HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #5461  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2013, 9:50 PM
brady&market brady&market is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 10
One Tenth Street (Market Square) Rendering

I was wondering what the One Tenth Street building located in Market Square was going to look like given that they did not re-skin the first two floors. Here is an image I found, Fitness SF is opening a new gym there in 2014....

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5462  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2013, 11:30 PM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWS View Post
Warriors Arena will get taken to the ballot, but the city seems to be overwhelmingly in favor of it (or at least enough are for it to pass). I don't think Mission Rock is in enough of an established area for people to rally against it. The only housing around it is brand new as well. The ones in bold I've essentially kissed off as "will never happen" long ago. Mexican and Howard from NIMBYism, and the other large scale projects as just pipedreams.
The thing about the warriors arena is the inclusion of the condo "towers" across the street (more like midrises, really). I know most of SF wants the arena, but the NIMBY propaganda about how luxury residential and waterfront towers are bad, seems to be accepted by a lot of people, and it makes me kind of nervous.

Same deal with the Mission Rock development, which actually does have people on Potrero Hill who will complain about tall buildings going up over there...and these are not only tall buildings, but tall buildings on the *gasp* waterfront! And they surely will not be very affordable either. I can just see Art Agnos and the wealthy NIMBY brigade latching onto it like they did with 8 Washington, and convincing enough San Franciscans to vote it down or at least get the towers killed.

And I feel the same thing could happen in regards to treasure island, 75 howard, hunters point, the Mexican museum tower, and park merced (if the TI/HP/Park Merced projects even happen).

But hopefully the success of "no on B&C" can be attributed more to the fact that barely anyone voted (but all the angry NIMBYs did, of course), rather than to the views of the majority of SF residents. I know that according to recent polls a majority of San Franciscans do see new housing construction as an important and necessary thing, and do want the warriors arena, for example. I guess the goal then is to inform non-NIMBY people about what's going on, and get them to vote when the inevitable NIMBY ballot measures show up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5463  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2013, 12:31 AM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech12 View Post
The thing about the warriors arena is the inclusion of the condo "towers" across the street (more like midrises, really). I know most of SF wants the arena, but the NIMBY propaganda about how luxury residential and waterfront towers are bad, seems to be accepted by a lot of people, and it makes me kind of nervous.

Same deal with the Mission Rock development, which actually does have people on Potrero Hill who will complain about tall buildings going up over there...and these are not only tall buildings, but tall buildings on the *gasp* waterfront! And they surely will not be very affordable either. I can just see Art Agnos and the wealthy NIMBY brigade latching onto it like they did with 8 Washington, and convincing enough San Franciscans to vote it down or at least get the towers killed.

And I feel the same thing could happen in regards to treasure island, 75 howard, hunters point, the Mexican museum tower, and park merced (if the TI/HP/Park Merced projects even happen).

But hopefully the success of "no on B&C" can be attributed more to the fact that barely anyone voted (but all the angry NIMBYs did, of course), rather than to the views of the majority of SF residents. I know that according to recent polls a majority of San Franciscans do see new housing construction as an important and necessary thing, and do want the warriors arena, for example. I guess the goal then is to inform non-NIMBY people about what's going on, and get them to vote when the inevitable NIMBY ballot measures show up.
Then all they have to do to win is have all anti development ballot measures on lame duck or off season election days. Only the angry vote then. That's how 8 Washington worked. And don't think they won't do it again, and again.they have created a recipe which they know works well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5464  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2013, 12:59 AM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,287
Saitowitz project on 15th and South Van Ness, replacing a former parking lot. This is a great project because it can really help turn around this area.. or should I say the evil word.. gentrify!






Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5465  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2013, 6:15 AM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakamesalad View Post


Such an ugly building, even by Saitowitz standards. Maybe they can leave the wrapping on?

Still, the current auto-oriented South Van Ness is a travesty, especially considering how close to BART it is, So I am all in favor, generally, of more housing and neighborhood retail along here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5466  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2013, 5:44 PM
jbm jbm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 128
It looks like some work may start soon on 1321 mission (micro units i think). I walked by the other day and it was finally fenced off.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5467  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2013, 6:14 PM
simms3_redux's Avatar
simms3_redux simms3_redux is offline
She needs her space
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,454
I think 2014 is going to be the biggest year for construction in the city, potentially ever. Looking forward to the ridiculousness, and I don't think most even realize the extent, even those of us in the city. It needs recapping and reminders because our city/skyline is already big enough to miss a lot of the big stuff going up.

