SAN FRANCISCO | 535 Mission Street | 380 FT / 116 M | 27 FLOORS

[1977]

Yes! We've been waiting for this one for a long time...

Boston Properties Announces Acquisition of 535 Mission Street in San Francisco

BOSTON–Feb. 6, 2013– Boston Properties, Inc. (NYSE: BXP), a real estate investment trust, announced today it has completed the acquisition of 535 Mission Street, a development site, in San Francisco, CA for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $71.0 million cash, including work completed and materials purchased to date. The Company expects to commence construction of the project in mid-February 2013 and expects to complete the project by the fall of 2014 at a total budgeted cost of approximately $215 million.
Source and article: http://news.theregistrysf.com/boston-properties-announces-acquisition-of-535-mission-street-in-san-francisco-and-agreement-to-acquire-the-last-remaining-development-site-in-reston-town-center/

[peanut gallery]

Finally! Man, I'm excited about this. The cranes for this and the terminal will be jousting in mid-air next year.

[ElDuderino]

Awesome news :tup:. With this and 350 Mission St going up soon the Mission st canyon is coming together. With the groundwork done and materials in hand this should shoot up fast.

[minesweeper]

It's great to hear that another crane will dot the skyline soon! Here's a tidbit from the WSJ (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323452204578288624141631036.html?mod=googlenews_wsj) about the steel that was already purchased for this tower:

Boston Properties' purchase of the site includes Beacon's design as well as the materials the seller had purchased to construct the tower, including steel, which has been sitting in storage, according to other investors who considered buying the property.

I think this is an accurate timeline of events:

Dot-com Era: Approved for office tower
2003-04: Monahan Pacific acquires site from Hines for $19.2 million, switches plans to condos
April 2006: Monahan Pacific abandons condo plans, sells site to Beacon Capital Partners for $30 million
June 2008: Groundbreaking
October 2008: Construction halted
January 2009: Site covered, fenced off
February 2013: Site sold to Boston Properties for $71 million, construction restarting

[fflint]

^To the timeline I would add that at some point the parcel's maximum allowable height was reduced by about 100 ft., if I recall correctly.

[peanut gallery]

Timeline looks right to me. I went back through some of the posts from when it went on hold and found this gem from January 2009:

I feel like starting a pool on how long it will sit. I'm guessing two years.

I was only off by 2 years (ie: 100%).

[kchalmers]

located within the context of the developing SF:
http://www.steelbluellc.com/skyscraper/535missionwhitemodel.jpg

[NOPA]

Thanks kchalmers! I was getting this site and the Transbay tower site confused.

[minesweeper]

I walked by the site today and saw some activity. The sidewalk was fenced off, and there were maybe a half dozen workers at the site.

A single excavator had dug up a couple dump truck loads of gravel and dirt as of noon today (click images to enlarge):

http://i.imgur.com/dLuGCILl.jpg?1 (http://i.imgur.com/dLuGCIL.jpg)

http://i.imgur.com/UlKJamMl.jpg?1 (http://i.imgur.com/UlKJamM.jpg)

http://i.imgur.com/7jVKdJ5l.jpg?1 (http://imgur.com/7jVKdJ5.jpg)

http://i.imgur.com/XbDmjuZl.jpg?1 (http://i.imgur.com/XbDmjuZ.jpg)

[minesweeper]

A little more dirt has been excavated, but the site is generally pretty quiet:

http://i.imgur.com/rQykgfAl.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/rQykgfA.jpg)

[mt_climber13]

WooHoo!! U/C

:cheers:

[minesweeper]

I went by the site around 10:30 this morning and it was all quiet with no workers or heavy equipment to be found.

It doesn't look like much has happened since last week, except that the alley next to Salt House is closed now:

http://i.imgur.com/bfzu70Sl.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/bfzu70S.jpg)

(Bonus shot of Foundry III in the background.)

[minesweeper]

Not sure if this got posted a couple years ago, but I found this HOK rendering on an old SF Gate article (http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Memory-of-Water-535-Mission-St-3293065.php#photo-2367247):

http://i.imgur.com/eSt51NL.jpg

Unfortunately, I couldn't find anything of a higher resolution. But it's great to see a rendering that gives a better idea of what this building will actually look like when completed.

