PDA

View Full Version : SAN FRANCISCO | Treasure Island / Sun Tower


Pages : [1] 2

J Church
Nov 9, 2005, 8:05 PM
i should probably wait to post this, as we don't have renderings yet or even very specific details. but a new redevelopment plan was announced yesterday for the island, which is in the center of san francisco bay midway between the city and oakland--and it has the potential to be one of the most innovative and exciting projects anywhere in the world.

some background:

the island is manmade, built for the 1939 world's fair and meant for conversion to an airport after--but then the war intervened, and it became a naval base. the base was closed several years ago, and for now, base housing is being rented out and a hangar is being leased for film production.

the island is 400 acres and is connected by causeway to the natural island of yerba buena, through which the bay bridge tunnels between its two spans:

http://thedude.com/images2/treasure_island.jpg (very large image)

so, the plan. the idea is to create an essentially car-free, self-sustaining new town on the island. the plan would cluster 5,500 housing units in 140 acres around a new ferry landing. this would require a half-dozen or so towers, including an 'iconic' skyscraper that might be as tall as 50 stories--a 500-foot highrise in the middle of san francisco bay. the rest of the island could then be used for organic gardens, for wind turbines (the island can get quite windy), and for wetlands that could be used for wastewater treatment. an ecological--and urban--dream of a place.

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2005/11/08/mn_plan.jpg

how likely it this? it'll have to navigate a couple of years' worth of hearings and studies, there will no doubt be opposition, but the developer is ready to go.

Towers, farm seen for Treasure Island
Self-sustaining neighborhood of 5,500 residences proposed

John King, Chronicle Urban Design Writer
Tuesday, November 8, 2005

The would-be developers of Treasure Island in the middle of San Francisco Bay have unveiled a startling new image for the island -- one that includes 20 acres of farmland and at least six residential towers.

The plan calls for as many as 5,500 housing units on the west side of the island facing downtown San Francisco -- nearly twice the number previously proposed. Most of them would be within a 10-minute walk of a new ferry terminal across from the city's historic Ferry Building. And 260 of the island's 400 acres would become public open space, including a tidal marsh cut into the northeast corner of the manmade island.

The island's development team has changed as well. It is still led by Kenwood Investments, which includes political lobbyist Darius Anderson, allied with housing giant Lennar Corp. But this summer, Kenwood added another equity partner: Wilson Meany Sullivan, which led the much-praised restoration of the Ferry Building.

On Monday, Chris Meany of Wilson Meany Sullivan described the changes as part of a larger push for a project shaped by environmental principles.

"You need a large number of households to support the services that a community requires," Meany said.

This includes the estimated $20 million cost to cut a ferry terminal into the west side of the island, instead of using a pier on the Oakland side inherited from the U.S. Navy. "Moving the ferry to the west side unlocks the rest of the island," Meany said. "Suddenly, it's an extension of San Francisco rather than a distant part of the bay."

The scheme, which will be shown Wednesday to the Treasure Island Development Authority, still has details to be filled in. A slender residential tower is proposed at the ferry terminal, for instance, but no height is specified, other than it probably would be at least 40 stories. North of the terminal is a string of neighborhoods with parks with views of the city and several towers in the 15- to 20-story range -- but the exact layout and heights are being refined.

Development team members say they will present a full plan next month to the Treasure Island authority, a mayor-appointed body that manages the island. If San Francisco's Board of Supervisors gives initial approval next summer to an agreement outlining what can be built as well as the financial structure of the deal between the city and the developers, the next stage would be an environmental review and final development plan -- a process likely to take at least two years.

The new proposal responds to criticism from environmental activists that the prior plan was too suburban and car-reliant. The activists also argued that a self-contained residential neighborhood could not work with the 2,800 housing units envisioned by developers.

The changes also reflect a political reality: The redevelopment of Treasure Island has been bumpier than anyone predicted when the Navy transferred control of the former military base to San Francisco in 1997.

The authority created by Mayor Willie Brown awarded development rights to both Treasure and Yerba Buena islands in 2003 to Treasure Island Community Development, a team organized by Anderson, a prominent Democratic lobbyist who had raised money for past political campaigns of Brown and then-Gov. Gray Davis. Anderson since has held at least one fundraising event for Mayor Gavin Newsom.

More recently, management of the island took on aspects of a soap opera when Newsom appointed then-Supervisor Tony Hall to serve as the authority's executive director in 2004 -- and then watched approvingly as the board fired Hall last month after charges of financial mismanagement. Hall responded with claims that the island's developers were receiving a "sweetheart deal."

In this context, any proposal to increase the project's size could be attacked as a giveaway to well-connected developers. But Newsom administration officials say the island needs density to thrive. By comparison, there are few services available for the residents of the roughly 1,000 apartments that now exist.

"Treasure Island is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to embrace sustainability -- and sustainable in this context doesn't just mean organic farming or solar and wind power," said Michael Cohen, the mayor's director of base re-use and development. "It also means residents don't have to go back to San Francisco for everything -- and that requires a critical mass of people" to support shops as well as alternative forms of transportation such as the ferries.

The "green" aspects of the new proposal include features that, if approved and followed through on, would be rare in urban settings.

For example, the high winds that routinely buffet the island would be converted into assets by erecting rows of wind turbines on several stretches of the island. Behind each row of turbines -- designed so as not to harm passing birds -- trees would be planted to deflect breezes within residential areas.

The proposed 20 acres of organic farmland in the center of the island would function both as a food source and an educational opportunity. The amount of land could raise enough food for 2,000 people, as well as be a place to show inner-city youth how agriculture works.

Even the towers are proposed to be designed to minimize the street-level impact of wind and maximize that amount of sunlight that could be captured on photovoltaic systems integrated into buildings.

Not all details have changed from prior plans.

The proposal maintains a 100-foot-deep parkland along most of the bay, as required by the State Lands Commission, as well as shopping and restaurants and a conference center facing Yerba Buena Island. The 36-acre federally operated Job Corps facility to train youth would remain.

Also, 30 percent of all units would be required to be sold or rented at below-market prices.

Dean Macris, the city's planning director, was shown the proposal Friday.

"The basics are all good. The proof of the pudding will be the next stage," Macris said. "They need to create an experience on the island that is different enough to attract people from around the region."

Redesign of Treasure Island unveiled
Revised plans intended to be denser and ‘Green’

By Emily Fancher
Staff Writer

A revised vision for Treasure Island imagines an urban neighborhood with a handful of high-rise towers, hip restaurants and boutique hotels that is also a model for environmental sustainability with an organic farm, renewal energy and limited use of cars.

The bold new plan for the 400-acre former naval base unveiled Monday calls for more housing on less land — a stark difference from the more suburban plans originally proposed for the island. It’s also a dramatic contrast to the island’s current landscape dotted with aging, Navy-built housing, weed-strewn lots, and a drab wastewater treatment plant.

City officials are currently negotiating for the Navy to transfer roughly 450 acres on Treasure Island and Yerba Buena Island to The City for redevelopment. The Navy closed the base on the islands in 1993.

Together, the islands are often described as some of the best real estate in the world with commanding views of San Francisco and offer a blank slate for building where a new kind of “green” development can be imagined. The redevelopment plans for the islands released last year called for environmentally sustainable practices including using green building techniques, creating wetlands and harnessing solar energy.

The new plan released Monday proposes denser housing clustered around the ferry terminal transit hub and a potential doubling of housing to up 5500 units — a response to critics who argued the islands need be self-sufficient, with enough residents to support transit and vital services such as a grocery market. It also reflects the need for the development to be a regional destination that draws visitors to its parks, restaurants, stores, hotels and marina.

Howard Strassner of the Sierra Club’s San Francisco chapter said the old plan paid lip service to sustainability, but was essentially a suburban development. In a leap from suburban to urban, the revised proposal places 90 percent of the housing within a 10-minute walk of the ferry terminal to limit car use.

“The plan has been pretty radically reconceived in a positive way to really imagine a kind of utopian project,” said Adi Shamir, dean of undergraduate studies at California College of the Arts, who saw the plan last week.

But whether the revamped plan will satisfy the environmental community’s high hopes for the island remains to be seen.

The plan will be presented to the Treasure Island Development Authority board Wednesday and the public will continue to have a chance to weigh in over the coming months and years. Many details from final building heights to building designs are still in flux.

Though construction could begin by mid-2008, the project will likely take over a decade to complete.

“We’re very excited about what we’ve done,” said Jay Wallace, project manager for the developer. “This is a fabulous step.”

Newnan_Eric
Nov 11, 2005, 3:34 PM
It sounds as though they’ve taken into consideration a lot of the concepts put forward by UC-Berkley students in their design. There was an article in the Chronicle in June that discussed this. I have attached it below.

I’m glad that the student’s ideas are gaining traction. It validates what they are doing in their classwork. It reminds me of the biggest new thing we’ve got going on in Atlanta – the Beltline. This idea started from a Architecture graduate student’s thesis.

- - - - - - - - - -

If a green utopia on Treasure Island sounds far-fetched, dreamers have a plan

By John King - San Francisco Chronicle - Thursday, June 2, 2005

Right now, San Francisco has a rare chance to do something that's historic and audacious: create the world's first green urban neighborhood on our very own Treasure Island.

Instead of a windswept former naval base with poor access to the Bay Bridge, 403 human-made acres could be a community where 20,000 people live mostly automobile-free lives. Energy would be generated by windmills; shops and parks would be within walking distance. Downtown San Francisco would be a 10-minute ferry ride away.

Far-fetched? Absolutely, and a long shot as well. There's a developer in place, but there also are state regulations and well-intentioned constraints at every turn.

But if ever there were a time to dream, it's this week, when San Francisco plays host to the World Environment Conference, and the notion of green cities is high on the agenda. On Treasure Island, environmentalism and urbanism could fuse as never before -- a vibrant community that creates its own energy, treats its own waste and has a transit system so convenient that cars are superfluous.

And before you blanch at the thought of 20,000 or more people living where 1,400 now reside, consider this: Environmental activists are the ones pushing us all to think big.

"There's the opportunity and the necessity to develop Treasure Island in a way that exemplifies the idea of sustainable development," says Eve Bach of Arc Ecology, a San Francisco environmental group. "To support the kinds of services you need on an island requires a lot of people."

That's a far cry from the plan that has evolved in procedural fits and starts over the past decade.

The current scenario calls for 2,600 housing units in four new neighborhoods, with 200 more tucked into the wooded natural hills of Yerba Buena Island to the south. There'd be attached homes modeled on traditional San Francisco neighborhoods, modest towers near a new ferry terminal on the island's southeastern cove, even an "eco-village" with community gardens looking toward Berkeley.

As for open space, start with a 350-foot-wide park facing San Francisco and a 250-foot-wide counterpart looking toward the East Bay. Add ball fields as part of a recreational strip in the middle of the island. The finale: Treasure Island's northern 72 acres would be a "nature park" with ponds and wetlands to help treat the island's storm water as well as provide natural habitat.

Plus -- to pay for the above -- there'd be hotels and conference space and boutique shopping near the cove.

"Here's an incredible opportunity to present something of respite to the Bay Area -- parks and wetlands -- but also a place of vitality and life," says Karen Alschuler, a principal at SMWM, the planning firm working for Treasure Island Community Development, the developer selected by the city to convert the former naval base.

Give Alschuler and her team credit: It's a good plan as far as it goes, especially the efforts to make the open space a functioning part of the larger environment.

But it's not the stuff dreams are made of.

That's because every line of every drawing is shaded by pragmatic and political considerations. The cap on housing comes from a citizen advisory group that concluded work in 1996, the year before the U.S. Navy closed its base. The wide bands of parkland along the shore are a dictate of the State Lands Commission, which controls what is done on filled land along the bay.

There's also a chunk in the middle of the island that's off-limits to any change at all because it houses the Job Corps Center, a federal program that trains at-risk youth in fields such as restaurant work and the building trades.

