I guess now there are plausible in-universe technological explanations that allow us to gravitate (no pun intended) away from Roddenberry's 1960s notion that the Enterprise should never be thought of as a ship capable of atmospheric flight.
Nobody's saying that the Enterprise, by itself, is designed for atmospheric flight, or by ANY means of "takeoff and landing."
Even... just supposing... if the ship was completely built planetside, it might be TOWED into orbit. It could, theoretically, be built in some giant scaffold.
I still believe that the subsections are built planetside and towed to orbit for integration and final outfitting. Because that's the ONLY way that the "San Francisco Yards" makes any sense.
That, and the fact that there's a REAL PLACE called the "San Francisco Naval Yards," just like there's a real place called the Golden Gate Bridge, or a real place called San Francisco for that matter.
You can argue that there's no canon evidence that it's the SAME SFNY, but it's much harder to argue that it wasn't the original INTENTION that it be the same SFNY.