[peanut gallery]

^Thanks! I hadn't seen that one before. I wish it was going to be more prominent on the skyline, but look forward to it nonetheless.

[jbm]

I walked by this site today and the crane was being installed.

[simms3_redux]

^^^Beat me to it! The only missing piece was the boom swing, but the tower was up.

[spyguy]

Unfortunately, I couldn't find anything of a higher resolution. But it's great to see a rendering that gives a better idea of what this building will actually look like when completed.

Slightly larger, and a few others:
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/838/originaloq.jpg
http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/2046/lobbybiggnette3tree1.jpg
http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/2214/board3perspective2missi.jpg
http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/15/535missionview01.jpg
http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/7708/spview6bhigh.jpg
http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/2791/spview4.jpg
http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/5921/spview5bhigh.jpg

[tall/awkward]

Nice! Where did you find these?

[viewguysf]

This one screams out to be taller, and I really wish that it were.

[mt_climber13]

I thought it was going to be taller than the pink Manass to the east :( It is going to hardly be visible.

[fflint]

It was shortened, maybe three years ago.

[LMich]

This one screams out to be taller, and I really wish that it were.

I was thinking the exact same thing. It'd look even better three times taller. It make an very nice supertall. Heck, even just twice the height would be nice.

[fimiak]

This tower is well suited to its purpose as a one-company tower (Salesforce). If it were significantly larger then the developers would have to spend a lot more effort filling the building with multiple tenants. The present arrangement is perfect for both developer and tenant.

I'm not saying its the best choice for this lot, but it is the easy one.

[easy as pie]

yo emcee, this one is the bp tower being built on spec, salesforce's new (much larger) tower is going in down the block at 350 mission.

[fimiak]

yo emcee, this one is the bp tower being built on spec, salesforce's new (much larger) tower is going in down the block at 350 mission.

My bad. No clue why its so short then.

[minesweeper]

One reason this tower is shorter is that the lot size is very small. If they had to build taller, more floor space would be consumed by elevators, etc.

Case in point, the aforementioned crane is being erected in Shaw Alley (click images to enlarge):

http://i.imgur.com/LKptAALl.jpg?1 (http://i.imgur.com/LKptAAL.jpg)

http://i.imgur.com/3HjVuBZl.jpg?1 (http://i.imgur.com/3HjVuBZ.jpg)

http://i.imgur.com/YPO4iF8l.jpg?1 (http://i.imgur.com/YPO4iF8.jpg)

http://i.imgur.com/oZnD6Gpl.jpg?1 (http://i.imgur.com/oZnD6Gp.jpg)

[rocketman_95046]

Nice thing is that being a steel framed building this is going to go up fast!

[fimiak]

No way can lot size be the only reason this tower is small. Look at 432 Park Ave in NYC and you will see a 1400' tower rising on a tiny footprint surrounded by other buildings. This tower is short because someone decided it would be. It's still a beauty though and short towers are just fine, I just wonder why they chose to go short in this juicy location.

[northbay]

They also don't have earthquakes in NYC

[minesweeper]

No way can lot size be the only reason this tower is small. Look at 432 Park Ave in NYC and you will see a 1400' tower rising on a tiny footprint surrounded by other buildings. This tower is short because someone decided it would be. It's still a beauty though and short towers are just fine, I just wonder why they chose to go short in this juicy location.

I'm not saying it's the only reason, but it's probably a major reason. 432 Park Ave is an all-residential building, which works better for small lot sizes. Skinny buildings don't work so well for offices, as JK Dineen said (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2012/03/beacon-to-seek-buyer-for-mission.html?page=all):

The primary disadvantage is that the building has small floor plates --the largest are 13,000 square feet -- which makes it unlikely that a large tenant would swoop in and take a large chunk of the building. No large tenant wants to be spread out over seven or eight floors if they can help it.

[fimiak]

Who is this tower being marketed towards if not large tenants? Are they targeting small to medium sized startups? Or perhaps law/professional offices or something of the sort. The exterior facade is superb, beyond what I would expect from a tower that is not meant to be anchored by any big name tenants.