Navigating all this favors endurance, not imagination. Developers study the checklist -- such as a legal agreement with the Board of Supervisors that could come this fall -- and steer clear of anything bold that might raise a red flag to potential opponents.

But sometimes bold is what's called for -- perhaps right here and perhaps right now.

What could be is glimpsed in a set of visions crafted by urban design students last semester at UC Berkeley's College of Environmental Design. Professor Elizabeth Macdonald led six teams through a study of Treasure Island, and then had them draw up plans for a community shaped by "ecologically responsible approaches to transportation, energy, water and waste disposal issues."

"There's timeliness -- decisions are being made that will be set in stone," Macdonald says. "Treasure Island offers a great opportunity to really create a showcase."

While the student plans differ in specifics, certain themes are as pervasive as the island's stiff afternoon winds.

Some feature lines of windmills to capture those gusts and put them to use. Most move the ferry terminal so that it faces downtown San Francisco; visibility is priceless. Street surfaces are designed to filter runoff into the ground, not into sewers.

More dramatically, the housing units don't include parking. Cars are kept off most of the island, allowing for narrow streets used by bicycles and the island's own shuttle system.

And here's the grand counterintuitive leap: The student schemes call for a population much larger than the 7,000 residents now envisioned. Not to give the developer a windfall, but to make everything else work.

Ferries and shuttles, for instance. Developers promise to make them convenient, but it's hard to build frequent service around day-trippers and a small population scattered across the island.

Or what about a place to shop? The official plan calls for a cluster of shops and residents in what it dubs Ferry Plaza Village. But that's at the southeast end of the island away from most of the residents -- and the development team concedes that the approved population isn't large enough to attract neighborhood-focused retailers.

"Once you start thinking about a car-free island, you start thinking about types of places that are needed so people don't need to leave -- a serious grocery store, for instance," Macdonald says.

Push the imagination further. If Treasure Island has the systems in place to handle its own energy, its own water and its own waste, suddenly a job corps there makes sense. Corps members could learn to operate the green infrastructure -- a possible ticket to more lucrative jobs than, say, learning how to prepare salads.

One official who has seen the student work is Mark Palmer, green building coordinator for the city's Department of the Environment. He's intrigued.

"The island really does need to have a density to support all the lifestyle features we'd like," Palmer says. "I hope we have an opportunity to reopen the density and population discussion, because it deserves another look. "

Yes, all this has a utopian glow. It can also be sniped at from a dozen directions. Won't the ferries cause pollution? Won't the windmills kill birds? Why not make the whole island a park?

Even this starry-eyed columnist is skeptical that an auto-free island could exist. It's hard to imagine thousands of households comfortable with the notion that a car is something you rent every month or two for a getaway to Big Sur.

But one thing I know for certain: The only credible way to ask people to give up automotive convenience is to surround them with everything they want.

Such as a good supermarket. Movie theaters. More than one restaurant to choose from when you don't feel like cooking after a day at work. All knit together so tightly that it's an enticing alternative to any big-city neighborhood you can name.

Arc Ecology's Bach, for instance, outlines a scenario where neighborhood life revolves around the link to the mainland.

"Imagine if the ferry terminal became the place to pick up mail, like the post office in Carmel," Bach says. "The place where you buy groceries, where you locate the drop-in childcare, where there's space for community activities ... you can build in all of these things."

Indeed you can. All you have to do is dream.

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b135/e_thomasus/SF%20Treasure%20Island/TreasureIslandstudentrendering.jpg
A plan crafted by UC Berkeley students shows a cluster of windmills on the island. Illustration by Justin Doull, Aditi Rao and Jeff Williams

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b135/e_thomasus/SF%20Treasure%20Island/TreasureIslandgreenspace.jpg
A Treasure Island Community Development plan shows a central greensward, with a view of San Francisco. Illustration by Chris Grubbs courtesy of SMWM

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b135/e_thomasus/SF%20Treasure%20Island/TreasureIslandredevelopmentplan.jpg
Chronicle Graphic based on an illustration done by Conger Moss Guillard Landscape Architecture.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An island of treasures

Redevelopment plans for Treasure Island include 2,600 housing units, extensive open space, preservation of several former naval buildings and a visitor-oriented commercial district with hotels along the island's southern shore. While details of the plan are likely to be revised further at a community workshop on June 14, below is the current version.


Eco-village: 475 housing units, including lofts, would be designed on so- called green building principles around a central garden.

Westside Park: This low-rise neighborhood would contain 607 townhouses and flats in what developers call a "typical San Francisco fabric."

Cityside: These 646 units line up to face spectacular views of San Francisco, with the possibility of one or two mid-rise towers.

Clipper Cove: Another 646 units would be clustered near the proposed ferry terminal and might include the island's tallest buildings.

Ferry Landing Village: This area could include hotels, a conference center, and shopping areas similar to Fourth Street in Berkeley, along with a 400-slip marina.

North shore: This large open space would include wetlands that double as part of the island's water reclamation system.

Source: Treasure Island Community Development, LLC.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If a green utopia on Treasure Island sounds far-fetched, dreamers have a plan

J Church
Nov 11, 2005, 6:33 PM
^ beltline grew out of a class project? not bad.

Agent Orange
Nov 23, 2005, 5:10 AM
Very intriguing project, I hope this happens.

Then again, I'd always imagined that Treasure Island would serve as a magnificent location for legislative assembly buildings if California or the West Coast were to secede. Oh well, auto-free, high density, eco-friendly utopia works as well.

Raraavis
Nov 23, 2005, 7:56 PM
Sounds great, maybe I can qualify for one of the low cost units.

Car-free is an interesting concept considering the bay bridge runs thousands of cars over the island every day. I think you may need parking for residents but nobody should need cars to get around the island.

J Church
Dec 15, 2005, 7:04 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2005/12/15/dd_johnkingcolumn.jpg

It's got high-rises, it's got organic gardens and it just might be a model for cities everywhere
John King
Thursday, December 15, 2005

Whether or not it ever gets built, the most intriguing development proposal in America right now involves our very own Treasure Island.

It's got organic gardens and a 60-story tower, wind farms and glitzy hotels. Restaurants beckon beneath an enormous glass roof that doubles as a solar panel. You don't need a car because everything essential is within walking distance, including a ferry straight to downtown San Francisco.

And here's the most intriguing thing of all: This urban utopia is being pushed by one of the largest developers in the United States.

That's why I hope that as San Francisco examines what Lennar Corp. says it wants to do with this 393-acre artificial island from the 1930s, cynicism doesn't totally cloud the fact that we're being shown an unprecedented vision of urban growth -- one crafted in response to the Bay Area's odd blend of urbanity and environmentalism.

Yes, the revised plan trotted out last month -- followed by models and polished images this week -- packs an intense amount of development onto an island that few outsiders have visited since the Golden Gate International Exposition of the late '30s.

There'd be as many as 5,500 housing units on an island that now has 750 apartments built by the U.S. Navy before it closed a base there in 1997. There would be two hotels, a conference center and a commercial district near a proposed ferry terminal sliced into the west side of the island.

There also will be five residential towers near the ferry. The model includes a central high-rise twisting 60 stories into the air, though Anthony Flanagan, president of Lennar's urban division, stresses that everything being shown is conceptual: "What we're trying to define is the character of the community, not the specific architecture."

So far, this is pretty much what you'd expect from a developer involved in five other base conversions across the country, including Mare Island in Vallejo and San Francisco's Hunters Point Shipyard.

But look at the project's green wrapping.

The northeastern half of the island is treated, in the plan, as a landscaped world apart, a 120-acre swath with ball fields and marshes as well as conventional parkland and 20 acres reserved for organic farming.

The scheme has wind turbines along the shore, and streets mapped to deflect that wind. Towers would come with photovoltaic panels to generate electricity for the island; so would a glass canopy atop the open-air retail zone near the ferry.

Most ambitious of all, 90 percent of the housing is clustered within a 10-minute walk to the ferry. Developers would be required to subsidize ferry service from the day the units open -- say 2009 in the most optimistic scenario -- so that new residents wouldn't feel they need to own a car that can't force its way onto the Bay Bridge during rush hour anyway.

Why push sustainable notions to such an extent? Because Lennar and co-developer Kenwood Investments finally realized where they are.

The Bay Area is a region where many of us think we can have it all -- scenery to rival Yosemite and neighborhoods that make New York seem dull. Food grown by nearby farmers, and urban culture at its most cutting edge.

With that parochial perspective comes a sense of entitlement that says if developers want to do business here, they'd better pay attention to what we want. In this case, "we" are the environmental advocates and planning watchdogs who have spent years saying a site this unique deserves a unique future.

And they're absolutely right. If large-scale growth is allowed to replace the remnants of the military base that closed in 1997, it had better be special. Otherwise, let the island's 20 million cubic feet of black sand filter back into the bay from whence it came.

What Lennar and Kenwood sought to build until last month wasn't special at all; it was quasi-suburbia. It was fashioned to win approval by avoiding controversy, but it had no spark.

The new approach is a profound change, especially the $20 million ferry terminal: Lennar first wanted to use an existing pier that faces Oakland. And the shift in the development approach is a tribute to critics who lobbied for a better plan, rather than simply saying no.

None of which means that what is on the table should now be rubber-stamped.

Here are two examples of things that need to be looked at more. Seismic issues can't be glossed over, certainly if high-rise condos are supposed to be attached to submerged bedrock closest to Yerba Buena Island. And even if towers make sense, consider this: The central high-rise would be taller than the nearby towers of the Bay Bridge. Aesthetic rationale aside, should a private enclave take precedence over public monuments?

The new Treasure Island proposals need intense scrutiny during the next few months as more details are released, and before San Francisco's Board of Supervisors votes on whether to endorse the broad outlines of the plan. It might turn out that this shining Xanadu is pie in the sky.

But what we have now is a starting point, a fascinating attempt to strike a balance between environmental principles and big-city life. If the Bay Area can find a way to make it work, the entire nation will pay attention.

http://sfgov.org/treasureisland

jsoto3
Dec 16, 2005, 1:48 AM
Looking good!

http://sfgov.org/site/treasureisland_page.asp?id=21914

Revised Land Use and Open Space Plan
Presented by Treasure Island Community Development

December 2005
Part 1 (PDF) (http://sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/treasureisland/Treasure_Island_Development_Plan/Pages01_22TIDA_20051214Final.pdf)
Part 2 (PDF) (http://sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/treasureisland/Treasure_Island_Development_Plan/Pages23_35TIDA_20051214Final.pdf)
Part 3 (PDF) (http://sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/treasureisland/Treasure_Island_Development_Plan/Pages36_51TIDA_20051214Final.pdf)
Part 4 (PDF) (http://sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/treasureisland/Treasure_Island_Development_Plan/Pages52_endTIDA_20051214Final.pdf)

D-nice
Dec 16, 2005, 10:04 PM
looks good, Use to live on the base housing out there best views of the prison and san fran, I thought that island was sinking?

phillyskyline
Dec 20, 2005, 5:01 PM
Interesting concept.... But if there is an emergency how are people living on the island going to get out if there are no cars?

J Church
Dec 20, 2005, 5:22 PM
d-nice, the island will need to be shored up.

phillyskyline, cars would be perfectly legal. there would just be less need for them.

that said:

http://www.watertransit.org/images/map.gif

your best line of defense in a disaster, as proven during the 1989 earthquake and 9/11. this is our new WTA system, now partly funded and very much in development.

brandonpdx
Dec 22, 2005, 1:09 AM
that is too cool.

one other famous resident of Treasure Island was the late Jim Morrison. He lived there as a kid when his dad was in the Navy.

navyweaxguy
Mar 24, 2006, 6:28 PM
I lived there also for a few months back in '94. This is an ambitious plan. I tell ya though... they would have to greatly improve the mass transit availability to the island. I remember waiting up to two hours for a bus over to San Fran...

