Lovely, as if this wasn't already the slowest supertall to rise in the history of planet earth.

I mean don't get me wrong, I'm grateful it is rising, and I'm very excited but still...

You mean only in San Francisco

2 years ago, this tower (then called Transbay Tower) and the 1100 foot hotel in LA, Wilshire Grand, were at the same stage--i.e., about to break ground. Now, the Wilshire Grand is about 3/4 of the way up while we're still excavating into oblivion

And this is comparing to LA, another city in California that has earthquake risks. Compare this to NYC, Texas, or Middle East, East Asia...

To be completely fair, the soil conditions at the Wilshire Grand site and the SF site are not even close to being the same. The prep required is completely different. Wilshire did not require caissons that went 275ft down. And Wilshire did not require the significant shoring that SF does.

Once again missing the point that the geological conditions beneath Salesforce Tower are vastly different from those under Wilshire Grand or just about any other tower under construction right now, and SFT is designed accordingly (written before reading rocketman's similar response above).

While I am very appreciative of SoCal Alan's interaction with site personnel, keep in mind that very rarely do craft foremen or even superintendents have a complete understanding of a complex project schedule. The field rumors regarding cost and schedule on the projects I've worked on have always been quite extraordinary, to put it mildly.

That said, an ex-coworker was a Transbay Transit Center superintendent (a completely separate project and team) until a few weeks ago, and he told me even from day one, the SFT April 2017 delivery would be delayed 2-3 months, and with the latest delays, 4th quarter 2017 is the current target (again, this is at best second-or-third-hand information). A phased delivery may also be a possibility, since Salesforce leased the lower half of the tower.

Schedule acceleration in the form of weekend work, swing shifts, etc. is another option, pending financial feasibility (acceleration cost versus liquidated damages), and the situation is likely convoluted with an attempt at recovery from the concrete supplier if it is determined that they are partially or fully responsible. It sounds messy, as many construction projects are, but good things come to those who wait.

That's a pretty lame excuse. It might justify a somewhat longer construction period but not YEARS of delays. And the soil conditions were known beforehand to begin with it's not like the soil quality just magically became poor after they did the design.

Shh.. don't say that. You'll get the armchair mafia out for you!

Every minute for building this tower has been totally justified as a normal operation, no screw ups, no set backs, no mistakes, no miscalculations, no structural defects.. everything has been flowing perfectly smoothly and there is nothing to worry about.

/s

BTW, it took 4 years to build the Golden Gate Bridge.

It also took less than 2 years to build the Empire State Building from 1930-31. That was in the midst of the Great Depression, using obviously far more primitive technology than today. The Empire State Building is much larger than Salesforce Tower, yet it was entirely built in less than time than it's taken Salesforce Tower to excavate

and only 11 workers died

I have no idea what YEARS of delays you are referencing. :shrug: From the initiation of construction, we've known the intended completion date is 2017. From the moment Salesforce signed their lease, we've known their occupancy starts in 2018. There has been no official announcement to the contrary.

Comparisons are pointless. This has been the time frame for the past two years. I don't understand the sudden outrage.

Pretty freaking incredible only 11 died, considering all circumstances.

Didn't some construction workers die or get seriously injured at 350 Mission St., a dinky tower (such as has been built hundreds if not thousands of times throughout the world) being built a couple years back?
Your point, again?

*I just want to add as further proof of America's faltering culture: the National Highway System was built in 35 years. We'll be lucky if train tracks from LA to SF are finished being built in that time.

It's not safety harnesses that are slowing projects these days, it's NIMBYs and unions.

Damn unions with their fair pay and benefits!

The problem with unions isn't the pay it's the working as slow as possible in order to try and keep projects going forever with tons of overtime. If they were making $50/hr to work hard it wouldn't be an issue, but making $50/hr to work as slow as humanly possible is absurd.

We are 4 months away to be in 2016 and this tower is still a hole in the ground, there is no way this 1000' plus tower will be built in a year and a half. This towers has been delayed, probably with an opening date in 2019 or 2020

That would probably be true, but by my math, they have 2-1/2 years until the Salesforce lease begins in early 2018.

Well, hopefully it gets built.
Maybe it is time for the idiots, who made the Cesar Pelli pick
(because of the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$),
to call the folks at S.O.M. to address the problems.
Sad part is that none of these people will be held accountable.
I still like the SOM tower design.
(extreme sarcasm above. yes, i know this won't happen. LOL!)

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/SQ...8=w681-h534-no Source: This website.

If SOM had won the competition, we might have been faced with a much more painful reduction of height from the original 1,375 tall design to somewhere below 1,100 to the top. Thankfully, the latest design for Oceanwide Center Tower 1 seems to have some qualities of the lost SOM Transbay Tower design that I am happy to see.

Good thing for some of our posters that they didn't live in Chicago during the last real estate bubble. I don't think they could have survived the cancellation of Waterview and the Spire midconstruction.

I think you have this backwards. It's projects like those that have caused people to have a more pragmatic view of these sort of projects. Back then you had people here going all "Baghdad Bob" saying everything was on schedule and the financing was all secure even as it became more and more evident exactly what was happening. It doesn't have to get to 2017 for us to announce a tower is behind schedule when it's still just a hole in the ground at the end of 2015.

It seems the tower is behind schedule, but they may have padded the delivery date to account for such things. It's not like this never happens. This is a huge and complicated tower, much more so than anything we've seen in San Francisco before.

It also seems there is a subset of forumers who strongly feel any potential deviation from the most optimistic schedule means the sky is going to fall and the tower canceled, and they apparently cannot be calmed or reassured, even by professionals in the field, because of an inexplicable emotional investment in playing the role of Chicken Little.