SAN FRANCISCO | Salesforce Tower | 1,070 FT (326 M) | 61 floors

[MyCitySFO]

Yes. Did see them. But thank you for bringing them here. Now I don't have to click on the link anymore. Can you also post the one picture that has the like a giant full moon to be used like when it's foggy? Please. I thank you in advance.

[SoCal Alan]

Originally Posted by SLO

Also love the view coming up 101 from the south....

That is the best. The anticipation of not seeing anything, and then all of a sudden, the skyline unfolds right in front of you as you drive north.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by MyCitySFO

Yes. Did see them. But thank you for bringing them here. Now I don't have to click on the link anymore. Can you also post the one picture that has the like a giant full moon to be used like when it's foggy? Please. I thank you in advance.

I don't see that on Socketsite--I posted all they have except this one, suggested by a comment:


http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/prod...amp_detail.jpg

[MyCitySFO]

I am sure that actually could be done... Would be so cool if they did something like that for Halloween????

[Jerry of San Fran]

Herewith is the artist's picture of what the lighting will look like. The image is from a submission to the City of San Francisco.

The San Francisco Chronicle has an article today about the artist and the light which is currently being installed. Thursday's presentation was a courtesy call and not required by the city.

Salesforce San Francisco by Apollo's Light, on Flickr

[Jerry of San Fran]

It is fun seeing Salesforce from different locations.

The brick building at the end of the street was a bathhouse in the early days. Many apartment buildings did not have baths then. I love the outside this building & have been inside which was a great disappointment.

Salesforce 05/06/2017 by Apollo's Light, on Flickr

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Jerry of San Fran

The brick building at the end of the street was a bathhouse in the early days.

Oh, my. Brings to mind something far different than what I think you were referring to and a different era of the "early days" (unless you are young enough to consider the Feinstein Administration the "early days" of San Francisco).

[ChipSF]

Some shots of the Salesforce Tower with glass and perforated metal panels beginning to wrap the crown.

[fimiak]

I can't believe they are working on a Sunday. The screen is going up fast. I think the cladding will be essentially done except where the cranes are positioned by the end of May.

[urban_encounter]

Not exactly an architectural icon but it's by no means a bad looking tower. More importantly it will give the SF skyline a boost and might open the door to additional similar sized towers in the future.

I can't wait to see it complete.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by urban_encounter

Not exactly an architectural icon

I think its simple sophistication is likely to make it an icon, at least on the West Coast.

It wasn't my choice among the candidates against which it competed, but I have come to think it probably should have been. I think the panel who picked it did the right thing. The truth is there aren't many supertalls I think are very good architecture. They may be extraordinary engineering, but attractive (to my eyes) most are not*. This one is.

*I always loathed the old World Trade Center--the new one is far superior. And I'm no fan of what I'll call the Sears Tower (because I'm not sure I know the right name of the moment) though the John Hancock is much better IMHO. Don't even bring up the tallest buildings in the Middle East and East Asia.

[mt_climber13]

This tower being chosen had nothing to do with the architecture but that the developer offered twice the $ amount for the land as the next competitor did, which the same developer later ended up giving only half that after they won.

[SLO]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I think its simple sophistication is likely to make it an icon, at least on the West Coast.

It wasn't my choice among the candidates against which it competed, but I have come to think it probably should have been. I think the panel who picked it did the right thing. The truth is there aren't many supertalls I think are very good architecture. They may be extraordinary engineering, but attractive (to my eyes) most are not*. This one is.

*I always loathed the old World Trade Center--the new one is far superior. And I'm no fan of what I'll call the Sears Tower (because I'm not sure I know the right name of the moment) though the John Hancock is much better IMHO. Don't even bring up the tallest buildings in the Middle East and East Asia.

I agree. I actually do think its iconic, in the way that Library(USBank) in LA is. Elegant, not over done towers with great size and height.

[SLO]

Originally Posted by SoCal Alan

That is the best. The anticipation of not seeing anything, and then all of a sudden, the skyline unfolds right in front of you as you drive north.

I agree, that is actually my favorite view of the skyline.

[Sky's the Limit]

Originally Posted by wakamesalad

This tower being chosen had nothing to do with the architecture but that the developer offered twice the $ amount for the land as the next competitor did, which the same developer later ended up giving only half that after they won.

I disagree that it had "nothing" to do with the architecture. I suspect at least some of the decision makers, believe or not, simply preferred PCP's design for the tower to SOM's and found the design and concept of the Transit Center's rooftop garden particularly compelling as well. While I liked the design of the SOM tower - notwithstanding its similarity to the firm's John Hancock Center on Chicago's Magnificent Mile - I cannot assume that the panel agreed with me but then went so far as to completely disregard their design preference and vote strictly based on the dollars. Obviously dollars are a key factor in a multi-billion dollar development project, but I don't believe it was the sole factor in this case. As an aside, I personally think the curtain wall system of PCP's tower - a specialty of the firm - exceptionally distinguishes it from SOM's design.

[OneRinconHill]

I'm not sure how I feel about those panels on top. They look a lot dirtier and less blended with the building than the renderings made them appear. I'm hoping the 4 white fins on the top will help tie it together.

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by SLO

I agree. I actually do think its iconic, in the way that Library(USBank) in LA is. Elegant, not over done towers with great size and height.

It does remind me of LA's Library tower and you're right, that tower has ended up becoming iconic on LA's skyline. Hopefully the same will hold true for Salesforce. Well without a doubt it's better looking than the Sears tower and John Hancock tower. I'm ok with the lines on the Hancock Tower but I've never been a big fan of very dark (black) tinted windows in towers. In any case, being originally from Sacramento, it's impressive watching all the new towers going up in SF proper.

[SFView]

If memory serves me correctly, aside from the money, I believe the competition panel was much more interested in the functional efficiency of the terminal rather than the design of the accompanying tower. The SOM design of the terminal appeared to have the most issues with the panel, much of it having to do with traffic flow. But I do remember some mention of concern that SOM's tower design might have been more difficult to shorten than the other competitor's towers if needed. It seemed much less an architectural beauty contest competition, and much more a competition for the best money package and terminal design layout. The tower was(is) more an accessory to aid funding support for the project than anything else. Please let me know if I am wrong, but that's the way I see it. In spite of this, I do feel lucky that the project is turning out a whole lot better than I originally thought it would be. Perhaps the panel did make the best choice, after all - even for us skyscraper fans as well.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by OneRinconHill

I'm not sure how I feel about those panels on top. They look a lot dirtier and less blended with the building than the renderings made them appear. I'm hoping the 4 white fins on the top will help tie it together.

Agree. I was thinking today myself that the top (it's not really a "crown") should be smooth, possibly frosted, glass, like a dome on the building (I hesitate to make any analogies that certain participants might consider phallc because I definitely don't want to start that again).

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by SFView

I do feel lucky that the project is turning out a whole lot better than I originally thought it would be.

Except with 13 lawsuits and counting plus no likelihood of trains coming into the building in my lifetime (maybe yours depending on your age), it may be pleasing architecture but it's probably going to be a economic disaster. And if it runs constant deficits, maintenance and even law enforcement will suffer so I wonder if what we've built is not the world's grandest homeless shelter. The only hope seems to be that Salesforce and/or other tenants of the adjacent and connected towers may form a "business improvement district" or some other arrangement whereby they can make sure that standards of maintenance and safety are kept up.