HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #8861  
Old Posted Dec 31, 2017, 12:41 AM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 863
Here is another project (655 4th Street) that is relying on the approval of the Central SOMA Plan.

These are being designed by Bjarke Ingels Group aka BIG. The early design looks pretty interesting and I like the plaza and courtyard ringed by retail - we'll see how it evolves.





Source and more info at SocketSite

Quote:
Developer Tishman Speyer wants to build up to 907 apartments in two towers designed by Danish starachitect Bjarke Ingels Group at 655 4th St.

The proposed $540 million project envisions two 400-foot-tall towers along with about 26,600 square feet of commercial and retail space. Reaching those heights requires the city to approve the Central Soma Plan, a long-awaited upzoning plan along the path of a new light-rail track extension from Union Square to the 4th and King Station.
Source and article by the SF Business Times
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8862  
Old Posted Dec 31, 2017, 9:31 PM
Fvn Fvn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1977 View Post
Here is another project (655 4th Street) that is relying on the approval of the Central SOMA Plan.

These are being designed by Bjarke Ingels Group aka BIG. The early design looks pretty interesting and I like the plaza and courtyard ringed by retail - we'll see how it evolves.





Source and more info at SocketSite



Source and article by the SF Business Times
another double tower'd development from tishman speyer
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8863  
Old Posted Dec 31, 2017, 10:06 PM
homebucket homebucket is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 257
Hard to judge this one when the rendering is in black and white. Massing is a bit too blocky, imo. I'd prefer more slender towers, and preferably clad with glass.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8864  
Old Posted Jan 1, 2018, 12:16 AM
fimiak's Avatar
fimiak fimiak is offline
Build Baby Build
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 746
I love the massing and the design of it. Developers and Architects are growing bold in SF and I couldn't be more happy. Having lived in an 'all glass' building, I think the quality of life is inferior (there is such a thing as too much light, too much sun..facing West in 100 Van Ness is blinding for several hours every day). This will be the second largest development in San Francisco in terms of units created, after Trinity Place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8865  
Old Posted Jan 1, 2018, 10:29 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Top Retributor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: California
Posts: 2,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushMan View Post
The idea that San Francisco is "diverse" is laughable. Anyone who dares to stray from the prevailing "progressive" groupthink is outcast as a Nazi, a homophobe, or any number of other ridiculous slurs that have no basis in reality.

It's a real shame because there are still many wonderful things about this town but the arrogance and intolerance of many its denizens are not among them.
Maybe it’s time for you to move? I have a number of friends in the city who are frustrated and weary. I left for Sacramento a few years ago and haven’t regretted that move. No it’s not San Francisco (few places are) but my quality of life and bank account is much better off.
__________________
“Skyscrapers! Unhealthy ugly giants! To live and work as close as to the land is a blessing! Remember, you are not a cloud! Come down and live on the ground!”
― Mehmet Murat ildan

Last edited by ozone; Jan 1, 2018 at 6:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8866  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 1:36 AM
Boss-ton's Avatar
Boss-ton Boss-ton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 46
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8867  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 8:51 PM
gillynova gillynova is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss-ton View Post
I honestly cannot wait for this to be completed. The skyline in the 2020's will be a whole lot different. I'm eager to see how it will look like from Twin Peaks, Treasure Island and coming off 101.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8868  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 9:33 PM
homebucket homebucket is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 257
It is a shame 181 Fremont will be covered up partially by Park Tower though, at least from the Bay Bridge/TI views. Would've been nice if it got built up to its originally proposed height of 900 ft! Or swapped places with Park Tower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8869  
Old Posted Jan 3, 2018, 10:54 PM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 863
I really hope this happens this year. Would be great to see some real activity on the west side of the city:

From the SF Business Times
Quote:
S.F. megaproject Parkmerced to break ground on first of 5,679 new units

The developer behind San Francisco's Parkmerced megaproject expects to start construction on the first new buildings in the first half of this year. Parkmerced Investors LLC plans to break ground on nearly 1,000 units after months of permitting delays.

The 152-acre development, approved seven years ago, calls for 5,679 total new units. That's the most new housing ever built in a single project on the city's west side. Parkmerced already has 3,221 apartments, and 1,538 existing rent-controlled units in the project will be replaced. Fifteen percent of the new units will be affordable.

"Site permits are being finalized and we’re gearing up for an anticipated construction start in the first half of 2018. We look forward to making great strides toward our goal of transforming Parkmerced into a vibrant 'eco-neighborhood,' as well as doing a large part to make the late Mayor Ed Lee’s goal of building 30,000 new homes a reality," said P.J. Johnston, a developer spokesman.

Building permits were approved in December, but not yet issued, for three residential parcels, according to city records:

1208 Junipero Serra Blvd., a 299-unit, 17-story tower with an estimated construction cost of $131 million. Kwan Henmi is the architect.

455 Serrano Drive, a 248-unit, 11-story building with an estimated construction cost of $91.5 million. Woods Bagot is the architect.

