SF Transbay Transit Center Tower competition designs

[Hipster Duck]

SOM by a wide margin.

And, does any part of this coincide with plans for a proposed California high speed rail project?

 

[Zephyr]

It looks more like a clone of Hong Kong's 2IFC, another Pelli building, minus the vertical elements. I like the design, but given that resemblance I don't think it's the unique iconic building that people in San Fran ... are looking for.

That is what I saw when I looked at this Pelli proposal - another Pelli re-cycle. But he is no worse than I. M. Pei, re-cycling his glass pyramid from Paris in Cleveland's Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Museum, or Richard Meier's variations on a theme. They can still look good or be improvements or result in an interesting re-work that is unique in its own way, but they can also be accused of being derivatives, or worse yet, clones/copies of prior work.

(BTW, everything tall and tapered looks like the Transamerica building when proposed for SF, a measure of TA's continuing impact on that city.)

.​

 

[unimaginative2]

SOM by a wide margin.

And, does any part of this coincide with plans for a proposed California high speed rail project?

The high speed line is proposed to run into the new Transbay Terminal site. It will also be the terminus for Caltrain, a more likely project that has been talked about for years.

 

[syn]

I like the SOM proposal as well. Does anyone know what the funding formula is for this project? I know it likely gets far more goverment funding than, say, the Union Station project here, I'm curious how much more though.

It's too bad the competitors for the Union Station contract couldn't have come up with some more exciting and visionary proposals.

 

[adma]

It's too bad the competitors for the Union Station contract couldn't have come up with some more exciting and visionary proposals.

Well, to repeat: unlike San Fran, Union Station is dealing with a significant existing "heritage condition"...

 

[syn]

Well, to repeat: unlike San Fran, Union Station is dealing with a significant existing "heritage condition"...

I realize that. I meant visionary in the context of the existing station.

 

[unimaginative2]

Adma, a potential office development could simply be located on the rail corridor behind Union Station. Nobody objects to the extensive air rights development well behind Grand Central. The Marcel Breuer building that caused so much preservation excitement would have obliterated either the waiting room or the front facade.

 

[adma]

Nobody objects to the extensive air rights development well behind Grand Central. The Marcel Breuer building that caused so much preservation excitement would have obliterated either the waiting room or the front facade.

Er, Pan Am aroused quite a fair bit of objection, both as something planned and as a fait accompli--in a sense, the controversy over Pan Am was a preview of what was in store for Breuer.

Also, anyone remember the plans for a new MLG atop the shed a decade ago? That was pretty controversial in its own right (and it wasn't even high-rise office-tower stuff).

Just because the "historic parts" are kept doesn't mean a scheme couldn't be taken to task on urbanistic grounds such as contextual encroachment.
With your "nobody objects" statement, you've short-circuited your argument; those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it, etc etc...

 

[unimaginative2]

Pan Am's more unpopular for its damage to the "Historic Vista" down Park Ave to the New York Central building (incidentally also built on the rail corridor), not for anything done to Grand Central. The baggage building that was on the site didn't really do anything for anyone.

I don't think the MLG was a good idea since it seemed to turn the great hall into a glorified entrance to the hockey arena. I would however be a strong supporter of lowering the grade of the rail corridor and adding that land to the city fabric. If that's too wild for Toronto, I wouldn't mind just building something on top of what's there. The site is deep enough that the impact on the existing station would be quite minuscule, and if the train shed's being torn down anyway, nothing is being destroyed for it either.

If you're going to take something like that to task for contextual encroachment, where are you in the distillery thread? I'd call that real contextual encroachment.

 

[syn]

Pan Am's more unpopular for its damage to the "Historic Vista" down Park Ave to the New York Central building (incidentally also built on the rail corridor), not for anything done to Grand Central. The baggage building that was on the site didn't really do anything for anyone.

I don't think the MLG was a good idea since it seemed to turn the great hall into a glorified entrance to the hockey arena. I would however be a strong supporter of lowering the grade of the rail corridor and adding that land to the city fabric. If that's too wild for Toronto, I wouldn't mind just building something on top of what's there. The site is deep enough that the impact on the existing station would be quite minuscule, and if the train shed's being torn down anyway, nothing is being destroyed for it either.

If you're going to take something like that to task for contextual encroachment, where are you in the distillery thread? I'd call that real contextual encroachment.

I actually liked the idea of a new MLG at that location. If I recall correctly, MLSE had some pretty decadent plans.

 

[adma]

I actually liked the idea of a new MLG at that location. If I recall correctly, MLSE had some pretty decadent plans.

Oh, that's for sure, that's for sure...

 

[Edward Skira]

And the winner is Pelli

Design Picked For SF Transbay Terminal, Skyscraper

CBS 5
Sept. 20, 2007

(CBS 5 / AP / BCN) SAN FRANCISCO A regional transportation commission picked a Connecticut architecture firm Thursday to design a new bus and train terminal in downtown San Francisco that has been described as the "Grand Central Station of the West" and an adjacent skyscraper that would be the tallest building this side of Chicago.

New Haven-based Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects beat out two other finalists for the right to move forward with multi-billion-dollar project at First and Mission streets that promises to remake the San Francisco skyline, the Transbay Joint Powers Authority Board of Directors announced.

"The Transit Center, with its accompanying tower, will have an immeasurable impact in the life and form of the city," architect Cesar Pelli said.

The firm's winning bid includes topping the new Transbay Terminal with a 5.4-acre city park and building a 1,200-foot-tall, obelisk-shaped office tower next door to raise cash and customers for the mass transit complex. Its partner in the deal, the Hines development firm, offered to pay $350 million for the land under the building.

The skyscraper's base will be encased in glass to let in natural light, officials said. They added that the park will help improve the environmental impact of the center by absorbing pollution, treating and recycling water and providing a habitat for local wildlife.

A jury of planning and design experts last week recommended the commission select the Pelli Clarke proposal, saying it best fit San Francisco and had the most potential of fulfilling the city's goals for the neighborhood that the new structures would anchor.

"The selection of Pelli and Hines to build this transit hub and tower is a testament to the values, the vision and the excitement of San Francisco and the entire Bay Area region," San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said.

The other finalists, from a design and development competition launched in November 2006, were the developer-designer team of Forest City Enterprises and architect Richard Rogers, and a team composed of Skidmore Owings and Merrill architects and Rockefeller Development Group.

Government officials hope to begin demolishing the city's existing bus terminal next year and to have its replacement built by 2014.

The new transit center will accommodate eight regional transportation systems, including Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Caltrain, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority, Golden Gate Transit, San Mateo County Transit District, Greyhound, Bay Area Rapid Transit and the future California High-Speed Rail.

The high-speed rail promises to reduce travel between San Francisco and Los Angeles to two and a half hours, according to officials.

© CBS Broadcasting Inc.