[fimiak]

Digging away this morning.

http://i.imgur.com/Tpmq5bL.jpg (http://imgur.com/Tpmq5bL)

http://i.imgur.com/13GhVyl.jpg (http://imgur.com/13GhVyl)

[northbay]

That roof top park is going to feel very cozy once this tower is completed

[tech12]

That roof top park is going to feel very cozy once this tower is completed

Definitely. I haven't been to that rooftop park in around 5 years, I'll have to check it out again once this tower is complete (or half complete, or whatever). Anyone know if there are plans to connect that park with the Transbay Terminal park?

[jbm]

that roof is a great place to have lunch downtown on a nice day.

[pseudolus]

that roof is a great place to have lunch downtown on a nice day.

and maybe a nice place to take pictures from (hint, hint)?

[minesweeper]

Definitely. I haven't been to that rooftop park in around 5 years, I'll have to check it out again once this tower is complete (or half complete, or whatever). Anyone know if there are plans to connect that park with the Transbay Terminal park?

According to this story (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2013/04/heightened-security-for-towers.html), the only buildings that will be connected to the park are the Transbay Tower and 181 Fremont.

[tech12]

According to this story (http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2013/04/heightened-security-for-towers.html), the only buildings that will be connected to the park are the Transbay Tower and 181 Fremont.

Oh, that's too bad that more buildings and that park won't be connected to the transbay park, especially considering that the two parks will only be 30 feet apart or so. But in a way, it'll also be cool that there will be two separate rooftop parks right next to each other. Rooftop parks are the bees knees.

[minesweeper]

Some comments from Boston Properties execs on their earnings call (http://seekingalpha.com/article/1391481-boston-properties-management-discusses-q1-2013-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single) yesterday:

We've commenced construction on 535 Mission Street, which is a speculative building, 535,000 square feet. And it's going to be delivered in the middle of 2014 with occupancy by the end of 2014. We introduced the product to the market about 2 weeks ago and made it clear we would be responding to leases of 2 floors or more. The square footage is actually 307,000 square feet, not 325,000 or 335,000.

We're very encouraged by the initial reviews and inquiries. The building has 13,000 square foot floors. So we anticipate that it's really going to be leased to a broad range of small or medium-sized technology and legal and financial services and other tenants. And if the average leases in the building hit our pro formas, we expect that in the mid 60s, the investment will generate about a 7% cash NOI return. And if it's higher than that, obviously, a much higher return on costs.

[1977]

Video of the construction process:

http://vimeo.com/65542875

[minesweeper]

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7294/8734589506_d19ce4c470_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbanists/8734589506/)
535 Mission Street (http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbanists/8734589506/) by urbanists (http://www.flickr.com/people/urbanists/), on Flickr

[simms3_redux]

I checked progress yesterday...foundation work moving quickly (lots of work was already completed a while ago in anticipation of this building). I know very little about construction, but have seen enough buildings go up to guess that we'll see structural steel in 4-6 weeks at most, and it should be quick from there!

[1977]

Another promo video.

http://vimeo.com/65933817

[minesweeper]

To go along with that promo video, Boston Properties launched 535mission.com (http://535mission.com/), which has some renderings:

http://i.imgur.com/D9YkM3r.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/Gg6TdUW.jpg

[mt_climber13]

Yeah, I think SF has a winner here.

Original Heller Manus Design:

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/7263/sftower8wx0.jpg

[northbay]

^ Which, btw, was when the project was still residential.

I agree, the design has definitely improved.

[rriojas71]

Nice building and it fits well with the other buildings along Mission... I only wish it was at least 200' taller.

[simms3_redux]

I walked by yesterday - it is majorly progressing. Caissons sticking up now, and I see more rebar. I'm sure steel is not far behind.

[tech12]

Here's a bigger version of one of those new renderings:

http://www.socketsite.com/535%20mission%20Street%20Rendered.jpg

http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2013/05/535_mission_street_rising_rendered_and_ready_in_2014.html

[fimiak]

If they are serious about delivering this building in October 2014 with the first pour in May 2013 then this building is going to rise INCREDIBLY fast. They are trying for 27 floors + foundation and basement complete in 18 months. I don't think the hammers are going to stop for a moment until this is wrapped.

[simms3_redux]

At least they are preserving the "views" of the currently vacant (I believe) floors of 555 Mission, LoL.

