Neither Millennium (M) nor 555 Mission might appear in most (any?) of the initial design renderings for the proposed Transbay Terminal and Tower by Pelli Clarke Pelli, but at least we can offer some perspective on where the buildings (will) lie.
And if you currently park in either of the surface lots between Natoma and Minna and didn’t know that they were going away, please don’t shoot the messenger.
∙ Millennium Tower San Francisco (301 Mission): Sales Update/Facts [SocketSite]
∙ A Virtual Tour Of 555 Mission Street (And Downtown San Francisco) [SocketSite]
∙ San Francisco’s Transbay Terminal: Website And Community Meeting [SocketSite]
I’m assuming the tower itself is the white square to the left of the Millennium?
[Editor’s Note: Yep.]
The renderings of the tower (posted yesterday) are absolutely stunning.
I hope the planning board is bound and gagged during the approvals process for this one. If they get their hands on it, the whole project will end up clad in bricks and clapboard siding and have the SF-style windows sticking out all over the place.
It seems very common for large project on-line sales sites to optimize their project’s position in their renderings and animations in relation to other existing, approved and underway, and proposed projects, often just leaving them out. Some projects manage to omit even their own later phases. Sometimes it seems up to the individual buyer to assess what the views and real sun and shadow issues a given unit will actually have.
I have been wondering if there was a business plan lurking here for 3D modeling and Google Earth gurus to provide prospective buyers with a third party view and sunlight exposure analysis that includes everything currently “on the boards”. In a less than white hot market, this could even be a contingency…”buyers offer contigent on acceptance of third party view animations and renderings”.
So, does anyone know where the entrance ramp will be? Are they still going to use the on-ramp from Clementina that creates the 2 overpasses over Beale (otherwise known as hobo-central)?
“buyers offer contigent on acceptance of third party view animations and renderings”
If I were a seller reviewing such a contract I’d be inclined to counter with a request to remove that contingency, mainly because I don’t fully understand its implications.
Back to the topic at hand seeing these 3 towers in such close proximity makes me think that the added density will really affect the dynamics of the current “street scene”. Much has been written here about what a disgusting open sewer the existing site is. Perhaps the many fold increase in residents adjacent to the transbay will put extra pressure to keep the quality of street life up. As it is today it is quite a ghost town.
Did anybody go to the meeting yesterday? What was said? When are they gonna start digging?
“And if you currently park in either of the surface lots between Natoma and Minna and didn’t know that they were going away, just don’t shoot the messenger.”
Good and good. As far as I’m concerned, if every single surface parking lot in and around the downtown area were simultaneously closed one day, I would literally dance a jig for an hour. What a waste of space. I would even go so far to say that I wish the business district required some type of permit that had to purchased by vehicles that want to drive in the business district during business hours. Sort of Tokyo-esque…
You can probably get a taste of what was said by looking at past PowerPoint shows from other District meetings posted on http://www.transbaycenter.org
My understanding is that the ramp over Beale Street will be demolished as part of the last phase of building the temporary transbay terminal.
does anyone know the scoop on ‘535 Mission’..?
is that building just a pipe dream.. or is it going to be reality?
tia.
^^^^”Beacon Capital reportedly will start construction in May on a 290,000-square-foot tower at 535 Mission St.”
Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci…ml?t=printable
redseca2: Sometimes it seems up to the individual buyer to assess what the views and real sun and shadow issues a given unit will actually have.
In fact, yes. Even if you know what today brings, you need to be cognizant of the future plans. I bought a place facing east down mission, and when I did, I factored in the fact that I’d likely lose some sky from the (then) proposed projects east of 2nd.
I’m wagering that the ‘named’ structures at new Montgomery will not be easy to demolish under the current climate, and I’m hoping that the city won’t approve any significant (> 20 story) structures between 3rd and New Montgomery in the forseeable future. And the transbay plans have been for smaller buildings around howard/folsom region, leaving me plenty of sky in that direction.
So in short. Yes. Caveat Emptor.