SAN FRANCISCO | Treasure Island / Sun Tower - Page 6

Gordo · #**101** Posted **May 6, 2011, 4:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila

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.

That would be very cool, and something that has occasionally come up in discussions over the past decade. I don't see it ever happening though, because any real discussion would be quickly overwhelmed by the Telegraph Hill Dwellers and other local NIMBY groups with deep pockets. Building something new on the island is one thing, altering their view of the Bay Bridge is something entirely different.

I think it would be awesome though.

ardecila · #**102** Posted **May 6, 2011, 4:34 PM**

It would be historically fitting, too... Andrew Smith Hallidie apparently invented one of the world's first tramway systems to use in mines.

Cable-based systems (cable cars, suspension bridges, elevators, etc) seem to be an SF trademark.

mahanakorn · #**103** Posted **May 6, 2011, 5:34 PM**

Interesting idea! An aerial tram might actually be quite practical. Not too expensive to build, potentially aesthetically pleasing, and such a spectacular view that visitors (i.e. non-Fast Pass / non-Clipper / non-transfer passengers) would happily cough up $5 a pop for the ride. Might even be a money-maker.

Similar systems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Aerial_Tram http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Island_Tramway

CyberEric · #**104** Posted **May 10, 2011, 4:59 PM**

An aerial tram would be very cool, good ideas.

Any updates on where this project is right now?

peanut gallery · #**105** Posted **May 10, 2011, 6:17 PM**

^ It's been approved by Planning and the Land Use Committee. It's supposed to go before the full board for approval next week.

San Frangelino · #**106** Posted **Jun 8, 2011, 2:22 PM**

From socketsite: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2....html#comments

Quote:

Treasure Island Redevelopment Plans Approved! (Appeal Rejected)

Narrowly passed by San Francisco’s Planning Commission in April, last night San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the 550 acre redevelopment of Treasure and Buena Vista Island and rejected the appeal backed by the Sierra Club and Aaron Peskin.

Over the next few decades, 240,000 square feet of retail and commercial, 10,680 parking spaces, 8,000 new residences (2,000 of which will be affordable), and over 300 acres of open space will be developed on the islands, with ground slated to be broken next year.

Surprised to see that the Board unanimously approved it. Perhaps more than any other large scale redevelopment project happening in the Bay Area, I am most excited to see how this one turns out.

CyberEric · #**107** Posted **Jun 8, 2011, 5:18 PM**

Very exciting and surprising news. I hope this turns out to be a great project.

My biggest concern is that it's being built on a man-made island and could be under water if the Bay rises.

rocketman_95046 · #**108** Posted **Jun 8, 2011, 5:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CyberEric

Very exciting and surprising news. I hope this turns out to be a great project.

My biggest concern is that it's being built on a man-made island and could be under water if the Bay rises.

if the bay rises much, this will be the least of our concerns.

Dylan Leblanc · #**109** Posted **Dec 18, 2011, 2:49 AM**

Here's a video which talks about some of the symbolism of the Sun Tower, among other things.

• Video Link

flight_from_kamakura · #**110** Posted **Jan 2, 2012, 2:56 AM**

no offense, dylan, but that's one of the most ludicrous things i've ever seen. we literally laughed the whole way through. excluding the many plain factual errors and absurd assumptions, there's nothing even remotely useful there. the only thing missing was a conspiracy about the events of sept 11th.

anyway, on the realism side of things, my friend on treasure island just got a pamphlet or something trying to organize people there against the whole project, which is to say that we'll see if this thing doesn't get caught up in the sf development vortex.

murrax · #**111** Posted **Apr 12, 2012, 4:27 AM**

A BART extension to the island would alleviate traffic on the bridge

homebucket · #**112** Posted **Jun 22, 2012, 8:12 PM**

From the SJ Mercury:
http://www.mercurynews.com/science/c...ise?source=rss

"At risk over the next generation: low-lying areas such as San Francisco and Oakland airports, Treasure Island, Alviso in San Jose and low-lying communities such as Foster City and Redwood Shores, particularly during winter storms at high tide."