[minesweeper]

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3766/8817752579_4bb86d1628_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbanists/8817752579/)
535 Mission (http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbanists/8817752579/) by urbanists (http://www.flickr.com/people/urbanists/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7435/8831837626_1b2748f816_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbanists/8831837626/)
Concrete Pour - 535 Mission (http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbanists/8831837626/) by urbanists (http://www.flickr.com/people/urbanists/), on Flickr

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2888/8894207673_483a2881d1_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tuesdaysatnoon/8894207673/)
535 Mission (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tuesdaysatnoon/8894207673/) by justinplue (http://www.flickr.com/people/tuesdaysatnoon/), on Flickr

[minesweeper]

http://i.imgur.com/VWxH7Lal.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/VWxH7La.jpg)

[simms3_redux]

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/575Mission_zps4bab3914.jpg

[simms3_redux]

If you look at the photo immediately below from May 15, you can see how much the hole has been raised by the foundation pour. The foundation is basically complete now - I suspect structural will start to come in this week or next and with all steel structural this should rise very quickly.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7294/8734589506_d19ce4c470_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbanists/8734589506/)
535 Mission Street (http://www.flickr.com/photos/urbanists/8734589506/) by urbanists (http://www.flickr.com/people/urbanists/), on Flickr

From yesterday evening:

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535M1_zps8ad0e57f.jpg

The sidewalk barricades have now been changed to protect passersby from overhead (I'm sure they'll be made more robust this week). This is a sign they are about to go vertical.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535M2_zps7a4d487e.jpg

Metering in:

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535M3_zps7fdea9f0.jpg

[simms3_redux]

Taken today at lunch...lobby structure being built now, this thing will rise really fast going forward.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535M1_zps7120cabf.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535M2_zpsfdfcf340.jpg

[MisterD]

Steel is rising quickly.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7427/9506135778_a78ee701ef.jpg

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5453/9506135632_e0200774d6.jpg

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2827/9506135412_1034e66bc8.jpg

[hruski]

Wow, that's moving along very quickly.

[biggerhigherfaster]

Further agreement that it's moving along fast. I walk by it every day to/from work. It looks noticeably taller and different each day.

[simms3_redux]

Has the webcam been posted yet? fimiak - another one for your signature.

http://535mission.com/construction/

Looks like they are already to floor 5 or 6 in the back corner. Gotta love steel construction!!! Wish all highrises were built with steel construction. This thing will top out before ORH North!

[fimiak]

Link added.


This is moving so fast and is wedged mid block that its going to be a shocker to most people not in the know when the tower tops out and glass is going up. I'm guessing it will top out really really fast, like February 2014 fast. I can't wait to look back on this post now to see how close I came.

[hruski]

It could be January.

[fimiak]

Video first.
72999392


http://i.imgur.com/h9eHPgL.jpg (http://imgur.com/h9eHPgL)

http://i.imgur.com/7GX3mP4.jpg (http://imgur.com/7GX3mP4)

http://i.imgur.com/Ne23sWG.jpg (http://imgur.com/Ne23sWG)

Bonus shot of Shanghai Tower model at the Autodesk Gallery

http://i.imgur.com/L4byWhT.jpg (http://imgur.com/L4byWhT)

[peanut gallery]

^Nice shots, fimiak. Here's one from a little farther away. It's beginning to take its place among the neighbors:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3734/9577843701_bfe6181e0a_b.jpg

The other cranes are working on the new Transbay Terminal.

[minesweeper]

It looks like they're up to six full floors now, and looking at the time lapse, it's growing at more than a floor per week.

So that would mean topping out in December or January depending on whether they can keep up the pace. Also, since the steel was apparently pre-purchased and sitting in storage, they shouldn't have any delays getting material to the site.

A grab from their webcam from this morning:

http://i.imgur.com/nnNlReLl.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/nnNlReL.jpg)

[mt_climber13]

Man, the glass can make or break it. On some renders it looked like a frosted white, which would be stunning. Others it looked green like 555 Mission next door. I hope it doesn't turn out green!

[simms3_redux]

Just some random views not unlike the pics above.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535Mission1_zpse369e0a2.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535Mission2_zpsbdf11e22.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535Mission3_zps60e1b7c9.jpg

Showing how narrow Shaw Alley is.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535Mission4_zps12b43ab4.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535Mission5_zps9da923c7.jpg

[viewguysf]

Just some random views not unlike the pics above.

