HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise & Supertall Proposals

    

41 Tehama in the SkyscraperPage Database

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2008, 3:12 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Interstellar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,671
SAN FRANCISCO | 41 Tehama | 550 FT / 168 M | 54 FLOORS

Looks like we have another proposal, or an upgrade to an already existing proposal. Not much known I suppose, but its a fairly significant tidbit.

Quote:

Friday, October 17, 2008
Owner Fritzi Realty seeks to bash through Transbay height limit
San Francisco Business Times - by J.K. Dineen

Downtown property owner Fritzi Realty wants to build a 550-foot residential skyscraper at 41 Tehama St., one of several proposed Transbay District projects that is significantly taller than the current draft rezoning would allow.

The 54-story glass tower, designed by Skidmore Owings & Merrill, would be one of the tallest residential buildings in the new Transbay District, with 350 housing units soaring up from a long, skinny 22,000-square-foot parcel, according to an application for environmental impact review filed with the city.

The proposed condo development is significantly more ambitious than the 23-story, 198-unit building that Fritzi had previously applied to build. That project was scheduled to go before the Planning Commission a year ago when the developer pulled it and resubmitted for a much larger project.

Josh Switzky, Transbay project manager for the San Francisco Planning Department, called 41 Tehama “a significant development site in the district.” He said the current rezoning calls for a 350-foot building on the site, greater than the current 220-foot limitation but much less than what Fitzi is seeking.

“We think 350 feet is appropriate for a variety of reasons including overall city form and composition of the area,” said Switzky. “At this point, their proposal is significantly above existing zoning and heights.”

Robert Tandler, who is heading up the project for Fritzi Realty, declined to comment except to say he is “diligently working with the city to complete the design process.”

Switzky said the overall plan calls for two clusters of tall buildings, one around the Transbay Tower and another climbing up Rincon Hill. Tehama Street lies midway between the two areas, in a part of the district where the city would like to bring heights down.

The building at 41 Tehama is not the only proposed tower in the Transbay District that is significantly taller than the zoning controls the Planning Department is proposing.

Kyoya Corp., owner of the Palace Hotel, is seeking to build a 669-foot tower on southwest corner of the hotel. The current zoning proposal calls for a 400-foot limit on that site.

“At this point, we don’t think the heights they are proposing are appropriate, but we have not seen any project proposal change yet in response to our plan,” Switzky said. “In both these cases we are recommending additional height — just not as much as they are proposing.”

jkdineen@bizjournals.com / (415) 288-4971
No renderings just yet it looks like, but I'm sure some will pop up eventually
__________________
Architecture should speak of its time and place, but yearn for timelessness.
-Frank Gehry
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2008, 3:55 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,080
Frankly, I think this is a little premature for a thread. It IS a proposal but barely since it does not meet the proposed height limit that the Planning Department seems to be pretty serious about and I feel fairly sure it will be cut down to size. For that reason I posted this article in the SF Compilation section early this morning. But we'll see.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2008, 4:28 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Interstellar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTinSF View Post
Frankly, I think this is a little premature for a thread. It IS a proposal but barely since it does not meet the proposed height limit that the Planning Department seems to be pretty serious about and I feel fairly sure it will be cut down to size. For that reason I posted this article in the SF Compilation section early this morning. But we'll see.
I could have went either way on this one as well, but its interesting they bring up the Palace Tower which had dropped out of radar recently. Apparently, the original proposed height persists even though that area is zoned for 400' and not 669'. For that reason, I though that since that had its own thread (which is sinking ever so deeply into the depths of this forum), it might be appropriate for this new proposal to also have its space. If this falls through (I hope it doesnt), or gets cut in size, I suppose the moderator can handle it from there on out.
__________________
Architecture should speak of its time and place, but yearn for timelessness.
-Frank Gehry
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2008, 7:08 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 4,816
Likely or not, I'd sure like to see SOM's renderings for this. They have been on a serious roll lately. Please let it go public!
__________________
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
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2008, 9:35 PM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 751
If this is under the radar to be shortened, I wonder if we might never see the 550' foot proposal like we might never see the 600' to 1200' one for 50 First Street by Piano. It's too bad we cannot somehow trade 41 Tehama with 350 Mission. At least the heights would be more suitable with their swapped locations. I am afraid that both towers will end up being much shorter than originally proposed along with eight other San Francisco towers proposed above 650'. Having 41 Tehama at 550' might destroy the bowl concept between the Transbay and Rincon Hill mounds. Personally, I don't think that is such a bad thing, but Planning has already worked very hard to develop and maintain this bowl concept. Downscaling the heights of all other towers proposed above 650' to help keep everything relative to the tallest Transbay Tower not shading Justine Herman Plaza, doesn't help 41 Tehama's chances of being much taller than 350' either.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Oct 22, 2008, 4:21 AM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 4,816
Since this is only a block away from me, I thought I'd get some shots of the site from the ground.

