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 38 7.76%
#2 Cesar Pelli 98 20.00%
#3 SOM 354 72.24%
Voters: 490. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3001  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 5:01 AM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
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?

Yeah that's what gets me. Are train and bus signs/maps now going to call the downtown SF station "salesforce terminal"? Meaning everyone will be bombarded with unavoidable advertising for a giant corporation? Advertising that's paid for by the public, and with no public input on the matter? That seems all kinds of wrong to me...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3002  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 5:12 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDude View Post
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.
Salesforce is our second largest private employer, a great company, and headed by an actual good CEO who is a San Francisco native. He and his wife have done a plethora of beneficial things for the City and Bay Area.

Do you even live here or know the slightest thing about this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3003  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 5:31 AM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
Saleforce's private security will enforce it.
I missed the part where the deal includes private security.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3004  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 5:53 AM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by viewguysf View Post
Salesforce is our second largest private employer, a great company, and headed by an actual good CEO who is a San Francisco native. He and his wife have done a plethora of beneficial things for the City and Bay Area.
Doesn't mean they should be allowed to turn a public transit facility/park into a giant advertisement for themselves.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3005  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 6:28 AM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 2,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozone View Post
... And if it's the name you don't like, ...
yes, it's the name (edit: naming, to be more precise) we don't like. everything else misses the point. I don't think anyone is arguing it is a bad thing that money has been made available for maintenance.

btw, why are we not calling it 'East Cut Terminal'? the CBD is also paying for maintenance, and seems to have gotten there first.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3006  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 6:42 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 7,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDude View Post
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.
$110 million AND relief from the workload of providing maintenance and security for years--THAT's what you call a horrible deal? I think it's astoundingly good no matter what name they put on it. But everyone got used to the name on the Tower pretty quickly (the initial reaction was exactly the same as this, in part because most of the reactors didn't know what Salesforce.com was and many still don't understand what it does).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3007  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 5:29 PM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech12 View Post
Doesn't mean they should be allowed to turn a public transit facility/park into a giant advertisement for themselves.
I tend to agree with you, but was referring to TowerDude's juvenile opinion of the company's name and the tower bearing its name. As we all know, the City had nothing to do with the name of our primo skyscraper as it's completely common for developers/owners to give naming rights to large tenants.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3008  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 5:30 PM
TowerDude TowerDude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
$110 million AND relief from the workload of providing maintenance and security for years--THAT's what you call a horrible deal? I think it's astoundingly good no matter what name they put on it. But everyone got used to the name on the Tower pretty quickly (the initial reaction was exactly the same as this, in part because most of the reactors didn't know what Salesforce.com was and many still don't understand what it does).
If the public doesn't want the "workload" of security and maintenance of this facility they shouldn't have built it in the first place.

And I don't care how big Salesforce is or what it does ... their hubris shouldn't be encouraged.

Private companies shouldn't be allowed to have police forces either.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3009  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 5:43 PM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDude View Post
If the public doesn't want the "workload" of security and maintenance of this facility they shouldn't have built it in the first place.

And I don't care how big Salesforce is or what it does ... their hubris shouldn't be encouraged.

Private companies shouldn't be allowed to have police forces either.
Do you live under a rock somewhere? All large companies, private buildings, hotels, private universities, etc., have either their own or contracted private security. The fact that you don't like Salesforce as the name of a company or on the tower is strictly your own opinion and certainly does not reflect poorly upon San Francisco. It's actually quite the opposite. The Salesforce name being on the transit terminal and park is another matter all together and I understand the concerns about it, sharing some of them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3010  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 5:58 PM
fimiak's Avatar
fimiak fimiak is offline
Build Baby Build
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 814
All hail SFTC.

The word 'Transbay' never made sense..just because AC Transit runs a bus line between SF and Oakland doesn't mean this should have ever been called the Transbay Transit Center, as the Transit Center does not actually transverse anything, its an immobile building. The Bay Bridge could be the Transbay Bridge because it actually transverses the bay.