Ditto simms!

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5350/9590221539_f925108f1b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9590221539/)
_MG_4847 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9590221539/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7390/9590244889_d998778eed_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9590244889/)
_MG_4853 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9590244889/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickr

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3724/9590303599_c4a4c3668e_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9590303599/)
_MG_4855 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9590303599/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7412/9590304377_aef79ea735_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9590304377/)
_MG_4856 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9590304377/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7347/9593099204_59c0aac7d5_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9593099204/)
_MG_4857 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/viewguysf/9593099204/) by viewguysf (http://www.flickr.com/people/viewguysf/), on Flickr

All of our photos also illustrate what a small project this is for Boston Properties.

[mt_climber13]

Last week, from the central skyway:

http://i.imgur.com/aN9XABo.jpg

[tech12]

^Nice angle. Three of my favorite SF towers right next to each other: JP Morgan Chase, 555 Mission, and 535 Mission (assuming it ends up as nice as the renderings).

[fflint]

Three of my favorite SF towers right next to each other: JP Morgan Chase, 555 Mission, and 535 Mission (assuming it ends up as nice as the renderings).
Agreed--love JPMC and 555 Mish. And while nobody can guarantee there won't be bad cosmetic changes (or god forbid, cheap materials), I am optimistic 535 will look good.

[peanut gallery]

I'm with you guys. Can't wait to see the glass going on. This is from today:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7289/9779056014_17c1887023_b.jpg

The protective scaffolding over the sidewalk masks it somewhat, but that lobby will be large, open and airy -- really more than two stories in height since the first floor is already taller than the others. Should be quite dramatic.

[simms3_redux]

They have added 4 floors since the last update - now up to floor 11:

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Sep%2029/SanFranciscoConstandMoreOct-13003_zps89d946cf.jpg

Note girl in green sweater below for size reference:

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Sep%2029/SanFranciscoConstandMoreOct-13006_zps704422ee.jpg

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Sep%2029/SanFranciscoConstandMoreOct-13007_zps9c160baf.jpg

[fimiak]

Wow this is going to (nearly?)top out in 2013 if they continue at this pace (4 floors in 3 weeks). Considering how all they are doing nowadays is leaving bare skeleton offices for tenants with concrete floors and open floor plans this building will be finished in a blink of an eye.

[Tectonic]

With this building being located in a seismic zone, how would the frame differ same a similar size building in NYC?

[rocketman_95046]

With this building being located in a seismic zone, how would the frame differ same a similar size building in NYC?

The biggest differences would probably be in the foundation strength. Soil types being very different in SF than NYC. This had pilings down to bedrock. Above ground, the frame might look close to the same, but the structural stiffeners, welds, bolts, and steel might be of different geometry and grade.

[tech12]

With this building being located in a seismic zone, how would the frame differ same a similar size building in NYC?

I would assume that it probably takes a bit longer to build the foundation in SF, as buildings in downtown need to be anchored really deep into the bedrock, below all the unstable landfill on top of it, but all of that was done years ago for 535 Mission. The project was then put on hold for a few years due to the recession, and finally was resumed recently. Seeing as the foundation was already done, and the fact that it's a steel frame building with the steel already ordered and in storage upon resuming the project, the building has been rising pretty fast.

Speaking of building to withstand earthquakes, wouldn't modern skyscrapers in New York or pretty much anywhere in the US (or anywhere with non-shit building codes) be built that way too, though maybe not to the same degree as buildings on the west coast? Other parts of the US may not be as seismically active as the west coast, but it's not like earthquakes are unheard of elsewhere. The New Madrid fault in the midwest/south has caused multiple large earthquakes (magnitude 5.0 to 8.0+) since the 1700s, some of which have been felt as far away as Boston. And wasn't there a magnitude 4.0-5.0 earthquake in NY a few years ago?