The penthouse on that 40+ story res tower would have the #1 view of the skyline.

J Church
Mar 24, 2006, 7:20 PM
Ah, the 108. It's much more frequent now--every 15 mins peak, no worse than 45 mins in the middle of the night. But under the plan there'd be ferries every few minutes.

navyweaxguy
Mar 24, 2006, 7:59 PM
Very nice then... now if it was just a tad warmer in july/aug... :) Still couldn't take my heart away from home.. but very very cool.

J Church
Mar 24, 2006, 9:28 PM
Actually, the way they're dealing with the wind is clever--notice how the "east-west" streets are at a funky angle?

jamesinclair
Mar 25, 2006, 6:24 AM
Hadnt seen this before, very interesting.

Don B.
Mar 25, 2006, 3:04 PM
This is a cool and rare opportunity. I'd live there if I wouldn't freeze my balls off, especially if it is that windy.

Of course, I'd freeze anywhere in the Bay area, unless I were inland where it is hotter. :)

--don

danvillain
Apr 1, 2006, 8:10 AM
Of course, I'd freeze anywhere in the Bay area, unless I were inland where it is hotter. :)
where, tracy? ;)


***
an excerpt from another piece on the TI plan, this one with a more critical take [for the full article--and some purty renderings--click the ellipsis below]:


> PLACE | SF 03 17 06
WHERE'S THE TREASURE?
Morris Newman

Treasure Island has nearly every necessary feature to make it the most exciting new residential development in San Francisco. This 403-acre island just a few minutes north of the city's Ferry Terminal has superb views of both downtown San Francisco and the other bay islands. It has dozens of acres of greenfields and an environmentally sensitive coastline, to make it a regional eco-attraction. And the island, with its 125-acre companion,Yerbe Buena, are close enough to the city to become a self-contained, functional neighborhood.

And for a city in perpetual need of new housing, Treasure Island joins Mission Bay as San Francisco's two largest home-building opportunities.

What could be lacking? Start with a coherent urban design.

... (http://www.theslatinreport.com/story.jsp?StoryName=treasure.txt)

BTinSF
Jun 12, 2006, 4:42 PM
I lived there also for a few months back in '94. This is an ambitious plan. I tell ya though... they would have to greatly improve the mass transit availability to the island. I remember waiting up to two hours for a bus over to San Fran...



They have improved it some already. When the Navy owned and ran the place it was served by AC Transit, the bus system in Alameda County (Oakland), by busses crossing the Bay Bridge on their way into SF. When SF took it over, direct service from Muni (SF Municipal Railway), by busses just going to and from the island, began and, since it's actually part of SF, that makes more sense and I think the service will be better.

However, the redevelopment plan includes extensive ferry service, including a new ferry dock, and the intention would be that ferries would be the primary transportation mode for getting to and from downtown.

BTinSF
Jun 12, 2006, 4:46 PM
This is a cool and rare opportunity. I'd live there if I wouldn't freeze my balls off, especially if it is that windy.

Of course, I'd freeze anywhere in the Bay area, unless I were inland where it is hotter. :)

--don

You'd get used to it. I have lived in SF since 1982 but after I retired in 2001 I started spending the NoCal rainy season in Tucson. So now half the year I'm in SF, half in Tucson. I look forward to both: warm sunny winters in Arizona, cool, pleasant summers in NoCal. I can keep my windows open all the time in both. No need for heat or A/C in either. And it's fun to drive a motorcycle, scooter or to ride a bike in both.

Fusey
Jun 13, 2006, 4:42 PM
This sounds really sweet! I had a friend who lived on Treasure Island a few years ago and all I could think about was the potential it had.

BTinSF
Jun 13, 2006, 11:01 PM
This sounds really sweet! I had a friend who lived on Treasure Island a few years ago and all I could think about was the potential it had.

Actually, I would NOT want to live there. Aside from the isolation and the constant wind, I would be concerned about earthquakes. I worked there at the time of the 1989 quake. There was serious liquifaction with mud "boils" and geysers, the pipes supplying water, gas and power from the "mainland" broke and so on. I know that buildings built now would be built much more solidly than the structures that were there in 1989 (some of which suffered surprising damage), but the land itself is a question mark in a bigger quake like 1906.

FourOneFive
Aug 28, 2006, 4:48 AM
you know, no one ever posted this article from may.

CASTLES ON THE SAND
Is the multilayered development plan for Treasure Island a vision for ecotopia or a pipe dream?
- Sam Whiting
Sunday, May 21, 2006

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/05/21/cm_treasure.jpg

The Treasure Island Chapel has no congregation so there won't be a displacement when the church is underwater.

In the new and improved model for the redundant Navy base, the ground underfoot will be notched out so a ferry can come right through the Avenue of the Palms, the church parking lot and garden, and dock up against what is now Avenue B. In the morning, after a 10-minute float, San Franciscans will debark for a day in the new regional park while organic farmers whistle off to work the back 40. In the evening, thousands of new Treasure Islanders will debark into a retail plaza and meander home along paths to a series of nine neighborhood parks running parallel to the Great Lawn along the western shore.

Each neighborhood will be defined by a low residential tower, between 15 and 18 stories. There will be some affordable housing among the 5,500 units, and, of course, much more of the unaffordable kind, most prominently in the skinny, twisty 60-story condo tower that will stand and sway just to the north of the historic crescent-shaped Administration Building.

"The idea is to make at least one tower, just like Venice, that marks the arrival point for the ferry, sort of, like a campanile," says architect Craig Hartman, whose campanile will be twice the height of that other Campanile, the nonresidential one over in Berkeley.

The shimmering new 600-foot campanile doesn't yet have a name. But it ought to be called the Sun Tower for two reasons. One, it will be built of glass embedded with photovoltaics facing south to capture solar power. Two, it is designed to evoke the pointy 400-foot Tower of the Sun from the Golden Gate International Exposition held here in 1939.

Built specifically for that purpose, as a New Deal make-work project, the island is essentially a 400-acre sand box. A rectangular rock seawall was filled with sand and gravel dredged from the bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, according to the city government Web site. The name Treasure Island comes from the assumption that there was gold in the dredgings.

Seventy-seven years later, speculators are still searching for the gold on Treasure Island. Three years ago the Treasure Island Development Authority, a state redevelopment agency that oversees the property, selected the Treasure Island Community Development, a partnership of investors, to come up with a plan. A year ago the consortium hired Hartman, 56, a partner at Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. His notable contributions to the San Francisco skyline are the 30-story 101 Second Street office tower and the 42-story St. Regis Museum Tower next to the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.

A downtown tower is, of course, necessitated by the lack of horizontal building space. Treasure Island will be nothing but horizontal building space. The three historic structures at the entrance -- the Pan Am Clipper terminal and the two seaplane hangars behind it -- will remain. The sprawl of Navy housing, school, theater, bowling alley, gymnasium and all the other boarded-up Dust Bowl detritus will be "deconstructed," meaning scraped and recycled. And that is how they will leave it.

Hartman's plan is to manufacture density by going vertical. Cram all the people onto one-quarter of the island and turn the other 300 acres into parkland, marshland, farmland. It will be a mini Chicago -- a flat place on the water with Modernist skyscrapers shooting up from the crops.

"The practical thing is to use height to make it less consumptive of land and to make it dense and focused to the ferry terminal," Hartman says.

The vast north and east shores will be open space surrounding a 20-acre organic farm where produce for the island's restaurants and markets will be grown. "It's not really meant to be a commercial enterprise," Hartman says. "It will grow enough greens to supply 2,000 people." With what? "It depends on how much salad you eat."

There will be no industry on the island unless the people who live in the tower condominiums happen to be farmers, descending from the 60th floor in overalls and work boots.

Everything will be within a 10-minute walk from the new ferry terminal. That convenience alone will cost $20 million. The existing battleship pier on the east side -- part of a previous ferry plan -- is of no interest. Nobody wants to ride a ferry all the way around to the back, when the action is on the front, Hartman says.

Treasure Island is within the boundaries of the city and county of San Francisco, the point of view is that it is just another San Francisco neighborhood, no more isolated than the avenues. And a lot less isolated if the ferry runs, say, every 15 minutes on that 10-minute run from the Ferry Building to the nearest point on the island.

Cars will be de-emphasized on the island. There will be one parking slot per residential unit, but only half of those will be in the neighborhood. The others will be stored away. There won't be any boxy garages in front of houses and there won't be any curbs in pedestrian areas because there won't be any cars.

If that doesn't cure the urge to drive, there is the neck-straining, stress-inducing merge onto the Bay Bridge from the island, flooring it from the stop sign to build up enough speed to avoid a whiplashing rear-ender.

"The intent here is to make this a new national model for what a wholly sustainable community can be about," Hartman says. "It involves the land, it involves a response to the microclimate." Anybody who has stood out there in the western wind would probably rate it a "macroclimate," one more thing it has in common with Chicago. But Hartman has a plan for that. He's going to switch the entire orientation -- streets and all -- a quarter turn counterclockwise so his new neighborhood will face south instead of west and south.

"If you turn it 45 degrees, you can actually buffer the wind," Hartman says. "You open up the island to the sun and you also are blocking the wind if you arrange the buildings and landscape right."

Even if he manages to redirect the wind and direct the ferry into the west side, there is still the little problem that has been on the Bay Area collective mind the past month or so. That is the likelihood of a 100-year earthquake.

Before any infrastructure is built, the island's rock seawall will be strengthened with a system of rock piles anchored in bedrock. The low and mid-rise buildings will be anchored by conventional pilings. It gets trickier with the skyscrapers, but Uri Eliahu, president of Engeo, the geotechnical consulting firm on the project, has a simple system for that.

In order to anchor a 60-story tower, "you build a 130-story tower and pound it down into the ground," he says. Eliahu is joking, but not by much. The towers will be anchored by a system of drilled case piles just like the structural supports on the new east span of the Bay Bridge, he says.

"A hole is drilled in the sand and this steel pipe is advanced to whatever depth," he says. "All the dirt from inside the pipe is removed. All the reinforcing steel is placed into this casement."

The tallest towers will be glass wrapped with an "exo-skeleton" of X braces, like the Alcoa Building downtown, or the Sears Tower in Chicago. If a major quake hits, the towers will be standing, even if they are standing in the water. In any case, Treasure Island will be no worse off, "and probably better off," Hartman says, than the towers at Mission Bay or South Beach, or for that matter, the Skidmore office at One Front Street, on the corner of Market.

There is a scale model of the plan up on the 24th floor, and standing behind it, Hartman sees it for what it is. "This is a massive, massive project compared to anything you'll see almost anywhere else," he says, and that includes the new Beijing Finance Street he designed, with 25 buildings currently under construction.

To get a handle on a 600-foot skyscraper, it is 50 feet taller than the One Rincon Hill tower already approved to become the tallest residential tower west of the Mississippi, according to estimates. If the Sun Tower goes to its full height, it will render One Rincon Hill a short-lived record holder, like Mark McGwire's 70 home runs in 1998, three seasons before Barry Bonds out-enhanced his performance with 73. "It's a creative scheme. Introducing high-rises here makes a certain amount of sense," says Dean Macris, planning director for the city and county of San Francisco. "When you have a flat piece of earth, the introduction of views improves the quality of life."

Behind the Sun Tower will be "the three sisters," about a third as tall. In all, there will be 13 to 15 towers ranging from 15 to 60 stories. The population may be 12,000, about the same as in Hartman's own commuter town of Larkspur.

"We're not attempting to build a town. This would just be a neighborhood," says Anthony Flanagan, president of the Urban Development Division of Lennar, a national home building company, which is part of the team.

Town or neighborhood. Either way, where will the buyers and renters come from?

"We're basically going to be providing different types of products that will appeal to different parts of the market," Flanagan says. "Some people may want to be on the ground, because maybe they have kids. Maybe they want a larger floor plan. Others may love high-rise living and want to have a great view of the city and would be willing to pay for that."

