In today’s San Francisco Chronicle, John King discusses the planning effort for the Transbay district in SOMA.
Transbay development’s evolution stands in stark contrast to Rincon’s
John King, Chronicle Urban Design Writer
Tuesday, September 2, 2003
No, the best thing is the fact that the city government is actually taking the initiative to shape growth in San Francisco — instead of simply reacting to what developers bring in the door.
Planning: What a concept! And what better way to reintroduce it than with a creative approach that aims to set the stage for striking towers in the air and a finely textured neighborhood on the ground.
A good example of creativity at work is the vision for Beale and Main streets, where one sidewalk on each thoroughfare would be widened to 32 feet.
In terms of foot traffic that's an absurd width — even Market Street's broad sidewalks are just 25 feet — but the intent is to use all but eight feet as linear parks. There would be lawns in one stretch, a tot lot in another, restaurant seating or bocce ball courts in a third. Each would tie into a generous 1-acre square just north of Folsom Street.
"This very green ground level is a way to overcome some of the disadvantages of the area as it now exists," said John Kriken, a partner at Skidmore Owings & Merrill, the architecture firm hired by the Redevelopment Agency to work on the plan. "We feel strongly that green and sunlight and views are the qualities that have to be present to make a good San Francisco neighborhood."
Up in the air, the planned towers would soar even higher than the ones proposed for the Rincon Hill district south of Folsom Street. Four are set at 55 stories — taller than all but a handful of the Financial District's towers.
But there's a difference between Transbay and Rincon, or Transbay and the Financial District. Transbay's towers would be carefully located, with just one per block. The result would be plenty of space between each tower — and towers near the bay would be kept below 30 stories, making for a nice transition.
The planners also realize neighborhoods need more than bedrooms and sidewalks to thrive. They need physical and social diversity. So the towers are framed by more traditional buildings in the four- to seven-story range. And besides the park near Folsom, there would be basketball courts and space for other activities threaded along alleys to the west.
"This will be a dense neighborhood, but it needs to be smart density," said Mike Grisso, the Redevelopment Agency's project manager for Transbay. "Making sure the neighborhood is attractive and livable will also make it marketable."
The difference between Transbay's planning and the saga of Rincon Hill is almost painful to contemplate.
For Rincon, the city's Planning Department has toyed with a neighborhood plan since 1999 after letting developers know that 40-story residential towers were welcome in an area near the Bay Bridge where they had never before been allowed.
On Thursday, two projects that contain 35- and 40-story towers could each be approved. Yet there still hasn't been a detailed plan, much less revisions to the city's zoning laws.
The Redevelopment Agency, by contrast, took nine months from hiring consultants to releasing a carefully argued 120-page draft. Yes, it had a bigger budget and is working with public land. But consider: If Mayor Willie Brown's administration had put resources into mapping out Rincon a few years back, some of the towers now jammed in the pipeline would be ready to open — bringing new tax revenue that the city desperately needs.
The Transbay plan isn't perfect, and some elements might be too ambitious. But it approaches the future with vision and care and gives the public a chance to weigh different options. May it be a sign of what's to come in the years ahead, and not just an aberration.