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 > Supertalls

Supertalls Discussions of projects under construction between 300-599m/1,000-1,999ft tall.
» Proposed Supertalls



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 September 21st, 2007, 05:35 AM   #421
San Fran Man
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 3
Likes (Received): 0

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...feed=rss.jking
San Fran Man no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 21st, 2007, 05:58 AM   #422
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

..

Last edited by wjfox; September 22nd, 2007 at 10:31 AM.
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2007, 07:34 AM   #423
YohIMhER
Registered User
 
YohIMhER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: san francisco, tokyo, taipei
Posts: 115
Likes (Received): 2

utterly generic.
__________________
Have you passed through this night?
YohIMhER no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2007, 08:27 AM   #424
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

what can be done to stop that monstrocity?
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2007, 08:47 AM   #425
Brendan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Wollongong, NSW
Posts: 2,219
Likes (Received): 23

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Stark View Post
what can be done to stop that monstrocity?
The people.
Brendan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2007, 08:51 AM   #426
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

It wohn't start construction until 2010. What do the people of SF think about it? if they are vocal about it they can change the corse. it would be one thing if it was a private project but that board is a public board and the terminal and least is public.
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2007, 09:11 AM   #427
Manila-X
PINOY MOD
 
Manila-X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: MANILA
Posts: 14,393
Likes (Received): 2575

I actually like Pelli's design despite its resemblance from the 2-IFC. Though I prefer SOM's atrium and ground flr.

Pelli's design still gives SF's skyline a boost.
__________________
Manila X-Perience, My collection of images around Metro Manila

Representing The Pinoy Community here in SSC!
Manila-X no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2007, 09:23 AM   #428
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

by biggest problem is not the tower but the terminal atrium design. the SOM atrium is much more dramatic.
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2007, 09:29 AM   #429
Manila-X
PINOY MOD
 
Manila-X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: MANILA
Posts: 14,393
Likes (Received): 2575

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Stark View Post
by biggest problem is not the tower but the terminal atrium design. the SOM atrium is much more dramatic.
Atrium-wise, I prefer SOM's version. Unless Pelli incorporate SOM's version for the approved structure.
__________________
Manila X-Perience, My collection of images around Metro Manila

Representing The Pinoy Community here in SSC!
Manila-X no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2007, 05:20 PM   #430
gothicform
Bossman
 
gothicform's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: s****horpe
Posts: 31,425
Likes (Received): 12361

Quote:
Supertall San Francisco Winner Chosen
Published by Skyscrapernews.com on 2007-09-21

After a hard fought campaign, the winner has been chosen for the San Francisco Transbay Terminal.

Beating off heavy competition from Skidmore Owings and Merril, and Rogers Stirck Harbour, the winning plans as voted by every member of the Transbay Authority's Board of Directors are by Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects with Hines as the developer.

The competition which is being run to pay for a new transport terminal and the demolition of the existing one had been organised in such a way that a jury of leading architects and development bods would peruse the three top proposals and then recommend a winner to the Board of Directors.

After much thinking they picked the Pelli proposal, not on the basis of being the overwhelmingly best design, but mostly because Hines had offered, $350 million, an extra $200 million more than their rivals raising the question of why the jury didn't consist entirely of accountants.

Giving an idea of how profitable the Hines development can be, it will cost a mere $279.88 million to build giving a healthy surplus despite being above the $255.656 recommended build cost whilst both Rogers and SOM came in slightly below.

The Pelli proposal if realised in its current design will be 1200 feet or 365.7 metres tall and have a 5.6 acre park standing atop of the new transport terminal. It's design is typically Pelli with a gradually tapering glass skinned skyscraper and facade overrun for a crown resembling a smoother version of Hong Kong's International Finance Centre.

The catch is that there are strict zoning laws in the area with height restrictions in place that state nothing should be built above the height of the Transamerica Pyramid which is 260 metres. There are also local concerns about the sheer size of a shadow that such a tall building could cast raising the spectre of the tower being reduced in height.

