SAN FRANCISCO | Trinity Place | 240 FT / 73 M | 24 FLOORS
 

This project finally received approvals from the Board of Supervisors after endless delays and debates, first at the Planning Commission and then on appeal, at the Board. But now it's a go--assuming the developer, Angelo Sangiacomo, can get financing. In another thread, word came that things are moving:

So I figured it's time to give this monster from Arquitectonica, that I hope will change mid-Market St. forever, a thread of its own.

http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/200...ba_trinity.jpg

It will have 1900 units and will replace this somewhat ugly structure:

http://www.examiner.com/images/newsr...A4D1CA1DFC.jpg

The available renderings:

http://static.flickr.com/54/150075930_2dfe827cc8_o.jpghttp://static.flickr.com/52/150075932_fdafecd0c8_o.jpghttp://static.flickr.com/54/150075934_8f6609467a_o.jpg

Wow, that looks phat and fat. Aquitectonica definitely has a style... this just seems a little bit more Beijingy than San Francisco. Still cool though.

Definetly a big improvement over whats there now. If the news about iminent construction is true, then this thread may not be in this forum for long, lets hope thats the case because we've been waiting for a long time for this one. This is one I'll watch going up for sure.

i wish we had that in atlanta. super sui generis.

Here are a couple of additional renderings, that give some context to the project:
http://www.squareoneproductions.com/...inity2/lb1.jpg
http://www.squareoneproductions.com/...rinity/lb1.jpg

Wow, to me it looks even bigger in those renderings. Perhaps its because I'm comparing it to its future neighbors. Thanks for sharing those renderings. :)

^^^So it appears the taller parts are toward Mission St. (to 24 stories--I'm using the figures given in the "Compilations" thread here and also from counting the floors in the second rendering I posted above). I wasn't clear on that before. But at 13-16 stories along Market St., it seems to make a nice streetwall (better than I previously understood).

Someone was talking about the views of SOMA Grand on its thread, but it seems like this will pretty much block those.

Yes, the market street buildings will only be 12-13 stories (~120'), and the buildings on mission will step up to 24 stories or 240'. all of the western views from the soma grand will be completely walled off once this project is completed considering the mass and height of the trinity buildings lining mission street.

How many of these units are going to be "affordable" or is the developer doing what many others (shamelessly) do and put them on another low income part of town?

How many square feet does this cover?

looks much better in the first renderings than the "additional"

My recollection is that what Chris Daly "negotiated" was 12% affordable. McGoldrick wanted 15% but didn't get it. Still, I believe the "affordable" units will all be on site and furthermore the existing tenants will be allowed to rent units in the new buildings at their existing rents (plus, I'm sure, whatever increases they could have gotten under the rent control ordinance).

What "low income part of town" are you referring to? I've been looking for a cheap part of San Francisco for 25 years.

This is going to be "mass market" rental housing. Think a downtown version of Park Merced. But that's what San Francisco really needs: rental housing that a reasonable number of "regular folks" can afford. You can't do that in glassy towers with Bay views. It probably can only be done in big, chunky, hulking buildings with no views worth mentioning. But we need it none the less and mid-Market is a good place for it because that area needs people living there in large numbers and walking around to put life in those panhandler-infested, deserted-at-night sidewalks.

I like it. Very nice. :yes:

Does kind of look like the Pink Palace though. (see http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...54C0A967948260 if you don't get the reference).

Soooooooooooo very true! I moved here from the DC area and not only did my rent double, but my space is half.

The only thing shameful
 

The only thing shameful is the hoops that had to be jumped through to appease everyone on this project. Lots to read

I am not sure I get why affordable housing in "low income" areas is shameful at all.

truth is
 

The truth is if Sangiacomo didn't own this land for many years there is no way this thing could pencil out

And we all wonder why few rentals or anything other than high end condos and "affordable" housing get built in SF

And
 

Again only possible because of unusual circumstances. BOS really don't care about "mass market" housing

I don't hate it!