SFist: Just As You Expected...Pelli Clarke Pelli Wins It

guest

Fri, 21 Sep 2007 20:19:32 -0800

It doesn't look enough like that other building to warrant any lame complaining. In fact, the San Francisco building looks a damn sight better.

sangfroid826

Fri, 21 Sep 2007 14:38:36 -0800

It's similar but it's not exactly the same. See also: Ice, Ice Baby Similar to Under Pressure but not exactly the same.

guest

Fri, 21 Sep 2007 12:08:29 -0800

It looks like the park area is directly on top of the public shopping/transit concourse (as opposed to offices), based on the first photo above. Does this mean there's at least some hope it'll be used by people other than the weekday office lunch crowd?

mcgordonliddy

Fri, 21 Sep 2007 09:14:18 -0800

It looks like a giant joint, which is why I support the design. I'm also excited for the 1000+ units of below market rental housing that is included in this plan. ITS ABOUT TIME!

guest

Fri, 21 Sep 2007 05:57:17 -0800

"t's not so much that it's an uninspired design. It's just that this particular inspiration has already been designed by another architect. The bastard also had the temerity to construct the building somewhere else. The nerve." It's similar but it's not exactly the same. The San Francisco version has a different shape and is taller and more slender looking at the top, rather than stubby.

guest

Fri, 21 Sep 2007 05:55:11 -0800

"it will never be a "park." it will be a well-manicured lunch spot for the 9-5 workers in the office tower and nothing more." This is very true.

RinconHillSF

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:40:51 -0800

Yeah for the City Park!

ChinaNob

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:17:56 -0800

A city "park" located 70 feet in the air attached to an office building will never function like what the fools in the public think it will. that's over five stories above street level by the way. it will never be a "park." it will be a well-manicured lunch spot for the 9-5 workers in the office tower and nothing more.

sangfroid826

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 19:45:50 -0800

It's not so much that it's an uninspired design. It's just that this particular inspiration has already been designed by another architect. The bastard also had the temerity to construct the building somewhere else. The nerve.

guest

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 18:59:34 -0800

"A totally uninspired design wins again! Let's ensure that San Francisco is known around the world as the city with a bland shyline. And there's no housing included in the design(the only one of the finalists that didn't include housing). 1200 ft of commercial office space just what we need. I thought Rincon hill/SOMA were going to be developed as the City's next neighborehood. . . ." Actually I think San Francisco has a beautiful skyline. And I also think that of the three plans presented, this is the best and best looking. If it's going to be built, I think this is the one to build. However, that doesn't mean I think the building has to be as tall as it is.

guest

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 18:45:18 -0800

A totally uninspired design wins again! Let's ensure that San Francisco is known around the world as the city with a bland shyline. And there's no housing included in the design(the only one of the finalists that didn't include housing). 1200 ft of commercial office space just what we need. I thought Rincon hill/SOMA were going to be developed as the City's next neighborehood. . . .

RinconHillSF

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:39:03 -0800

Yeah for the City Park!

guest

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:31:23 -0800

That's not what I asked, I asked if San Francisco needs to compete in a pissing match with other cities to build a "Supertall" Skycraper. Gavin Newsom even said something along the lines of "we have to build it because other cities are building skyscrapers as tall or taller". For the record, I didn't grow up in a small town, and I don't live in one now, in fact, I live in another city (not San Francisco) that has buildings far taller than the Transamerica Pyramid and even this new building if built (hint: it's not Chicago).

Brock Keeling

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:05:44 -0800

we need buildings because...this is a metropolitan city, not the small town many of you grew up in. you can't come here for the liberal politics and food, but then ignore the fact that you live in a city that moves upward and in need of constant change.

guest

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:03:50 -0800

Once it's built, can we rename San Francisco "Minas Tirith?"

guest

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:59:57 -0800

Well I think the idea is that CalTrain and someday in the far off distant future sadly not in our lifetimes because the government (both state and local) sucks shit a high speed Amtrak train that connects San Francisco and L.A. will both be pulling into the new terminal. Do you really think San Francisco needs a building this tall just "because" other cities in the world are building supertall skycrapers? Why must San Francisco take part in this pissing match? For what?

aj

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:14:27 -0800

So will they actually build the train station, or just "leave space" for some future builder to actually make this suitable for a rail line?