City. I may be wrong but I think there is so much money involved that the developers knew that they simply had to explain the safety of this type of structure to the city engineers/inspectors and that the project would not be derailed.

Mainly I think there was a lot of sensationalist hype in the newspaper because many bay area residents don't like the idea of highrise housing. But the people who live in the buildings certainly enjoy the buildings and the location.

sf_eddo
Apr 20, 2006, 8:27 AM
Did anyone else notice this post from Socketsite about SSP and this thread in particular? They give major props to SSP and FourOneFive!

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2006/04/say_hello_to_yo_1.html

:tup:

The_Analyst
Apr 21, 2006, 5:23 PM
That illustration of Rincon Hill from the Bay Bridge is fantastic. I have seen many renderings and read many descriptions of the heights of the new towers but this really puts it into context. I'll bet a lot of folks who are only casually interested in the skyline figure that One Rincon would be basically similar to the clock tower that was on the site but, wow, they'll be in for a surprise when the steel starts going up! John King in the SF Chronicle wrote that these towers would fundamentally change the way anyone coming in to the city from the south and east would see it and if this illustration holds true he is absolutely correct.

In fact, just imagine what a drive from Oakland to the city will be like in ten years with a trip across the new east bridge and then these spectacular towers at the end. Wow!

ACSF
Apr 21, 2006, 6:20 PM
If you haven't seen it, check the video of One Rincon Hill (bottom right of page)

http://www.onerinconhill.com/about.html

It is unbelievable how tall it is. And since One Rincon is on the top of a hill, it looks like the 22-story Watermark only reaches about the 10th story of One Rincon.

I'm sure the views are going to be pretty amazing!

nathanh6686
Apr 26, 2006, 8:29 AM
Developer drops plans for condo tower
SoMa site's new owner says it wants to build offices there

San Francisco Business Times - April 21, 2006 by J.K. Dineen


Citing an "overheated" residential construction environment, developer Monahan Pacific has scrapped plans to build a condominium tower at 535 Mission St. and has unloaded the prime south financial district land to Beacon Capital Partners for $30 million.

While the property is approved for a residential complex, a spokesman for Beacon Capital confirmed the company plans to build an office tower on the site, the latest example of what is shaping up to be a revival of new Class A office construction in San Francisco. In addition to the 535 Mission St. site, Tishman Speyer is expected to break ground this year on an office building at 555 Mission St., and Shorenstein Properties is actively seeking tenants for a 350 Bush St. highrise.

Jeff Hutchinson, Monahan Pacific's director of acquisition and finance, said the company had hoped to develop the land as a 34-story housing complex but a "super-heated environment" put construction costs 40 percent above what they were in 2004 when the company finished its 166-unit building at 199 New Montgomery St. Monahan Pacific bought 535 Mission two years ago for $19.2 million.

"It seems like the labor and construction issues were going to get worse before they get better," he said. "The cost environment gave us some pause along the way."

Hutchinson said the project would have been competing for labor and materials with a spate of skyscrapers under construction, including 301 Spear St., One Rincon Hill and Millennium Partners' towers at 301 and 333 Mission St.

"With all the residential that is being built, it's tough to get a crew," said Hutchinson. "We would have been fighting for a tower crane reservation. There is a waiting list for man lifts. Given that type of environment and given that it was going to get worse before it would get better, it was not readily apparent that the costs would settle."

In a sense, the 535 Mission property has come full circle. During the economic downturn, the Hines real estate investment trust abandoned plans to develop an office tower on the site, clearing the way for Monahan to snap it up in 2003 to take advantage of the explosion of demand for high-end condo towers in downtown neighborhoods.

Charlie Kuffner, president of Swinerton Builders, said he now sees residential highrise softening slightly and that "the stars are starting to align so that office makes more sense." That the 535 Mission site has been pulled by market forces from office to condo and back again, makes it a telling microcosm of the overall trends, Kuffner said.

"That site has an interesting tale to tell," said Kuffner.

Hutchinson said his company could have sat on the property until construction costs went down, but that is not the way Monahan Pacific operates.
We are a development firm -- we were either going to build or move on and do something else with the capital," he said.

The rise in construction costs over the past few years has been staggering. A study by Webcor showed the price of roofing, glass, aluminum, drywall and metal stud jumped by more than 25 percent in 2005. Glenn Gabel, senior vice president of Webcor, said crane towers are "at a premium right now in the Bay Area and continue to get more expensive, but they are available."

ยป Get the latest business news on the go!
Brought to you by Cingular "Is the market overheated in construction? I don't know that I'd use that term. But most contractors are pretty well stretched. There are selected trades where it's difficult to get participation," he said.

Over the past year, Beacon has become a major player in the downtown office market, snapping up 50 Beale St., 100 California St., and 1 Sansome St., as well as two other buildings. Beacon Capital Partners Chairman Alan Leventhal did not return a call seeking comment, but last year he told the Business Times that "San Francisco has the type of long-term fundamentals we like, with the highly educated workforce, great financial centers, teaching facilities and research."

