THE BAY AREA | Projects from San Francisco's Surrounding 8 Counties - Page 57

1977 · #**1121** Posted **Dec 11, 2018, 12:09 AM**

New tallest proposed for the east bay...in Emeryville:

Quote:

Canadian developer pushes to build East Bay's tallest building: a 54-story tower in Emeryville

Canadian developer Onni Group is breaking into the Bay Area with a proposal to build 638 apartments in a 54-story tower along with a 16-story office tower in Emeryville. At a proposed height of 683 feet, the tower would be the city’s and the East Bay’s tallest building.

The tower, designed by Los Angeles-based IBI Group, features an “organic wave” design that incorporates juxtaposed balconies to create an undulating look.

Source

northbay · #**1122** Posted **Dec 11, 2018, 12:56 AM**

Beautiful! Build it please!

homebucket · #**1123** Posted **Dec 11, 2018, 1:51 AM**

That tower would have sick views. Just build it! I imagine there will be much opposition from the folks living in the Berkeley hills though.

iamfishhead · #**1124** Posted **Dec 11, 2018, 2:01 AM**

This is good, though it would probably be better positioned closer to BART. Capitol Corridor is not exactly frequently running transit.

gillynova · #**1125** Posted **Dec 14, 2018, 7:07 AM**

WOW!!! THAT IS BEAUTIFUL. BUILD IT PLEASE

(Sorry I'm a couple of days late)

patriotizzy · #**1126** Posted **Dec 14, 2018, 5:21 PM**

Design is cookie-cutter. We've seen this building in almost every major city.

'features an “organic wave” design that incorporates juxtaposed balconies to create an undulating look.'
At least they didn't label this unique or innovative.

I like it, for what it is. Not a bad look. However, I'm always holding out for something more. One thing is for sure, Emeryville is already under heavy construction. The blocks surrounding this proposal have seen a new hotel, a new park just completed, and a few new buildings that I am unsure whether they are commercial or residential.

Hopefully they throw all development onto Emeryville and leave Berkeley alone.

My heart would break if Berkeley changed too much.

BobbyMucho · #**1127** Posted **Dec 14, 2018, 6:17 PM**

As much as I'd love to see the waterfront around Emeryville be developed with density and transit in mind, I don't think this is the way to do it. Neither myself (who lives and works in the city) let alone anyone that lives in Oakland or Berkeley is excited about a bay lined and dotted with seemingly random 400-500ft towers. I would, however, be in full support of dense, mixed-use hubs with 8-10 story buildings and a few (very few) towers to break up the height/tabletop.

p.s. Where are the comprehensive development roadmaps for East Bay neighborhoods like this? Or are the cities relying entirely on decades-old zoning and the occasional, lofty rehab plan for initiative?

Pedestrian · #**1128** Posted **Dec 14, 2018, 6:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamfishhead

This is good, though it would probably be better positioned closer to BART. Capitol Corridor is not exactly frequently running transit.

Exactly. It's in the wrong place--will just add to I-80 traffic

viewguysf · #**1129** Posted **Dec 14, 2018, 7:15 PM**

In order to not seem negative, I was holding my comments since first seeing this elsewhere and then posted here, but I certainly wouldn’t call this development beautiful by any stretch of the imagination. It’s a mediocre version of others that sits on a big boxy parking podium and is located in the wrong place, away from good mass transit as others have well noted. I say down with it!

JWS · #**1130** Posted **Dec 14, 2018, 10:40 PM**

Oh man that's ballsy. Love it.

SLO · #**1131** Posted **Dec 14, 2018, 11:17 PM**

Good spot, looks a little Miami'ish....not a bad thing, I could see a cluster of residential highrises in that area.

SFBuildings888 · #**1132** Posted **Dec 15, 2018, 1:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLO

Good spot, looks a little Miami'ish....not a bad thing, I could see a cluster of residential highrises in that area.

Will this go to a vote? If it does, then I think it will be rejected.

JWS · #**1133** Posted **Dec 15, 2018, 2:28 AM**

Anybody who is familiar with Emeryville...what is their process like? Seems they are bullish on new construction in general and with such a low population, many of whom are in newer rentals/condos themselves, seems like NIMBYish would be less prevalent...although have no idea if this spot is remotely zoned for anything like this.

Pedestrian · #**1134** Posted **Dec 15, 2018, 2:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLO

Good spot, looks a little Miami'ish....not a bad thing, I could see a cluster of residential highrises in that area.

I'm guessing you don't regularly have to cope with Bay Bridge traffic. If so, you'd see why nothing should be done to exacerbate it including locating a lot of residential housing in a place where BART is either not an option or, at least, a bad one. This is especially true since there are plenty of places to build something like this adjacent to a BART station and, in many cases, localities have allowed NIMBY's to prevent it. The result is this proposal: Put it where you can and not where it should be. We need to resist that.

Pedestrian · #**1135** Posted **Dec 15, 2018, 2:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWS

Anybody who is familiar with Emeryville...what is their process like? Seems they are bullish on new construction in general and with such a low population, many of whom are in newer rentals/condos themselves, seems like NIMBYish would be less prevalent...although have no idea if this spot is remotely zoned for anything like this.

Emeryville may be among the Bay Area's least "NIMBYish" local jurisdictions which is probably why this developer proposes to put the building there: Because he might be able to get permission to build it. But it's not where it should be.

viewguysf · #**1136** Posted **Dec 15, 2018, 6:35 AM**

So many people here and elsewhere constantly denigrate parking spaces being included in San Francisco developments, yet this project includes 1,105 spaces in a six story podium garage. I agree with Pedestrian. The freeways and the maze next to Emeryville are already jammed with some of the worst commutes in the Bay Area. In the meantime, we have massively spread out low rise development and suburban sprawl in Milpitas and elsewhere next to or near BART stations. This belongs in one of those areas or in Oakland, not where it is proposed. The project's renderings show an empty freeway, something no one would ever see.

SLO · #**1137** Posted **Dec 15, 2018, 9:01 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I'm guessing you don't regularly have to cope with Bay Bridge traffic. If so, you'd see why nothing should be done to exacerbate it including locating a lot of residential housing in a place where BART is either not an option or, at least, a bad one. This is especially true since there are plenty of places to build something like this adjacent to a BART station and, in many cases, localities have allowed NIMBY's to prevent it. The result is this proposal: Put it where you can and not where it should be. We need to resist that.

No, not regularly. I would however say, that the status quo for infrastructure and density in the bay area cannot remain unless they want to impose moratoriums. Other cities are building many residential high rises in just as challenging a situation, but I understand the sentiment.

gillynova · #**1138** Posted **Dec 21, 2018, 12:47 AM**

Some Milpitas shots:

pseudolus · #**1139** Posted **Dec 21, 2018, 1:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gillynova

Some Milpitas shots:

So walkable!

Busy Bee · #**1140** Posted **Dec 21, 2018, 3:11 AM**

Yeah it's horrendous. It looks like the scenes from the dashboard cams of walking babushkas getting clipped by lunatic Russian drivers.