Kinda "done" at this point

NEMA - 22/37 stories
ORH North - 50 stories
535 Mission - 27 stories
55 Ninth - 17 stories
Most of Upper Market (with exception of glass for 8 Octavia and Forest City's gas station replacement)

2014 will be the year of:
350 Mission - 33 stories (now at street level)
45 Lansing - 45 stories (now at street level)
201 Folsom - 37/43 stories (crane now up and core of mid-rise visible from street)
222 Second - 26 stories (excavation nearly done, that crane has got to be on its way)
SFMOMA expansion - going to be HUGE, suspect we'll see its size by year end)
181 Fremont - 54 stories (I suspect we'll get well out of the box by year end, at least through office portion of frame)
TB Block 6/7 - 32 stories (I suspect this will rise VERY rapidly)
340 Fremont - 40 stories (I suspect we'll get past excavation and see a crane, may turn into more of a 2015 construction)
399 Fremont - 45 stories (I think this thing is going to move VERY fast now - I've seen Metlife invest in several multifamily towers in Atlanta and once Metlife got on board, things shot up)
TB Tower - 60 stories (I think we'll get past excavation)


I also think 2014 and 2015 will be the year of the 10-20 story tower along the Market St corridor (we're already seeing several of those projects breaking ground and all the renovations along Mid-Market will only make the area more desirable). 15 story Hampton Inn is moving along at several floors now.

2014 will also be the year of Hayes Valley as all those projects get going.

I don't know that any city outside of NYC in the United States can touch this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5468  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2013, 11:19 PM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 3,150
333 Brannan

altho socketsite said this one had gotten underway, I didn't see much evidence when I walked by yesterday

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5469  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2013, 11:25 PM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 3,150
speaking of 333s...

... at 333 Fremont looks like the sidewalk out front will be usable again soon. looking north



now let's get a few hundred neighbors on that street so they can use it! :-)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5470  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2013, 11:58 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by simms3_redux View Post
I don't know that any city outside of NYC in the United States can touch this.
You're kidding, right? Good to hear what is happening in SF, but you seem to have forgotten that Chicago has the kind of high rise boom you just described (and even now one roughly double in volume to what you predict for SF in 2014 despite this being nowhere remotely close to Chicago's high rise construction peak) year after year...

Anyhow, I had to interject that. Carry on..
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q

Last edited by the urban politician; Dec 23, 2013 at 12:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5471  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2013, 12:12 AM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 3,150
the BMR project on Broadway where the freeway ramp used to be is quietly making good progress:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5472  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2013, 2:38 PM
coyotetrickster's Avatar
coyotetrickster coyotetrickster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
You're kidding, right? Good to hear what is happening in SF, but you seem to have forgotten that Chicago has the kind of high rise boom you just described (and even now one roughly double in volume to what you predict for SF in 2014 despite this being nowhere remotely close to Chicago's high rise construction peak) year after year...

Anyhow, I had to interject that. Carry on..
What happens in a flyover state doesn't count.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5473  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2013, 3:36 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by coyotetrickster View Post
What happens in a flyover state doesn't count.
^ If it didn't happen on the coasts, it didn't happen..
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5474  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2013, 5:01 PM
biggerhigherfaster biggerhigherfaster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician View Post
You're kidding, right? Good to hear what is happening in SF, but you seem to have forgotten that Chicago has the kind of high rise boom you just described (and even now one roughly double in volume to what you predict for SF in 2014 despite this being nowhere remotely close to Chicago's high rise construction peak) year after year...

Anyhow, I had to interject that. Carry on..
Unless the Spire project and the Post Office development project are a go, not sure this is true based on visits to the Chicago skyscraper threads

In any event, SF's boom is relative to what it's had so far; the skyline is about to look 30% larger by 2017

All that said, a few cities like DC, Miami, Houston, and Austin (in addition to the usual NYC and Chicago) have a lot going on, so SF is far from alone in boosting its skyline in the 2010s
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5475  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2013, 6:09 PM
jbm jbm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 128
also 1400 mission, 1415 mission and 100 Van Ness.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5476  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2013, 7:53 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by biggerhigherfaster View Post
Unless the Spire project and the Post Office development project are a go, not sure this is true based on visits to the Chicago skyscraper threads
^ Well, unlike many other cities Chicago doesn't have many individual threads for highrises. Most of the projects are in the compilation thread. Right now there are roughly 20 highrises under construction or in site prep, and we are looking at being in the low 20's in 2014, with at least 2 (if not 3) being class A office towers. And this is pretty much par for the course for Chicago in the post recession years (except for the office towers), certainly not exceptional.