The poison pill of the Pelli proposal is that the more the tower is reduced in height, and therefore floor space, the less money Hines will actually pay so the local authorities will have to have to walk the tightrope of balancing the economics of the project with concerns from residents nearby.

The final zoning of the scheme should be in place by 2009 allowing Pelli and Hines to submit a revised proposal that can then receive planning approval which if granted would see almost immediate construction begin in time for a 2013 opening.

The project is part of a wider masterplan dreamed up by Skidmore Owings and Merrill that could transform the San Francisco skyline which despite being one of the most recognisable in the United States is dominated by buildings over 20 years old and desparately in need of more space.
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/news.php?ref=1113



we're gonna do a run down on the other two losing ones comparing all three in a separate thing. i have stupidly high res images of the SOM proposal, we're talking 10000 x 7000 pixels across type stuff. cant understand myself why they didnt choose the SOM, its clearly the better one. probably cos hines offered more.
gothicform no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 21st, 2007, 11:34 PM   #431
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by WANCH View Post
Atrium-wise, I prefer SOM's version. Unless Pelli incorporate SOM's version for the approved structure.

I woudn't mind the Pelli if he incorporated the SOM Atrium. the Pelli dosn't even have a dramatic enterance. if that piece of crap gets built I will personally pay all the homeless in SF to use it as a toilet which it is.
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2007, 12:09 AM   #432
Muse
Supernature
 
Muse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,590
Likes (Received): 32

In the longer term, SOM's would've brought in a lot of revenue for being a tourist attraction due to it being so different & iconic to boot. Not to say Pelli's won't be bringing in revenue, but the SOM proposal was such an opportunity. Grand and different, brought down to the indifferent, a generic sleek.
Muse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2007, 12:36 AM   #433
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcastle Guy View Post
Who want's more renders and models!?!

Model pics taken by Botoxic over at SSP, who kindly gave permission for me to post them here:

Roger Stirk Harbour & Partners:













Pelli Clarke Pelli:













SOM:

















And SOM render from SSP:

image hosted on flickr


Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2007, 12:43 AM   #434
Muse
Supernature
 
Muse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 8,590
Likes (Received): 32



S.F.'s loss!
Muse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2007, 12:55 AM   #435
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

construction will only start if the high speed rail gets funding. we need to do what ever we can to stop funding.
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2007, 01:01 AM   #436
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

(what's this?) (what's this?)

To all Safari Browser users,

Our implementation of comments on SFGate causes the back button to break on all versions of Safari. To resolve this issue we have provided you with an alternative "Safari Back" button to help you navigate through our site. We will continue to work toward resolution of the issue and regard this as a "temporary" fix.

Another option is to consider use of the Firefox browser which does not experience this issue. You can download Firefox at getfirefox.com.

Apologies for any inconvenience.

The SFGate Team.

[close]


'Aggressive schedule' for proposed Transbay transit center, tower
John King, Chronicle Urban Design Writer

Friday, September 21, 2007



http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl.../BAO7S9J2H.DTL
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2007, 01:02 AM   #437
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

Learn more about the Transbay Terminal project:
www.transitcenter.org



The half-acre Mission Square would serve as the front yard of the complex, an open-air plaza topped by a glass canopy that billows up to the terminal's rooftop park. Along Fremont Street would be two rows of redwood trees - and between them, a funicular tram that whisks visitors to the park on the terminal's roof.

The crown of the tower would extend 100 feet beyond the top floor - a metal cage tapered to accent the building's silhouette. Inside would be four wind turbines. Not only would they generate electricity, they would glow as they spin - and glow more intensely in strong winds.

The tower would be sheathed in a metal grid - vertical and horizontal fins that extend as much as three feet beyond office windows. Besides adding depth to the facade, they'd serve as sunscreens and should help reduce the tower's energy needs by 15 percent.

The half-acre Mission Square would serve as the front yard of the complex, an open-air plaza topped by a glass canopy that billows up to the terminal's rooftop park. Along Fremont Street would be two rows of redwood trees - and between them, a funicular tram that whisks visitors to the park on the terminal's roof.

