HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

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

View Poll Results: Which transbay tower design scheme do you like best?
#1 Richard Rogers 37 7.58%
#2 Cesar Pelli 98 20.08%
#3 SOM 353 72.34%
Voters: 488. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2981  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 5:09 PM
fimiak's Avatar
fimiak fimiak is offline
Build Baby Build
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 792
Salesforce, a software company with its headquarters and 6,600 employees in the Bay Area, has agreed to a 25-year, $110 million sponsorship of the 2½-block-long facility set to open next spring at Fremont and Mission streets. The deal includes naming rights, which means that the complex would be known as the Salesforce Transit Center.

Similarly, the 5.4-acre rooftop open space will become Salesforce Park if the board of the Transbay Joint Powers Authority approves the contract Thursday at its monthly meeting.

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/a...t-11274011.php


Salesforce Transit Center & Salesforce Park.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2982  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 6:19 PM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,124
lol

I know it's just a name, but what's wrong with calling it what it was already named? A name that everyone knows it by, which is aso a name that rolls nicely off the tongue: Transbay Terminal.

Salesforce transit center? It's one thing to name a tower after the company that leases the most space in it...but a public transit station and park?

Is embarcadero station eventually going to be named Twitter station, after they agree to pay for an art installation or something? Union Square will become Facebook Square? Or maybe City Hall will become Airbnb Hall, after they pay for a new lighting system. Etc, etc...

At least when they did it to SF General it was person's name instead of a company name.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2983  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 6:38 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Spaceship Earth
Posts: 5,276
Sorry SF but this is sickening.

And if you don't find this kind of monetizing of public assets disturbing you haven't thought about it long enough. The willingness to do this says something about our culture and society and it's associated social contract, and it doesn't say anything positive.
__________________
You slip me the cash and I'll slip you the wiener. <><><><><><>IMPEACHMENT NOW!

For me it can be reduced to this: For every personal freedom we gained from the automobile, we lost in social cohesion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2984  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 7:29 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 6,750
^^Sickening?

On the contrary, I think it's wonderful and something I have expected since a year or two ago when it was announced the Transbay Board may not have enough money to build out the park. They seem to have come up with the money to build it but I believe it would be a near certainty that maintenance and security would slip without the participation of a private entity that has reason to care that the place stays clean and safe.

Benioff (Salesforce CEO) has now created what he says his employees wanted--a "campus" in the city center--and the transit terminal, its park and the plaza next to Salesforce's eponymous tower are all part of it. The company has every reason to want to keep it all shining and working properly (and to keep the homeless from despoiling it all) and I believe they will.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2985  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 8:28 PM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,164
Tacky! And a horrible precedent. Actually.. that precedent started when Candlestick park was renamed "3COM"

Quote:
Originally Posted by tech12 View Post

At least when they did it to SF General it was person's name instead of a company name.
But corporations are people now don't ya know?

It seems as if SF is turning into one big corporate conglomerate. I checked out the pride parade a few weeks ago and was very disappointed. The last one I attended was about a decade ago and seemed much more bombastic/ parade like with really cool floats. This year's parade was just a marching of corporate logos one after the other: Wells Fargo, PG&E, AT&T, Verizon. And they weren't even on floats, it was mainly just a bunch of employees wearing shirts of their corporate overlord logos and waving (or at the most riding in a BMW). Even the Apple representation was just a bunch of dorks in different colored Apple logo shirts waving to the crowds. You're telling me that the richest corporation in the world couldn't afford to put together an elaborate float??

My point being: SF is losing some of its edge and turning into a big corporate logo.