Tim Maas and Tony Crossley of Colliers represented Monahan Pacific and John Cecconi represented Beacon in the transaction.

J.K. Dineen covers real estate for the San Francisco Business Times
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

From a proposed office highrise in the 90's, to residential last year, and now back to office ... a changing market indeed. Well maybe whatever's proposed next will be of a higher, more inspired design ( but what can you expect from Heller Manus)

kazpmk
Apr 26, 2006, 5:04 PM
^Very dissapointing news. I don't think it's very realistic for the developer to make it an office tower. Vaccancy rate are still high and as far as I know 555 Mission still doesn't have an anchor tenant.

These high construction costs are hurting much of the west coast. The article also said it would have been difficult finding a construction firm to build the residential tower because of towers like Millenium, Spear and Rincon. That sounds like a poor excuse to me. If SF doesn't have the resources to build a few major projects at the same time than SF in is in some serious trouble.

EastBayHardCore
Apr 26, 2006, 5:15 PM
I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. The Financial District seems to have an imaginary border in which it cannot cross. It seems that the most rabid of NIMBY's have given up on the Financial District, so once that area is built up, it'll be harder to build office towers, if there is an increase in demand for them.

tech12
Apr 26, 2006, 11:49 PM
I might be being optimistic, but maybe now we'll get something taller than the (400 ft?) tower that was planned. The space is in a prime location right smack in the middle of the SOMA highrise boom, so it could be a good thing.

ronson
Apr 27, 2006, 8:08 PM
yes, taller and more ambitious for SF............

sf_eddo
May 10, 2006, 8:57 AM
I'm on a photo kick now - the weather's been so nice, I can't help myself!

One Rincon Hill - I took this pic before some guy came and yelled that I was on the construction site and needed a hardhat.

http://static.flickr.com/46/143904574_9683a64edd_b.jpg

from across the street (where I got banished to)
http://static.flickr.com/50/143904575_729f66e799_b.jpg

Federal Building:

Side facing Mission:
http://static.flickr.com/55/143904576_9cc31c2f7c_b.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/56/143904578_e3e8677326_b.jpg

Side facing Market:
http://static.flickr.com/48/143904579_b297386c1d_b.jpg

colemonkee
May 10, 2006, 4:39 PM
The Federal Building's turning out nice. It's like the Cal Trans HQ with 15 pieces of flare.

EastBayHardCore
May 10, 2006, 4:42 PM
Sweet pics. Are the sides of that building really going to be left with boring concrete? It seems a shame that a building wrapped in metal and glass would have exposed concrete on the side.

EastBayHardCore
May 11, 2006, 1:07 AM
Some more Fed Building photos courtesy of pbo31 on Flickr:

http://static.flickr.com/49/144215300_c3e538b210_b.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/49/144215348_e0d578d311_b.jpg

EastBayHardCore
May 16, 2006, 1:57 AM
300 Spear courtesy of Patrix on Flickr.
http://static.flickr.com/51/147161242_9aa24943f6_b.jpg

craeg
May 16, 2006, 2:36 AM
Hot

ltsmotorsport
May 16, 2006, 3:11 AM
Seriously, that's a great looking pic. And the projects not gonna be too bad either.;)

sf_eddo
May 17, 2006, 8:43 AM
300 Spear courtesy of Patrix on Flickr.


Seeing as how it's dark and you can see all the underground levels from that particular angle - Patrix either has access to the site or totally broke in at night and took some long-exposure photography. Either way, I'm jealous.

EastBayHardCore
May 17, 2006, 8:50 AM
In his comments on Flickr he mentioned this being stitched together. I guess it's conceivable that he was able to angle the lens between the links in the fence, but you're right, either way the pics are amazingly detailed.

The_Analyst
May 20, 2006, 4:49 PM
Definitely a unique night time construction shot. I am surprised at how well lit up it is. They must be working extra shifts. Kind of Sci-Fi looking, actually, like George Lukas' scene of them building a new Death Star!

The Fed Building is shaping up nicely. The Mission Street side reminds me a bit of NASA's Vehicle Assembly Building at Cape Canaveral--like a giant door will slide open and the shuttle will be rolled out. The Market Street side looks awesome, though.

It seems, with the possible exception of the Transamerica Pyramid, that most of large scale architecture from the 70's to the 90's in SF has been rather "safe" and dull. With the DeYoung Museum and now the Federal Building (and perhaps the new east side of the Bay Bridge when that is completed in like 2050) we seem to have entered an era when it is okay to do something more daring. The result is architecture that may not necessarily delight everyone but it is at least worth talking about.

FourOneFive
May 21, 2006, 2:12 AM
new sexy pictures of the proposed 1177 market courtesy of Arquitectonica:

http://static.flickr.com/54/150075930_2dfe827cc8_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/52/150075932_fdafecd0c8_o.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/54/150075934_8f6609467a_o.jpg

fflint
May 21, 2006, 2:30 AM
^Well that's different!

