HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


View Poll Results: Which transbay tower design scheme do you like best?
#1 Richard Rogers 40 8.05%
#2 Cesar Pelli 99 19.92%
#3 SOM 358 72.03%
Voters: 497. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #621  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:37 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by nequidnimis View Post
I was at the presentation.

I personally vote for the Rogers'project. I like the way its expressed structure echoes the Golden Gate bridge, including the color. According to Roger's presentation, the building facade would be quite animated, like Llyod's or the Centre Pompidou. I think it is the project that is most likely to look as interesting once it is built as it did in the renderings and models.
I agree with your last above, but I think the Rogers terminal is the least interesting of them all and I think the idea of leaving it open with protection only above misunderstands San Francisco's cold, windy, drizzly and foggy weather. Lord Rogers must have only spent his time here in June and October.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #622  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:41 AM
bmfarley's Avatar
bmfarley bmfarley is offline
Long-Time Californian
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: California; All Over
Posts: 1,302
I don't like the top one, Roger's, at all. It looks like the model was done in the past week... rushed. The red frames on the corners remind me of oil rigs and our worship of fossil fuels... despite the knowledge that proposed is a 'green' structure.

I am most impressed with Pelli's. I like how it tapers to the top and the street running open air garden.

SOM's... I am indifferent.
__________________
- Think Big, Go Big. Think small, stay small.
- Don't get sucked into a rabbit's hole.
- Freeways build sprawl. Transit builds cities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #623  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:46 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBuchman View Post
I suspect the housing advocae was also an SSP forumer. Also worth noting that even Richard Mlynarik's comments were relatively benign.
And was going to mention Richard. For the first time, what he said made sense to me. In fact, as someone who has hiked from one end of an AMTRAK train to my compartment at the other end with too much luggage many times, he was spot on.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #624  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:47 AM
PBuchman PBuchman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 70
Pelli gets my vote. I think his tower's simple, tapering geometric form is an ideal complement to the TransAmerica Pyramid at the other end of the skyline. I also think that his adherence to more traditional geometric forms will more likely withstand the test of time than will the more abstract looking SOM proposal. Like BT, however, I have concerns about how much use a six-story public park would actually get.

SOM's design is very nice too, but I have to say that I dislike Rogers' intently. The red lattice work looks like a set of construction elevators.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #625  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:49 AM
caramatt caramatt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 36
It's Pelli most of the way for me guys. I agree with CityKid's earlier comment that Pelli really took into account the character of San Francisco, and how the design will integrate into the [new] skyline as a whole. A couple of comments that were made during his presentation that really stood out to me, but that you may have missed:

1) The rate at which the turbines on the top of the tower spin dictates the intensity of the light for the crown (awesome!)

2) The "3-dimensional" structuring of the facade. Pelli had a slide up briefly where he brought attention to the fact that 100% percent of the air in the building will come from outside - nothing will be recirculated - which is made possible by the unique facade. He then went to so far as to say no building in San Francisco should have an entirely glass curtain wall, and the proof is in the pudding based on his earlier work at 560 Mission.

3) The absolute detail that went into making the park what could only be considered an eastern Golden Gate with its water features and awesome selection of trees and plants (Peter Walker from Berkeley knows his stuff!). Plus, another great kinetic action was that the water jets on the northern fountain along the perimeter of the terminal would rise and fall according the pressure from the wheels of the AC Transit buses as they drive along below (awesome!)

Even beyond all my praise for the majority of the proposal, the underground portion of the terminal itself was extremely underwhelming. That, however, I would assume would be easily fixable in the future. I wish there were some renderings of the interior of Roger's terminal, with its wood interior ceilings and beautiful feats of integrated engineering. To me, that was the best terminal proposal, albeit the concrete roads on top aren't the most attractive (a park would be much nicer ;-) And the tower? The fact that they kept reiterating how it was only preliminary should give you an idea.

As for SOM, I'd definitely be happy if it wins as well, but obviously I'm rooting for Pelli. I just feel like that latticework facade is going to be dated even before its begun. Speaking of which, their proposal for the Shanghai Center tower, while symmetrical, is nearly identical to this one (check it out here). Lame for something that is supposedly audacious and new.

Go Pelli!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #626  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:51 AM
rajaxsonbayboi's Avatar
rajaxsonbayboi rajaxsonbayboi is offline
Pizza Pizza
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: bay area
Posts: 84
this one reminds me of HK's IFC building
__________________
l'architecture est le breuvage magique ce des feuls ma vie.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #627  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:53 AM
tyler82's Avatar
tyler82 tyler82 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SAN FRANCISCO
Posts: 561

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #628  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:53 AM
kenratboy kenratboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 1,096
Woohoo!!!

