SAN FRANCISCO | Oceanwide Center | 910 & 636 FT | 61 & 54 Floors | ON HOLD - Page 13

rriojas71 · #**241** Posted **May 11, 2015, 2:44 AM**

i agree with mdsayh1... Although I love the height and elegance of Salesforce it feels like it has been done already. I think the design and massing of this building is so unique that it will make an indelible impact on SF's siyline and will be talked a out for years to come.

peanut gallery · #**242** Posted **May 11, 2015, 3:15 AM**

Love those renderings, spy guy, thank you for posting them. If this gets built as currently designed, it might be my favorite skyscraper in the city.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdsayh1

Sorry if this is a stupid question, just wondering when we could see this begin construction?

Last I recall reading, they hope to get approvals done late this year and start construction next year.

mt_climber13 · #**243** Posted **May 11, 2015, 4:34 AM**

Stunning!!! San Francisco deserves this.

tall/awkward · #**244** Posted **May 11, 2015, 11:59 PM**

Did they add some kind of slab to one side of the taller tower?

peanut gallery · #**245** Posted **May 12, 2015, 1:23 AM**

^Hmmm, I'm not sure what you're referring to. There are existing buildings next to the site that are represented as plain shapes. Perhaps you are looking at one of those?

SFView · #**246** Posted **May 12, 2015, 1:45 AM**

Yes, there is slab like protrusion on the west elevation of the taller building. It shows in two of the renderings - the view looking north, and the view looking upward at the southeast corner. Look at the south (left) edge of the tower in the southeast view. There is a stepped back slab portion of the building just visible at the building edge. The west protrusion was not included in the 3d prints of the building.

viewguysf · #**247** Posted **May 12, 2015, 4:20 AM**

I was wondering the same thing.

view guys thinking alike...

peanut gallery · #**248** Posted **May 12, 2015, 3:10 PM**

Doh, got it. Somehow I ignored those as background buildings but they are too tall for that. In the view looking up First it looks almost like a bad bit of photoshop work. But there is definitely some structure in the view looking up from the corner that I ignored as 25 Jessie. Makes me a little nervous about how this will look from the west.

tech12 · #**249** Posted **May 12, 2015, 6:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

Doh, got it. Somehow I ignored those as background buildings but they are too tall for that. In the view looking up First it looks almost like a bad bit of photoshop work. But there is definitely some structure in the view looking up from the corner that I ignored as 25 Jessie. Makes me a little nervous about how this will look from the west.

I'm thinking someone just screwed up those two renderings a bit, and it wasn't caught for whatever reason. I see no reason why they would suddenly add a giant blank slab to one half of the building.

In the second rendering, the "slab" looks kind of like a non-textured mirror image of the shorter 600' tower. Though in the third rendering it just looks like...a slab. That's taller than the 600' building. Weird.

SFView · #**250** Posted **May 12, 2015, 9:07 PM**

Here is a west view that was posted earlier. It isn't very clear, but it looks like there could be pop-out portion of the building that has a central spine with wings that spread out on both sides at around the 600 foot level. The center spine terminates at the roof 850 foot level according to the other rendering looking north. The mystery slab doesn't show in some of the renderings by others, so we may not be the only ones that are possibly confused. It would be nice if we can have another drawing or rendering from the architect that shows the western building shape more clearly.

SLO · #**251** Posted **May 12, 2015, 11:16 PM**

Nice! Add in all of the Rincon hill towers and it's really stretched the skyline

mt_climber13 · #**252** Posted **May 13, 2015, 5:57 AM**

Such an incredible collection of signature towers in that rendering. No other city outside of NY and Chicago even comes close!

boyinthecity · #**253** Posted **Jul 25, 2015, 1:41 AM**

Has anything changed since the property was sold to new owners?
Is it still in the planning process?
Personally, I like Foster's taller tower, but he shorter one looks cheap and bland.
IMHO, the two towers should match architecturally.

We need a couple of 900' plus towers to balance-out the height of the transbay/salesforce tower.

slock · #**254** Posted **Jul 25, 2015, 3:56 AM**

All of the planning documents, including environmental, office allocation, and conditional use were submitted on June 5th. See files here under attachments and related records (https://aca.accela.com/ccsf/Cap/CapD...gencyCode=CCSF).