Last edited by mt_climber13; Jul 8, 2017 at 8:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2986  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 8:51 PM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 530
Quote:
Originally Posted by mt_climber13 View Post
The last one I attended was about a decade ago and seemed much more bombastic/ parade like with really cool floats.
First time I ever heard of Android was seeing the Google contingent at the parade all wearing their Android t-shirts...about a decade ago? The parade's been corporatized for a long time. You could probably find complaints about this from the 1980s.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2987  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 9:05 PM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus View Post
First time I ever heard of Android was seeing the Google contingent at the parade all wearing their Android t-shirts...about a decade ago? The parade's been corporatized for a long time. You could probably find complaints about this from the 1980s.
No doubt it had definitely sold it's soul to Budweiser and Shmirnoff et. al. long ago. Just seemed more bland than the last time I was there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2988  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 9:17 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 6,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by mt_climber13 View Post
Tacky! And a horrible precedent. Actually.. that precedent started when Candlestick park was renamed "3COM"
Do you like the job the city Park and Rec Dept. does? Would you like homeless tents in the park on the Transbay? Do you want the "gondolas" getting you to the park to be broken as often as BART's escalators? Looking forward to the expensive greenery all dying like that at City Hall and the State PUC Building? Then you don't want it called "Salesforce Park". You want the city to pick a name like "Willie L. Brown Park" or maybe "Barbara Boxer Park". Actually, the most appropriate name might be "Chris Daly Park" since he was on the Transbay Board when the terinal was approved. It has a ring to it development fans ought to love.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2989  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 10:46 PM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
^^Sickening?

On the contrary, I think it's wonderful and something I have expected since a year or two ago when it was announced the Transbay Board may not have enough money to build out the park. They seem to have come up with the money to build it but I believe it would be a near certainty that maintenance and security would slip without the participation of a private entity that has reason to care that the place stays clean and safe.

Benioff (Salesforce CEO) has now created what he says his employees wanted--a "campus" in the city center--and the transit terminal, its park and the plaza next to Salesforce's eponymous tower are all part of it. The company has every reason to want to keep it all shining and working properly (and to keep the homeless from despoiling it all) and I believe they will.
I agree with you!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2990  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 11:17 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Spaceship Earth
Posts: 5,276
I don't give a shit what the park is named, that's not the part that bothers me. The naming of the station itself is beyond what I'm comfortable with. American cities have for years floated (or threatened) the idea of naming rights to public transit stations in an effort to plug budgets from chronic underfunding. They never happened... until now. This is a new precedent. If they wanted to say Transbay Transit Center or Transbay Terminal with a branding add-on like "brought to you by Salesforce"... fine, whatever. I wouldn't like it but whatever. This is different. This is surrendering it's entire identity as a public facility for the public good to a private brand. That is not the same thing as a ball field or arena, this is public infrastructure. Ask yourself how it would strike you if there was a national story titled "New York City's Grand Central Terminal being renamed 'Goldman Sachs Station' in 200 million dollar deal". Would that make you feel nauseous? And if so, why not here?
__________________
You slip me the cash and I'll slip you the wiener. <><><><><><>IMPEACHMENT NOW!

For me it can be reduced to this: For every personal freedom we gained from the automobile, we lost in social cohesion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2991  
Old Posted Jul 8, 2017, 11:45 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 6,750
^^Without the profanity, I will say the important thing is having adequate dollars and real concern for these assets. There is little evidence the city government will make the dollars available or that it will apply the attention and concern that Salesforce will. I believe the result of city control will be neglect and deterioration. What it boils down to is whether you think Mark Benioff or the BOS will be the better steward of the asset. Your faith in the BOS is touching but wrong.

While some cities have actually sold assets, this is not a sale which I would oppose. This is "naming rights" which you say you don't care about and "sponsorship" which means they will have a stake in the things that matter: husbandry* of the park and terminal. The Transbay Transit District will continue to own them.

*management and conservation of resources
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2992  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2017, 1:25 AM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 530
Just a historical note, all IIRC.

1. When Muni was building new raised platforms for the M line, one station was going to be called Stonestown because it was adjacent to the mall. This was deemed not acceptable and it's now named Winston Drive.

2. Similarly, when BART was extended to the airport, one of the new stations was going to be called Tanforan, after that mall. That was not considered acceptable and it's now San Bruno station.

These malls are the main landmarks/identifiers for their neighborhoods.