Have there been any other updates on this project since the board approval in 6/2011? Is this news (or old news, rather) going to affect the project in any way? Has the grading and seawall infrastructure work been completed yet? (See BTinSF's post #61)

minesweeper · #**113** Posted **Jun 26, 2012, 6:54 PM**

Lennar may turn to China to jump-start the Treasure Island project:

Quote:

Chinese in Talks to Fund U.S. Homes
State Bank in Talks to Provide Lennar $1.7 Billion for Two Long-Stalled Projects
By DINNY MCMAHON and ROBBIE WHELAN, June 25, 2012

Lennar Corp., one of the U.S.'s largest home builders, is in talks with the China Development Bank for approximately $1.7 billion in capital to jump-start two long-delayed San Francisco projects that would transform two former naval bases into large-scale housing developments, according to people familiar with the discussions.

The negotiations aren't final and the financing arrangement could still fall through. But if completed, the deal would reflect a changing dynamic between the U.S. and Chinese economies, as an American company turns to China for help funding a long-delayed and partially publicly funded project that otherwise wouldn't get done.

The developments, Treasure Island and Hunters Point Shipyard, also have the potential to alter San Francisco's housing market by providing nearly 20,000 new homes, a sports arena and millions of square feet of office and retail space in a market that is land-constrained and has had limited new construction. The city has committed hundreds of millions of dollars, in the form of tax-increment bonds, to the projects, which in total are expected to cost $10.5 billion over the next few decades.

San Frangelino · #**114** Posted **Dec 4, 2012, 2:59 AM**

From The Bay Citizen

Quote:

Treasure Island development plans inch forward
But significant hurdles remain, including loans from China and environmental lawsuit

By MATT SMITH AND KATHARINE MIESZKOWSKI on December 3, 2012 - 12:01 a.m. PST

After a decade of delays, San Francisco is taking concrete steps toward turning the former sandbar known as Treasure Island into a $1.5 billion condominium community.

However, obstacles remain for the project, a top priority for three of the city’s mayors. Barriers include political uncertainty about a bid for loans from the Chinese government, a pending environmental lawsuit, and residents’ worries about the U.S. Navy‘s cleanup of toxic and radioactive waste at the former military base.

Continue Reading...

timbad · #**115** Posted **Mar 12, 2013, 4:59 AM**

Chron today had a little blurb about this:

Quote:

Big sit-down the other night at the 5A5 Steak Lounge on Jackson Street to try to seal the mega-development deal that Mayor Ed Lee hopes to sign on his upcoming trip to China.
At issue: finalizing a $1.7 billion deal with China Development Corp., the Chinese national railway and Lennar Corp. to construct 12,500 homes on the Hunters Point Shipyard and a string of high-rises on Treasure Island.
...Rose Pak's setting up the mayor's trip to Beijing at the end of March.
...
"We're trying very hard to time it so that my arrival is for a celebration rather than more negotiations," Lee said Friday....

theskythelimit · #**116** Posted **Apr 11, 2013, 8:45 PM**

Loos like the Chinese are out. Deal collapses and no deal signed.

http://blog.sfgate.com/matierandross...t-ti-collapse/

fflint · #**117** Posted **Apr 11, 2013, 9:42 PM**

So Mayor Ed Lee comes home to San Francisco from his expensive junket to China bearing very, very bad news.

Meanwhile, across the Bay, Jean Quan stays home but gets to announce very, very good news from China...

theskythelimit · #**118** Posted **Apr 12, 2013, 6:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fflint

So Mayor Ed Lee comes home to San Francisco from his expensive junket to China bearing very, very bad news.

Meanwhile, across the Bay, Jean Quan stays home but gets to announce very, very good news from China...

Quite ironic indeed. But, having lived in China, I learned not to take their word for it. I would not be surprised to see the Oakland deal to fall through. But then again, Oakland is known for giving away the store and would concede anything the Chinese want. At least Learner stood by and did not sign away their rights. I would like to see a US financial institution to step forward but that is wishful thinking.

fimiak · #**119** Posted **Apr 12, 2013, 7:31 PM**

The Chinese firm had tax problems and wanted a lot more control of Treasure Island than the developer was prepared to give. I think this result is probably better in the long run for SF Bay than if the island's future was handed over to foreign investors without checks in place.

biggerhigherfaster · #**120** Posted **Apr 12, 2013, 8:17 PM**

Meh, I never thought the Treasure Island project was such a good idea. Building skyscrapers and 5-10k housing units mixed with "urban farms" on landfill that is relatively unhabited at the moment and trying to minimize/eliminate cars...while providing limited transportation options to/from the island? Seemed more like a pipe dream for city planning academics than anything else

Didn't seem like the brightest idea. Imo, Treasure Island should remain mostly parkland with some housing. If we want dense development, it should be in SF or Oakland