[fflint]

Speaking of building to withstand earthquakes, wouldn't modern skyscrapers in New York or pretty much anywhere in the US (or anywhere with non-shit building codes) be built that way too, though maybe not to the same degree as buildings on the west coast? Other parts of the US may not be as seismically active as the west coast, but it's not like earthquakes are unheard of elsewhere. The New Madrid fault in the midwest/south has caused multiple large earthquakes (magnitude 5.0 to 8.0+) since the 1700s, some of which have been felt as far away as Boston. And wasn't there a magnitude 4.0-5.0 earthquake in NY a few years ago?
New York is located within a seismic zone 2A (San Francisco is within a seismic zone 4), and according to Wikipedia, seismologists believe the greatest magnitude earthquake in the New York area was around 5.0. When constructing skyscrapers, that's a sufficient risk to require building codes addressing seismicity, and so New York has them.

Admittedly I'm not an engineer, but I would imagine many of the systems designed to handle New York's occasional hurricane-force winds are probably similar to those designed to handle earthquakes.

[viewguysf]

The biggest differences would probably be in the foundation strength. Soil types being very different in SF than NYC. This had pilings down to bedrock. Above ground, the frame might look close to the same, but the structural stiffeners, welds, bolts, and steel might be of different geometry and grade.

The lack of banding on rebar for many of NYC's skyscrapers really shocks me when you compare it to what we do here. Look at ONE57 as an example; it's just over 1,000' and has much less banding than Foundry Square III or Trinity Place. The same is true in Chicago. Both cities have many examples of this.

[cv94117]

The lack of banding on rebar for many of NYC's skyscrapers really shocks me when you compare it to what we do here. Look at ONE57 as an example; it's just over 1,000' and has much less banding than Foundry Square III or Trinity Place. The same is true in Chicago. Both cities have many examples of this.

Take a structural engineering course one day and maybe you'll find out why. There's nothing to be concerned about. These guys know what they're doing.

[viewguysf]

Take a structural engineering course one day and maybe you'll find out why. There's nothing to be concerned about. These guys know what they're doing.

I think that they do, yet it also appears to my lay person eyes that our structures are built to withstand greater external forces.

[simms3_redux]

Adding yet another 2 floors and it looks like they are framing the windows/curtain wall on floor 3.

This building is like a weed in the tropics. Screen grab from webcam.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535missionscreengrab-20131009_zps8e7d6b03.jpg

[fflint]

Lower Mission Street contains San Francisco's best collection of new and new-ish skyscrapers. Market was mostly built out by the mid-1980s, and its towers are fairly old fashioned at this point compared to the slick stuff going up along and next to Mission.

[viewguysf]

Lower Mission Street contains San Francisco's best collection of new and new-ish skyscrapers. Market was mostly built out by the mid-1980s, and its towers are fairly old fashioned at this point compared to the slick stuff going up along and next to Mission.

The bulk of lower Market Street actually sprang up in waves in the 70s.

[simms3_redux]

535 Mission

Pictures taken 10/13/2013

FYI I believe they have installed a few windows!!!!!


http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/38535Mission1_zps14367507.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/38535Mission1_zps14367507.jpg.html)

With site/rendering for 524 Howard in front.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/39535Mission2_zpsf18acde3.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Oct%2013%202013/39535Mission2_zpsf18acde3.jpg.html)

[minesweeper]

They're almost at the halfway point height-wise (12-13 of 27 floors).

Click photos to enlarge:

http://i.imgur.com/fVr0eN9l.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/fVr0eN9.jpg) http://i.imgur.com/idLihlQl.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/idLihlQ.jpg)

http://i.imgur.com/LMqyawvl.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/LMqyawv.jpg) http://i.imgur.com/MXLaIehl.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/MXLaIeh.jpg)

[simms3_redux]

Quoting myself from yesterday evening:

No construction equipment yet on Block 6/7, but walking by other projects today and 350 Mission is about to go "above ground", 535 Mission is still slow and quiet and they haven't raised the crane yet (looks like they need to one of these weekends in order to build more floors), 222 Second is frantically digging and they have quite a hole there now, and Lumina's digging has to be nearly done as they are quite deep with a remaining mound of dirt in the middle. 181 Fremont has definitely commenced excavation work as well. ORH North is definitely topped off - they are building the steel structure at the top that will hold the TMD.