300 Arballo Drive, an 89-unit, eight-story building with an estimated construction cost of $31 million. LMS Architects designed the building.
1208 Junipero Serra Blvd

https://parkmercedvision.com

455 Serrano Drive

https://www.bdcnetwork.com/designs-r...os-west-side-0

300 Arballo Drive

https://parkmercedvision.com

Last edited by 1977; Jan 3, 2018 at 10:55 PM. Reason: Forgot source
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8870  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2018, 5:55 AM
pseudolus pseudolus is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1977 View Post
I really hope this happens this year. Would be great to see some real activity on the west side of the city
This is not a popular opinion to have, I'm guessing, but I am not enthusiastic about this one. This is as far as you can get from the major job center and still be in the city. It destroys Tommy Church's gardens and the charming townhouses, while sparing the commie block towers that were added later. It will almost certainly be entirely car dependent, even after the city spends billions to convert a short segment of the M from an exclusive right-of-way to underground.

Just a huge mistake, all around.

Flame away.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8871  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2018, 9:56 AM
timbad timbad is online now
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 1,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus View Post
This is not a popular opinion to have, I'm guessing, but I am not enthusiastic about this one. This is as far as you can get from the major job center and still be in the city. It destroys Tommy Church's gardens and the charming townhouses, while sparing the commie block towers that were added later. It will almost certainly be entirely car dependent, even after the city spends billions to convert a short segment of the M from an exclusive right-of-way to underground.

Just a huge mistake, all around.

Flame away.
I'm actually at least partially, maybe substantially, in agreement. wish the towers were going instead of the garden apartments, and don't like what I perceive to be a somewhat haphazard disruption of the look and pattern of PM (tho I admit it's been a while since I've looked at the plans).

I'm a bit more hopeful that people will use the M once it is diverted into the complex itself.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8872  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2018, 12:20 PM
pizzaguy pizzaguy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 283
I grew up in one of those townhouses. There's nothing charming about them,
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8873  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2018, 5:38 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzaguy View Post
I grew up in one of those townhouses. There's nothing charming about them,
In appearance they resembled low cost housing slapped together in the Washington DC suburbs where I grew up to house returning veterans' famiies in the wake of WW II. I'm guessing that may have been the purpose they also served in SF. Am I right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8874  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2018, 8:30 PM
pseudolus pseudolus is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
In appearance they resembled low cost housing slapped together in the Washington DC suburbs where I grew up to house returning veterans' famiies in the wake of WW II. I'm guessing that may have been the purpose they also served in SF. Am I right?
The townhouses were conceived before then. The commie blocks towers were added to the plan later to deal with the housing demand right after the war. AFAIK.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8875  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2018, 12:57 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is online now
High on a Hill
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzaguy View Post
I grew up in one of those townhouses. There's nothing charming about them,
I had extensive involvement with a number of those townhouses for quite a few years and think they are very charming, especially the way both the blocks and unit layouts vary so much. They were and are very popular with residents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkmerced,_San_Francisco

Last edited by viewguysf; Jan 5, 2018 at 1:15 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8876  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2018, 1:10 AM
Stellar_Mass's Avatar
Stellar_Mass Stellar_Mass is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Redwood City
Posts: 24
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8877  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2018, 2:56 AM
pseudolus pseudolus is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzaguy View Post
I grew up in one of those townhouses. There's nothing charming about them,
Could you elaborate? Thanks.

I briefly dated someone who lived in one. It seemed nice enough on the interior. I know there have been problems for a long time with maintenance. As for the exteriors, it's one of my favorite places when I go for a run.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8878  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2018, 6:29 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,447
Quote:
750 homes could be coming soon to San Francisco's Mid-Market neighborhood
By Blanca Torres – Reporter, San Francisco Business Times
Jan 4, 2018, 2:00pm PST Updated 8 hours ago

Three major housing projects in San Francisco’s Mid-Market neighborhood could start construction soon adding more than 750 new homes — part of a massive wave of new housing in the area.

Developers have finalized or are close to finalizing building permits to move forward on the following sites:

- Group I’s 247 condos, a 232-room hotel and 16,050 square feet of retail at 950 Market St. The contractor is Bovis Lend Lease and estimated construction costs are $144 million.
- Shorenstein Properties’ 304 rentals at 1066 Market St. at an estimated construction cost of $84.6 million. Swinerton Builders is the general contractor.
- Tidewater Capital and Warhorse LLC's 186 units at 1028 Market St. Swinerton Builders is the contractor for the estimated $60 million construction project.
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranc...558&j=79447901
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8879  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2018, 8:17 AM
IMBY IMBY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 751
Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
Hard to judge this one when the rendering is in black and white. Massing is a bit too blocky, imo. I'd prefer more slender towers, and preferably clad with glass.
Indeed! This project cries out for glass! And why not different colored glass!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8880  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2018, 5:02 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,447
Quote:
Bill could add millions of new homes next to California's public transit stations
By Roland Li – Reporter, San Francisco Business Times
3 hours ago

California State Senator Scott Wiener proposed a trio of new housing bills on Thursday, including one that would make it easier to build taller projects near public transit.

Wiener (D-San Francisco)'s SB 827 calls for the statewide removal of single-family home and parking requirements for projects within a half-mile of transit hubs like BART, Muni and Caltrain stations.

The bill would mandate height limits of at least 45 feet to 85 feet for new projects, depending on how close they are to transit. Cities would be able to raise height limits beyond those minimums, and developers could also build smaller projects within the areas if they chose . . . .

Most of San Francisco would be included under the proposed law, since Muni buses are present in every neighborhood. Land along BART stations and Caltrain stations throughout the East Bay, on the Peninsula and in SIlicon Valley would also qualify, according to a previous map by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission . . . .
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranc...473&j=79452471
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:12 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.