SAN FRANCISCO | 181 Fremont | 802 FT | 52 FLOORS - Page 8

viewguysf · #**141** Posted **Jan 26, 2011, 4:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by colemonkee

I love the homage to Transamerica Pyramid at the base, but the rest of the design comes across as unbalanced and messy. I usually love diagonally braced buildings that express their structure in the facade, but the spacing of the horizontal sections - as plinko mentioned before - just come across as awkward to me.

I agree with you--the renderings have always look awkward to me too--rather crude and unfinished.

Fabb · #**142** Posted **Jan 27, 2011, 10:33 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by plinko

Back from the dead!

Right.
But it seems like it lost 200 ft and 12 floors.
So, it's not such a good news...

San Frangelino · #**143** Posted **Jan 27, 2011, 4:34 PM**

Yes, it's listed on the website as 54 stories and 700 ft.

Maybe that's not counting the spire/needle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fabb

Right.
But it seems like it lost 200 ft and 12 floors.
So, it's not such a good news...

On a side note, I am happy to see that after a decade, Heller Manus finally got around to updating their website.

ElDuderino · #**144** Posted **Jan 27, 2011, 11:41 PM**

Yeah...what happened to 900ft? It doesn't look like a 200' spire. The diagonal bracing looks alright, but I think the building as a whole would look much cleaner with flat sides rather than that jumbled in and out look.

CyberEric · #**145** Posted **Jan 27, 2011, 11:49 PM**

Maybe they lowered the overall height to try to get it past Chris Daly. Dunno.

SFView · #**146** Posted **Jan 28, 2011, 12:49 AM**

It is lowered to keep the Transbay Transit Tower most prominent.

For background on the lowered height, start reading here, and maybe the next 2 or 3 pages:
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...136300&page=87

viewguysf · #**147** Posted **Feb 5, 2011, 9:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by CyberEric

Maybe they lowered the overall height to try to get it past Chris Daly. Dunno.

Most thankfully, Chris Daly is gone--termed out and unable to run again in last November's election.

tommaso · #**148** Posted **Jun 12, 2011, 9:31 AM**

How far along are they with this building?

1977 · #**149** Posted **Mar 17, 2012, 6:50 PM**

Some updated renderings:

Source: http://sksinvestments.com/properties/181-fremont/

Zapatan · #**150** Posted **Mar 17, 2012, 6:56 PM**

I like it, but it could be taller. Is there still a 915 foot tower planned with this project or was this it?

San Frangelino · #**151** Posted **Mar 17, 2012, 6:56 PM**

Thanks for posting those 1977.

This will definitely add a little Hong Kong to the SF skyline.

Zapatan, the 915ft tower is at 50 First St on the opposite corner of the Transbay Tower. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=185537

viewguysf · #**152** Posted **Mar 17, 2012, 7:28 PM**

This site is no longer being considered for 900', right? The rendering looks more like 700', which is about what I recall seeing the last time this was discussed. It's too short!

1977 · #**153** Posted **Mar 17, 2012, 8:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by viewguysf

This site is no longer being considered for 900', right? The rendering looks more like 700', which is about what I recall seeing the last time this was discussed. It's too short!

Yeah, it's now proposed at ~700 feet. Not bad, but another 100-200 feet would be better.

tech12 · #**154** Posted **Mar 17, 2012, 8:26 PM**

Another 900 foot proposal would be nice, but it's still pretty good looking as it is. At least it still breaks away from the skyline plateau by a decent amount.

Another rendering:

http://sksinvestments.com/properties/181-fremont/

Zapatan · #**155** Posted **Mar 17, 2012, 9:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by San Frangelino

Thanks for posting those 1977.

This will definitely add a little Hong Kong to the SF skyline.

Zapatan, the 915ft tower is at 50 First St on the opposite corner of the Transbay Tower. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=185537

oh ok good, I thought it was this one and had gotten shortened.

This design is really good though.

RobertWalpole · #**156** Posted **Mar 17, 2012, 10:27 PM**

Beautiful.

plinko · #**157** Posted **Mar 18, 2012, 12:28 AM**

Well now we are starting to get somewhere with the structure. The tower kind of screams SOM Chicago 1978, but at the same time I think I really like it.

viewguysf · #**158** Posted **Mar 18, 2012, 12:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by plinko

Well now we are starting to get somewhere with the structure. The tower kind of screams SOM Chicago 1978, but at the same time I think I really like it.

It's an updated version of the SOM 70's (and late 60's) Chiccago look though. Just think, Big John's designs are already more than 45 years old!

mt_climber13 · #**159** Posted **Mar 18, 2012, 2:02 AM**

A very elegant tower. What an amazing neighborhood we will have in a few years time! I think the height looks good. Do you think the Transbay tower mass in the renderings reflect the current Heights at 1070 feet?

tech12 · #**160** Posted **Mar 18, 2012, 2:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakamesalad

A very elegant tower. What an amazing neighborhood we will have in a few years time! I think the height looks good. Do you think the Transbay tower mass in the renderings reflect the current Heights at 1070 feet?

I think so. Neighboring 50 Fremont is 600 feet tall, and the transbay tower in the rendering doesn't look twice as tall as it. It looks like it's about ~1,000 feet tall, as it should.