StevenW
May 21, 2006, 2:43 AM
very nice, indeed! :)

The_Analyst
May 24, 2006, 4:04 AM
Hmmm...the jury is still out on this one. I like the boldness of taking out chunks of the buildings. But, I am not sold on the facade design. Looks a bit like a Holiday Inn. Maybe real life will look better.

sf_eddo
May 24, 2006, 10:04 PM
Im just glad the renderings don't show more stinkin Palm trees. ;)

And wow, it's massive. Yet playful. I likes.

fflint
May 25, 2006, 1:42 AM
Hmmm...the jury is still out on this one. I like the boldness of taking out chunks of the buildings. But, I am not sold on the facade design. Looks a bit like a Holiday Inn. Maybe real life will look better.
Agreed. The form is great, especially the playfully punched-out portions, but I'm not sold on the facadist pastiche.

Austinlee
May 25, 2006, 11:43 AM
I love that new federal building! And imagine the sense of pride I felt as a Pittsburgher when I read that a local Pittsburgh company is involved with the construction management on that building.... Wonderful!

J Church
May 25, 2006, 9:47 PM
Hell has just frozen over.

Proposed SoMa tower could be tallest building on West Coast
- John King, Chronicle Urban Design Writer
Thursday, May 25, 2006

If you've ever wanted to look down on the Transamerica Pyramid, stick around San Francisco for a few years and you might get your chance: City planners say it's time to make room for a new tower of at least 1,000 feet that could be the West Coast's tallest building.

The proposal was presented this morning to the Transbay Joint Powers Authority, a city agency that seeks to build a new transit terminal south of Market Street. Planners want to raise heights near the terminal site to allow two towers as tall as the 853-foot Transamerica Pyramid -- and a third that would rise at least another 150 feet.

The high-rises would also generate money for the transit terminal, with revenue from land sales and property taxes being steered to the transit terminal.

City planners say that with new residential towers being built between Mission Street and the Bay Bridge, there's a new spot for a few extra-tall towers to finish the picture and create a distinctive peak on the skyline.

"We're looking at a trio of towers around the Transbay center that would mark a new center of downtown," said David Alumbaugh, a senior urban planner at the San Francisco Planning Department.

Officials stressed that today's presentation is only a starting point for discussion. A formal planning study and a full environmental impact report would be needed before any zoning changes could occur.

"We want to start the discussion of changing the rules," city Planning Director Dean Macris told the Transbay board. "We want to stretch and raise the imagination of the public."

At present, the tallest building on the West Coast is the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles, at 1,018 feet.

EastBayHardCore
May 25, 2006, 10:36 PM
What a bombshell that was. Here's the link to the BizJournal article, it has a bit more info.

http://www.bizjournals.com/ct/rc/30414/www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/05/22/daily49.html?from_rss=1

J Church
May 25, 2006, 10:50 PM
http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/05/26/ba_towers26_ph03.jpg

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/05/26/ba_towers26_ph01.jpg

colemonkee
May 25, 2006, 11:30 PM
Great news. Now somebody put a giant NIMBY magnet on a barge in the bay, sail it around the city, out to the ocean, and sink it.

craeg
May 26, 2006, 11:39 PM
^bump

The_Analyst
May 30, 2006, 9:04 PM
The potential for this area is quite exciting. Reading the 2-cents comments in the Chron was interesting, though. A lot of folks decried big buildings and said they either wanted more open space or more affordable housing. In order to pay for those things you need a vibrant and growing business base paying taxes. And you can't grow business if there is no office space available. You would think the proposal was to build these towers in Golden Gate park. I can't think of a better area to grow upward than SOMA, especially if the designs are cutting edge or at least attractive. Unfortunately, the timeline of these kinds of projects seems to be about 20 years from concept to completion so I won't be holding my breath.

I do like the orange color scheme on the towers in the renderings. Very distinctive. :haha: Ok, I am just kidding, I know those were just illustrations of the height. But, we do need something other than beige or gray.

sf_eddo
May 30, 2006, 9:19 PM
^ Seriously, we're not building in the traditional neighborhoods, people. We're building near a Transit Center (next door to the fourth tallest building in the city, by the way, and another one under construction that will be the 3rd tallest, i think) and in a freeway loop/exit. over an abandoned parking lot nonetheless.

if height should be anywhere, it should be here. but these people are opposed to height for height's sake, I suppose. Immediate reaction among San Franciscans: don't change a thing! my housing is worth too much as it is!

tech12
May 31, 2006, 3:39 AM
^ Seriously, we're not building in the traditional neighborhoods, people. We're building near a Transit Center (next door to the fourth tallest building in the city, by the way, and another one under construction that will be the 3rd tallest, i think)

The fourth tallest is going to be 301 mission, but what is this 3rd tallest you speak of? I thought that was 345 California Center?

sf_eddo
May 31, 2006, 6:45 AM
The fourth tallest is going to be 301 mission, but what is this 3rd tallest you speak of? I thought that was 345 California Center?