Flanagan also believes people will be willing to pay Four Seasons prices for a luxury hotel with a view back at the city, so it is being added to the mix. For the lower end, 15 percent of the 5,500 units will be rentals. The developers will shoulder the cost of all new infrastructure, from sewer lines on up. Flanagan won't even estimate what it will cost beyond "hundreds of millions of dollars."

If all goes perfectly, it will be under way by 2009, to honor the 80th anniversary of the world's fair. But there is a lot that can go un-perfectly, starting with the height of the Sun Tower, which may be knocked down to 400 feet, the same height as its ancestral Tower of the Sun.

No one will know for another two years, which is how long it is expected to take for the plan to reach the Board of Supervisors for final approval and permits. There is also the technicality that the land is still owned by the Navy, but that should be resolved by then, after 10 years of talking, at least two high-flying ambassadors -- Annemarie Conroy and Tony Hall -- and several shot-down concepts.

The usual naysayers haven't found too much to say nay about this incarnation. Yet. "It needs significant public vetting," says Supervisor Chris Daly, whose district includes Treasure Island. "We are past due."

Daly applauds the relocated western ferry terminal, and the open space, but laughs off the high-rise concept as "The Vancouver model, only in the middle of the bay." As for the tall skinny buildings to protect sight lines? "Aren't all the towers slender?" he asks. "It's kind of a buzz word."

Buzz-kill Daly will get his due this summer when the development plan, which is not legally binding, is expected to go before the Board of Supervisors. Public testimony will be invited.

"We're getting an entitlement, and in exchange for that entitlement, the city is getting a regional park (one-third the size of Golden Gate Park) and 30 percent of the housing will be affordable," Flanagan says. The public is also getting the missing link between the city and the bicycle lanes being built on the new eastern span of the Bay Bridge. From Yerba Buena Island, it's a downhill coast to the terminal and onto the ferry.

So will it ever happen? "I started working on Mission Bay in 1982 and people said, 'Is this ever going to happen?' '' responds Planning Director Macris. "It's taken 20 years."

Treasure Island developers are slightly less patient. They'd like to get it done in 10, building in phases. People living in Navy housing won't be transitioned until the land is needed. Then they will get the first crack at the 575 units of market-rate housing on the island that will be available in July 2007.

"From our perspective, it's not just the towers but the holistic vision for how the land use and urban design will create a successful project," says Jack Sylvan, Treasure Island project manager in the office of Mayor Gavin Newsom. "The public benefit that's being provided out there is the most extensive of any project that we know of in recent history."

Hartman calls it the most extensive in ancient history too, or at least "since 1907," Hartman says. "I don't think there has been anything like this, in one single piece, since the earthquake."

E-mail Sam Whiting at swhiting@sfchronicle.com.

FourOneFive
Aug 28, 2006, 4:55 AM
new rendering

http://www.kenwoodinvestments.com/images/TI2.jpg

Dr Nevergold
Aug 28, 2006, 4:56 AM
I thought San Francisco: Treasure Island was the newest porn flick?

None-the-less, its a fun looking project. ;)

CHapp
Aug 28, 2006, 8:08 AM
Very nice then... now if it was just a tad warmer in july/aug... :) Still couldn't take my heart away from home.. but very very cool.

July/Aug have been perfectly balmy & lovely this year. So give that TI project a chance. :)

BTinSF
Aug 28, 2006, 8:23 AM
"If a major quake hits, the towers will be standing, even if they are standing in the water."

I like that image--"standing in water". :tup:

Renton
Aug 30, 2006, 11:57 AM
I haven't been out to the bay area since my navy days over in Alameda in the 80's. I didn't realize that they closed Treasure island. I heard about Nas Alameda and Oakland army base. Plan seems interesting. If they do complete this project, I'll have to go out west and check it out. Treasure island will always mean- Firefighting school - to me. Which is where you went in the navy for this training.

BTinSF
Aug 30, 2006, 5:32 PM
I haven't been out to the bay area since my navy days over in Alameda in the 80's. I didn't realize that they closed Treasure island. I heard about Nas Alameda and Oakland army base. Plan seems interesting. If they do complete this project, I'll have to go out west and check it out. Treasure island will always mean- Firefighting school - to me. Which is where you went in the navy for this training.

Everything military in the Bay Area is closed: TI, NAS Alameda, Oakland Navy Hospital, NWS Concord, Oakland Army Base, The Presidio, both the Mare Island and Hunter's Point Shipyards. The Pentagon did not like our attitude toward them in general or home porting the USS Missouri in particular. ;)

All of these former bases are now redevelopment projects of one sort or another. Even the Presidio, now a National Park, is being cleaned up, the non-historic structures removed and replaced with rentable modern construction like George Lucas's "letterman Digital Arts Center" because Congress mandated the park be self-supporting (mostly through renting out the buildings).

J Church
Aug 30, 2006, 5:50 PM
Concord north of the freeway wasn't handed over. I don't think they're doing much with it, but it's still military.

So's Moffett, sorta/kinda.

http://www.mv-voice.com/story.php?story_id=1889

FourOneFive
Aug 30, 2006, 8:20 PM
^ we also have travis air force base too. isn't that apart of the bay area too? ;) considering the region's long history with the department of defense, it's a shame we don't have a major military base located in the central bay area aside from moffett.

btw steve, i loved your homer simpson quote so much i had to use it on my myspace. :D

J Church
Aug 30, 2006, 8:23 PM
Hey now!

BTinSF
Aug 30, 2006, 10:44 PM
^ we also have travis air force base too. isn't that apart of the bay area too?

Not enough a part of the Bay Area to get me to drive out there to use the commissary.

FourOneFive
Oct 31, 2006, 1:16 PM
From today's San Francisco Chronicle:

Treasure Island makeover plan gets thumbs-up
Board of Supervisors is next hurdle for $1.2 billion proposal
- Robert Selna, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 31, 2006

The city commission overseeing the former Treasure Island Naval Station approved a plan Monday to spend more than $1.2 billion to transform the 403-acre island and its smaller neighbor, Yerba Buena Island, into a self-sufficient community with 6,000 homes, a new ferry terminal and 300 acres of open space.

The seven-member Treasure Island Development Authority, appointed by the mayor, gave its support for a building blueprint that has been three years in the making.

The plan calls for nearly $500 million in private investment and $700 million in borrowing by the city through the issuance of bonds backed by property taxes collected from the island after development is completed.

The lead developer, Kenwood Investments, which is controlled by Democratic lobbyist and fundraiser Darius Anderson, is working with Miami-based home builder Lennar Corp. and local firm Wilson Meany Sullivan, which led the Port of San Francisco's Ferry Building restoration.

The developers plan to replace the former military housing and other structures with homes and retail and commercial buildings using "green" construction methods.

The developers would pay an estimated $40 million to the Navy for the decommissioned base -- part of their $500 million investment -- and would anticipate collecting $370 million in profits by completion in 2022.

The plan is scheduled to be introduced to the Board of Supervisors today and will likely be voted on by the end of the year, according to Michael Cohen, head of military base reuse projects for Mayor Gavin Newsom.

"I'm optimistic about the reception the plan will get from the Board of Supervisors because I think the development plan makes an overwhelmingly compelling case," said Cohen. "We're using private investment to create a 300-acre park in the bay and 1,800 units of below-market-rate housing without a penny from the city's general fund."

Some of the below-market housing units would be created by private developers, and the rest by nonprofit builders with backing from the city and other sources. Private builders would be required to sell or rent approximately 740 units at prices within reach of households earning at or below the median income in San Francisco -- which for a three-person household is $82,000 a year.

Renderings of the proposed new island village show a ferry terminal connected to a retail center as part of an urban core with a 40-story tower and hotels. Several residential neighborhoods would radiate from the core area and feature townhouses, flats and a 14-story residential tower.

To discourage driving on and off the island, the plan calls for most housing to be clustered within a 10-minute walk to the ferry and for a free shuttle to serve the neighborhoods. A congestion pricing scheme would levy an estimated $5 fee on motorists driving on and off the island during commute times.

Completed in 1938, the manmade Treasure Island is composed mainly of bay fill and is susceptible to earthquakes and flooding. As a result, it will require significant seismic stabilization, including a 50-foot-wide reinforced zone around the entire perimeter of the island.

Environmental contamination from the former industrial uses needs to be cleaned up, and the future neighborhood situated in the middle of the bay will need an entirely new utility and wastewater collection and treatment system.

The project must undergo a review of its impact on the environment and on traffic patterns and commerce in the area.

Moreover, as changes are made, details of a final agreement between the developers and the city remain to be negotiated and approved by the Treasure Island Development Authority, the Board of Supervisors and the mayor.

"We continue to have tremendous constraints that we will have to overcome, but our work to date shows a path of success," said Jay Wallace of Kenwood Investments. "It's a complicated project, but we have a critical path we can proceed upon to make Treasure Island a great place for future generations."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

and since we all love renderings here, i transfered these renderings of the project from some other threads around here...

http://i.pbase.com/g5/27/712527/2/67719093.1kQPEvOP.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/122/255786347_1850879533_o.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/90/255787142_2c15ebab70_o.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/112/255786349_c6ca906075_o.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/81/255786351_ccd93de021_o.jpg
http://static.flickr.com/107/284382286_1555606042_b.jpg

kenratboy
Nov 28, 2006, 7:03 AM
Hmmmm, not sold on the idea of having a FARM there. This space should be used as public parks/recreation. I would be willing to bet the farm would be surrounded by a huge fence to keep people away from food (it would be necessary), and would just detract from the appeal.

I would just like to see a big park, development around it, and then the transportation links as well.

Also, the development looks too spread apart, doesn't look like it has a 'urban village' feeling to it, and being semi-isolated like it is, they could do some cool stuff.

I just wonder if they are trying too hard to be 'eco-friendly' and will ultimately neglect and shut out the very community they are trying to help. After all, this is a project for the people of the Bay Area, not a monument to a urban planner who 'thinks it would be cool'

EDIT - also, it looks way too formal and regimented, no organic shapes (the park looks like a bunch of rectangles...wow...) - also, I would love to see lots of small parks/squares mixed in. It is the small 'micro parks' that are really people friendly, not something massive.

BTinSF
Nov 28, 2006, 8:57 AM
:previous: I'm not certain but I think most of that open space is less seismically stable than the areas of the island that are planned for building. I worked on the island in 1989 and recall sand boils as well as severe building damage in those areas. That's probably why they aren't planning to build there and are even turning part of into a lake (maybe they figure nature would do that eventually anyway). As to the "farm", maybe it's one of those coop things where individula residents can get a small plot and grow their own veggies. Those have existed elsewhere in the city.

WestCoast
Feb 23, 2007, 5:09 AM
anything exciting regarding progress on TI?

mthd
Feb 23, 2007, 5:54 PM
Also, the development looks too spread apart, doesn't look like it has a 'urban village' feeling to it, and being semi-isolated like it is, they could do some cool stuff.

I just wonder if they are trying too hard to be 'eco-friendly' and will ultimately neglect and shut out the very community they are trying to help. After all, this is a project for the people of the Bay Area, not a monument to a urban planner who 'thinks it would be cool'

EDIT - also, it looks way too formal and regimented, no organic shapes (the park looks like a bunch of rectangles...wow...) - also, I would love to see lots of small parks/squares mixed in. It is the small 'micro parks' that are really people friendly, not something massive.

this development is in actuality pretty dense, and you have to remember that the transit links are limited to the ferry system. this is probably not a place for a hundred thousand homes. they've already increased the density many, many time. think back to the original SMWM plan...

a very large component of this project's public success (it has been exceptionally well received) is the careful attention paid to 'green' issues. i don't see how the positioning of the streets, the wind rows, the ferry terminal, the organic farms, the photovoltaic skins, the turbines, and the myriad of other green features mean they are 'shutting out' the residents. there is plenty of open space in the plan (not just around the farm but throughout the plan, e.g. near the new ferry terminal) and the inclusion of community gardens at various scales have been very successful in many cities.

kenratboy
Mar 8, 2007, 6:02 AM
Any news on this project?

