After the revisions presented at this month’s waterfront workshops, we have reached a major milestone with the design of our future intermodal transit station.

The latest Alternatives 1 and 4 are so well done, either will beautifully reflect the character of the waterfront neighborhoods in which they reside.

By the time the buzz and commotion of the latest public meeting had died down, and I had a chance to finally look closely at the revised Alternative 1, I can honestly say that it might be the best station concept yet. Even though its origins derive from Safeway Station, it no longer can be criticized as such.

Here are five reasons why the new Alternative 1 is stellar:

1. The alien modernist tower design is gone. In fact, Alternative 1’s tower is now exactly the traditional one from the popular Alternative 4. The architect made it even better by adding a light shaft down its center, composed of nicely scaled square windows. This vertical ban of little square windows is repeated in a horizontal ban of the same on the main station front.
2. The station’s uninterrupted huge modern glass walls have now been broken down into handsome smaller windows of a much more traditional fashion. The detail and scale of the subdivisions and mullions of the metal and glass walls have been done at a size humans can relate to. (In fact, the detailing in the glass walls’ metal work is so attractive, it recalls one of my favorite skyscrapers in San Francisco, 560 Mission Street.)
3. Just as the tower is directly from Alternative 4, so too is the stair placement. It’s much preferred having the entry stairs face forward into the plaza and more so towards Bayfront Boulevard. The old location of sending the stairs to the side cluttered and hid the station’s front facade and detoured commuters away from Bayfront Boulevard’s future shopping and restaurants.
4. The station’s strong overall horizontal banding of brick, concrete and metal work is evocative of the horizontal lines of railroad tracks.
5. The transparency of the design will always lead to a greater feeling of safety and security to its users.

For those still holding out for Alternative 4, I offer you this: Even if the revised Alternative 1 prevails, the current high level of design couldn’t have been done without exploring and pushing for Alternative 4. Alternative 4 facilitated and made possible our latest Alternative 1.

Many workshop participants thought that RTAA was biased towards Alternative 1 in their presentations. Perhaps this is because that is where their heart is and has always been. I propose now that we have a fantastic Alternative 1, maybe it best that we indeed let them follow their hearts (renderings of Alternative 1 below)…