For me, in order I like:

SOM
Pelli
Rodgers

That said, you bet these will be tweaked and changed. Rodgers isn't doing it for me now, but I like the concept, and with different colors and designs, could be a winner.

San Francisco is unique because the buildings are not just 100% glass, many have stone and individual windows, and I would like to see this theme in a new building.

Reality is, they are all wonderful and any of them would be awesome.

Do we know anything about the other buildings? I would love to see any of these three, but what will be built along side them?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #629  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:54 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
This is the render that reminds me of Babylon (or is it Nineveh? Well one of the ancient Middle eastern seats of empire anyway):



And as someone else said, it IS just amazingly Dubai.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #630  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:58 AM
Stepping Razor Stepping Razor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Francisco, via Portland
Posts: 30
To my taste, the best of the three is SOM by a mile.

I was a bit worried to see at the hearing that AC Transit seems dead set against SOM's proposal to double-deck and shorten their bus area, however. Do we think AC Transit has the juice on the committee to kill SOM's chances?

It would be a shame if SOM were effectively disqualified by AC Transit's objections, and Pelli were disqualified by Chris Daly for providing no affordable housing, leaving us with no option but Rogers aesthetically much inferior (IMO) project as the only option.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #631  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 5:59 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenratboy View Post

Do we know anything about the other buildings? I would love to see any of these three, but what will be built along side them?
There's really only the site of the Piano project adjacent to the tower (diagonally across the intersection of 1st & Mission) and we haven't seen his design yet though everybody now assumes the cluster of bamboo notion. There's a lot on Fremont south of the terminal that's part of the TransBay project area but will probably not be developed for quite some time. The other potentially developable lots in the project area are all a block or two away from the signature tower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #632  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 6:00 AM
rocketman_95046's Avatar
rocketman_95046 rocketman_95046 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SD/SJ, CA, USA
Posts: 1,879
SOM's tower reminds me of Beijing's national "birds-nest" stadium for the 2008 olympics. And after seeing the nest in person, i would be thrilled with SOMs plan.


courtesy beijing-2008.org
__________________
1,000 posts and still going...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #633  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 6:03 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
Here is my stab at it (All these were taken by me).

Pelli Clarke Pelli:



Skidmore Owings and Merrill:









Richard Rogers:



__________________
Reject the lesser evil and fight for the greater good like our lives depend on it, because they do!
-- Dr. Jill Stein, 2016 Green Party Presidential Candidate

Last edited by Reminiscence; Aug 7, 2007 at 6:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #634  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 6:05 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBuchman View Post
SOM's design is very nice too, but I have to say that I dislike Rogers' intently. The red lattice work looks like a set of construction elevators.
It looks like a vertical Pompidou Center which, of course, was pretty thoroughly hated at first as well. That's why I'm now willing to put that sort of reaction aside. This is the Rogers style and I'd rather see his self-expression than the mediocrity of a committee which is what San Francisco usually ends up with. I'll learn to love anything bold.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #635  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 6:06 AM
kenratboy kenratboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 1,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTinSF View Post
There's really only the site of the Piano project adjacent to the tower (diagonally across the intersection of 1st & Mission) and we haven't seen his design yet though everybody now assumes the cluster of bamboo notion. There's a lot on Fremont south of the terminal that's part of the TransBay project area but will probably not be developed for quite some time. The other potentially developable lots in the project area are all a block or two away from the signature tower.
It will be interesting to see how all of this will fold together. I would like to think of this as a mater plan vs. a bunch of random buildings being built within a few blocks of each other.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #636  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 6:11 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
I had high expectations heading into today's meeting, and for the most part, I was not dissapointed. I'm dissapointed to say it but Roger's proposal does not strike me at all, it looks like some odd cross between the Sutro Tower and a gigantic air filter. SOM's tower looks very nice and so does Pelli's. However, when it comes to the terminal itself, I think Pelli's version beats the others. SOM's version scored some points with me because of the clear and transparent structure. However, Pelli's roof park proposal is a nice idea. At 5.4 acres, its no small park as said.

