daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Highrises

Highrises Discussions of projects under construction between 100-199m/300-649ft tall.
» Proposed Highrises



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 19th, 2014, 07:17 AM   #21
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53449

Quote:
Originally Posted by keepthepast View Post


Sometimes, less is just less.

I appreciate the belief that ornamentation and some relief is "extra", but for San Francisco, vanilla tastes in architecture (and sex) is so not San Francisco. Let's get some sizzle going instead of walls of plain glass!
Rem Koolhaas is doing the Block 8 tower, what more do you need?
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 19th, 2014, 08:31 AM   #22
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272

Quote:
Originally Posted by keepthepast View Post
Let's get some sizzle going instead of walls of plain glass!
Look to Transbay Blocks 8 and 9: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3382

Desertpunk is, of course, correct that Koolhaas is doing Block 8 and SOM is doing Block 9 but making it anything but plain glass.
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2014, 08:59 AM   #23
RaymondHood
Retired Mohawk Ironworker
 
RaymondHood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: San Jose
Posts: 686
Likes (Received): 336

Ungainly and unimaginative -- what a pity.
__________________

keepthepast liked this post
RaymondHood no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2014, 09:14 AM   #24
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272

I'm going to speak up for this building. It appears "ungainly" in part because it's got large floor plates and limited ornamentation. This building, unlike most of the other non-residentil buildings going up now, is not really in or near the financial district. The neighborhood is a little less classy than what the bankers and lawyers want. I think it will be very attractive to uses that need relatively low per-square-foot costs and large floor plates: "back office" sorts of things and possibly smaller software companies, game developers and that sort of thing of which there are many in that part of town. In other words, it may fill a need nobody else--and no other building--is addressing.
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2014, 09:46 AM   #25
techniques1200s
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 902
Likes (Received): 477

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal_Escapee View Post
This building, unlike most of the other non-residentil buildings going up now, is not really in or near the financial district.
I agree with everything you posted except for this. 222 second is only a few short blocks away from Montgomery street, which is the heart of the financial district...so how is it not near the financial district? It's pretty much right next to the financial district.
techniques1200s no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2014, 09:52 AM   #26
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272

Quote:
Originally Posted by techniques1200s View Post
I agree with everything you posted except for this. 222 second is only a few short blocks away from Montgomery street, which is the heart of the financial district...so how is it not near the financial district? It's pretty much right next to the financial district.
Well, we just disagree. That one block makes a huge difference. Very different feel on Howard--especially that 2nd St corner--than on Mission. And when you walk down Howard most of the folks you encounter during the work day are techies, not the financial types on Mission. And New Montgomery is a world different from Montgomery. You have to cross Market to get to the financial part of Montgomery. Major tenants on New Montgomery are Yelp (moving into the Pac Bell Building) and the Art Academy as I recall.
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2014, 06:45 PM   #27
keepthepast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 977
Likes (Received): 1676

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal_Escapee View Post
I think it will be very attractive to uses that need relatively low per-square-foot costs and large floor plates: .
If that happens, it will be a miracle. The office rents in that area and all over the SOMA, Fin Dist, Union Sq, have tripled in the last two years. Owners are raking in inflated rents and this building is unlikely to be offering leases at under-market rates.
keepthepast no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2014, 12:38 AM   #28
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53449

__________________
We are floating in space...

SimsPlanet2 liked this post
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2014, 12:39 AM   #29
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53449

4.01


https://www.flickr.com/photos/judgmentalist/
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2014, 12:40 AM   #30
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53449

Apr. 9


Seven cranes if you count that shadow + part on the ground #doomedview #vscocam #s6 by bsdfm, on Flickr
__________________
We are floating in space...

andr1 liked this post
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2014, 08:19 AM   #31
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272

This photo looking down Howard St from near Third (maybe from the W Hotel) puts 222 Second into the urban context nicely.


https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/13806864295/

In the photo, on the right side of the street, the first intersection seen is Hawthorne. Then there are 3 buildings and then a gap in the street wall. That gap, at the intersection of Second St., is the site of 222 Second which will ultimately be a large, glassy presence which obliterates the view of a Bay Bridge tower from this vantage point.
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2014, 10:28 PM   #32
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272

Quote:
LinkedIn . . . is going to sign a full-building deal for Tishman's new 26-story tower at 222 Second. The Mountain View-based networking giant already sits on several full floors totaling about 135k SF at One Montgomery Tower in the Financial District . . . .
http://www.bisnow.com/commercial-rea...igantic-lease/
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 16th, 2014, 07:03 AM   #33
SF1977
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 271
Likes (Received): 177

Great news!
SF1977 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 7th, 2014, 03:05 AM   #34
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272

Going vertical:


Photo by me
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2014, 09:10 PM   #35
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53449

5/18


IMG_4971 by timbad, on Flickr
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2014, 09:10 PM   #36
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53449

5/20-22


Gone. Framing might get weird when my original points of reference are all gone. #doomedview #varley #litely by bsdfm, on Flickr


View gone #doomedview #lofi #lux by bsdfm, on Flickr
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 7th, 2014, 11:19 PM   #37
RaymondHood
Retired Mohawk Ironworker
 
RaymondHood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: San Jose
Posts: 686
Likes (Received): 336

Some of these new DT SF towers are OK in themselves;
some of them are not.
But there's another significant esthetic/experiential issue:
what happens when there are hardly any of the older, smaller, more human-scaled buildings left?
What kind of pedestrian environment will all these new towers create?
What happens to variety in age, scale, use, materials, and building texture?
Will we wind up with something like LA's Century City, only more crowded?

RaymondHood no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2014, 08:42 PM   #38
techniques1200s
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 902
Likes (Received): 477

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondHood View Post

But there's another significant esthetic/experiential issue:
what happens when there are hardly any of the older, smaller, more human-scaled buildings left?
What kind of pedestrian environment will all these new towers create?
What happens to variety in age, scale, use, materials, and building texture?
Will we wind up with something like LA's Century City, only more crowded?

The vast majority of under construction/approved/proposed towers in SF aren't replacing older "human scale" buildings. They're mostly replacing parking lots, empty lots, warehouses, abandoned/vacant buildings, stuff like that.
techniques1200s no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2014, 02:43 AM   #39
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272

6/9/14




Sorry for the lousy shot--I guess shooting into the sun isn't a good idea but you can count the floors.
My photos
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.

desertpunk liked this post
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 10th, 2014, 02:47 AM   #40
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondHood View Post
Some of these new DT SF towers are OK in themselves;
some of them are not.
But there's another significant esthetic/experiential issue:
what happens when there are hardly any of the older, smaller, more human-scaled buildings left?
What kind of pedestrian environment will all these new towers create?
What happens to variety in age, scale, use, materials, and building texture?
Will we wind up with something like LA's Century City, only more crowded?
The downtown plan and other neighborhood plans identifies plenty of architecturally or historically significant buildings that MUST be preserved and will be. Next to most of the new towers or intermixed with every grouping are examples of these buildings (e.g.: Town Hall next to 199 Fremont and Salt House between 535 and 555 Mission).

Also, the near universal mandate for street level retail in the downtown area tends to preserve the walkability and human scale. One exception in on Rincon Hill where the Planning Department has decreed that Folsom St (but only Folsom) will be a "neighborhood shopping street" like Polk, Haight, 24th, Chestnut, Union and so on.
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
222 2nd st., san francisco, soma, transbay

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu