A tipster directs us to seven rendered videos of SOM’s proposed Transbay Terminal and Tower. And as it’s friday, we pass them along.
∙ SOMSanFrancisco’s Videos [YouTube]
∙ San Francisco’s Transbay Terminal Design Proposals: Highlights [SocketSite]
A tipster directs us to seven rendered videos of SOM’s proposed Transbay Terminal and Tower. And as it’s friday, we pass them along.
∙ SOMSanFrancisco’s Videos [YouTube]
∙ San Francisco’s Transbay Terminal Design Proposals: Highlights [SocketSite]
People we have a winner.
The SOM design is the best when you consider how carefully they integrated the transportation hub into the building and public use park.
This is the kind of “Welcome to San Francisco” you want friends and family to experience when making the trip into town.
The weave around the building gives it the right kind of texture that most glass box structures these days lack.
The view angles from inside allow people to feel like they are still out in the city while indoor.
The art display wall – is a nice tech reference for the Bay Area – and given the success of other large multimedia installations in Chicago etc. will be a hit as long as it’s not commercialized.
OTHER DESIGNS
I don’t understand the attraction to the rector set design. Can you imagine what this architect would do designing a pair of eye glass frames? Multiple layers of metal around the lens and distracting color.
The final design is too bland and the integration with the terminal is not as impressive. I’d rather have this than the rector set but the SOM design has everything.
When can they start tearing down the current piece of $hit bus terminal?
I still have to learn to love the tower. But the terminal is what San Francisco should have. The tall square opening into the terminal is grandiose. That’s the kind of grand central station that visitors and communters should see when arrive in San Francisco.
Awesome… exactly the sort of monumental public edifice that San Francisco needs.
We have a winner.
The Terminal Design is really very beautiful. This really would be amazing, but it almost reminds me more of some sci-fi movie fantasy. The high speed trains, let alone trains coming up to Transbay in general are no longer a sure bet at this point. Where is all this money going to come from? We are literally watching the collapse of the credit markets and nobody has responded to my challenge of whether or not this developer already has funding “in hand”. In Chicago people are literally walking away from their deposits at the 90 story Trump Tower once they were asked to put in more than their initial $15,000 place holding checks. The Fordham Spire is to be 150 stories of luxury fun but their sales office went from being a zoo to a ghost town. I would myself be more interested in getting the trains (including high speed) to come up to a new Transbay Terminal such as this, but could care less about the tower. I understand that the tower “pays” for the terminal, but who “pays” for the tower?
anoncollapsewatcher – you might note that none of the proposals had more than 40% residential, and one proposal (Pelli) was 100% office. Not sure if you’ve been watching the rest of the news from the last few days, but SF just had the first $100 per sqft office lease signed since the dotcom boom – Bloomberg at Piers 1 and 3. This tower would be every bit as top end as the Piers project. Expect a very large office component in this tower (perhaps even the 100% from the Pelli proposal).
Here’s the link for you:
http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2007/08/13/story3.html
The Piers are what I would call boutique office space, and 30,000 sq.ft. is not a lot compared to other cities. Interesting Bloomberg is paying that type of price however, and it is a good sign for San Francisco. Does anyone know who is putting up the real cash for the Transbay Tower? As an example, the Fordham Spire is being funded by money from two large Irish Banks. I actually think the Transbay Tower could be a real success and hope the funds do not dry up, whoever is providing them.
The credit markets are in panic mode, but, the economy is still fundamentally sound and growing. Within a few months, this panic will pass, and those with good credit and the appropriate purchasing power will be able to get the loans they seek.
There are many banks that have not made subprime loans that are salivating at the prospect of gaining market share right now. Once the big banks realize that they are getting beat by smaller competitors, they will start loosening the purse strings.
Expect to see some blood shed in the emerging markets…
What are the chances this happens in our lifetime? Consider the Third street rail, which finally opened if still running intermittently. Displaced far fewer, less controversial, and much cheaper. Started planning in 1985 and took over twenty years. I expect this terminal to be built, and underwhelming, around 2050.
This is what is so frustrating about the Transbay Project. 1. The high speed trains at this point are a dead issue as no funds are currently available from the state (may change after election) 2. Tower has no anchor tenants or hotel signed on at this point. 3. Tower has not released names of who is funding project 4. No longer a certain issue whether Caltrain will extend lines to this location (lack of funds).
It is fun to debate which design is more stunning, but what is the point if you are not sure this will happen. Even if there will be a tower, Caltrain and high speed rail, the earliest projections of completion are 2019. Show me the money and I will start to believe this could actually happen.
To answer your concerns:
1. Wrong. State funding is likely not going to be what the agency has asked for (just over $100 mil)- but they will still be getting some money – likely as much as $40 million this year.
2. Why would the design teams attempt to locate tenants before they even know whether they will be the ones developing it – it’s insane enough to know that all three teams have spent millions on the CHANCE to build it, thinking that they would sink more money into marketing and locating tenants is preposterous. They haven’t even come to a complete decision about what mix of uses the tower would be.
3. Again, the teams don’t even know if they have won. Part of the competition is to present a financing plan – to expect them to announce things before the date that they’re supposed to announce things is ridiculous.
4. Source for this? The Caltrain extension and electrification is actually moving quite smoothly. They have made more progress moving through the FRA regs than was previously imagined. Financial hurdles are easy to overcome if there are no political hurdles – and for this project there is the opposite – significant political support.
You sound much like Guv Arnie – show me the money and I’ll support high speed rail. Support has to come first, then the money follows – that’s how public works projects work.
As to 4, I believe anotherskeptic is referring to the transbay website, where it says:
2012-2019 Project Construction – Phase II, Downtown Rail Extension
And that timeline hasn’t changed – were you expecting them to say, “Guess what? We were totally kidding about that timeline – we’re going to bust this Caltrain extension out in five years instead! Surprise!”
Brutus, it is quite common for developers to need to secure anchor tenants BEFORE final designs are begun. You are going to go to major financial institutions for hundreds of millions for a train station without trains till MAYBE 2019, for a condo tower selling at some of the highest prices in the city during what could be called a “troubling” real estate climate, and from every article I have read, the high speed trains are a dead issue as of now. BTW, how many years have we already been waiting for just the “planning stages” of the new Transbay Terminal? (15 years at least) I can think of many cities that could have built the new tower and terminal in one mayor’s 4 year term, but this is San Francisco, the city that doesn’t know how.
And what makes you think in 2019 the high speed trains will go to San Francisco? They won’t let them roar up the Peninsula, and I doubt we will float the bill for another transbay tunnel. I would bet money that IF the high speed trains get built, they will terminate in Oakland and San Jose. From everything I have read, IF the high speed trains are a “go”, it will be well beyond 2019 before they arrive in San Francisco.
I myself would vote to raise my taxes to build high speed trains to San Francisco, but I just think the time has not arrived to convince most people in the state to pay for it yet. The previous comment is correct that I got the 2019 date from the Transbay website. Give me a break, they planned (5 years), and built (3 years) Walt Disney World (larger than the city of San Francisco) in less time.
anotherskeptic – I wasn’t arguing that it didn’t take waaaaay to long for things to happen here- it does. What I was saying is that it’s ridiculous to think that dates that have been established for years would somehow be changed to something sooner – and that if that didn’t happen then somehow everything is doomed.
The facts are this – no dates on the tower/terminal construction or Caltrain extension have been altered or even called into question. HSR is a little more questionable just because everything revolves around the ballot initiative – which may or may not happen in 2008. But again – nothing has happened in the last few days to call that into question more than it was two months ago. I find your comments about the peninsula routing bizarre – if the trains can’t go the SF, they won’t happen – there was legislation passed years ago requiring HSR to terminate in a new Transbay Terminal in SF and Union Station in LA.
And you are correct – it will be after 2019 by the time HSR arrives – but the 2019 for Caltrain is still well on track.
Re the financing – this is not a “common” building. This is a design competition, very similar to the 9/11 site competition from a few years ago. Final designs will not be started for months. The decision on who gets to start on their final design will not be made for another month. Did you go to the presentation? Part of the process is determining which team has the best business plan to make this thing work – that’s why there were three entirely different mixes of uses – one 100% office, BTW. Why would any company or hotel sign up with one of the teams if they know that there is only a 33% chance that they will get it? Should a company sign up with all three teams? Or perhaps wait a month to see who wins? Hmmm…
On high speed rail, the most interesting thing I’ve heard is that the most common users are expected to be folks living in the Central Valley – Fresno, Bakersfield, and thereabouts. It’ll provide a more convenient way to get to LA or San Francisco.
Maybe the high speed rail should terminate at SFO airport. That’d make sense.
Transbay JPA Citizens Advisorty Committee (the CAC) meets tomorrow at 5:30 pm on second floor of Yerba Buena Arts Center at 701 Mission St. (at third). There’s a 60 minute presentation of the three designs along with public comments…
3 Billion Dollars!? I just read on another site that the bus station (and maybe trains too after 2019) alone could cost 3 Billion Dollars!? I guess China will have the final say in which scheme gets chosen as they are the only country that can afford to build it.