Raising it today ironically:
http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535mishraisecrane_zps495db738.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/535mishraisecrane_zps495db738.jpg.html)

[simms3_redux]

By the way, if you go Here (http://535mission.com/space/535_Mission.pdf), and count floors on renderings and their last page where they break space available down by floor, it becomes apparent that this building is as follows:

1 lobby floor plus a small discreet floor above (so 2 floor lobby, no RSF)
23 full floorplates that you can count on rendering
very small 25th office floor that looks like it's going to be 4,000 SF facing Shaw Alley on top floor, but otherwise look like mechanical on all other sides

They skip 13th floor and count lobby as 2, so this is really like a 24 floor building, 25 if you include the 4,630 SF available on top floor.

They have built floor 11 office floors (13 total), so from this we can infer that they have 13 more structural floors to go, including 12 floors that will be used fully as high-rise office space and 1 that will have some office space and likely mechanical. Halfway up.

[peanut gallery]

Does anyone else feel like this going up relatively slowly for a steel-framed building? Could the tapered corners add complexity and thus time? Or am I off base here?

[simms3_redux]

^^^It only went vertical at the end of August. It's risen 13 floors in ~9 weeks - 1.44 floors per week. So yea, maybe it is going up slowly (that is like concrete speed and I think ORH North may have been faster than that). It's still supposedly on track to deliver in April of 2014, and it's pre-certified LEED Gold Core and Shell, so I'm sure delivery is of the Core and Shell, and lobby improvements and interior buildouts will remain. I'm sure we won't see lights on and employees using the building until 3Q2014, if not later.

My estimate is that from ground level to topping off, ORH North did 50 floors in 249 days, or roughly 1.41 floors/week. Similar speed. 350 Mission will take forever.

[simms3_redux]

Glass.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535glass_zps7bf7b5d3.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/535glass_zps7bf7b5d3.jpg.html)

[simms3_redux]

They have glass (angled) over the lobby now and were installing more panes today.

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535Mission1_zpsd90eacf1.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/535Mission1_zpsd90eacf1.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/535Mission2_zps3ae724c4.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/535Mission2_zps3ae724c4.jpg.html)

[minesweeper]

Looks like they're up to the 22nd floor (counting the lobby as 2 and skipping 13). So, five more floors until it's topped off.

http://i.imgur.com/bZk2bPFl.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/bZk2bPF.jpg)

[simms3_redux]

Floor 21 - 11/30

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission1_zps74ebc815.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission1_zps74ebc815.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission2_zps4364efb0.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission2_zps4364efb0.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission3_zps9b756ffa.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission3_zps9b756ffa.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission4_zpse0b8a8c6.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission4_zpse0b8a8c6.jpg.html)

http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission5_zpse45f8780.jpg (http://s916.photobucket.com/user/jsimms3/media/SF%20Construction%20Nov%2030%202013/535Mission5_zpse45f8780.jpg.html)

[mt_climber13]

I like the glass.. I am picturing how this building is going to be like a big vanity mirror that will reflect the Transbay Park and the new downtown skyline. Exciting!


One thing I noticed that is off putting is that these retail spaces in these new towers are bank branches. Yawn. Talk about soul sucking. Millennium has bank of the west and 555 Mission has Chase. I also noticed it at the new project on Market and Noe. Not very inviting if creating a sense of neighborhood is the goal.

[shakman]

This tower, 10-floors taller, would have been better standing out on its own rather than an infill structure. Where ever it should be, it is one of favorites under-construction in SF.

[cv94117]

One thing I noticed that is off putting is that these retail spaces in these new towers are bank branches. Yawn. Talk about soul sucking. Millennium has bank of the west and 555 Mission has Chase. I also noticed it at the new project on Market and Noe. Not very inviting if creating a sense of neighborhood is the goal.

I agree about the banks! - Get rid of them. Who even goes to a bank branch any more? I've heard that it's all about marketing - keeping the brand out there, but surely there must be better ways of doing that than creating dead zones on what should be vibrant corners.

[simms3_redux]

The only bank branch in any of the new towers that I can think of is Mountain Bank in Millennium. Most of the towers built post 2000 have either no commercial space, or they have a restaurant space.

Will 535 Mission even have any commercial space?

[timbad]

today:

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2871/11377832374_c8170aa849_b.jpg

[ElDuderino]

Cladding looks quality. A lot more reflective than what the renderings show. We will have to wait for more cladding to get an idea of the final product. 4 more floors to go?