BTinSF
Mar 8, 2007, 8:15 AM
a very large component of this project's public success (it has been exceptionally well received) is the careful attention paid to 'green' issues.

As someone who worked on TI and commuted there for 6 years, I continue to think the project's public success is based on some romantic notion about living on an island out in the bay with great views held by people who have been there for an hour or two a few times in their lives. It is a cold, windy, foggy place which, as you say, will be dependent on the ferries for connection to the city. BART doesn't run 24 hours. Will the TI ferries? There's the Bay Bridge but how would YOU like to face that traffic anytime you wanted to get off the island?

Nope. Most of those folks who think the project is great aren't planning to live there themselves.

Personally, I think it would be a great place for a huge gambling casino. Think about it. "What happens on TI stays on TI."

Coriander
Mar 8, 2007, 9:52 AM
I can't comment on the weather but there will always be people who want to live on the edge of a given city. The fact that it's an island and will have quite a bit of open space will add to the appeal. Plus it seems it will be an attractive development. It will be SF's Roosevelt island.

BTinSF
Mar 8, 2007, 6:06 PM
^^^You movin' there?

San Frangelino
Mar 8, 2007, 6:48 PM
I lived on Yerba Buena Island for six months with the Academy of Arts. God there was nothing at all there, but quite honestly it wasnt all that bad. Was a neat feeling being in this tiny forrest between SF and Oakland. For me there is something appealing about island life, especially if a plethora of activity sits a stones throw away by boat. I'd reckon I would be in consideration of purchasing if I could consider purchasing. Where do I sign up.

BTW, If you are driving into san francisco from Oakland you can see my building and the little deck we had. Actually it was more of a roof than a deck.

mthd
Mar 9, 2007, 7:22 AM
^^^You movin' there?

whether you or i or any individual would want to live on TI is sort of irrelevant. they aren't marking to everyone, they're marketing to some particular subset of people looking for a particular thing. i think TI will have no problem selling or renting units for one simple reason - people pay for views. the views of the city are phenomenal.

there are a lot of places i wouldn't chose to live - but they're still successful developments.

most people will drive (just like everywhere, sadly) but the ferries will be viable for the people 'commuting' to the financial district on weekdays. avoiding the toll plazas will make the congestion somewhat more bearable.

as for the casino - i was always a big fan of the idea of turning treasure island into some sort of 21st century adult urban playground. casinos, high end bars, restaurants, retail, etc. it would be awesome. like taking a little slice of macao and transporting it to the middle of the bay :banana:

BTinSF
Mar 9, 2007, 7:51 AM
as for the casino - i was always a big fan of the idea of turning treasure island into some sort of 21st century adult urban playground. casinos, high end bars, restaurants, retail, etc. it would be awesome. like taking a little slice of macao and transporting it to the middle of the bay :banana:

Now you're talkin'. But as for the people wanting to live there for the views, only time will tell, but I predict a lot of 'em will last 6 to 12 months and then decide the views aren't worth the inconvenience and isolation. For 6 years I could look at those views all day 5 days a week, but every one of those days I was never so happy as when I was rolling west onto the 5th and Harrison exit ramp.

San Frangelino
Jun 19, 2007, 1:43 AM
Inspired by Marvel 33's post http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=2904373&postcount=803, I checked out SOM's website and found some cool renderings that are worth a glance.

From:http://www.som.com/content.cfm/bending_the_grid

http://www.som.com/resources/content/5/0/4/3/4/2/7/3/images/001_21586620.jpg

http://www.som.com/resources/category/5/0/3/9/5/5/images/001_21580575_resized616.jpg

BTinSF
Jun 19, 2007, 2:27 AM
:previous: Interesting--->Seems to show both One Rincon towers, 375 Fremont, 301 (or is it 300) Folsom and both 300 Spear towers, but not 45 Lansing.

roadwarrior
Jun 19, 2007, 4:25 AM
Actually, I would NOT want to live there. Aside from the isolation and the constant wind, I would be concerned about earthquakes. I worked there at the time of the 1989 quake. There was serious liquifaction with mud "boils" and geysers, the pipes supplying water, gas and power from the "mainland" broke and so on. I know that buildings built now would be built much more solidly than the structures that were there in 1989 (some of which suffered surprising damage), but the land itself is a question mark in a bigger quake like 1906.

1 - About 1/2 of the remainder of the city is built on landfill as well.
2 - I personally think it is safer to live in a newer building in a landfill area (say Mission Bay), where they drive the metal piles down to the bedrock than to live in an older building on the hillside. The ground there may be more stable, but the building certainly isn't.

BTinSF
Jun 19, 2007, 5:55 AM
^^^If you're on TI, just make sure you're on at least the 4th floor (higher is better). And keep an inflatable boat in the closet.

roadwarrior
Jun 19, 2007, 5:31 PM
Cool rendering from Socketsite

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2007/06/the_som_master_plan_for_san_franciscos_treasure_island_1.html#comments

BTinSF
Jun 19, 2007, 10:39 PM
Marvel33 originally found this and posted it to the SF Rundown thread. But since TI has its own thread--which he may not have realized--I thought it should go here. The original article also contains (and may have been the source for) the socketsite renderings above but I won't post them again--you can go to the original for them.

Reawakening Treasure Island

Monday, June 18, 2007
By kelly Matlock

San Francisco, CA, US (NCS) - How do you go about redeveloping a 393-acre manmade island that was originally constructed for the Golden Gate International Exposition and later served as a United States Naval Air Station until its decommissioning in 1997?

The San Francisco office of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill has fearlessly answered that question with a master plan development proposal for San Francisco’s Treasure Island, located off Yerba Buena Island and connected to the San Francisco Bay Bridge.

Since 2005, SOM has worked to create a new vision for the island after former development proposals were opposed for various reasons after the initial planning began in 2001.

Two associate firms based in San Francisco, SMWM and CMG Landscape Architects, were also working on the project. The development team includes San Francisco’s Kenwood Investments and Wilson Meany Sullivan, along with Lennar Corporation, headquartered in Miami.

According to the architects, the plan has earned broad support from community groups, political leaders and business organizations since its unveiling at a series of meetings and presentations led by SOM.

The Treasure Island Plan involves a unique, 21st century San Francisco community that is socially and economically diverse and supported by close-knit neighborhoods, unprecedented open space, resource-conserving technology and a robust network of transportation choices. Envisioned as both a great place to live and a regional destination, the plan proposes three compact neighborhoods centered around an energizing, mixed-use hub and ferry terminal set within a richly faceted 275-acre Great Park.

The scope, scale and visibility of the project make it one of the largest development plans in San Francisco history and one of the highest profile urban redevelopments in the country.

The environmentally sustainable scheme includes green elements including runoff-filtering wetlands and green skyscrapers as well as an ecological education and art park, a shoreline park at the island’s edge, playgrounds and a 20-acre organic farm. A wind farm as well as diagonal rows of trees will help control the amount of wind hitting the island.

The new development would take up only a quarter of the island’s area and will be built in phases. In the residential phase, there will be approximately 5,900 residential units built, of which 30 percent will be affordable. The residential area will accommodate around 13,500 residents, and will be divided by high-density, low-to-midrise blocks of townhouses, flats clustered around neighborhood open spaces, and residential towers approximately 14 stories high.

A new street grid aligned with rows of wind-shielding trees offers
“a richer pedestrian experience than the typical Cartesian grid,” said SOM partner Craig Hartman.

Four 40-story towers will surround a central, 60-story tower, which will be supported by a structural exoskeleton that frames an optimal amount of glass for the exterior. The tower will incorporate sustainable features, such as the use of geothermal energy, a series of glass light shelves clad in transparent photovoltaic film, and a glass sky garden on the roof. The building will be called the Sun Tower, in reference to the island’s former Tower of the Sun, a 400-foot structure that was the first major landmark of the original exhibition grounds.

All of the towers will be concentrated in the center of the island’s urban core. A new ferry terminal will be installed adjacent to a new retail, commercial and cultural district, and a parking system will encourage car-free living. The neighborhoods, which are pedestrian and bicycle-friendly, will be within a ten minute walk to the ferry terminal.

In December, the $1.2 billion development plan, of which $500 million would be private investment and $700 million would be city bonds, received preliminary approval from the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. This preliminary approval opened doors for the design and development team to make a binding contract. A group of additional architects may be commissioned throughout the design process to flesh out the plan.

“The intent is to make this a new national model for what a wholly sustainable community can be about,” said Hartman.

Overall completion of the development is currently scheduled for 2022, and new residents are expected to move in by 2013.



Source: http://www.newcityskyline.com/TreasureIslandMasterPlan.html

TWAK
Jan 2, 2008, 2:13 AM
I just spent new years around treasure island and the city, and I really like the feel of how treasure island is now. The residents don't pay utilities except for rent, and rent also seems pretty cheap. I thought this proposal was cool, but after hanging out there I'm not so sure about it.

roadwarrior
Jan 2, 2008, 7:27 PM
I just spent new years around treasure island and the city, and I really like the feel of how treasure island is now. The residents don't pay utilities except for rent, and rent also seems pretty cheap. I thought this proposal was cool, but after hanging out there I'm not so sure about it.

Yeah, it is cheap compared to the rest of the city. However, the problem with the current state is that there is NOTHING there other than the apartments. People have to take a bus into the city for any and all convenience items. Also, many of the buildings are old, run down and pose a fire danger. Some of the vacant units are currently used by many homeless squatters and I believe that two major fires occured because of this in 2007 on the island.

San Frangelino
Jan 10, 2008, 4:46 PM
From:http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/earth/4239381.html
Via:http://www.socketsite.com/

Treasure Island Is the Super-Green City of the Future
A blighted island in San Francisco Bay could become the world’s hottest property, a showcase of sustainable design. With cities now consuming 75 percent of natural resources, it’s just in time.
http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/treasure-island-model-0108.jpg

By Logan Ward
Photographs by Ofer Wolberger
Published in the January 2008 issue.
Every day, a few hundred thousand vehicles cross the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, their drivers barely aware of the small, rectangular land mass lying just to the north. From where I am standing, on rocky Yerba Buena Island, I can both hear the traffic thundering overhead and look across a narrow isthmus to the long-forgotten patch of real estate in the middle of the bay: Treasure Island. Home to an abandoned Navy base and a small population of low- to middle-income residents, the 400-acre property hardly lives up to its prosperous name. Defunct military buildings, rusty oil tanks and electrical transformers litter the landscape. Crumbling asphalt caps chemical dumps.

Treasure Island is an unlikely place to look for the city of the future, but that's what I'm here to find. My guide is Jean Rogers, an environmental engineer with the global design and consulting firm Arup. Surrounded by a panorama of postcard views—San Francisco, Golden Gate, Berkeley Hills—and buffeted by winds that whip in from the Pacific, Rogers seems somewhat unlikely, too: Petite, stylish, with an impressive string of degrees and a down-to-business manner, she speaks with easygoing "likes" and "you knows" sprinkled among phrases such as "tertiary water treatment" and "optimal solar exposure." Rogers jabs at the ground with the heel of her shoe, reminding me what an engineering feat we stand on: Completely man-made, Treasure Island consists of 20 million cubic yards of sea bottom that has been dredged up, dumped into walls made of 287,000 tons of quarried rock and topped with 50,000 cubic yards of loam.