As for the towers themselves, Rogers once again failed to impress me as his tower looks too out of place design-wise. His tower doesnt give the city that iconic tower that is pleasing to the eye. A building such as the Chicago Spire is what San Francisco needs to define its skyline, something to that magnitude and design. SOM did a very nice job with the base of the building and I love how the shape and aesthetics of the building change as it rises. Pelli's design was nice as well; simple, sleek, and slender. The only things that bother me about Pelli's is the building looks too much like 2 IFC (naturally, as both have the same architect, Pelli), and the office only design makes it even more shaky. For that reason I think Skidmore Owings and Merrill takes my vote. The design of SOM is nice, but If it indeed is 1375', they need to go taller, they have room to grow. Something of at least 1500' would do nice as some other have already said. Overall, I was pretty satisfied with the proposals (except for Rogers, yikes). I'm just looking forward to hearing more information about them.

-- In the end, I'm left wondering ... what would Santiago Calatrava and/or Norman Foster proposed? --
__________________
Reject the lesser evil and fight for the greater good like our lives depend on it, because they do!
-- Dr. Jill Stein, 2016 Green Party Presidential Candidate

Last edited by Reminiscence; Aug 7, 2007 at 9:10 AM. Reason: Added Opinions
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #637  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 6:13 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by botoxic View Post
:

Nice job, you got me and the model.
__________________
Reject the lesser evil and fight for the greater good like our lives depend on it, because they do!
-- Dr. Jill Stein, 2016 Green Party Presidential Candidate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #638  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 6:15 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by djvandrake View Post


It's going to be very hard to decide between Pelli and SOM.

I absolutely LOVE the idea of the 5.4 acre park on the roof of the terminal in Pelli's proposal. Pelli's tower is sleek, elegant and beautiful. This is an awesome proposal.

The tower in the SOM design is by far the best (IMO). It's graceful and bold at the same time. The curvature of the structure and the twist in the form is most pleasing and complimentary. The base design is a masterstroke, just magnificent! The terminal design is also quite artisitc, open, light filled and beautiful. I was very impressed with the LEED standards that SOM is trying to obtain.

I'm sorry, but I really dislike the Rogers proposal. I normally like his work too, but I think he went too far here. I don't think this tower fits the context of the SF skyline at all, and the terminal is almost an afterthought.

Right now my fav is the SOM proposal. All I can say is whoever wins, you bay area fourmers are DAMN LUCKY!
Of all the instant reviews here tonight, yours most succinctly states what I am thinking after this feast for the mind and senses that you have all so wonderfully provided. I would gladly live with any of the three designs and feel that a major development like this is long overdue in our City. I think that the SOM design just absolutely rocks though! It's elegant yet confident and did initially remind me of a modern version of the Eiffel Tower with touches of SOM's Big John (which I've always loved). I'm thrilled that this firm still has it in them to create a design like this.

Roger's design will draw the most public criticism and could well be too hard edged to accomplish what we all want to achieve here--for the majority of the population to admire and appreciate skyscrapers in our midsts.

I'm thrilled with all of this though and think that I won't be the only one having good dreams tonight!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #639  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 6:25 AM
LWR's Avatar
LWR LWR is offline
Waiting for what's next..
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF: on top of a hill behind UCSF
Posts: 170
Thumbs up Elegance is the key...

If I were to choose one, based only upon the exact three photographed here, I would have to choose either Pelli or SOM. The other structure is much less elegant.

Nothing wrong with an elegant city hosting an elegant tower.
__________________
Show me a 12 foot fence and I'll show you a 14 foot ladder.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #640  
Old Posted Aug 7, 2007, 6:29 AM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,334
Damn, I gotta say, it's Pelli for me, with SOM close behind. The facade on Pelli's tower, and the terminal are amazing. The Pelli Tower may not be the boldest, but I love it's design, and I just see it fitting into the city the best out of all the proposals. Just imagine it alongside the Millenium tower, and the other buildings along Mission Street...looking at that massive wall of skyscrapers from the terminals rooftop park..

As for SOM, it's amazing. But I agree with others when they say it'll be dated looking sooner than the Pelli tower. But it is huge, and the base is jaw-dropping.

Rogers? Sorry, but it's not working for me. The first thing I thought of when I saw it, was the Sutro Tower, not the Golden Gate Bridge, and while the Sutro tower is an SF landmark, anything resembling it in any shape, way or form, has no place Downtown, in my opinion. Changing the color of the latticework would be better, but...it seems much less refined and elegant than the other towers. Waaaay too Hard edged, definitely.

Pelli, just...works, and aside from the no housing thing (which is a big thing unfortunately), I see it being the most likely to be accepted overall...
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 > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:31 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.