Anyway, SFTC is good enough and tells everyone right where it is, at the base of the Salesforce Tower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3011  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 6:21 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 7,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDude View Post
If the public doesn't want the "workload" of security and maintenance of this facility they shouldn't have built it in the first place.
They may want it (or not) but they do a terrible job of it. And privatizing it, as has more or less been done with Yerba Buena Gardens from the beginning (in that case, the function is performed by MJM Management Group), should have been the plan all along. The anchor tenant in the tower is the perfect steward of the terminal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3012  
Old Posted Jul 11, 2017, 7:25 PM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by fimiak View Post
The word 'Transbay' never made sense..just because AC Transit runs a bus line between SF and Oakland doesn't mean this should have ever been called the Transbay Transit Center...
I agree that the name Transbay was inappropriate for this replacement terminal from the start. The original one was built primarily for the Key System, rail lines that served as the East Bay's connection to San Francisco via tracks on the lower deck of the Bay Bridge.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3013  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2017, 2:35 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 7,591
^^It has occurred to me that all this breast beating over letting a PRIVATE BUSINESS name it after themselves is water over the dam anyway. New York's Penn Station and lots of other Penn Stations (like Baltimore's) were named after the Pennsylvania Railroad and Grand Central was named after the New York Central Railroad, both very private. The difference was, of course, those companies built the stations but Salesforce is effectively renting it for a very "market rate" sum (and if their agreement to do so ever expires without renewal, the name will likely be changed).

Anyway, today thanks to the controversy we at least got a couple of photos of the state of affairs in the park-to-be:




https://sf.curbed.com/2017/7/11/1595...n-francisco-sf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3014  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2017, 5:09 AM
tech12's Avatar
tech12 tech12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oakland
Posts: 3,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by fimiak View Post
All hail SFTC.

The word 'Transbay' never made sense..just because AC Transit runs a bus line between SF and Oakland doesn't mean this should have ever been called the Transbay Transit Center, as the Transit Center does not actually transverse anything, its an immobile building.


The transbay terminal's primary function has always been to serve transbay public transit (buses and trains). Which is why it was named the transbay terminal in the first place, all those decades ago.

How does that name not make sense?

Also, AC transit runs way more than a single transbay bus line to it, and they go to more places than just Oakland. As do other transit agencies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3015  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2017, 7:12 PM
fimiak's Avatar
fimiak fimiak is offline
Build Baby Build
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech12 View Post


The transbay terminal's primary function has always been to serve transbay public transit (buses and trains). Which is why it was named the transbay terminal in the first place, all those decades ago.

How does that name not make sense?

Also, AC transit runs way more than a single transbay bus line to it, and they go to more places than just Oakland. As do other transit agencies.


The new terminal will be taking in people from all over California with HSR. The terminal doesn't really have any connection with the water, and doesn't have a tunnel across to Oakland like BART has. Something like San Francisco Transit Terminal would have been more accurate. Neither name matters much anymore.

On another note, here is the best description I have seen of the new Powell Station.

http://designbythebay.com/central-su...t-station-ums/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3016  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2017, 8:08 PM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 539
Quote:
Originally Posted by fimiak View Post
On another note, here is the best description I have seen of the new Powell Station.
"the design could suggest a model in the process of being draped by a couturier—the tunnel as the human body and the station as its stylish outfit"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3017  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2017, 9:06 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 7,591
Quote:
Originally Posted by tech12 View Post
How does that name not make sense?
No money in it. And it would depend on the city to do the "excellent" job of security and maintenance it does on, say, Civic Center Plaza or UN Plaza.

I don't care what they call it--I want it kept clean, free of homeless squatters, safe and well-maintained. I think Salesforce will do a much better job than the city and to think they are willing to pay for the right to take on the job!

Penn Station has nothing to do these days with the defunct Pennsylvania Railroad or Grand Central with the defunct New York Central Railroad and those long-gone-entities don't even pay to keep their names on their former NYC terminals (although NYC does a much better job of policing and maintaining its public spaces than SF). We are getting a good deal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3018  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2017, 10:17 PM
minesweeper minesweeper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 608
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3019  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2017, 11:24 PM
SLO's Avatar
SLO SLO is online now
REAL Kiwi!
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: California
Posts: 7,660
Great pics, thanks for posting them. This thing is looking great...
__________________
He said he'd cure your ills, but he didn't and he never will
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3020  
Old Posted Jul 19, 2017, 11:35 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 7,591
^^Given how long it is likely to be--a great tragedy IMHO--before heavy rail comes to its lower level, I hope it does not turn out to be an empty cavern with too many "hangers about" (homeless or otherwise) and too few transit riders, shoppers or other legiimate users. It almost might make sense NOT to have access to the roof on the outside and force people using the park to at least walk through the building just to make it seem more busy and crowded.
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 4:06 PM.

     

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