It's long and thin:




This little building, which looks like a tiny repair shop, is the only permanent structure on the site:


Looking west down Tehama:
__________________
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
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Oct 23, 2008, 6:26 PM
AndrewK AndrewK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Miracle Mile
Posts: 192
when this, 48 tehama, and foundry square 3 all get built, this block of tehama will be very different.

they probably wont be able to do shows at 58 tehama anymore, which is too bad cause its a pretty cool little spot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Oct 24, 2008, 6:10 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Twin Peaks, San Francisco
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewK View Post
when this, 48 tehama, and foundry square 3 all get built, this block of tehama will be very different.

they probably wont be able to do shows at 58 tehama anymore, which is too bad cause its a pretty cool little spot.
Unfortunately, you probably won't have to worry about this for a long, long time.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2009, 11:31 PM
tommaso tommaso is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 396
Updates...

What is the current plan for this site?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 10:39 AM
tommaso tommaso is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 396
So what's happening with 41 Tehama?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2011, 8:03 PM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 641
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2011, 9:48 PM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 641
Here's a rendering of the base:


Source: http://www.rinconhillsf.org/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2011, 11:27 PM
CyberEric CyberEric is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 639
Hmmm, interesting...very mysterious. Thanks for the update.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Nov 30, 2011, 8:25 PM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 641
Is anyone attending this? I'm really curious to see what they're proposing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2012, 6:34 AM
timbad timbad is online now
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 764
a year with no updates, but I stumbled across this on the site today:



part of that stretch of Tehama is downright charming. this is looking east (41 would be in the distance on the right):



and from a little further back, approx from 2nd (I have nothing to do with the shoes):



I can imagine Tehama being a really pleasant place to walk with a few alley treatments, especially once Oscar Park is in place.

at the far end is the back of Foundry Square III. (that is, what you see in the pic is FS II, but at the end of Tehama itself, on the left side but not really visible in the pic, is FS III)

Last edited by timbad; Nov 12, 2012 at 7:26 PM. Reason: added last sentence
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2012, 6:59 PM
easy as pie's Avatar
easy as pie easy as pie is offline
testify
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 94109
Posts: 853
so it's down to 342 feet and 31 floors. a shame, but maybe making it more likely to be built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2012, 4:36 AM
urbandreamer's Avatar
urbandreamer urbandreamer is offline
recession proof
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: renderpornstar.com
Posts: 632
__________________
I'd rather be homeless than live in a condo...but I do like watching attractive ones get built...like Woodwards, 42 in Waterloo, and anything by Daoust/Saucier+Perotte/Nomade/aA/Teeple
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2012, 6:40 AM
timbad timbad is online now
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 764
not much new info, but socketsite had a blurb today
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Nov 16, 2012, 5:40 AM
ltsmotorsport's Avatar
ltsmotorsport ltsmotorsport is offline
Here we stAy
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The grid of course
Posts: 7,793
Really too bad about the downsizing. Just under 300 units is good, but would have been better to get some more out of that site.
__________________
Yeah, I'm like an even less classy version of Tucker Max. - Snodrifter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2012, 9:38 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 4,816
Seems to include a fair amount of open space at ground level. Hopefully, we'll see more complete renderings soon.
__________________
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
     
     
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 > Highrise & Supertall Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:43 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.