HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive

    

350 Mission Street in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • San Francisco Skyscraper Diagram
San Francisco Projects & Construction Forum
            
View Full Map

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2008, 5:27 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
High on a Hill
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reminiscence View Post
No need to raise the temperature, we were merely having a discussion. I was simply voicing what I would like to have seen. Besides, with all the proposals going around and some of them dropping below the radar, who knows.
I agree that we don't need to raise the temperature, but BT is quite right regarding this project. In the increasingly wretched economic situation enveloping our country, we're very fortunate to have good projects moving forward. Not every building has to be tall and it's better for this one to be shorter then those sites that have a little more breathing room around them.

As far as Foundry Square is concerned, I would be adamantly opposed to the height of the final building being taller than the other three. It's a unique development of matching buildings on four corners of an intersection providing an oasis that will emphasize taller buildings around them.
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2008, 7:01 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,218
Regarding Foundry Square: when the idea of a taller scale for building 1 was proposed, I liked the idea. But the longer I've considered it, the more I've come around to what you're saying. They should match. And more importantly, that would be the worst corner to have the tallest building because of shading. It's a public square (albeit non-typical) and that location would doom it to shadow basically all day and most notably during lunch when it gets used the most. This wouldn't have been as problematic on any of the other corners.

Sorry to go off topic, but that's been on my mind, and it came up so...
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2008, 7:05 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut gallery View Post
that would be the worst corner to have the tallest building because of shading. It's a public square (albeit non-typical) and that location would doom it to shadow basically all day and most notably during lunch when it gets used the most. This wouldn't have been as problematic on any of the other corners.
Yeah, it would have because on the north side of Howard St. the shading would have been on the "park-to-be" atop the new TransBay Terminal. And as I've mentioned before, I recall when Foundry Square was first proposed and the Planning Dept. expressed pleasure at these buildings not being as high as the zoning allowed precisely because of overshadowing the TransBay.
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2008, 7:33 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,218
True enough. I was speaking just within the context of the FS square. But point well taken.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2008, 6:59 AM
hi123 hi123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 586
Wow! This tower will look so great with the millenium tower, the transbay terminal&main tower , 550 mission and 535 mission!!! In 5 years mission street will be fantastic!
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2008, 10:56 PM
hi123 hi123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 586
Has the developer already purchased the building currently occupying the site? And is it sure that heald and starbucks are will to leave this building?
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2008, 11:05 PM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is offline
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,134
I haven't followed this one closely, but it seems as if the thread title implies a 700' building that doesn't seem to be the case. Correct me if I am wrong. This is really going to fill out Mission as a Manhattan-worthy 'scraper canyon.
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2008, 11:06 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,095
(hi123 and Wonderland Park) See post #41 above and let us know if your questions are unanswered. I have no doubt the developer is aware of the Starbucks and Heald leases and has a way to deal with the issue.

The latest rendering is post #49
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2008, 11:18 PM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is offline
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,134
Doesn't answer my question at all.

Still a 27 story office tower (lets say 13' per floor) floated above a 90' high semi-public plaza. Maybe the glass goes up a bit above roof line like 555 does, so that gives a height in the ballpark of 460'

nowhere near 700' and below existing zoning max.
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2008, 11:42 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,095
If your question isn't the building height, what is it?

In posts subsequent to #41 we tossed around guesses as to the height but no one knows for certain yet beyond "27 stories". My own guess was between 350 and 400 ft. But it certainly won't be 700' and I think it was suggested that a mod fix that on the thread title.

As to the zoning, it is below the height limit but the #41 article explains why it can't be taller--essentially because of the size of the lot. Taller would mean a need for an additional elevator bank leaving floor plates with too little rentable space to be economic or to satisfy most people looking to rent office space (they prefer larger floor plates).
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Aug 4, 2008, 1:45 AM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is offline
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,134
I didn't see the request for the title change, that was all I was wondering about. I read all the rest, sorry for any confusion, I thought you were referring to a way this could top out a 700' when you said read post 41. Post title should change.
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Aug 4, 2008, 3:54 AM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,218
Yep. And move it to the midrise section.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2008, 8:16 PM
holeinground holeinground is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 11
GLL has launched a site: http://www.350mission.com/
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2008, 9:49 PM
AndrewK AndrewK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 322
the views feature is pretty nifty, it even has a silhouette of the new transbay terminal and tower.
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2008, 10:22 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,218
This will be incredible:


With the grand entrance to the new Transbay terminal across the intersection and Millennium across Mission, this will be one sexy intersection (have those words ever appeared together before?).
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2008, 3:55 AM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,218
Finally able to check out the site from my mac. Wow! That views feature is cool. So are the intro and the virtual tour.

Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut gallery View Post
On one side is the Bechtel Building at 476', on another is the Blue Shield Building at about 300'. And on just the other side of that is the PG&E Building at 492'. (All numbers according to the SSP database.) Something in the 380-400' range (as BT suggested) might be just about the perfect fit.
Judging from the virtual tour, it looks like it will be slightly taller than the Blue Shield Building, so I'm now guessing closer to 350' and maybe a little under.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2008, 5:37 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
I think you're about right p.g. I recall reading some of the information provided on the website dictating floors of around 10' to 10.8'. (10.8 x 26 = 281' + 30' = 311') I'd add on around 30' - 40' for the crown for around 340' - 350'. Either way, I agree with you, that lobby entrance will look stunning both at day and night. I also think its time for the thread to be moved to the "Mid-rise Proposals" section since its clear this will not be 700' after all.
__________________
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
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2008, 5:13 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,095
For those who bothered to download and read through the leasing brochure, there was this: Expected Completion Second Quarter 2011

Given that it takes about 2 years to put up something like this, that means construction in 2009 if they stick to the schedule.
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2008, 8:18 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,218
Interesting find, BT. Thanks!

Who changed this to 375'? It sure doesn't look that tall in any of the renderings. Not to mention Rem's calculations, which look right to me.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2008, 10:30 PM
WildCowboy WildCowboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 489
That 10' to 10'8" is for floor-to-ceiling heights, so floor-to-floor heights should be a good bit more than that. A quick analysis of a screenshot from one of their preview videos highlighting the floor slab technology suggests a floor-to-floor height of about 13'. That would yield ~340 feet plus the crown.

I also did a quick analysis of one of their square-on renderings, and assuming that the obvious change in curtain wall is at the 50-foot mark, that scales up to a total height (including crown) of 340 feet.

So there...two more contradictory estimates.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:00 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.