HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals

    

One Oak in the SkyscraperPage Database

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2015, 10:53 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Top Retributor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: California
Posts: 2,113
I actually prefer the redesign. Ok yes the facade is not quite as interesting but if you compare the two you'll notice that the previous renderings implied more variation through different interior shades and lighting. This latest rendering doesn't do that so it appears flatter and less interesting by comparison. I think it's success will all come down to the type of glass used.
__________________
“Skyscrapers! Unhealthy ugly giants! To live and work as close as to the land is a blessing! Remember, you are not a cloud! Come down and live on the ground!”
― Mehmet Murat ildan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2015, 12:03 AM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,218
^I don't know. In the rendering that SFView posted back in April, there was a random pattern to the fenestration (or at least random enough that you couldn't immediately discern the pattern). Now that is completely gone. I do agree that the quality of the glass is even more important now.

All that said, if this was proposed for the first time today just like this and I had never seen previous versions, I think I would be happy with it. Not particularly excited or anything, but not disappointed either. Unfortunately, I can't go back and un-see the previous design, so I am disappointed. But I'll try to keep that in mind going forward.
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2015, 12:47 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,213
The massing is cool and the housing is needed. It is transit-oriented development by any other name.

The value-engineered facade, however, is just sad. This could have been a stunning, even iconic building. Now it will just be...a building.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2015, 12:59 AM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,218
Couldn't agree with you more, fflint.
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2015, 2:13 AM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,114
I think the redesign looks fine, but it's frustrating how many towers in SF get value-engineered into something uglier, especially when it's after they've been approved. It seems like there should be a rule against that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2015, 2:28 AM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,600
Damn, at first I thought the design looked great, then I looked at the previous page and saw the original renders, what a shame.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2015, 6:09 AM
jbm jbm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 128
a week or two ago i heard both that the plaza on oak was getting some pushback from the city, also that the MTA (I guess) was not very open to the possibility of moving the MUNI elevator to a different corner in that intersection.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2015, 8:08 AM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,027
Quote:
Originally Posted by a very long weekend View Post
oh damn! that's a big drop in quality!
As we know, a big drop in quality usually equals big drop in costs. Did the client/owner get sticker shock from an architect's updated construction cost estimate or something? If that's the case, that's unfortunate. There is such a large number windows that any design change to them could have a potentially significant impact on costs.

I am disappointed with the simplified facade pattern as well, but what the new renderings don't show is the potentially varied pattern of curtains behind each of the many windows. I am hoping that this effect would be strong enough to help make up for the less interesting design we are now seeing.

I am glad the overall building form and basic design concept is still maintained.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2015, 5:29 PM
patriotizzy's Avatar
patriotizzy patriotizzy is offline
Metal Up Your !
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 1,116
I just wish they'd have kept the interesting base. It added a lot of ground level character!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2016, 6:05 AM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 1,700
socketsite with an update





Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2016, 8:51 AM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 1,700
in the meantime we still have this...

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2016, 9:04 AM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,114
At least there's that cool mural on the All Star Cafe building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2016, 3:26 AM
shakman's Avatar
shakman shakman is offline
Chairman
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: PRMD - People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 2,404
Previous proposal looked so much better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jan 4, 2017, 11:46 PM
botoxic botoxic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The Mission
Posts: 656
Bring on the sneering cigarette! (or smirking, or grimacing - whichever you prefer)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry of San Fran View Post
I saw a notice at 1500-1540 Market St. for a hearing on January 5th before the San Francisco Planning Dept. Below in part is from the department's calendar. This one will be exciting to see get built. Glad to see some movement on this!

1500-1540 MARKET STREET/ONE OAK STREET - Public Hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact Report. The approximately 18,375-square-foot project site (Assessor Block 0836, Lots: 001, 002, 003, 004, 005) (District 5) is located at the intersection of Market and Oak Streets at Van Ness Avenue in the C-3-G (Downtown Commercial, General) use district, the Van Ness and Market Downtown Residential Special Use District, and is within a 120/400-R-2 Height and Bulk District. The project entails demolition of the site’s two existing buildings (at 1500 Market Street on Lot 1, currently accommodating convenience retail use; and 1540 Market Street on Lot 5, occupied by office use) and construction of a 310-unit, 40-story residential tower (to a height of 420 foot-tall, including rooftop mechanical equipment) with ground-floor commercial space, an off-street loading space, and subsurface parking garage with 155 spaces, resident bicycle parking in a second-floor mezzanine and bicycle parking for visitors in racks on adjacent sidewalks.