You're right, I got carried away. Too excitable, I suppose. :)

I was talking about the current 4th tallest being 50 Fremont, and then the third tallest to be 301 Mission. BUT I forgot rather simple logic.

Thougt I'd throw in some visuals:

Below is a google maps visual of the planned Transbay Redevelopment Area.

The Transbay Center (1000+ ft) is the big grey box in the middle with the bus lines running to and from it. First and Mission (850+ ft) has a marker on it, and I believe the Howard & 1st parcel is the parking lot above the word 'Tehama' near First. (FYI - 301 Mission (Millennium) is at the corner of Fremont and Mission, right where the 't' in "50 Fremont Center" is, 300 Spear (Infinity) is at Spear/Folsom/Main, One Rincon Hill is at at the bottom of the picture at 1st & Harrison)

http://static.flickr.com/67/153272725_572ecc3fae_o.jpg

We've seen the Transbay Terminal before, so it wasn't really exciting to capture the parcel, but here are what I believe are the two 850+ ft. towers that are being discussed.

The first one is at the Northwest corner of 1st and Mission, and its footprint will extend to the parking lot. This is the view from Local Live looking East, I believe. The white lowrise building is the one being talked about, and the adjacent abandoned parking lot above it (which by the way smells offensively like human feces everytime the sun comes out).

http://static.flickr.com/37/157038613_2d791dfe8d_o.jpg

The Howard/1st parcel, I think is this one. I cannot see where else they would be able to easily build, unless they are tearing down the building. My opinion is, if the parking lot goes, I'm for it, whatever it is! This is the view from Local Live looking south. From memory, I believe the building in the lower right corner is part of the Foundry Square complex, and is also the corporate headquarters of Gymboree.

http://static.flickr.com/69/157038612_eeac4de9d6_o.jpg

Hope this sheds light for those who had difficulty imagining the actual sites on the city grid.

(sorry for those who've seen this before...)

tech12
May 31, 2006, 8:33 AM
You're right, I got carried away. Too excitable, I suppose.

I was talking about the current 4th tallest being 50 Fremont, and then the third tallest to be 301 Mission. BUT I forgot rather simple logic.

oh, ok, gotcha. I thought i had missed something:P

WonderlandPark
Jun 1, 2006, 2:16 AM
Yesterday in the city: larger files

300 Spear/Infinity:
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inf_01.jpg
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inf_02.jpg
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inf_03.jpg
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inf_04.jpg
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inf_05.jpg
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inf_07.jpg
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inf_08.jpg

I don't know what this one is, 400ft.
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inf_06.jpg

The Intercontinental:
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inter_01.jpg
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inter_03.jpg

The most important part of the construction site:
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inter_02.jpg

One Rincon, from the Bay Bridge offramp 101:
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_rincon_01.jpg

other direction,
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_rincon_02.jpg

Federal Building, very cool, coming along nicely:
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_fed_01.jpg
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_fed_02.jpg

EastBayHardCore
Jun 1, 2006, 2:37 AM
Great pic of the the new Fed from the alley! Thanks for the update.

FourOneFive
Jun 1, 2006, 3:54 AM
WOW. things are certainly rising in san francisco!

FourOneFive
Jun 1, 2006, 4:10 AM
I don't know what this one is, 400ft.
http://www.pixelmap.com/sf_inf_06.jpg

here's a rendering of 340-350 fremont:

http://static.flickr.com/55/125392147_05852e120d.jpg

this project is being taken up by the planning commission on June 8 rather than June 1st. here's a brief description of the project:

The proposed project would involve demolition of two existing marine labor union halls and construction of a 40-story, 400-foot-tall building containing 380 residential units, with up to 380 off-street parking spaces located on five levels of below-grade parking. The project would provide about 108 bicycle stalls, two off-street loading spaces, approximately 20,400 square feet of onsite open space, and additional publicly accessible open space at an off-site location

also being taken up at the June 8 meeting is 399 fremont:

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/375%20Fremont.jpg

The project is to demolish the existing three buildings (375 Fremont Street, 385 Fremont Street and 399 Fremont Street) and construct a residential project that would consist of a tower reaching 400-feet (exclusive of mechanical penthouse and screening) that would be sited at the corner of Fremont Street and Harrison Street; the project would also consist of a podium structure that would align Fremont Street and Harrison Street and would feature townhouse units. The project would include approximately 432 dwelling units and up to 432 parking spaces (one half of which would be independently accessible).

The_Analyst
Jun 3, 2006, 12:45 AM
Looking at the rendering of 340 Fremont. They show the Rincon towers in the background. I wonder if they did that to basically signal, "Hey, you guys approved those new towers so we hope you'll approve ours."

The designs aren't too bad. I just wish someone would come up with a color scheme that didn't include gray/blue/green glass and stainless steel for a change. Limestone? Gold tinted glass? White marble? Brick? Or, how about black? Are those colors/materials illegal in SF?

craeg
Jun 3, 2006, 12:46 AM
No, it's innovation and free thinking that are illegal in SF.