Built for the Golden Gate International Exposition in 1939, Treasure Island was claimed as a Naval base during World War II. When the base was finally decommissioned 11 years ago, San Francisco began studying how to redevelop it. From nearly 300 meetings among city officials, engineers, architects and the public emerged a plan for the most ambitious new community in the United States—a 13,500-person "urban oasis" that will rise from the soil of reclaimed Superfund sites, combining cutting-edge technology with restored natural systems to leave a light footprint on the Earth. After ground is broken in 2009, Treas ure Island will become a testbed for the newest ideas in energy efficiency, water conservation, waste management and low-impact living. Says Rogers, with idealism undaunted by the task ahead: "We want it to be the most ecological city in the world."

At no time in history has a model metropolis been more sorely needed. More than half of the people on Earth now live in cities, where they consume 75 percent of the natural resources and are responsible for the majority of greenhouse gases. But while cities can be a liability to the planet—their aging infrastructure ripping through raw materials and compounding the effects of global warming—they can also represent an important opportunity. Typically, food and water enter a city as raw material and exit it as sewage and garbage in what might be called a linear flow. By producing its own energy and recycling its waste, a city can operate less like a factory and more like an ecosystem—supporting a larger number of people with far fewer resources.

Treasure Island represents a rare chance to wipe the slate clean—to tear down old infrastructure and lay new foundations using only the smartest ideas for the future. As Jared Blumenfeld, the director of San Francisco's Department of the Environment, asked a crowded forum last spring: "If you could start from scratch, absolute scratch, what would you build?"

(Click link to read rest of article and use the interactive maps)

BTinSF
Feb 11, 2008, 5:41 AM
Island housing

Calling for more housing affordability in the Treasure Island and Yerba Buena Redevelopment Plan

By Michael Leonard

As the Treasure Island and Yerba Buena Redevelopment Plan heads for a pair of public hearings that will shape the project's environmental impact report, Sup. Chris Daly, whose District 6 includes the island, is calling for more housing affordability.

The Mayor's Office of Base Reuse and Real Estate Development is pushing the project along with private partner Treasure Island Community Development (which includes politically connected entities such as Lennar Corp. and Darius Anderson's Kenwood Investments).

The project now calls for 5,500 to 6,000 housing units, 30 percent of them to be offered below market rates, including 400 available to "formerly homeless San Franciscans."

But Daly introduced a resolution Jan. 15 calling for half the units to be offered below market rates. "What [the resolution] comes out of is a growing sense that we need to do more for affordable housing, especially when there are significant public resources involved," Daly told the Guardian in a phone interview.

Jack Sylvan, project manager for the city, noted that the Board of Supervisors approved the project's term sheet 10-1 in 2006, with Daly among those in favor. "It's changing the rules in the middle of the game," Sylan told us. Plus, he doubts the developer could meet that affordability goal and still have the project pencil out: "It's not a choice between 30 percent and 50 percent. It's a choice between 30 percent and zero."

Daly's resolution heads to the board's Land Use and Economic Development Committee in the next few weeks. The first Planning Department meeting is on Feb. 11, 6 p.m., at the Bayside Conference Room, Port of San Francisco, Pier 1. The second is on Feb. 13, 6 p.m., at the Ship Shape Bldg., bldg. 497, Avenue M and 11th Ave., Treasure Island. These will focus solely on the drafting of the EIR, but the affordable-housing aspect will continue to be part of the larger discussion.
Source: http://www.sfbg.com/printable_entry.php?entry_id=5614

condodweller
Feb 12, 2008, 6:21 AM
Treasure Island represents a rare chance to wipe the slate clean—to tear down old infrastructure and lay new foundations using only the smartest ideas for the future. As Jared Blumenfeld, the director of San Francisco's Department of the Environment, asked a crowded forum last spring: "If you could start from scratch, absolute scratch, what would you build?"

Brasilia, apparently...

peanut gallery
Apr 14, 2008, 8:32 PM
A small, but I think interesting, update from the Examiner (http://www.examiner.com/a-1335682~Historical_building_may_anchor_ferry_terminal.html?cid=rss-San_Francisco):

Historical building may anchor ferry terminal
by John Upton
April 12, 2008

http://www.examiner.com/images/newsroom/4123FBF1-3048-7D2A-C2AB0FE0C5B73053.jpg

SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - A cavernous crescent-shaped building on Treasure Island, designed more than 70 years ago to serve as an airport terminal, will soon be the backdrop for another type of landing.

In late 2006, the Board of Supervisors adopted a multibillion-dollar Treasure Island development plan that included a ferry terminal and transit hub, hotels, 300 acres of parks and 6,000 new housing units, including a residential tower that could reach 60 stories.

In updated plans, the ferry terminal has been moved to the front of the U-shaped Building 1 — a four-story building at the entry to the island which has wide staircases, a marble-clad hallway, high ceilings topped by a dome and 150,000 square feet of space.

Ferries that arrive at the terminal would carry tourists and locals alike, according to Jack Sylvan, who oversees public-private partnership projects for The City.

“Ideally, it will attract everybody in the way that the Ferry Building does,” he said.

The U-shaped building was built for the two-year international exposition that began in 1939 and designed to be used eventually as an international airport terminal. It never served that purpose because the Navy took over the island in the lead-up to World War II, according to a 1995 historical study. More recently, it was featured in the movie “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.”

Under “current thinking,” the building would be filled with shops and restaurants, according to Sylvan.

Treasure Island Development Authority directors in a recent public meeting told Sylvan it will be important to plan stores that are affordable to low-income island residents. Nearly one-third of the new units planned on the island will be sold at below-market rate, plans show.

The updated plans will be presented to the Board of Supervisors when an environmental impact report for the project is finished, according to Sylvan. That’s expected early next year, he said.

The artificially made, 450-acre island is currently home to nearly 3,000 people — “everything from no-income to high-income” residents, according to development authority spokeswoman Marianne Thompson.

San Frangelino
Jun 11, 2008, 5:52 PM
From: http://www.socketsite.com/



Supervisor Daly Drops Treasure Island Below Market Rate Bill

In other real estate related Supervisor news:

Supervisor Chris Daly tabled legislation Tuesday that he had proposed to increase to 50 percent the amount of below-market-rate housing offered in the planned major redevelopment of Treasure Island.
His decision to drop the item comes a week after another housing measure he backed at the polls suffered a decisive defeat. That measure, Proposition F, would have required the redevelopment of Bayview-Hunters Point to offer 50 percent of the housing at below the market rate, not the 30 percent as proposed.

BTinSF
Nov 10, 2008, 5:58 PM
Barack Obama May Be Treasure Island's Only Hope

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/10Nov08_Treasure.jpg

Not even a week into President-elect Barack Obama's, uh, president-electness, and his halo's already glowing over Treasure Island. While developer Wilson Meany Sullivan twiddles its thumbs waiting to build San Francisco's island eco-wonderland, the city's been hard at work negotiating with the federal government for a price to let the former Navy base go quietly. At the city's offer of about $40 million, plus 50 percent of future land profits, the feds aren't budging— thus dooming us to a neverending limbo of dragon boat races and the occasional concert. Enter the messiah president-elect, who will likely pounce on the opportunity to get the feds a few extra benjamins while putting the land into productive use to stimulate the economy. Said the city's economic development director: "It hasn’t been necessarily clear that the current administration’s priorities around closed military bases have been local economic development." Not necessarily, but... Yes! We! Can!
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/

peanut gallery
Nov 10, 2008, 11:06 PM
^ Here's the article from the Examiner (http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/City_hoping_for_easier_Treasure_Island_buy.html) that goes along with that:

City hoping for easier Treasure Island buy
By Katie Worth
Examiner Staff Writer 11/10/08

SAN FRANCISCO – The City may get a better deal on Treasure Island under President-elect Barack Obama’s administration, the project’s leaders say.

For the last two years, The City has been embroiled in negotiations with the Navy on the purchase price of Treasure Island, a former military base that ceased operations in 1997. The City hopes to build 6,000 new homes, three hotels, a 400-slip marina, and a bevy of retail, restaurants and entertainment venues on the island, along with 300 acres of parks and open space. But the Navy and city negotiators have not been able to come to an agreement.

In summer, city negotiators offered to buy the island from the federal government for the price of cleaning it up — the equivalent of $40 million, upfront — plus 50 percent of future profits from the land. However, the Navy has not accepted that deal.

Developer Tom Sullivan of San Francisco firm Wilson Meany Sullivan said he’s hopeful the new administration may bring a change in some of the negotiators, and may bring the deal to a close sooner — and with better terms for The City.

San Francisco Economic Development Director Michael Cohen said he’s not sure the negotiating team will change, but perhaps their objectives may.

“I think there’s a reason to be optimistic that the Obama administration will understand, from an economic stimulus standpoint, how important it is to take these dormant military bases — of which there’s 35,000 acres in California — and put them back into economic productive use,” he said. “It hasn’t been necessarily clear that the current administration’s priorities around closed military bases have been local economic development.”

The City is finalizing the development plan for the island, and will be ready to move forward in about 12 months, Cohen said.

“We need to have a Navy deal done before then,” he said.

Perhaps a bit of wishful thinking on the city's part, but hopefully they're right. It would be nice to have this in position to start once the economics of development turn around.

BTinSF
Jan 23, 2009, 12:32 AM
Treasure Island to be protected from rising seas
By John Upton
Examiner Staff Writer 1/21/09

http://media.sfexaminer.com/images/597*317/treasureisland.jpg
Vulnerable: Parts of San Francisco’s man-made island may be elevated with fill to protect developments scheduled to be built in 2010.Getty Images File Photo

SAN FRANCISCO – Dirt and other fill may be piled onto parts of Treasure Island to protect planned buildings from sea level rise due to climate change and other factors.

A multibillion-dollar plan for the 450-acre man-made island — including a ferry terminal, retail strip, three hotels and 6,000 new housing units, including a 60-story residential tower — was adopted in 2006 by The City.

But the low-lying island is vulnerable to floods if seas rise due to climate change, according to Kheay Loke, a developer with Wilson Meany Sullivan, which is partnering with Lennar Corp. on the project.

The flood risk will be greatest if rising seas coincide with a high tide and large storm, according to Loke.

Loke and a handful of engineers and city officials presented options last week to the Treasure Island Development Authority Board of Directors for protecting new buildings against climate change-related flooding.

To protect new buildings from floods, fill will likely be dumped beneath planned development sites, according to Loke.

The fill will be excavated from some of the 300 acres of island that’s slated to be used for parkland and sports fields, and additional fill will be imported to the island, according to Loke.

“It’s all about raising grades to enable gravity drainage, as opposed to relying on levees for protection,” Loke said.

The developers could also choose to build sea walls — which would serve the same function as levees in the Central Valley and New Orleans — around the island to protect against flooding, authority documents show.

The Board of Supervisors will ultimately decide how to protect the island from a potential 3-foot sea level rise over 70 years, according to Jack Sylvan, who oversees public-private partnership projects for The City.

Property taxes could be set aside to build sea walls, or take other flood-protection measures, if seas rise more than expected, according to Sylvan.

“The City is working on how it will address sea level rise in the future, assuming it does in fact happen,” Sylvan said.

Infrastructure work, including grading and seawalls, could begin by late 2010, according to Sylvan. Building construction is expected to start 18 to 24 months later, he said.
Source:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Treasure_Island_to_be_protected_from_rising_seas.html[/quote]

Reminiscence
Jan 24, 2009, 12:56 AM
I thought work was suppose to begin late this year? Oh well, I'm just glad this is still on. Its going to be great watching this getting built along with Transbay.