Last edited by botoxic; Jan 5, 2017 at 1:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2017, 9:17 PM
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 shakman View Post
Previous proposal looked so much better.
Totally, but it was too good to be true. This will still be interesting compared to the mess that exists at that major intersection now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jan 5, 2017, 11:23 PM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,027
Quote:
Originally Posted by timbad View Post
socketsite with an update





The bottom rendering of the building base shows some of the detail variation retained and simplified from the earlier design, but I don't detect such variation in the other two renderings. The bottom rendering also shows a bay window variation, but the other renderings just show "V" shaped protrusions with the windows flat with the facade instead. Since there are differences in the renderings, I'm not certain what will actually be final. Maybe there is still some hope there will still be some of the variation kept. I at least hope they can compromised with some of the value engineering. This building will be so highly visible at this prime location. It needs to be as attractive and interesting as possible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jan 6, 2017, 2:31 AM
cv94117 cv94117 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFView View Post
The bottom rendering of the building base shows some of the detail variation retained and simplified from the earlier design, but I don't detect such variation in the other two renderings. The bottom rendering also shows a bay window variation, but the other renderings just show "V" shaped protrusions with the windows flat with the facade instead. Since there are differences in the renderings, I'm not certain what will actually be final. Maybe there is still some hope there will still be some of the variation kept. I at least hope they can compromised with some of the value engineering. This building will be so highly visible at this prime location. It needs to be as attractive and interesting as possible.
I believe this building is on its third architect. It was originally Richard Meier, then Shohetta (sp? - the SFMOMA and one-time Warriors arena architect) and now I think SCB is involved - each time IMO downgrading the design. Still pretty good though and the best of the crop planned for that intersection. Hope it happens soon without further VE.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 6:48 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 3,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by cv94117 View Post
I believe this building is on its third architect. It was originally Richard Meier, then Shohetta (sp? - the SFMOMA and one-time Warriors arena architect) and now I think SCB is involved - each time IMO downgrading the design. Still pretty good though and the best of the crop planned for that intersection. Hope it happens soon without further VE.


Note that Snohetta is still co-architect (their logo is still on the linked renderings which have previously been posted).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2017, 10:23 PM
botoxic botoxic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The Mission
Posts: 656
Plaza to Transform Market at Van Ness Redesigned (Again)

Quote:


The plans for the proposed Oak Plaza to be constructed at the intersection of Market and Van Ness, at the base of the proposed 310-unit One Oak tower to rise up to 400 feet in height, have been substantially redesigned for the third time.

The MUNI elevator is back to where it currently sits but without the fancy enclosure, the wind canopies have been redesigned as pergola-like structures with perforated metal blades, and the continuation of Oak Street as a shared public way has been widened, as has the sidewalk on the north side of Oak.



Speaking of the north side of Oak Street, the re-refined plans include 90-square-foot retail kiosks to be set within four of the seven recessed archways along the southern façade of 25 Van Ness Avenue, kiosks which are intended to activate the proposed Oak Plaza with a flower stand, coffee stand and/or the like.



And on a related note, the proposed number of underground parking spaces for the One Oak tower has been reduced from 155 to 136.
http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...ned-again.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jun 10, 2017, 2:44 AM
botoxic botoxic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The Mission
Posts: 656
One Oak Tower and Plaza Slated for Approval Next Week

Quote:
Along with the refined designs for its signature plaza, which we first revealed last week and are newly rendered in more detail below, the plans for the proposed One Oak Street tower to rise up to 400 feet in height (420 feet if you count its parapet) on the northwest corner of Market, Oak and Van Ness Avenue, where the All Star Cafe currently stands, could be approved by San Francisco’s Planning Commission next week.



As we also noted last week, the proposed number of underground parking spaces for the 40-story tower to rise on the 1500-1540 Market Street site been reduced from 155 to 136. And the total unit count has now dropped from 310 to 304, with a mix of 54 studios, 96 one-bedrooms, 135 two-bedrooms, 16 three-bedrooms, and 3 fours.



The tower, which would take an estimated 32 months to complete once the ground was broken, is slated to be 100 percent market rate with the development team planning to pay an in-lieu fee to meet the City’s inclusionary housing requirements, a fee which is envisioned to fund the development of below market rate (BMR) units along Octavia Boulevard on former Central Freeway Parcels R, S and U.
http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...next-week.html
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 > Proposals
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.