EastBayHardCore
Jun 3, 2006, 5:39 AM
Gold glass? That'd be a bit much for a 400 story building. It'd be Vegas by the bay! Although I'd absolutely love to see a pure black building (a la Trump World Tower)

sf_eddo
Jun 5, 2006, 2:16 AM
No, it's innovation and free thinking that are illegal in SF.

San Franciscans like to think that light colored buildings add to the "Mediterranean" allure of The City.

I have to admit - the very dark and massive B of A tower looks slightly out of place amongst all the light/pale skyscrapers.

urban_encounter
Jun 5, 2006, 3:30 AM
http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/05/26/ba_towers26_ph03.jpg

Now that would be a very impressive skyline..


Although (keeping in mind the three new buildings wont be orange as highlighted in the rendering), it appears above as though San Francisco is giving the bird to the rest of the country. Note the three proposed taller towers, with the tallest providing the subtle (if not subliminal) suggestion..????


:haha:

The skyline is really taking off and San Francisco is already one of the most beautiful cities in the country. All the new development is just icing on the cake...

J Church
Jun 5, 2006, 5:05 PM
^ An astute observation ...

ACSF
Jun 5, 2006, 8:30 PM
Pretty amazing, how even sales practices are changing in SF. Sales office for One Rincon is opening next week to start taking deposits on units, even though move in is 20 months away!

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/05/01/story3.html?t=printable

Condo projects selling first, building later
New law drives marketing
San Francisco Business Times - April 28, 2006by J.K. Dineen
Encouraged by new legislation allowing binding sales contracts as soon as construction starts, San Francisco highrise developers are pumping millions into deluxe sales centers aimed at taking buyers' money months or years in advance.

In a Harrison Street warehouse next to the One Rincon Hill site where construction recently started on the first of two slender skyscrapers, developer Michael Kriozere is building out a $2.5 million sales office featuring a fully appointed, two-bedroom model apartments with lightboxes simulating views both night and day. The 9,000-square-foot sales office, with an oval-shaped rotunda, will open in June -- some 20 months before the first of two of Urban West's slender Rincon Hill towers is scheduled for completion.

Kriozere said the investment in the sales center is a response to the passage of Assemblyman Mark Leno's AB728. While state laws used to prohibit binding contracts with homebuyers until construction was complete, AB728 says that as soon as construction begins developers can collect non-refundable deposits big enough to cover any damages if the buyer defaults. Buyers are generally required to put down 3 percent of the sales price.

"This is the first time you can take a non-refundable deposit, so it means something. It's a serious contract," said Kriozere.

Other sales offices slated to open this spring include one for the 110-unit Park Terrace project in Mission Bay, the 246-unit SoMa Grand at Seventh and Mission streets and one catering to Intracorp's two projects, the 268-unit "green" Arterra building in Mission Bay and the 128-unit Hayes in Hayes Valley.

Signature Properties has already opened a sales center for the 99-unit 255 Berry St. and 70-unit Broderick Place, both of which are half sold out. All of these projects are at least a year away from opening.

Mike Ghielmetti, president of Signature Properties, said Bay Area home shoppers are still getting comfortable with pre-sales. His sales center at 215 King St. has sample kitchens, bathrooms, and virtual reality tours. "The California public is not used to pre-sales, it's a matter of acclimating people to it," he said.

The flurry of condo projects coming into the market and the emphasis on agressive sales efforts early in the construction process has been a big windfall for the two San Francisco companies that handle nearly all the marketing for this sector: the Mark Co. and Pacific Marketing.

Rob Parker, director of marketing at Pacific Marketing, said his company's revenue is are projected to jump 50 percent, with the number of units sold jumping from about 1,000 in 2005 to 1,500 this year. Marketing specialists, like brokers, are paid a percentage -- usually about 2 percent -- of each unit that closes. While Parker would not speculate on the company's revenue, based on an average condo price of $500,000, Pacific Marketing could generate about $15 million in revenue this year. The company's staff has doubled to 18 in the past year.

Parker, who is handling the marketing for Rincon Hill, said the sales center will be unveiled to brokers and to 1,500 registered propective homeowners in June with a weeklong grand opening. The goal is to sell 100 units the first week.

"I don't think somebody buys a home because the sales office is better than the others, but that's a component of how the potential buyer perceives the project," Parker said. "How well the sales office is executed is an indication of how well the building is going to be executed."

On Tuesday, as painters and plasterers worked on the One Rincon sales office, Parker walked through pointing out where the hallways, closets, kitchen, bedroom, washer/dryer and den will be located.

"You are now in the living room," said Parker. And pointing at a blank wall which will feature daytime views from the 42nd floor. "This is wall-to-wall, ceiling-to-floor glass," he said.

Pre-sales have long been a staple of condo business in Chicago and Miami, where developers often sell 80 percent of units before even starting construction. Parker said pre-sales and the investment in early marketing and sales centers are here to stay.