Simms3's post lists about 10 or so potential highrise projects for SF for 2014 in what is supposed to be a record year. Now we can go tit for tat over the numbers, but I'm not really here to do that. The only reason I even bothered to respond was because of this rather ridiculous and completely uninformed statement he made at the end:

Quote:
I don't know that any city outside of NYC in the United States can touch this.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5477  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2013, 8:29 PM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Yes, yes, other cities are also booming, and there are likely a few that are building more and bigger buildings than SF is and will. There's no good reason to make the claim SF is booming more than all but NYC.

That said, it does appear San Francisco's overall skyline is going to be transformed over the next couple of years to an extent that we won't likely see in the other booming US cities. In three years, Chicago and Miami will likely look much as they do today, but not San Francisco. This city's entire profile is being radically, permanently altered by several of the towers u/c and slated for construction within the next year or two.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5478  
Old Posted Dec 24, 2013, 10:58 AM
simms3_redux's Avatar
simms3_redux simms3_redux is offline
She needs her space
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint View Post
Yes, yes, other cities are also booming, and there are likely a few that are building more and bigger buildings than SF is and will. There's no good reason to make the claim SF is booming more than all but NYC.

That said, it does appear San Francisco's overall skyline is going to be transformed over the next couple of years to an extent that we won't likely see in the other booming US cities. In three years, Chicago and Miami will likely look much as they do today, but not San Francisco. This city's entire profile is being radically, permanently altered by several of the towers u/c and slated for construction within the next year or two.
I still beg to differ. Since when is Chicago constructing a supertall? San Francisco now has a 1,070 ft office tower (no spire) and an 802 ft mixed-use tower (will be city's 1st and 3rd tallest respectively) under construction. Not only is it transformative with what's going on relative to the skyline, it's a lot in sheer numbers (because I'd venture that while the skyline is table top, really only a few cities in US exceed it), and some of the buildings are actually significant.

And we're talking US only. Obviously the Canadian cities have quite a bit to show for themselves.

If we're talking sheer amounts, I would still contend that no city outside of NYC is adding as much office space as SF. For the first time in a really long time Prop M might be maxed out here in the city. In fact, most SF construction is office at this point, even though we still have nearly half a dozen residential towers between 40 and 55 floors under construction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5479  
Old Posted Dec 24, 2013, 1:56 PM
the urban politician the urban politician is offline
The City
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago region
Posts: 21,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by simms3_redux View Post
I still beg to differ. Since when is Chicago constructing a supertall? San Francisco now has a 1,070 ft office tower (no spire) and an 802 ft mixed-use tower (will be city's 1st and 3rd tallest respectively) under construction. Not only is it transformative with what's going on relative to the skyline, it's a lot in sheer numbers (because I'd venture that while the skyline is table top, really only a few cities in US exceed it), and some of the buildings are actually significant.

And we're talking US only. Obviously the Canadian cities have quite a bit to show for themselves.

If we're talking sheer amounts, I would still contend that no city outside of NYC is adding as much office space as SF. For the first time in a really long time Prop M might be maxed out here in the city. In fact, most SF construction is office at this point, even though we still have nearly half a dozen residential towers between 40 and 55 floors under construction.
^ Well, again I'm not here to go tit for tat, this is the SF thread and you guys are here to discuss SF projects, not Chicago ones. Chicago will likely have 3 large pure class A office towers (2 or which, if not 3, to exceed 700 ft) in addition to a rather large new HQ for Google's Chicago office in a former cold storage warehouse under construction in 2014, nothing to bat an eyelash at, and amounting to several million sf of new office space. You guys can calculate and compare the math if you want, I'm not really interested. I was just reponding to that earlier statement by you which was much more vague, but it looks like you kind of clarified what you meant above.
__________________
Supercar Adventures is my YouTube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4W...lUKB1w8ED5bV2Q
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5480  
Old Posted Dec 24, 2013, 8:16 PM
POLA's Avatar
POLA POLA is offline
urbanphile
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Western Addition
Posts: 2,147
__________________
I'll make no subscription to your paradise.
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 > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:30 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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