BTinSF
Sep 8, 2009, 5:43 PM
Treasure Island: Anti-Wind Street Grid + Mini-Telegraph Hill

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2009_09_treasureisland.jpg
[CMG Landscape Architects, via A/N Blog]

The ground-up green redevelopment of Treasure Island will orient major streets to block gusts of wind, which primarily hit the artificial island from the southwest. The result is a grid of streets rotated exactly 68 degrees, as determined by the geniuses at CMG Landscape Architects. And thus shall pedestrians enjoy the pedestrian-oriented modern village that's being built just for them on the grounds of the former naval base. Recall that, true to the principles of smart growth, density's the key word— only 100 acres of the island's total 400 will be future-ized. The rest? Open space. Plans also include turning the west-facing part of Yerba Buena into a some sort of mini-Telegraph Hill, with townhomes up and down the hill, capped by a new park. The 6,000 to 8,000 residences included in the master plan will be farmed out to individual architects to avoid an "architectural monoculture" with—alas— no fake Victorians.
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2009/09/08/treasure_island_antiwind_street_grid_minitelegraph_hill.php#reader_comments

FerrariEnzo
Sep 8, 2009, 11:37 PM
"the master plan will be farmed out to individual architects to avoid an "architectural monoculture""

such a simple concept and yet so many cities with large projects do not conisider this... nice to see SF is going about this in a holistic manner.

peanut gallery
Sep 9, 2009, 1:21 AM
I'm surprised the wind mostly hits the island from the southwest. I would have thought it comes in from due west or maybe a little northwest. And looking more closely at that image, those angled streets are lined up along a southwest/northeast axis, which doesn't fit with the intention of minimizing wind from the southwest. Perhaps Curbed meant to say the wind predominantly comes from the northwest.

Anyhoo, it's a cool-looking plan. Interesting to see they are looking at YB as well.

San Frangelino
Nov 8, 2009, 3:45 PM
New image I found at this website: http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/09/10/treasure-island-reveals-new-sustainable-development-plan/

http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/future-treasure-island-panoramic.jpg

ltsmotorsport
Nov 13, 2009, 5:32 AM
Great looking plan. Really generous amounts of greenspace too...I wonder if they won't allow for a few more buildings later down the line if the project is successful.

Yankee
Nov 13, 2009, 10:11 PM
Wow!

I had heard something about plans to redevelop parts of Treasure Island, mainly build a few highrises there, but I had no idea the plan was to actually completely raze every structure that's currently on it, remove almost all the streets and completely redevelop the area. I mean there isn't much on the island right now, but there are a few residences and businesses here and there.

Well anyway, I love the new plan, can't say I'm a big fan of the offset street grid though - cmon, the wind...? Who cares wind is wind it's all over the place :D We've been strictly following the square grid principle for almost all of our major cities regardless of topography (SF being the best example) or pretty much anything else, now all of a sudden we're supposed to care about the wind...? Can't say I'm a big fan, as a pedestrian I prefer perpendicular blocks, but the offset grid has its charm too I guess.

I'm assuming the plan for the green space is maybe a park for starters and then as demand increases it will get filled in...? Is the Sun Tower and all the other highrises still on track? They're obviously going for density and I do hope that a filled in island or just the developed area for starters has at least a density of 20,000/sq mi (isn't Treasure Island pretty much 1 square mile?) This has a huge potential of being like a second downtown, kind of like Miami's Miami Beach. And I do hope that as demand and population increase they consider adding a subway line, either MUNI or BART under the bay to Treasure Island. :D

So when are we gonna start seeing everything getting torn down?

(sorry that was a long and erratic post...)

BTinSF
Nov 14, 2009, 12:19 AM
Wow!

I had heard something about plans to redevelop parts of Treasure Island, mainly build a few highrises there, but I had no idea the plan was to actually completely raze every structure that's currently on it . . . .

They aren't razing every structure. The old crescent-shaped Headquarters building, which is rather historic, will stay.

can't say I'm a big fan of the offset street grid though - cmon, the wind...? Who cares wind is wind it's all over the place :D . . . . They're obviously going for density and I do hope that a filled in island or just the developed area for starters has at least a density of 20,000/sq mi (isn't Treasure Island pretty much 1 square mile?) This has a huge potential of being like a second downtown, kind of like Miami's Miami Beach.

If you'd spent any time on TI (worked there for 4 years), you'd understand how pervasive and annoying the wind can be. Anything reasonable that can be done to mitigate it should be done.

I am extremely skeptical about putting any density on this island. I know I wouldn't want to live there. I realize Ferry service is planned but that's fairly low capacity and won't carry cars, trucks or other personal vehicles. Otherwise, for everyone who lives there access to and from home is going to be via the traffic-choked Bay Bridge which now experiences gridlock for maybe 6-8 hours a day and, by the time TI is actually redeveloped, will likely be a parking lot 18 hours a day--not even counting the extra traffic load the TI development imposes. How would YOU like to realize that if you wanted to go to the Mission for Mexican food or a movie at the Metreon, you'd have to spend 30-45 minutes in bumper to bumper traffic each way?

FerrariEnzo
Nov 14, 2009, 1:47 PM
Great looking plan. Really generous amounts of greenspace too...I wonder if they won't allow for a few more buildings later down the line if the project is successful.

I was thinking similarly.

BTinSF
Dec 16, 2009, 5:37 PM
How much is fair market value for the whole of Treasure Island? The Navy has said $240 million, while in the effort to completely redevelop the former naval base as a sustainable pedestrian community, San Francisco says $11 million. And thus stalling of the sale for years. Now Mayor Gav's flown to D.C. to hammer out details with the Pentagon over a Treasure Island sale. Hopes were after President Obama was elected that the impasse would clear up, and that the president would simply gift San Francisco the naval base for the sake of moving the economy along. That didn't happen, but after the usual Washington to-and-fro, lawmakers ended up with a compromise idea: San Francisco would make a small payment up front and then pay the Navy more money later as profits from land sales and developments roll in.
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/

BTinSF
Dec 16, 2009, 5:39 PM
Great looking plan. Really generous amounts of greenspace too...I wonder if they won't allow for a few more buildings later down the line if the project is successful.

Unlikely. In SF, greenspace is more valuable than buildings. And the part of the island set aside for it is lower and more vulnerable to earthquakes which is why it is being set aside. The present plan does not allow for future development. One can't say what future generations will do, but that isn't what this one has in mind.

San Frangelino
Dec 17, 2009, 1:56 AM
Treasure Island: Sold To The Bidder Across The Bay For $55M Plus...
from:http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2009/12/treasure_island_sold_to_the_bidder_across_the_bay_for_5.html#comments
http://www.socketsite.com/Treasury%20Island%20Aerial%20SOM%20Rendering.jpg
The Chronicle reports:

Mayor Gavin Newsom struck a deal today with the U.S. Navy to transfer Treasure Island to San Francisco for a $55 million guaranteed payment over several years, plus additional considerations that could make the total deal worth more than $105 million to the federal government.
The plan is for 6,000 homes to be created through private and public financing. Development partners Wilson Meany Sullivan, Lennar Corp. and Kenwood Investments will stake $500 million with the city providing an additional $700 million in bond money financed by property taxes collected once the development is completed. The initial $1.2 billion will pay for the project's infrastructure and some of the proposed housing.
Once again, infrastructure work for the SOM designed development of Treasure Island could start as early as 2011 with the first residences ready for occupancy in 2013 and an Island complete by 2022.

BTinSF
Dec 17, 2009, 1:59 AM
:previous: Is that checkerboardy looking bit in the middle the collective farm?

BTinSF
Feb 19, 2010, 1:16 PM
Friday, February 19, 2010
Planners envision green, walkable Treasure Island
San Francisco Business Times - by Eric Young

As they set out to build San Francisco’s newest neighborhood, Treasure Island planners are also trying to build its “greenest” neighborhood.

The 403-acre site, erected on landfill where the 1939 World’s Fair was held, will have as many as 8,000 homes, more than 400 hotel rooms, a shopping district and the second largest amount of open space in the city behind Golden Gate Park.

Guiding architects, developers and city officials has been an effort to create San Francisco’s most sustainable area . . . .

A vital element of Treasure Island’s plan stems from having highrise, mid-rise and other closely packed housing within about a quarter mile of a planned ferry landing and shopping district. That “density” — as it’s called in planning parlance — means most residents would be within walking distance of shops, other services and ferry service, reducing the need for cars . . . .

As a result, the island has large expanses of open space — about 330 acres worth — rather than pockets of smaller parks like those that dot the rest of San Francisco. Ball fields, urban farms and wetlands, for example, are all connected.

Planning for prevailing winds and the arc of the sun were another major influence on Treasure Island’s design . . . .

The streets on the island will intersect at 68 degrees — rather than the traditional 90 degrees — to give homes maximum exposure to the sun’s path and minimum exposure to westerly winds . . . .

Lines of trees and other shrubbery will be planted in open spaces to provide wind breaks. Also, along the edge of the island, berms will help disrupt the wind along walking paths . . . .

The island . . . will treat its own wastewater and recycle water for irrigation . . . .


Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2010/02/22/focus4.html

Sonofsoma
Feb 23, 2010, 1:28 PM
One has to deliberately turn a blind eye to the obvious to believe any of the plans to make Treasure Island into a green utopia are anything other than "just pretend."

Simply put.. as a development site Treasure Island is constrained as it is unique.
The man-made island was created to be site for a Worlds Fair lasting one year and was not engineered to support permanent development.

The military installation was never intended to be permanent when it hastily developed the island with the onset of WWII.

The island cannot be developed upon as it is today. It needs to be completely re-engineered and rebuilt including a raise of 10-15 feet...
The resulting project would be similar in scope to San Diego's Mission Bay. -- Ain't going to happen.

Not because it isn't technically feasible, but because it is not politically feasible in modern-day "green" California.

One day (sooner or later) California will come its senses and write a new state constitution that junks the current government and replaces it with a vastly smaller, less powerful government.

Until then... Dream on.

BTinSF
Mar 11, 2010, 6:34 PM
BIG PLANS
Treasure Island Draft Plans Want To Avoid A "Mini-Vancouver"

http://sf.curbed.com/uploads/2010_03_treasureisland.jpg

Yesterday, reports the SF Examiner, city staff and developers presented draft guidelines for the look and feel of Treasure Island's new eco-community, in particular towers. Looking to limit the shadow effect of a forest of skyscrapers, the plan is to go with a new trend toward slimmer buildings and to limit the width of towers with a menu of different sizes. To wit: a 600-foot tower can't be wider than 150 feet, while a 450-foot tower can't be wider than 145 feet. Short and stout, however, is apparently OK for buildings, with 70-footers able to go up to 200 feet wide. With all that said, the planning director stresses the point is to be flexible so the island doesn't look like Vancouver, with its perfectly machined and "boring" buildings.
Source: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2010/03/11/treasure_island_draft_guidelines_want_to_avoid_a_minivancouver.php#reader_comments

We could have worse than a "min-Vancouver". We could have an all Heller-Manus island of beige stucco towers. That's what the planners probably need to focus on avoiding.

FerrariEnzo
Mar 12, 2010, 3:06 AM
We could have worse than a "min-Vancouver". We could have an all Heller-Manus island of beige stucco towers. That's what the planners probably need to focus on avoiding.

Right on, no offense to SF but it sounds like some of the people in city government have a giant stick... no better yet, branch, lodged up their... well you get the idea. Vancouver and its "perfectly machined, boring buildings".... right because with the exception of the Trans America tower/pyramid EVERY high-rise in SF is so damn unique and inspiring... right.

ardecila
Mar 12, 2010, 4:33 AM
Since when is Vancouver boring? Vancouver has a beautiful skyline. Houston, on the other hand...

BTinSF
Mar 12, 2010, 5:16 AM
Since when is Vancouver boring? Vancouver has a beautiful skyline. Houston, on the other hand...

It does tend to have a problem San Francisco also has--a lot of buildings of the same height giving a "table top" effect. In San Francisco, the Planning Dept. itself needs to take a lot of the blame because the main reason is the PD's height limits. In Vancouver, I suspect it's economics since most of the buildings are residential and building costs escalate with height above a certain level.

If you read the article again, what they are proposing is to encourage a maximum of height and bulk variation. Leaving aside the Vancouver comparison, that's a good thing.

FerrariEnzo
Mar 12, 2010, 2:06 PM
Regardless, when completed this will be A. very sought after housing and B. one of the great urban success stories of recent times. Ambitious and thankfully though snobby at times, SF tends to get nuanced issues that other cities might be ignorant to.