"When you have this many units in this tall a building, you can't wait until you've got units available in the building to sell."

The Palms, a 300-unit development on Fourth Street, opened its sales office in November, about 10 months before construction is slated to be complete. Palms developer Joe Cassidy said half the units have been sold, in part thanks to the $1.25 million sales office he built.

"You really have to do good job with sales office," he said. "They have got to be able to see the kitchen cabinets, feel them, take virtual walks through the units."

J.K. Dineen covers real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

BTinSF
Jun 11, 2006, 5:57 PM
Two questions. First, I walked up Fremont St. the other day to look at progress on the Rincon complex and noticed they are doing demolition on the "odd" side of the street (across the street from 340-350), presumeably on at least part of the parcel where 399 Fremont would go. Are they beginning construction??

Second, I noticed they are also demolishing a large parcel on the middle part of a block on Turk in the Tenderloin (between Leavenworth and Jones or perhaps Hyde and Leavenworth)). Anybody know what's going there?

SoMaSF415
Jun 12, 2006, 3:23 AM
There is a crane on Van Ness by Lombard St., anyone know the details of this new residential project? How many stories?

EastBayHardCore
Jun 12, 2006, 3:25 AM
Is it at the site of the Galaxy Theatre?

SoMaSF415
Jun 12, 2006, 4:00 AM
Nope, it's on the other side of Van Ness closer to Union St, looks like a pretty big project for Van Ness. On another note, the Federal Building is definately making it's presence known in the Civic Center area...

BTinSF
Jun 12, 2006, 4:26 AM
Last summer's annual edition of the SF Business Times "Structures" supplement shows nothing residential planned or even proposed in that area (Van Ness and Lombard). The farthest north building on Van Ness is the Galaxy Theater condo project (134 market rate units). The largest project on Van Ness by far is the rebuild of Pacific Medical Center at the Cathedral Hill Hotel site (a monster building covering the Geary/Van Ness/Franklin/Post block on the west side of Van Ness with an administrative annex on the east side and a tunnel under to connect them) but it'll be a while before that gets underway (cost is in the billions). Otherwise, there is the Symphony Towers project between Turk and Eddy--13 floors, 91 units--that's about to the 5th floor now.

Yes, I live at Opera Plaza and we get a nice view of the top of the Federal Building but I'm waiting to see the condo next door rise up next to it.

SoMaSF415
Jun 12, 2006, 4:30 AM
This is further north than the Cathederal Hill development... there is definately something going up and I don't think it's an office building.

San Frangelino
Jun 12, 2006, 5:04 PM
Oakland:

http://www.pmateam.com/communities/23rd_valdez.htm

23rd AND VALDEZ
Description: Luxury Urban High-Rise
Location: Oakland, CA
Developer: Pacific Properties
Homes: 237

SF:

http://www.pmateam.com/communities/5800_3rd_street.htm

5800 3rd STREET
Description: Condominium Flats
Location: San Francisco, CA Developer: Levin Menzies
Homes: 400

I believe I read this one will be next door to another large bayview infill project called armstrong place by http://www.dbarchitect.com/

BTinSF
Jun 12, 2006, 9:43 PM
There is a crane on Van Ness by Lombard St., anyone know the details of this new residential project? How many stories?

I went over there this morning. The crane is, indeed, quite impressive but I don't think the building(s) will be. I couldn't find a building permit posted but the various permits I could find listed 2 contractors: Old Sod Construction and Joyce Construction. Niether appears to have a web page but both names make me think these are a couple of the Irish outfits that filled SOMA with tacky lofts. The project looks like it will take up both ends of the block (with an old 4-story building of flats remaining in the center of the block) along Van Ness. One of the lots is presently being used for parking and staging by the crew while they build on the other (where the crane is, though it reaches both lots). Judging by the foundations that were in place and the density of vertical rebar and so on, this will not be a very tall building (and these are not among the contractors like Webcor that do large construction projects in SF). I'd expect more of a midrise loft type structure in the range of 5-10 stories. If you are familiar with the condo building that was put up on the west side of Van Ness at Ellis (there's an ATT Cellular store on the ground floor, across the alley from Burger King) by one of these Irish outfits, I'd expect something similar.

fflint
Jun 15, 2006, 11:02 PM
Update:

One Rincon, Tower One will not be merely 550' as previously stated, but will actually be 641' tall.

Tower Two will also be upsized, to 541'.

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/06/14/ba_tower.jpghttp://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/06/14/ba_rincon2_056_ls.jpg

BTinSF
Jul 4, 2006, 10:52 PM
Perhaps I just missed it--someone will let me know I'm sure--but I've looked in vain for any previous discussion of this building now nearing topping-out on Fillmore St.:

http://www.urbanhdc.org/assets/fillmore/1300Fillmore.jpg

It's the Fillmore Heritage, which is scheduled to be complete next spring and will contain 80 1, 2, and 3 bedroom condos (68 market rate, 12 "affordable"), a Yoshi's Jazz Club, a Blue Mirror Restaurant and Lounge, the Jazz Heritage Center and public parking. It's part of the long-awaited Fillmore Jazz Preservation District.

