HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture


    Salesforce Tower in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • San Francisco Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
San Francisco Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #701  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2014, 5:32 PM
brantw's Avatar
brantw brantw is offline
Get me out of here
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by simms3_redux View Post
They were taking truckloads of dirt away from the site today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #702  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2014, 5:47 PM
rocketman_95046's Avatar
rocketman_95046 rocketman_95046 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SD/SJ, CA, USA
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by simms3_redux View Post
They were taking truckloads of dirt away from the site today.
You sure those trucks are leaving full? It looks to me like they are arriving full from 181 Fremont, unloading, and leaving empty. You can see them level out the dirt on the West end of the site. Not sure why because they are also bringing in excavators to the site, but there may be some staging going on.
__________________
1,000 posts and still going...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #703  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2014, 10:56 PM
rocketman_95046's Avatar
rocketman_95046 rocketman_95046 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SD/SJ, CA, USA
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketman_95046 View Post
You sure those trucks are leaving full? It looks to me like they are arriving full from 181 Fremont, unloading, and leaving empty. You can see them level out the dirt on the West end of the site. Not sure why because they are also bringing in excavators to the site, but there may be some staging going on.
@SalesforceTower just tweeted that the soil prep is done... on to building the shoring walls

so i guess that is where we are..
__________________
1,000 posts and still going...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #704  
Old Posted Sep 17, 2014, 12:23 AM
simms3_redux's Avatar
simms3_redux simms3_redux is offline
She needs her space
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,454
Here we go! For a while I was getting antsy...but judging from other similar towers in LA and NYC, excavation and foundation work is really going to take a while.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #705  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2014, 5:25 AM
upward 2000 upward 2000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 403
I wonder how long it will be before steel starts to rise?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #706  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2014, 2:52 PM
rocketman_95046's Avatar
rocketman_95046 rocketman_95046 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SD/SJ, CA, USA
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by upward 2000 View Post
I wonder how long it will be before steel starts to rise?
My guess is that they are 3-4 months behind 181 Fremont. So feb or march they should be building up instead of down. Its amazing that they have already spent about $75 million on construction so far but its all buried about 250ft down.
__________________
1,000 posts and still going...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #707  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2014, 4:00 PM
upward 2000 upward 2000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 403
It is amazing how much goes in the pit just to get to ground level.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #708  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2014, 4:27 PM
biggerhigherfaster biggerhigherfaster is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 111
The Transbay Terminal has been underground for over 3 years now and likely will stay that way for another year
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #709  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2014, 4:36 PM
simms3_redux's Avatar
simms3_redux simms3_redux is offline
She needs her space
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,454
^^^I'm pretty positive it won't be another year before we see steel above ground. Maybe 6 months before the western end of the terminal starts rising, and maybe another 6 months for the eastern end. The train box has really come along on the western end.

Also, BXP and Hines are pretty much (almost) a quarter billion into the TB Tower. Not sure if that is all equity first and then debt funding comes later, or what, but their basis is basically already what it takes to put up a 60 story office tower in other cities in this country, and steel hasn't even risen. 181's project cost is something like $600M if I remember reading something correctly (incl land basis). That's basically $1,000psf. Whoa. Those condos will average >$2,000psf though, and that's 33% of the project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #710  
Old Posted Sep 19, 2014, 5:34 PM
simms3_redux's Avatar
simms3_redux simms3_redux is offline
She needs her space
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2,454
There is some CRAZY INTENSE equipment being assembled on-site right now according to webcam. I will definitely walk by today to check it out - I mean it almost looks like a tower crane or something, but I believe it's just machinery.


Edit: Totally a tower crane going up (luffing of course). I think it's a preliminary "smaller" one to help with excavation/foundation. Then we'll get the big heavy duty stuff like at Wilshire Grand and 181's proposed tower crane.

COOL

double-edit: Nvm, it's just a HUGE yellow crawler

Last edited by simms3_redux; Sep 19, 2014 at 7:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #711  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2014, 11:18 PM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,287
TRANSBAY TOWER DEAD (for now)

DEVELOPERS THREATEN LAWSUITS, PUTTING TRANSBAY DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT AND THE TRANSIT CENTER IN JEOPARDY

Litigation "could take years to resolve"

"An agreement between San Francisco officials and downtown developers over a proposed tax district collapsed this week, throwing into jeopardy the future of the Transbay Transit Center, the extension of Caltrain downtown and the construction of a half-dozen skyscrapers, including one that’s set to be the largest on the West Coast."

"It wasn’t until 2012 that the Planning Department picked up where it had left off [during the recession] with the rezoning and the formation of the Mello-Roos district. At that time, the city laid out a proposed tax for the district: 0.55 percent of assessed value, or, at the time $3.33 per square foot.

But this year, the property owners — all of whom had bought their parcels after the proposed tax rate had been set — were shocked to see that the their financial responsibilities had changed significantly, in part because property values skyrocketed. The tax, for example, jumped from $3.33 per square foot to $5.11 a square foot.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/articl...879.php#page-1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #712  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2014, 11:53 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,795
High taxes...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #713  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 12:37 AM
rocketman_95046's Avatar
rocketman_95046 rocketman_95046 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SD/SJ, CA, USA
Posts: 1,879
^^^Wakamesalad

I think your dramatic headline is not representative of the facts..

