HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #261  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2021, 8:42 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,042
Why would construction last 4 to 5 years? Nice to hear it's (probably) approved though, hope it gets built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #262  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2021, 9:19 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Why would construction last 4 to 5 years? Nice to hear it's (probably) approved though, hope it gets built.
In San Francisco, unless you want your building tilting like the Millennium Tower, piles must be poured (usually poured in place rather than driven) to bedrock (commonly 200 ft down) and a deep foundation dug. That typically can take 2 years leaving another 2-3 for actual construction.

In earthquake country, foundations are no afterthought, especially if they are on filled ground as is much of the Financial District of San Francisco.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #263  
Old Posted Mar 27, 2021, 6:43 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
The Business Times is reporting:

- They "have a new potential commitment that we are working on that will help make the project viable"

- They have "secured a commitment from an unidentified hotel operator that still stands". I has also been reported that they have agreed that this hotel will be unionized.

- At a Supervisors Land Use Committee hearing members "sought guarantees that the complex project would indeed break ground this year . . . ." The committee members seemed particularly concerned with this because of the associated affordable housing commitment.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #264  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2021, 7:23 PM
timbad timbad is offline
heavy user of walkability
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mission Bay, San Francisco
Posts: 3,150
just a shot of the site since I was by there over the weekend

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #265  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2021, 8:10 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
^^Oh I love that bat. If they have to cover it up, they should find a way to preserve it, if only as a fine-grained photo, and put it in the SFMOMA.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #266  
Old Posted May 24, 2021, 6:15 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Roland Li
May 24, 2021
Updated: May 24, 2021 10:31 a.m.

. . . PG&E has agreed to sell its San Francisco headquarters for $800 million, a mega-deal that shows investors remain interested in downtown properties despite the coronavirus pandemic.

Developer Hines agreed to buy office buildings including 77 Beale St. and 245 Market St., PG&E said Monday . . . .

It’s another major commitment to San Francisco for Hines, which is planning to start construction on its $1 billion Parcel F tower a few blocks away PG&E’s Beale Street building. Construction is moving forward despite Salesforce canceling its office lease in the project as the tech company embraces more remote work. Hines previously developed Salesforce Tower with Boston Properties and also managed a seismic retrofit for the PG&E buildings.

The PG&E deal comes two months after Dropbox’s headquarters sold for $1.08 billion, the second-highest price in city history for a single building. Despite Dropbox’s “remote first” policy change, the building is being subleased to biotech companies, which have continued to expand during the pandemic.

Another major deal was the Transamerica Pyramid’s sale for $650 million last year, a transaction that was delayed for months.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/business...n-16199033.php
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #267  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2021, 9:12 PM
pseudolus pseudolus is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mission Terrace, SF
Posts: 705
"San Francisco's next major skyscraper will break ground in 2022"

https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/artic...l-16444701.php
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #268  
Old Posted Sep 9, 2021, 9:50 PM
homebucket homebucket is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 8,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudolus View Post
"San Francisco's next major skyscraper will break ground in 2022"

https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/artic...l-16444701.php
Is this 61 floors now?

Either way this should be a stone cold stunna.

Quote:
San Francisco’s next major skyscraper — a 61-story mixed-use tower planned for 550 Howard St. in the Transbay District — will break ground in the first quarter of next year and will include a deluxe 180-room Rosewood Hotel, the developer announced on Thursday.

The 800-foot tower, designed by Pelli Clarke Pelli — the same architect who designed the Transbay Transit Center and adjacent Salesforce Tower — will total 1.1-million square feet and include about 250,000 square feet of office space, 170 condos and 79,000 square feet of shared amenity space, the developer said.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #269  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2021, 12:18 AM
gillynova's Avatar
gillynova gillynova is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Austin / Bay Area
Posts: 2,140
Good news!! But I will keep my fingers crossed until the day of ground breaking.

The article also says this is going to be 806 feet tall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #270  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2021, 4:03 AM
tall/awkward tall/awkward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 175
I think the revision reduced it from 806 to 800.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #271  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2021, 7:09 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
The Business Times is reporting:

- They "have a new potential commitment that we are working on that will help make the project viable"

- They have "secured a commitment from an unidentified hotel operator that still stands". I has also been reported that they have agreed that this hotel will be unionized.

- At a Supervisors Land Use Committee hearing members "sought guarantees that the complex project would indeed break ground this year . . . ." The committee members seemed particularly concerned with this because of the associated affordable housing commitment.
So it seems like the secret commitment is the Rosewood Hotel chain.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #272  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2021, 8:04 PM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by gillynova View Post
Good news!! But I will keep my fingers crossed until the day of ground breaking.

The article also says this is going to be 806 feet tall
I think you should keep them crossed for a lot longer than that. Remember, Oceanwide Center did much more than break ground.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #273  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2021, 8:08 PM
homebucket homebucket is online now
你的媽媽
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 8,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by viewguysf View Post
I think you should keep them crossed for a lot longer than that. Remember, Oceanwide Center did much more than break ground.
I think the reasons for Oceanwide are unique in this case though and not generalizable to other construction projects in SF.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #274  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2021, 9:08 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
I think the reasons for Oceanwide are unique in this case though and not generalizable to other construction projects in SF.
That's what I would assume too, this isn't Chinese money.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #275  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2021, 9:09 PM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
I think the reasons for Oceanwide are unique in this case though and not generalizable to other construction projects in SF.
True, though a number of us remember when the same thing happened to 535 Mission. The foundation was buried for a temporary parking lot until demand for office space increased later.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #276  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2021, 9:28 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by viewguysf View Post
I think you should keep them crossed for a lot longer than that. Remember, Oceanwide Center did much more than break ground.
Oceanwide is Chinese financed and that is its essential problem. Chinese overseas investment is subject to both the shakiness of the finances of the particular company, and a lot of them are very shaky (Google the troubles of China Evergrande and now Soho), but also governmental restrictions on capital exports that have only gotten worse since Oceanwide stopped active construction.

Parcel F is a project of US companies Hines, Urban Pacific and Goldman Sachs. It would be hard to find a bluer blue chip list of project sponsors. There can be no question they've got the cash and credit to proceed if they have the will and the Rosewood Hotels deal apparently was the critical factor in giving them the will. With only about ⅓ of the building being office (375,000 sq ft out of 957,000 sq ft), and with the hotel portion signed for, evidently the sponsors are comfortable.

Incidentally, these renderings are the first I've seen of the city skyline with BOTH Parcel F and Oceanwide in place:




https://sfyimby.com/2021/09/rosewood...francisco.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #277  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2021, 11:36 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
DENNAB
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NA - Europe
Posts: 6,042
My gosh I hope someone builds the Oceanwide Tower someday, Parcel F is looking great too though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #278  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2021, 8:19 AM
tall/awkward tall/awkward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 175
Ditto
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #279  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2021, 7:58 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
My gosh I hope someone builds the Oceanwide Tower someday, Parcel F is looking great too though.
See the Oceanwide thread--I added a lengthy discussion about the troubles of Ocenwide Holdings, the company. I'm sure they are desperate to sell all their US properties. Like many Chinese property developers right now, they need the money.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #280  
Old Posted Nov 8, 2021, 7:18 PM
obemearg obemearg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: San Francisco / NYC
Posts: 116
No news but I hadn't seen this schematic before

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 > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:22 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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