I'm sure all the Bay Area folks here know the story of the Fillmore's heritage as a jazz venue and of its bulldozing in the "urban renewal" programs of the 50's and 60's. Finally, this building may mean the revival of some bit of that history. Only time will tell about that, but meanwhile, for what it is--a nice 13-story condo building, it's not a bad addition to the City IMHO and I'm glad to see it replace that vacant lot next to Safeway. At the very least, it means that nearly all the lots that have now been barren for decades have been redeveloped and the Fillmore is, to some extent anyway, healed.

EastBayHardCore
Jul 4, 2006, 11:11 PM
The area bordered by Fillmore, Geary, Webster, and Eddy desperately needs a make over. It was basically converted into on massive parking lot and is probably one of the worst looking parts of the city IMHO. I'd be interested to see this area before it was fucked over by urban renewal. Anyone have any pics?

The_Analyst
Jul 21, 2006, 5:47 AM
I had a chance to get into the city last Saturday and found time for a few shots of some of the construction sites.

300 Spear from the Bay Bridge:
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/PIX/A300Spear1.jpg

One Rincon Hill is now just creeping up above the deck of the Bay Bridge (around 3-4 stories and 50+ to go!):
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/PIX/AOneRincon1.jpg

Close up of work on the central core on the west side of One Rincon:
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/PIX/AOneRincon3.jpg

Work next to the old Transbay Terminal (at left) off Harrison:
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/PIX/A1stHarrison1.jpg

And lastly, a couple of the recently completed Mission Bay buildings. I believe this one is the UCSF student housing:
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/PIX/AMssnByUCSF1.jpg

I didn't see a sign by this one so not sure if it is UCSF or other offices:
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/PIX/AMssnBy2.jpg

And just to put the location in context, this was in the opposite direction from where I shot the above two buildings. AT&T Park looking north just off Third Street.
http://www.newcondoinvestor.com/PIX/AattPark1.jpg

EastBayHardCore
Jul 21, 2006, 5:59 AM
300 Spear has been rising at a pretty good clip ever since they finished that enormous basement. Thanks for the comprehensive coverage Analyst!

SFBoy
Jul 21, 2006, 6:53 AM
One Rincon Hill is starting to rise! :cheers:

sf_eddo
Jul 21, 2006, 6:56 AM
Does anyone else think that most Mission Bay development looks a little, oh, dot-com campus-like?

BTinSF
Jul 21, 2006, 7:51 AM
Does anyone else think that most Mission Bay development looks a little, oh, dot-com campus-like?

It looks like that, yes, but mostly I have been perplexed and saddened by the lack of height. We can all thank John Burton for that, of course. UC planned its housing to be much taller, but the good folks of Potrero Hill got (then) Sen. Burton to bully them into lowering the height: See http://pub.ucsf.edu/missionbay/building/summer_progress.php

Money quote:
To make a long story short, University and Catellus officials reached an agreement to allow UCSF to offer affordable housing at Mission Bay. And later, campus officials, led by Irene Agnos, associate vice chancellor for University Relations, reached a compromise with Senator John Burton and neighbors to scale back the height of the proposed housing complex, which partially blocked city skyline views of some neighbors.

Thanks John.

Double L
Jul 21, 2006, 7:45 PM
San Francisco is always moving! It's amazing to see.

The_Analyst
Aug 15, 2006, 4:31 AM
I suspect the locals saw this in yesterday's paper. But, for you out-a-towners, this was another interesting little article on One Rincon Hill which seems to be the most talked about skyscraper under construction around here.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/13/BAG1AKHFNN1.DTL&hw=rincon&sn=001&sc=1000

Frisco_Zig
Aug 20, 2006, 12:44 AM
SF eddo

Mission Bay looks very much like The Biotech companies in South San Francisco

Genentech has a number of 5-6 story buildings that look just like those in Mission Bay. Amgen is building there now as well and Genentech has just asked the city to greatly expand over the next few decades

The fact that South City has a 30 year lead on SF and there isn't a single private biotech company in SF is a different story that has to do with the politics and anti business climate

LWR
Sep 9, 2006, 3:24 AM
:cool: One Rincon Hill is starting to rise! :cheers:

I live on a hill, just south of the UCSF medical campus. I can't see anything rising "down there" at this point in time. (Good excuse to invest in a high-powered telescope)... OMG! L@@K at what the Luskowsky's are doing! :haha:

The_Analyst
Sep 18, 2006, 8:18 PM
Saw this today in San Francisco Business Times:

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.

coyotetrickster
Sep 18, 2006, 8:24 PM
It looks like that, yes, but mostly I have been perplexed and saddened by the lack of height. We can all thank John Burton for that, of course. UC planned its housing to be much taller, but the good folks of Potrero Hill got (then) Sen. Burton to bully them into lowering the height: See http://pub.ucsf.edu/missionbay/building/summer_progress.php

Money quote:


Thanks John.