Big as it is, "Salesforce" is not how people identify downtown San Francisco. Are the route maps going to say "Salesforce". Are the bus destination signs going to say "Salesforce". Will the station agents and drivers refuse to understand what you're talking about unless you ask about "Salesforce Station", the same way Starbucks forces you to say stupid stuff like "venti"?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2993  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2017, 1:49 AM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Spaceship Earth
Posts: 5,276
^herehere
__________________
You slip me the cash and I'll slip you the wiener. <><><><><><>IMPEACHMENT NOW!

For me it can be reduced to this: For every personal freedom we gained from the automobile, we lost in social cohesion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2994  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2017, 4:24 AM
cv94117 cv94117 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 131
While we're talking about naming, can we rename this thread? This has bugged me for years - the thread is about the Transbay Terminal, or the Transbay Transit Center (hopefully not the Salesforce Center, but that's not my point). The Transbay Transit Center Redevelopment Plan, as this thread has been called for years, is something different - it is everything around the Transit Center, by not the Transit Center itself. So this thread should be called the "Transbay Transit Center." Period. (Although frankly, talk of Salesforce notwithstanding, please let's go back to the Transbay Terminal).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2995  
Old Posted Jul 9, 2017, 7:31 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 6,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus View Post
Are the bus destination signs going to say "Salesforce". Will the station agents and drivers refuse to understand what you're talking about unless you ask about "Salesforce Station", the same way Starbucks forces you to say stupid stuff like "venti"?
That is not clear. Nobody here can answer that question at this point. I'm sure whatever the signs say, nobody riding will have any doubt where they are.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2996  
Old Posted Jul 10, 2017, 11:29 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 6,750
Socketsite brings us more details on the terminal renaming and as far as I'm concerned it's more good news is some respects:

Quote:
Salesforce Secures Rights to Transbay Transit Center and Park
July 10, 2017

While the 25-year, $110 million deal doesn’t exclude other companies from sponsoring events atop the future Salesforce Transit Center, the agreement does provide Salesforce the ongoing option to reserve the future Salesforce Park for its exclusive use during its annual Dreamforce convention.

The agreement also limits the operating hours of the rooftop park for public use, to no earlier than 6:00 am and no later than 8:00 pm from November through April, with the closing time extended to 9:00 pm from May through October.

The rooftop park hours will not apply to the rooftop Restaurant and Café, however, “or to events in the park” (see paragraph above). And the park hours could be modified with Salesforce’s consent.

If approved by the Transbay Joint Powers Authority, the naming rights agreement will take effect as of Thursday, July 13. And in addition to the 25-year term, the agreement includes an option for a 5-year extension as well.

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...-and-park.html

Closing the park from 8 or 9 PM to 6 AM means no homeless camping there and unlike the city, Saleforce's private security will enforce it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2997  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 3:18 AM
cv94117 cv94117 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
Socketsite brings us more details on the terminal renaming and as far as I'm concerned it's more good news is some respects:


http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...-and-park.html

Closing the park from 8 or 9 PM to 6 AM means no homeless camping there and unlike the city, Saleforce's private security will enforce it.
Gross.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2998  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 3:35 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,222
^^^^ because you think homeless camps would be a good addition to the park? I'm 100% all for this. Maintenance and security is expensive and governmental agencies in SF do not have a great track record in this department. Look at the Embarcadero Center. It's a privately owned, maintained and secured but is basically public space. Or Grand Central Terminal in NYC. It's not owned by the MTA but a private company. And if it's the name you don't like, wait long enough and it'll likely change.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2999  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 3:47 AM
TowerDude TowerDude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 81
Salesforce is a horrible name for 1: A Tower 2: A Public Transit facility and 3: A Company.

San Francisco should be ashamed of themselves for these horrible deals.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3000  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 4:42 AM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Spaceship Earth
Posts: 5,276
Puke.
__________________
You slip me the cash and I'll slip you the wiener. <><><><><><>IMPEACHMENT NOW!

For me it can be reduced to this: For every personal freedom we gained from the automobile, we lost in social cohesion.
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 4:58 AM.

     

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