SAN FRANCISCO | Salesforce Tower | 1,070 FT (326 M) | 61 floors

[boyinthecity]

Blind those poor, downtrodden folks on telegraph hill, you say?

IMHO. I'd call that a Win / Win scenario.

At a minimum,
hopefully they do some innovative lighting with the crown.
It's the least they could do since there is no observation deck.

[mthd]

Originally Posted by fimiak

SPUR doesn't know anything we don't know about this tower's design. That model is wrong, not the renders.

the model wasn't built by SPUR - and it isn't "wrong." it's a very accurate abstraction of the version of the project presented to and approved by the planning commission.

until the developer releases new drawings, or finishes the building, the massing shown in the model is correct.

[fimiak]

The model at SPUR is not fully accurate, and not a final design. The post I was replying to was suggesting that the final design of the tower had changed after looking at the SPUR picture, but that picture has nothing more than artistic renditions of the new towers. The rendering here http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...ancisco-record is the most accurate, I believe.

[simms3_redux]

Originally Posted by fimiak

The model at SPUR is not fully accurate, and not a final design. The post I was replying to was suggesting that the final design of the tower had changed after looking at the SPUR picture, but that picture has nothing more than artistic renditions of the new towers. The rendering here http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...ancisco-record is the most accurate, I believe.

Hmmm, a couple things to point out.

1) @ 714,000 SF assuming 15.5 years term, 12 months free as article assumes, and $560M in base rent, that implies a base start rent of only $43psf, which is absurdly low.

2) Article quotes a "$ Billion" deal after improvements, however, not factoring in improvements, "billion dollar deal" implies a start rent of $76psf, which seems high for such a large lease on the bottom half of the building.

At the end of the day, $83psf is someone's backed into AVG term rent, implying a lower start and higher finish. Not factoring in free rent and only looking at asking, and assuming 3% ann growth, that is a $66psf start, which is basically MARKET these days.

The article also suggests this is the peak of current asking rents in SF and that the 2000 peak was $70psf. Neither is true.

2000 saw triple digits in some leases, and this past year a deal got done at $117. Not to mention 555 California, one of the most prestigious buildings in the financial district inked two comps this past year:

Supercell Takes ~30k sf top floor for $97/sf lease

Microsoft leases streetview floors 2 and 3 at 555 Cal (50k sf) for $62psf

Wish Takes top 3 floors at One Sansome (54k sf) for undisclosed rate


Needless to say, $83psf isn't a record breaker today, nor would it have been in 2000. The absolute size of the lease and the value of the lease due to that size are. And anything above $60psf start for a lease that big is only achieved either in NYC or SF, ever. So it is a big deal, but to imply some $83psf start is a little disingenuous at best, and nobody really has all the facts except for the brokerage community.


I view this lease by Salesforce similar to how I view the Coach lease (for the lower half) at Hudson Yards in NYC. The higher rents are yet to come. And you can believe that Salesforce is paying, effectively, a different rate for its different floors, blended of course. No doubt that asking for the top floor was triple digit. FOR SURE. But lower floors at streetview were probably $60-65psf. I'm sure remaining start rents for mid-tower and viewspace will start in the $70s and go dramatically up from there.

[jbm]

I walked by this weekend and asked one of the workers when it would start popping out of the ground. He said it would still be awhile, as they had only dug about 1/2 way out so far.

[rocketman_95046]

half way down by johnsabatino
https://instagram.com/p/zin10WwuB7/

[kdeff]

I wonder how many tons of concrete they need to pour for the foundation. I imagine enough to build a decent size skyscraper with.

[simms3_redux]

Speaking of rents, Bisnow today had some interesting tidbits on asking rents in SF.

Avison Young just released an eye-opening report this morning that summarizes how high rents are these days for 100 top-tier buildings in the CBD, as well as what's up for grabs. In its Tier 1 building group, average low-rise starting rents start at $66.50, full service, and surge to $82 for high-rise product (floors 16 and up). The Ferry Building (pictured) starts at $85/SF, with 82k SF of direct space available. One Market's 42-floor Spear Tower (which Google is leasing a big chunk of) asks $91/SF for upper floors, where 25k SF is available.

Meanwhile, 101 Cal has the most space available out of the Tier 1 group, at 222k SF mostly above floor 16. There high-rise space in the 48-story tower costs around $85/SF. Out of the top-tier product, 8.3% is available. For Tier 2 buildings, which include 650 Cal and 525 Market, 14.5% is available and high-rise space starts at $71/SF, on average.