Unfortunately it appears the bulky slab does in fact protrude from the rear of the taller tower, lessening the elegance of the design. I wouldn't have a problem with it if the slab ended around 600 feet -- it's the fact that it goes almost all the way to the crown that I struggle to embrace.

The Lurker · #**255** Posted **Jul 25, 2015, 4:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakamesalad

Such an incredible collection of signature towers in that rendering. No other city outside of NY and Chicago even comes close!

Agreed! This cluster of new towers is a long time coming. San Francisco has always had the density of a black hole. just missing a few exclamation points. Not to mention the topography, Golden Gate... SF will be one of the most recognizable cities in the world.

SFView · #**256** Posted **Aug 7, 2015, 7:22 AM**

This project is now called "Oceanwide Center"

http://www.mka.com/projects/featured/oceanwide-center

http://www.fosterandpartners.com/pro...anwide-center/

bflatflat9 · #**257** Posted **Aug 8, 2015, 12:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFView

This project is now called "Oceanwide Center"

http://www.mka.com/projects/featured/oceanwide-center

http://www.fosterandpartners.com/pro...anwide-center/

So BAD ASS! I miss the bay.

minesweeper · #**258** Posted **Aug 18, 2015, 4:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by slock

All of the planning documents, including environmental, office allocation, and conditional use were submitted on June 5th. See files here under attachments and related records (https://aca.accela.com/ccsf/Cap/CapD...gencyCode=CCSF).

SocketSite has some new renderings that they seem to have pulled from that link. I'll just skip the middleman and post the renderings here:

Quote:

The 61-story First Street Tower, 850 feet in height, would have 34 stories (approximately 1.01 million square feet) of office space above an approximately 68-foot-tall urban room that would provide publicly accessible open space. Two intervening stories would contain mechanical equipment and residential amenities, and the topmost 19 floors would contain approximately 111 residential units. Approximately 2,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space would be provided on a portion of the ground floor. To make way for the First Street Tower, the four buildings at 40, 50, 62, and 76-78 First Street would be demolished. The First Street Tower’s gross floor area is as follows: 415,794 gfa of residential, 1,014,436 gfa of office, and 2,642 gfa of retail, for a total size of 1,432,872 gfa.

The 605-foot-tall Mission Street Tower would be a 54-story residential and hotel building, also with ground-floor retail space, and would occupy a currently vacant site at the corner of Mission Street and Ecker Place. A hotel containing approximately 169 rooms along with conference and meeting space, dining facilities, and other amenities, would be located on the floors 3-21 of the building, and approximately 154 residential units would be located on the upper 33 levels. The Mission Street frontages would have separate entrances for the residential units and hotel, with a two-story lobby for each use. Approximately 3,500 square feet of ggroundfloor retail space would extend along Ecker Place from Mission Street to Elim Alley, with access from Ecker Place. The Mission Street Tower’s gross floor area is as follows: 382,604 gfa of residential, 245,895 gfa of hotel, and 3,139 gfa of retail, for a total of 631,638 gfa.

The Project proposes to retain, renovate and integrate the existing building at 88 First Street with the Project. The Project will preserve the character-defining historic features of the existing building at 88 First Street.

Credit: Foster + Partners

a very long weekend · #**259** Posted **Aug 18, 2015, 5:05 AM**

looks good, though i'll miss the 1st street buildings and that old sf feel along richardson, which will surely become the parking/loading ingress. the heller manus hotel/apparments look okay but heller manus has never done a good street job and they won't here either unless the city forces them too. leave ecker lane alone, pull all your shitty ass parking and that under 50 first street and follow the wonderful lead of 535 mission street. i.e. fight with your chinese masters for what's right! (who am i kidding, it'll all come down to what planning forces upon them).

as an aside, it's a bit shocking how good the renderings have become over the past 4-5 years.

Zapatan · #**260** Posted **Aug 18, 2015, 3:20 PM**

This building is so awesome. Build now please