Sitting atop the bus platform, 173 feet wide and one quarter-mile long, 50 wider than Market Street and roughly the length of five football fields, City Park would be landscaped to emulate seven Californian terrains, from "marshland" to "oak woodlands." There would be a half-mile jogging trail around the perimeter, a stage, fountains and a playground. The park would also play an environmental role, filtering water and exhaust from below - and screening while providing habitat for butterflies and birds. At the very least, it would screen the view of the bus platform from nearby high rises. The design has 14 entries from the terminal and the street, and there's an ability for neighboring buildings to make connections as well.

Alongside At the base of the terminal, Natoma Street would become a pedestrian zone of shops and cafes. Forty-five feet above, the bus platform would extend out roughly 25 feet - shielding pedestrians the sidewalk from rain without being oppressive, say the architects.

The Transit Center layout has trains arriving below-ground (assuming money is found to extend tracks from their current terminus at Fourth and King streets) while the ground floor includes ticket booths and banks of escalators, with local bus service on the east end. A second-floor concourse is devoted to waiting areas; the buses would be on the third floor.


Alongside At the base of the terminal, Natoma Street would become a pedestrian zone of shops and cafes. Forty-five feet above, the bus platform would extend out roughly 25 feet - shielding pedestrians the sidewalk from rain without being oppressive, say the architects.

The half-acre Mission Square would serve as the front yard of the complex, an open-air plaza topped by a glass canopy that billows up to the terminal's rooftop park. Along Fremont Street would be two rows of redwood trees - and between them, a funicular tram that whisks visitors to the park on the terminal's roof.

The crown of the tower would extend 100 feet beyond the top floor - a metal cage tapered to accent the building's silhouette. Inside would be four wind turbines. Not only would they generate electricity, they would glow as they spin - and glow more intensely in strong winds.

The tower would be sheathed in a metal grid - vertical and horizontal fins that extend as much as three feet beyond office windows. Besides adding depth to the facade, they'd serve as sunscreens and should help reduce the tower's energy needs by 15 percent.

The half-acre Mission Square would serve as the front yard of the complex, an open-air plaza topped by a glass canopy that billows up to the terminal's rooftop park. Along Fremont Street would be two rows of redwood trees - and between them, a funicular tram that whisks visitors to the park on the terminal's roof.

Sitting atop the bus platform, 173 feet wide and one quarter-mile long, 50 wider than Market Street and roughly the length of five football fields, City Park would be landscaped to emulate seven Californian terrains, from "marshland" to "oak woodlands." There would be a half-mile jogging trail around the perimeter, a stage, fountains and a playground. The park would also play an environmental role, filtering water and exhaust from below - and screening while providing habitat for butterflies and birds. At the very least, it would screen the view of the bus platform from nearby high rises. The design has 14 entries from the terminal and the street, and there's an ability for neighboring buildings to make connections as well.

Alongside At the base of the terminal, Natoma Street would become a pedestrian zone of shops and cafes. Forty-five feet above, the bus platform would extend out roughly 25 feet - shielding pedestrians the sidewalk from rain without being oppressive, say the architects.

The Transit Center layout has trains arriving below-ground (assuming money is found to extend tracks from their current terminus at Fourth and King streets) while the ground floor includes ticket booths and banks of escalators, with local bus service on the east end. A second-floor concourse is devoted to waiting areas; the buses would be on the third floor.

E-mail John King at [email protected].

This article appeared on page B - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2007, 01:03 AM   #438
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

e-mail John King and give him a piece of your mind,
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2007, 01:04 AM   #439
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

Comments:


http://sfist.com/2007/09/10/jurys_pick_pell.php
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 22nd, 2007, 01:09 AM   #440
Robert Stark
BANNED
 
Robert Stark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 957
Likes (Received): 5

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show....php?p=3064275


here's the thread. they are still pushing for SOM.
Robert Stark no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
salesforce tower, salesforce.com, san francisco, supertall, transbay, transbay tower

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 01:52 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