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 6th, 2013, 08:54 PM   #1081
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:
Excavation crews have been digging and shoring up the site since August 2010, and are starting to pour the foundation.
http://blog.sfgate.com/cityinsider/2...round/#15614-1

This refers to the terminal building, for which sale of the land for the tower is partially paying, not the tower itself, but the two are adjacent, physically connected, and theoretically part of the same project.
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.

ChuckScraperMiami#1, Highcliff liked this post
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old September 6th, 2013, 09:34 PM   #1082
Riley1066
Registered User
 
Riley1066's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 628
Likes (Received): 521

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal_Escapee View Post
And quite seriously I tell you nobody from San Francisco who is not a geek participating on this forum cares or would give you other than a blank look at the words "Wilshire Grand".

Indeed, the Transbay is still somewhat of a work in progress. They just "value engineered" the terminal some more, reskinning it with some kind of white metal rather than glass. They have redesigned the crown of the tower at least once (maybe twice--originally it was to have shielded wind turbines up there which was the reason for all the height above the roof but I'm not even sure if they are still part of the design).

So who knows how tall it may be IF they build it?
I think the terminal wasn't really value engineering as much as the Police stepping in, like the NYPD did with the base of One World Trade.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Riley1066 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2013, 12:18 AM   #1083
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 must say this has me confused. They HAVE had a ceremonial groundbreaking, but there's no visible activity at the site (which is contiguous with the terminal site which is very active so it's sometimes hard to tell what's what). Still, for what it's worth:

Quote:
Hines is partnering with Boston-based real estate investment trust Boston Properties Inc. to develop the building, previously called the Transbay Tower but now undergoing rebranding. Glass walls, 13-foot ceiling heights and column-less interiors should imbue every floor and internal space with natural light, Paradis said.

“People will just plain feel good working in this building. We are looking at valet bike parking, so bikers will be treated the same as car drivers. This will be the easiest building to get to in the Bay Area, period,” he said. Security will be exceptional; structural elements that reach 250 feet below the surface to anchor it to bedrock will make it the place to be in an earthquake . . . .

A plaza adjacent to the new Transbay tower will feature 20 full-sized redwood trees with a gondola to carry visitors from Mission Square up to the five-acre city park perched atop the roof of the Transbay Transit Center, Paradis said.

Floor plates measure 25,000 square feet with depths of a bit more than 40 feet from the building’s windows to the core. “These are great stacking floors, and all of the systems and bathrooms are designed for high-density users,” he said.

The building is under construction now. Tenants could begin improvements to their spaces in late 2015 with the building itself projected to open in mid-2016.

“Our cost is similar to other new buildings in the city, so we will be competitive in our rates,” Paradis said. “Our vision is that there is no better place to work in San Francisco and that it is where productivity and creativity will soar.”
http://news.theregistrysf.com/pamper...to-go-all-out/
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2013, 04:12 AM   #1084
theskythelimit
Registered User
 
theskythelimit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 548
Likes (Received): 117

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal_Escapee View Post
I must say this has me confused. They HAVE had a ceremonial groundbreaking, but there's no visible activity at the site (which is contiguous with the terminal site which is very active so it's sometimes hard to tell what's what). Still, for what it's worth:


http://news.theregistrysf.com/pamper...to-go-all-out/
It is my belief that The ceremonial groud breaking was the handing over of the $192m check Hines paid for the land. It appeares they are not moving forward speculatively like other projects in the area.

The part about the building under construction is not being quoted by anyone and is the conclusion of the author of the news piece.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
theskythelimit no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2013, 04:17 AM   #1085
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53452

Quote:
Originally Posted by theskythelimit View Post
It is my belief that The ceremonial groud breaking was the handing over of the $192m check Hines paid for the land. It appeares they are not moving forward speculatively like other projects in the area.

The part about the building under construction is not being quoted by anyone and is the conclusion of the author of the news piece.
Yep, we have to take what conventional reporters say about groundbreakings, "under construction", floor counts, etc. with a HUGE grain of salt. It seems every reporter in Boston refer to the 600 footers being developed there as being "60 stories" tall when in their own articles they correctly report those same towers as having 48 floors!
__________________
We are floating in space...

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2013, 08:35 AM   #1086
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272

Well what confuses me is the rather specific quote (or paraphrase) from the developer that tenants can begin improvements in 2015 with building completion in 2016. That sounds to me like people at Boston Properties or Hines--this guy Paradis is being quoted--are really saying this. I suppose it could be part of a pitch to lure tenants and a schedule that will simply slip as needed, but it's the closest thing to an actual timetable for building this structure I've seen.
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2013, 04:29 PM   #1087
theskythelimit
Registered User
 
theskythelimit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 548
Likes (Received): 117

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal_Escapee View Post
Well what confuses me is the rather specific quote (or paraphrase) from the developer that tenants can begin improvements in 2015 with building completion in 2016. That sounds to me like people at Boston Properties or Hines--this guy Paradis is being quoted--are really saying this. I suppose it could be part of a pitch to lure tenants and a schedule that will simply slip as needed, but it's the closest thing to an actual timetable for building this structure I've seen.
The timetable is pretty aggressive. Here it is the lateral part of 2013 and they are talking about a ~2-3 year occupancy.

What I believe is the developers are concerned about is a downturn in the market 3 years out. Companies who want to expand in the City want the buildings now.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
theskythelimit no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2013, 10:31 PM   #1088
techniques1200s
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 905
Likes (Received): 484

Here's a new animation of the transbay tower/terminal that also includes all of the new buildings going up in the transbay and Rincon hill areas. That area and the skyline will be completely different in several years:


http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...ine_fully.html
techniques1200s no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 12th, 2013, 10:36 PM   #1089
Cal_Escapee
In Search of Sanity
 
Cal_Escapee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Francisco/Tucson
Posts: 3,695
Likes (Received): 10272



The full list of new downtown San Francisco developments which make an appearance above:

1. 50 First Street
2. 201 Folsom Street (LUMINA)
3. 530 Folsom Street (Rene Cazenave)
4. Foundry Square III
5. 181 Fremont Street
6. 325 Fremont Street
7. 340 Fremont Street
8. 399 Fremont Street
9. 524 Howard Street
10. 45 Lansing Street
11. 350 Mission Street
12. 535 Mission Street
13. 75 Howard Street
14. 540 Howard Street
15. One Rincon Tower 2
16. Oscar Park
17. 222 Second Street
18. 41 Tehama Street
19. Transbay Block 1
20. Transbay Blocks 2/3/4/5
21. Transbay Block 6/7
22. Tranbay Block 8
23. Transbay Block 9
24. Transbay Park (current Transbay Temporary Terminal)

Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2...ine_fully.html
__________________
The SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP is real.

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Cal_Escapee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2013, 04:00 AM   #1090
techniques1200s
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 905
Likes (Received): 484

The building permit was issued today, and site prep is going on. The building is also listed as having 63 floors now, though it's not clear if that's including floors below ground, or if extra floors were added.

Here are some pics by fimiak at SSP:

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...&postcount=312





__________________

Last edited by techniques1200s; September 28th, 2013 at 04:05 AM.
techniques1200s no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2013, 05:03 AM   #1091
Kenni
What?
 
Kenni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: LATAM
Posts: 27,215

So, which will be considered the tallest in the west? The Wilshire Grand with it's spire or this one in San Fran?
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Kenni no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2013, 06:44 AM   #1092
Simfan34
Complainer-in-Chief
 
Simfan34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 11,884
Likes (Received): 2461

Quote:
Originally Posted by onewtclover View Post
Why are there so many towers like this? The idea of a tower tapering ever so slightly is overused. Here's a list of buildings that do just that:
1. Transbay Tower
2. Goldman Sachs Building
3. China World Trade Center 3
4. Costanera Center

And many others!
Do you realise that they're all designed by the same person?
__________________
(Don't forget Ethiopia and NYC, too!)

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Simfan34 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2013, 06:47 AM   #1093
Mplsuptown
Registered User
 
Mplsuptown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Minneapolis MN
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 713

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenni View Post
So, which will be considered the tallest in the west? The Wilshire Grand with it's spire or this one in San Fran?
This has been talked about repeatedly on both forums. I suggest you go back a few pages, then if you don't get your answers go back and read some more. Both will be in their own respective categories.
__________________
I ain't got time to breed

*And Major D., just leave the angry man's post up. - spectre000

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Mplsuptown no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2013, 08:54 AM   #1094
Mojeda101
IG: UrbanLosAngeles
 
Mojeda101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 802
Likes (Received): 1283