Hey, before you give Burton all the blame, let's save some for Sue "Time for Developer's auto de fe" Hestor's role in UCSF being forced to reduce the size of the postdoc housing tower. As for the 'dot com' look of the Mission Bay, that is driven by city planning and the community agreements between Catellus, UCSF, et al.

coyotetrickster
Sep 18, 2006, 8:34 PM
SF eddo

Mission Bay looks very much like The Biotech companies in South San Francisco

Genentech has a number of 5-6 story buildings that look just like those in Mission Bay. Amgen is building there now as well and Genentech has just asked the city to greatly expand over the next few decades

The fact that South City has a 30 year lead on SF and there isn't a single private biotech company in SF is a different story that has to do with the politics and anti business climate


SF eddo, there are several private bio-tech companies in the city. Five Prime just moved into the second floor of the Gladstone Institutes research building. I can also name several more if you want. That's not to minimize the impact on the city's business environment by policy blundgeons enacted by the knee-jerk, anti-business morons on the board of supes (and you know who they are on any given day), but the growth in south city had more to do with the land available for suitable research facilities. The safety requirements for life-science research facilities (.e.g dual water systems for distilled water to use in wet experiments and separate from potable and waste water pipes. fume hoods/vents, eye wash stations, negative air pressure flows designed to function as a first-leve/immediate containment system) drive the cost of life-science buildings far beyond those of other commercial structures. Engineering fail-safe systems in high-rises is even more costly when work in those buildings involves biohazards. The Gladstone Institutes (Mission Bay) building is only six floors but it cost $185 million to build. That could buy you a nice 20/25 story high-rise, even in SF. The five/six story buildings on the Genentech campus are all for administrative/regulatory/operations. The low-rise buildings are where the actual research labs are still located.

coyotetrickster
Sep 18, 2006, 8:38 PM
I went over there this morning. The crane is, indeed, quite impressive but I don't think the building(s) will be. I couldn't find a building permit posted but the various permits I could find listed 2 contractors: Old Sod Construction and Joyce Construction. Niether appears to have a web page but both names make me think these are a couple of the Irish outfits that filled SOMA with tacky lofts. The project looks like it will take up both ends of the block (with an old 4-story building of flats remaining in the center of the block) along Van Ness. One of the lots is presently being used for parking and staging by the crew while they build on the other (where the crane is, though it reaches both lots). Judging by the foundations that were in place and the density of vertical rebar and so on, this will not be a very tall building (and these are not among the contractors like Webcor that do large construction projects in SF). I'd expect more of a midrise loft type structure in the range of 5-10 stories. If you are familiar with the condo building that was put up on the west side of Van Ness at Ellis (there's an ATT Cellular store on the ground floor, across the alley from Burger King) by one of these Irish outfits, I'd expect something similar.

Isn't the Van Ness Corridor zoned for up to 13 stories. Symphony Towers, over by your complex, BT, is supposed to be 13 floors (14 or 12 on the elevator call plate???)

fflint
Oct 3, 2006, 1:34 AM
The InterContinental Hotel (888 Howard): 320', 31 stories

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/10/03/ba_fire_1.jpg

(Please pardon our raging fire)

vizvalleykid
Oct 3, 2006, 4:15 AM
anyone know of the construction projects down at arthur and geneva they have a huge crane biggest ive seen in that area.

J Church
Oct 9, 2006, 8:12 PM
Isn't the Van Ness Corridor zoned for up to 13 stories.

It's 130' between roughly McAllister and California. BT mentioned the Galaxy Theater project at Sutter; that would be 13 stories. Of course the new Cal Pacific hospital between Geary and Post (the Cathedral Hill Hotel site) would be 330'. Interestingly, that's in the Western Addition redevelopment zone so it wouldn't require rezoning, although the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors will no doubt weigh in at some point.

northbay
Oct 14, 2006, 5:02 AM
stopped by the citadel for omanju (japanese sweets)

then i went for a walk with the girl to take a look at some of the construction sites. sorry about the poor quality, i just used my cellphone cam:

---
300 spear
http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/6027/1013061600zu8.jpg

same pic, but with my girlfriend caught playing with herself
http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/3161/1013061601if5.jpg

close-up, the glass is sexxxxyyy
http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/5024/1013061604ko8.jpg

getttin hiiiiiiggggghhh
http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/9762/1013061606pz7.jpg

peek-a-boo
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/9535/1013061616gz9.jpg

---

one rincon
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/6716/1013061612jq4.jpg

i like this pic better cuz it has a 2nd crane
http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/1325/1013061613cn8.jpg

---

the new jewish muesum
http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/646/1013061632wf4.jpg

hi-tech parking meter (i know, kinda random, but interesting)
http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/6131/1013061618le9.jpg


enjoy.

colemonkee
Oct 14, 2006, 6:30 PM
Wow. Both those buildings sprouted up rather quickly. Did you notice work on the second towers of either project?