Source

[fflint]

101 Cal has a lot of available space due, in no small part, to Booz Allen Hamilton's departure. They had two full floors, around 32 and 33 if I recall correctly.

[Mojeda101]

Why is this taking so long? They destroyed the existing 14 story Wilshire Grand building, dug out the foundation, did the largest pour in history and is already at over 300 feet in the air. Why is this going at a snails pace?

[rocketman_95046]

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

Why is this taking so long? They destroyed the existing 14 story Wilshire Grand building, dug out the foundation, did the largest pour in history and is already at over 300 feet in the air. Why is this going at a snails pace?

Soil prep is a bit different for this tower. Wilshire did not have to pour approximately 50 caissons over 275ft deep to anchor the building in bedrock (already done). Shoring a basement that is below sea level and dug out of landfill is a little different (harder) as well. The logistics are also different due to the lot size, location, and other construction around the site. They are working 16 hour days.. so its not like they are going slow!

[simms3_redux]

Originally Posted by fflint

101 Cal has a lot of available space due, in no small part, to Booz Allen Hamilton's departure. They had two full floors, around 32 and 33 if I recall correctly.

I believe they moved catty corner to 50 Cal. I recall you snapping a pic from one of those floors - I worked +/- 1 floor from them at a previous firm so I remember that pic for having the same view I had, and now I am also in a different building, slightly higher up too.

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

Why is this taking so long? They destroyed the existing 14 story Wilshire Grand building, dug out the foundation, did the largest pour in history and is already at over 300 feet in the air. Why is this going at a snails pace?

Really? See explanation below your quote. Things generally take longer than in LA - it's a more urban environment with lots of unique challenges. Also, some projects in LA don't really even excavate, instead opting to do podium parking and starting on the vertical immediately, not that Wilshire Grand is one of those.

[fflint]

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

Why is this taking so long? They destroyed the existing 14 story Wilshire Grand building, dug out the foundation, did the largest pour in history and is already at over 300 feet in the air. Why is this going at a snails pace?

The Salesforce site is landfill. The Wilshire Grand site is not.

[mt_climber13]

Originally Posted by Mojeda101

Why is this taking so long? They destroyed the existing 14 story Wilshire Grand building, dug out the foundation, did the largest pour in history and is already at over 300 feet in the air. Why is this going at a snails pace?

So that it can be built after WG is completed and have additional height added. Duh

This tower is much narrower, simpler, and about 1 million sq. ft. less volume, so it will go up much quicker.

[Onn]

Originally Posted by wakamesalad

So that it can be built after WG is completed and have additional height added. Duh

There have been rumblings about a height change. Is there any truth to those rumors?

[fflint]

There is nothing behind such rumors except some forumers' wishful thinking.

[Onn]

Originally Posted by fflint

There is nothing behind such rumors except some forumers' wishful thinking.

It's funny, when this project was originally proposed it was supposed to be 1,250 feet. At the time that seemed unlikely simply because they had to find someone to fill all the space. The tower was then cut from its original height, as San Francisco's real estate market picked up dramatically. Today they could probably build the original height. A little disappointing I suppose.

[kdeff]

fflint, is that area landfill? I thought only the first block or so of what is now the waterfront was originally water.

In any case, the reason the tower is slow is the same reason as ffling said, liquifaction. Landfill (and other soft or sandy ground) is prone to turning liquidy during an earthquake, a problem the Wilshire doesn't have. And as fflint said, digging to bedrock isnt that simple. at 23:50 this video actually shows how they're building on reclaimed land in Mission Bay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSyDJLRJxRM

There they're driving steel beams 250ft underground to bedrock just for a midrise construction - thats longer than any skyscraper in the world!

Take the challenges earthquakes pose to LA, add the issue of liquifaction, and then top it off with what (for construction purposes) is the density of Manhattan. Thats why construction in SF takes so long.

[fflint]

Fully half of the parcel was part of San Francisco Bay in 1850 (ignore the red dot; Salesforce is the block bounded by Mission, First, Fremont and Howard:


source

[kdeff]

Originally Posted by fflint

Fully half of the parcel was part of San Francisco Bay in 1850 (ignore the red dot; Salesforce is the block bounded by Mission, First, Fremont and Howard:


source

Huh. Learn something new every day. Ive got a map from circa 1910, looks like there was a lot of growth between 1850 and 1900.