BTinSF
Apr 5, 2010, 7:11 PM
Regardless, when completed this will be A. very sought after housing and B. one of the great urban success stories of recent times. Ambitious and thankfully though snobby at times, SF tends to get nuanced issues that other cities might be ignorant to.

Those of us who have spent any time on Treasure Island (I worked there for 7 years), have trouble agreeing with any of that. People who romanticize TI have mostly spent little time there.

The place is cold, windy and an access nightmare. Unless some way is created to get to and from the island by rapid transit and/or car that is independent of Bay Bridge traffic (even a 24 hour ferry isn't good enough), I personally would never want to live there and I have trouble imagining others would and certainly that they would pay a premium to do so.

BTinSF
Apr 5, 2010, 7:14 PM
. . . Treasure Island is destined to be filled with high-rise buildings, an expanded marina, shops, a hotel, and nearly 8,000 condos and apartments. A groundbreaking is anticipated late next year, with infrastructure expected to be in place that’s needed to start selling lots to builders a year later.

Closely linked building plans for Yerba Buena Island could break ground one year later, in 2012, but construction might proceed more quickly than those on the outcrop’s artificially made neighbor.

That’s because extensive engineering work is required to protect Treasure Island, which was built from Bay dredge for the 1939 World’s Fair, from liquefaction during earthquakes and flooding caused by sea-level rise, according to Kheay Loke, project manager for master developer Wilson Meany Sullivan.

“Yerba Buena Island is pretty darned strong,” Loke said. “Come early 2013, you should be able to go and have your picnic up there” . . . .
Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Hilltop-park-planned-for-Yerba-Buena-Island-89893412.html#ixzz0kFpsYfgr

I'm not sure I believe much development is going to happen there this quickly either, but maybe . . . .

San Frangelino
Apr 9, 2010, 11:26 PM
New View of the Treasure Island Skyline I found at http://www.sftreasureisland.org/index.aspx?page=26

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4067/4506001645_aa0e070e20_o.png

San Frangelino
Jul 14, 2010, 3:24 PM
From: http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2010/07/13/treasure_island_eir.php

Treasure Island EIR
Tuesday, July 13, 2010, by Andrew Wietstock

In the first bit of news in a very planning-heavy news day, the Planning Department released the Draft Environmental Impact Report for Treasure Island yesterday. The high points include 8,000 housing units, 140,000 square feet of new commercial and retail space, up to 100,000 square feet of new office space, adaptive reuse of 311,000 square feet of commercial, retail, and flex space, roughly 500 hotel rooms, new and upgraded public and community facilities, 300 acres of new parks and public spaces, waterside facilities for the Treasure Island Sailing Center, and a new Ferry Terminal. The Planning Department expects full build-out over the next 15 to 20 years.

At four volumes, this should all make for some riveting light reading. Public comment will be accepted until August 26, with a public hearing scheduled for August 12.


Some images I found in the EIR Documents

http://www.sfplanning.org/index.aspx?page=1828

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4117/4793031801_9ebe362ff4_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4793031025_9345d671c2_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4079/4793030399_e90beff236_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4142/4793663620_59080a24cd_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4793028635_40c0027e4a_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4120/4793028153_6382037d94_b.jpg

peanut gallery
Jul 14, 2010, 4:17 PM
Thanks for pulling those out! I haven't taken the time to even download those docs yet. Those first two are really interesting. I haven't really thought about how this will all look from either the bridge or TI Rd, just from the city. Driving along the causeway will provide quite an impressive sight.

M II A II R II K
Apr 21, 2011, 2:51 PM
Treasure Island: ambitious plan for development


April 17, 2011

Read More: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/17/MNHE1IJT3A.DTL


.....

On Thursday, the City Planning Commission will be asked to give its final approval to both the environmental impact report for the project and the development itself, with a final hearing before the Board of Supervisors looming.

After five years of studies and negotiations, proponents still confront questions about two basic issues: transportation and seismic safety.

-- As a low-lying artificial island set between two major faults, geologists say that in its present state, Treasure Island's sandy soil could liquefy in a major earthquake and be threatened by rising sea levels.

-- Despite a plan that subsidizes ferry service and commuter buses, studies project that more than half of island residents will travel to and from work by automobile - a major strain on the Bay Bridge, which already is at capacity during commute hours.
A fresh question involves financing: the project was conceived as a redevelopment area, but Gov. Jerry Brown's move to scuttle the statewide system pushed developers and city officials this month to come up with a districtwide fee to pay for infrastructure improvements. This is a more costly approach, so the plan now includes 400 fewer units of affordable housing than were agreed to in 2006, a change sure to be debated in hearings ahead.

Other details have changed since the concept was introduced in 2005. The maximum number of housing units in the plan increased by 30 percent, even as several tower heights were lowered for aesthetic - and political - reasons. The ferry terminal was shifted to the south, leaving one-third of the residents outside the oft-touted 10-minute walk to ferry service.

The current plan also trims some of the project's more aggressive environmental strategies. In the original plan, for instance, construction of a central utility plant was described as a "key component" to reduce the island's energy use. The current documents say only that development "may include" a central plant.

If the $1.5 billion project is approved, developers anticipate two years of site work before construction of the first townhouses facing Yerba Buena Island. The initial phase also would include a small grocery within a 1938 airplane hangar, one of three buildings that remain from the World's Fair. The project, which also includes roughly 200 housing units on Yerba Buena Island and a hilltop park, is expected to take at least 15 years to complete.

.....

CyberEric
Apr 21, 2011, 10:53 PM
I am interested to see what happens tonight with this.

San Frangelino
Apr 22, 2011, 3:38 PM
I posted this on the "City Compilations" thread, but I'll also stick it here. It's shows the updated images and plans for T.I. The most obvious change is that the central tower has been reduced to 450ft. The adjacent towers have also been reduced in height. Other than that, things aren't drastically different.

The document:http://www.sftreasureisland.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=644

brantw
Apr 22, 2011, 4:23 PM
Sounds like it got approved!!! :)

"In a 4-3 vote the Planning Commission voted to approve the plan for the proposed $1.5 billion neighborhood on Treasure Island.

Commissioners Bill Sugaya, Christina Olague and Kathrin Moore -- all appointed by the Board of Supervisors -- voted against the plan. The mayor's four appointees approved the plan.

At the same meeting, the Treasure Island Authority - a separate oversight board - unanimously approved the plan.

The development has been in the works since 1997 when the Navy closed the base. The plans include 8,000 residential units, a 450-foot high-rise, robust transit and a vibrant shopping area, developers say.

The three commissioners who opposed the plan said they worried it was poorly considered and would actually do more harm than good.

They made special note of the recent cut of 400 affordable housing units, the governance of the development and the environmental impacts of adding 19,000 new residents to the island.

But supporters noted that no project of this scale could be perfect and the current plan was the best to improve the aging 403-acre Navy base.

"Twenty-five percent (affordable housing) is still better than zero percent, and no project is zero percent," said Commissioner Gwyneth Borden.

The project will now head to the Board of Supervisors for final approval."



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/cityinsider/detail?entry_id=87554#ixzz1KGnaMfrT

WildCowboy
Apr 22, 2011, 4:41 PM
What are the chances of it getting through the supes? It passed with Planning Commission with the votes of the four Newson-appointed members. The three Board-appointed members voted against it.

NOPA
Apr 22, 2011, 4:44 PM
Does anybody know how Chris Daly's successor is on these issues? I guess you can't be worse that Mr. Daly.

CyberEric
Apr 22, 2011, 6:25 PM
That is good news! Thanks for the update!

peanut gallery
Apr 22, 2011, 9:03 PM
What are the chances of it getting through the supes? It passed with Planning Commission with the votes of the four Newson-appointed members. The three Board-appointed members voted against it.

I noticed that too. I wouldn't be surprised if this is hung up with the Board for awhile to come. I hate to be pessimistic, but lately I find myself being rather jaded about the chances of this, Hunter's Point or Candlestick ever getting built. They all seem too grandiose for me to see them happening. Maybe I've just been beaten down by the recession...

San Frangelino
Apr 22, 2011, 11:21 PM
Here's a "skyline" view of the updated plan.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5222/5644292177_fdc10f37e5_b.jpg

ElDuderino
May 4, 2011, 7:40 PM
$1.5B Treasure Island plans clear another hurdle

Associated Press
Posted: 05/04/2011 10:10:24 AM PDT

SAN FRANCISCO -- Plans to turn a man-made island in San Francisco Bay into the city's newest neighborhood have cleared another hurdle.

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors' Land Use and Economic Development committee voted on Monday to approve the $1.5 billion plan, which would add 8,000 housing units to the 400-acre former Naval base.

The plan also includes 140,000 square feet of retail space and 300 acres of public open space on the island, created in the 1930s for the Golden Gate International Exposition. Currently, only about 2,000 people live there.

Supporters say the plan provides badly needed expansion for San Francisco. Opponents say expansion would create too much traffic on the already congested San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge.

The full board is scheduled to vote on the plan on May 17.

http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_17990939?source=rss

gtbassett
May 4, 2011, 11:24 PM
If Treasure Island is really redeveloped like they plan. They will NEED to build either another bridge/tunnel connecting it with the peninsula or some type of mass transit system that stops on the Island. Considering the major shipping channel that runs underneath the western span of the Bay Bridge to the Port of Oakland and the extreme clearance needed for those ships, it seems like a tunnel would be the best option but would also be really expensive. I would love to see a purely Muni Metro tunnel, but considering that they just barely secured funding for the North Beach line, it seems unlikely that that will happen in the near future. Either way, the Bay Bridge is already a nightmare when it comes to traffic, and adding 15,000 additional residents plus businesses would completely cripple the Bay Bridge and traffic would grind to a snail pace all day.

Here's hoping they build a light rail tunnel and extend the bicycle path bridge across the western span of the bridge.

ardecila
May 5, 2011, 12:06 AM
I think a frequent ferry service should be enough if it runs every 8 minutes during peak periods and every 15 minutes after that (every 30 minutes late-night).

If there is demand for a second Transbay tunnel, then we can talk about rail transit to Treasure Island.

In the long term, I could also see a reallocation of lane space on the Bay Bridge, turning the lower deck into two tracks/three eastbound lanes, with the upper deck becoming three westbound lanes and two reversibles.

Gordo
May 5, 2011, 12:24 AM
They're only allowing the equivalent of about 9,000 cars to be located on the island (8,000 parking spots in housing, plus ~1000 in street/commercial/etc parking). That's a negligible amount for the bridge to handle, considering that most won't be used at the same time. There will already be an added toll to leave the island (it's free now), and that can always be adjusted upward if traffic becomes a problem.

My worry is that the plan has far, far, far too few residences to make the island self-sufficient for many things, and also too few to make the rapid ferry services a decent investment. The whole plan is just far too small, IMO, and I fear that even the relatively small transit investments being made will become money pits for Muni or whatever operator gets saddled with them (Golden Gate Transit for the ferries?).

It would need to be 40-50,000+ units before we could even begin to talk about some type of bridge or tunnel, and even then that probably wouldn't be enough to make spending money on a tunnel smarter than spending it on Geary or a second Transbay tube south of the current one to go under Alameda and into Oakland from that direction.

ardecila
May 5, 2011, 11:05 PM
It would need to be 40-50,000+ units before we could even begin to talk about some type of bridge or tunnel, and even then that probably wouldn't be enough to make spending money on a tunnel smarter than spending it on Geary or a second Transbay tube south of the current one to go under Alameda and into Oakland from that direction.

You might be able to swing the cost of an aerial tramway. Building piers for the pylons in the Bay would be expensive, but far less than a bridge or tunnel. If designed properly, it can haul a decent load of passengers to SF or Oakland. I'm not sure about maintenance expense, but this would certainly require less manpower than a fleet of ferries.