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenni View Post
So, which will be considered the tallest in the west? The Wilshire Grand with it's spire or this one in San Fran?
If the spire on WTC 1 allows it to be the tallest in the US, then the Wilshire will get just that in California. Although it would be hilarious if they added 3 more floors just to be taller XD
__________________
Any and all photos of my Los Angeles updates can be found at my Flickr
Any extras can be found on my Instagram

ChuckScraperMiami#1, Kenni liked this post
Mojeda101 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2013, 02:39 PM   #1095
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenni View Post
So, which will be considered the tallest in the west? The Wilshire Grand with it's spire or this one in San Fran?
Transbay will be the tallest by roof height, Wilshire the tallest by pinnacle height and official height. Transbay has a roof height of 326m/1070f while Wilshire has a roof height of 285m/934f but a spire height of 335m/1100f. For comparison, US Bank has a roof height of 310m/1018f and Transamerica Pyramid has a roof height of 260m/853f

I hope this helps and don't be frustrated with forumers who are mean to you cause none of us, not even them have ever browsed through an entire thread just to get answers. If you need any info, just ask, there's nothing bad about asking
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1, Kenni liked this post
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2013, 07:20 PM   #1096
techniques1200s
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 905
Likes (Received): 484

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
Transbay will be the tallest by roof height, Wilshire the tallest by pinnacle height and official height. Transbay has a roof height of 326m/1070f while Wilshire has a roof height of 285m/934f but a spire height of 335m/1100f. For comparison, US Bank has a roof height of 310m/1018f and Transamerica Pyramid has a roof height of 260m/853f
Actually, the Transbay tower will have a roof height of 278 meters/912 feet, with a mechanical penthouse rising to 296m/970f. The total structural height includes a crown rising to 326 meters/1,070 feet. Though Transbay will obviously have much more mass at the top than Wilshire's spire does. So the roof will look like it's at the top of the building, unlike Wilshire Grand, so Transbay will seem to be a bit taller to most people if you put them side by side, even though it's not. Of course that might change if there actually are 3 floors added to it, but I have a feeling that the 63 floor height listed by the department of building is because of floor numbers being skipped or the three underground parking levels being included.

Here's a diagram of the Transbay tower:



http://ec2-50-17-237-182.compute-1.a...12.0257EBX.pdf

Personally, I think it would be awesome if a spire were added to the Transbay tower, sticking out of the middle of the crown. Kind of like a modern Chrysler building, which has a similar height to the Transbay tower.
__________________
techniques1200s no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2013, 09:55 PM   #1097
PinkFloyd
R.I.P. Chris Cornell
 
PinkFloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Fontana, California
Posts: 881
Likes (Received): 3462

Kanto counts parapets as part of the roof. To me, it's just a decorative element like a spire.
__________________

Kanto, ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
PinkFloyd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 28th, 2013, 10:20 PM   #1098
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

Quote:
Originally Posted by techniques1200s View Post
Actually, the Transbay tower will have a roof height of 278 meters/912 feet, with a mechanical penthouse rising to 296m/970f. The total structural height includes a crown rising to 326 meters/1,070 feet. Though Transbay will obviously have much more mass at the top than Wilshire's spire does. So the roof will look like it's at the top of the building, unlike Wilshire Grand, so Transbay will seem to be a bit taller to most people if you put them side by side, even though it's not. Of course that might change if there actually are 3 floors added to it, but I have a feeling that the 63 floor height listed by the department of building is because of floor numbers being skipped or the three underground parking levels being included.

Here's a diagram of the Transbay tower:



http://ec2-50-17-237-182.compute-1.a...12.0257EBX.pdf

Personally, I think it would be awesome if a spire were added to the Transbay tower, sticking out of the middle of the crown. Kind of like a modern Chrysler building, which has a similar height to the Transbay tower.
As Pink Floyd said, I do count this parapet towards roof height because it is a solid parapet. If it would be an open air lattice parapet I wouldn't count it but from the renders I saw so far it looks like a solid parapet. It's the same as for example the Hong Kong ICC, it too has a solid parapet that is counted towards roof height
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 29th, 2013, 01:00 AM   #1099
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,664
Likes (Received): 28211

parapets are always counted in the official height.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old September 29th, 2013, 02:35 AM   #1100
Mojeda101
IG: UrbanLosAngeles
 
Mojeda101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 802
Likes (Received): 1283

So are spires :P
__________________
Any and all photos of my Los Angeles updates can be found at my Flickr
Any extras can be found on my Instagram

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Mojeda101 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 11:47 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