The transbay terminal funds are in jeopardy, not the tower. There is nothing in the article that says that the developers are going to halt building this or any other tower. And facts on the ground show that this continues to move forward, just as 181 fremont is moving forward.
__________________
1,000 posts and still going...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #714  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 1:00 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
High taxes...
The special tax rate the greedy developers already agreed to pay before they bought their parcels and started construction--0.55% of assessed value--is in consideration for being allowed by the City to build taller than the maximum height limits governing their parcels, and the rate has not changed.

What changed? The assessed value of the greedy developers' land. Why did that land grow in value? In large part, because the City upzoned the land in consideration for the special tax developers agreed to pay to fund necessary public transportation upgrades to adequately serve the upzoned district.

An increase in the value of land such as what we have seen in Transbay since the Great Recession eased was and is easily foreseeable, and an ordinarily sophisticated developer would certainly have considered such easily foreseeable outcomes when agreeing to a deal with the City.

If these greedy developers had wanted a fixed fee instead of a percentage of future assessed values, then they should have bargained for a fixed fee. They did not do so. They agreed to a percentage based on assessment. Now, they apparently seek to break the deal they made but keep their gains, for nothing in return. That is bad faith, and I predict they'll lose in court if they dare show up there. Because I think they'd lose in court, I suspect the developers' threat is just hard bargaining--they want to go back and change the agreement they already made. The City may very well allow that. We'll see. I'm not going to run around like Chicken Little with 7-point font screaming the sky is falling...yet.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #715  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 1:12 AM
ElDuderino's Avatar
ElDuderino ElDuderino is offline
Droppin' Loads
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ventura, Santa Rosa, California
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketman_95046 View Post
^^^Wakamesalad

I think your dramatic headline is not representative of the facts..

The transbay terminal funds are in jeopardy, not the tower. There is nothing in the article that says that the developers are going to halt building this or any other tower. And facts on the ground show that this continues to move forward, just as 181 fremont is moving forward.
The article does however state, "throwing into jeopardy the future of...half a dozen skyscrapers, including one that’s set to be the largest on the West Coast." Not quite sure what this means.

Developers are clearly being greedy. I really don't think they are all so stupid so as not to understand the terms of the agreement. What part of .55% of the assessed value don't they understand?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #716  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 1:21 AM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,287
If the tax value is in limbo, then the tower is as well. That's the point- the developers don't want to build yet until this is all figured out (which could take years.. decades in SF terms)

Perhaps they are waiting until the next recession so that the tax values go back down and they build then, and this is just stalling?

And who really knows about 181 Fremont either? It's not going vertical at this point. But the developer may not be one of them that is fighting the tax. I'm not sure. I think simms might have some more to add to this.

It's kind of a shadenfreude. It will be fun to see what happens. Who knows how much longer this will take. Maybe we should move this back to proposals now!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #717  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 1:24 AM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 18,365
Hope this doesn't kill the project. This could however mean a height reduction or even cheaper facade materials or a redesign. Hope this doesn't change anything!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #718  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 1:25 AM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakamesalad View Post
TRANSBAY TOWER DEAD (for now)
Whoa, please remove this. That's not the name of the article at all, or says that anywhere in the article! This dispute only has to do with a small portion of the funding for the Transbay Tower, it's not big dispute that's going to drag on long. They already had a deal before in fact. Construction is also continuing on the tower.

How the city San Francisco could get themselves into such a hole is beyond belief though. There's no excuse for this kind of tension in taxes. They already set out a proposal, sick to it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #719  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 3:28 AM
applejacks's Avatar
applejacks applejacks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 69
If the Tower were dead I'd think Saleforce might have an issue with that. They went and sold their land in Mission Bay to the Warriors with this tower in mind. There would be major legal implications if the developer weren't to deliver.

This tower is far from dead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #720  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2014, 3:39 AM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
Whoa, please remove this.
Sorry.

SALESFORCE TOWER DEAD (for now)

There you go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
They already had a deal before in fact. Construction is also continuing on the tower.
Tell that to the Chicago Spire.


Quote:
Originally Posted by applejacks View Post
If the Tower were dead I'd think Saleforce might have an issue with that... There would be major legal implications if the developer weren't to deliver.
And you know about the legalities of Salesforce and BP's terms because...?

Developers are unable to deliver buildings for many reasons. I'm sure there is some sort of clause to cover BP's butt that gives them the right to renege for a multitude of reasons..
It may just sit here as an empty lot for a few years (or many years). And I doubt Salesforce could do anything about it, other than buy the land and build it themselves.

And then there's the horrible implications for the entire transit center itself.
Maybe this was all just too good to be true.

Maybe the city will get smart and elect competent politicians instead of "activist" zombies, and then it may have cool things again.

Last edited by mt_climber13; Sep 24, 2014 at 3:49 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:26 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.