[fflint]

555 Mission Street, San Francisco: 482' - 34 floors - Office

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/4362/577954000ll0.jpg

Tishman Kicks Off S.F. Office Tower
33-story highrise is downtown's first since dot-com downturn

J.K. Dineen
The San Francisco Business Times
September 29, 2006

Tishman Speyer has broken ground on its long-anticipated 33-story highrise at 555 Mission St., the city's first Class A office tower in more than four years, company officials told the Business Times.

The announcement, which ends months of speculation in the real estate community, will be made next week with a video podcast sent to 100 high-profile brokers on a complimentary "555 Mission St." video iPod.

The glass-curtain building between First and Second streets, designed by Kohn Pedersen Fox and Heller Manus Architects, will take 22 months to complete, according to Carl Shannon, managing director for Tishman Speyer.

Turner Construction is the contractor on the project, which will cost an estimated $300 million.

"We have given Turner orders to proceed and they are mobilizing forces," said Shannon.

The 550,000-square-foot building will be the first in the next generation of office highrises to be built downtown, a group that will eventually include Shorenstein Properties' 350 Bush St. and a trio of dazzling highrises planned around the new Transbay Terminal.

Tishman Speyer has been extremely active in the Bay Area over the last five years, acquiring 1 Bush St., 595 Market St. and 550 Terry Francois Blvd., as well as properties on the Peninsula such as Bayside Towers and 800-900 Concar Dr. The company is also building the Infinity, a luxury highrise development on Rincon Hill.

Famously publicity-averse, Tishman Speyer has kept brokers guessing about the timing of the 555 Mission project. Tishman Senior Director Allen Palmer said the company "has kept a low profile on purpose."

"We decided to start construction first and then our marketing campaign will begin," said Palmer. "We're going to be very patient and focused. Not just about size of tenant, but quality and the type of tenant."

Palmer expects the building to attract major law firms, financial services, hedge funds and consulting companies. But as of now it's a speculative building, without a single tenant in tow.

The glass-curtain design will be enhanced through glass and metal fins on every mullion. The fins will reflect light and create a "prism effect," said Shannon. A green back-lit glass box at the top of the building will give it a halo. The design also includes large exterior balconies on the sixth and 21st floors. The floor plates will be 21,000 square feet on the lower levels, 18,000 in the middle and 16,000 on top.

"The colors coming off the skin will create an interesting effect," he said. "This is something very special. I can't think of a comparison in the Bay Area."

Bill Cumbelich, a partner with the CAC Group, said the building, along with 101 Second St. and 560 Mission, will cement Mission Street's arrival as the most desirable downtown location.

"Mission Street is sort of the street of the future for the financial district," said Cumbelich. "This is where premier companies are migrating to."

While Tishman Speyer sat on the site for more than five years during the dot-com crash and its ugly aftermath, the company never lost confidence in its potential, said Shannon.

"It's a testament to what Tishman Speyer is," said Shannon. "To have a building approved in 2000 and 2001 and wait patiently for the market to come back speaks to their confidence in the Bay Area economy."

In addition to Tishman Speyer's investment in the Bay Area, the company has built, developed or acquired more than 145 investments totaling approximately 80 million square feet with a total value of $27 billion. Properties include New York's Rockefeller Center and Chrysler Center, Berlin's Sony Center, CBX Tower in Paris and Torre Norte in Saõ Paolo.

[FourOneFive]

i think it's great to finally see this project rise. outside of mission bay, this will be san francisco's first large scale office project since the dot-com boom.

btw. with the redesign, 555 mission almost looks like a junior version of 7 WTC here in New York.

old rendering:

http://63.240.68.122/FirmFiles/25/images/555%20Mission%2003-16-05%20High%20Res.jpg

[J Church]

Tony, where'd you find the new rendering?

[FourOneFive]

Tony, where'd you find the new rendering?

the san francisco business times

[J Church]

Was there a credit? I'd like to use it but I need to credit the source.

[BTinSF]

In case anybody is unaware, they are working on it NOW. I briefly stood across the street today and watched two truckloads of dirt hauled away as the excavation progresses. And a large billboard showing the above rendering is place.

[BTinSF]

Tony, where'd you find the new rendering?

That's the rendering shown here: http://cll.bizjournals.com/story_image/57795-400-0.jpg?rev=3

[BTinSF]

Duplicate

[BTinSF]

Heller-Manus is showing this streetlevel view (I think of the pedestrian plaza next to the building):

http://63.240.68.122/FirmFiles/25/images/Plaza.jpg

at http://www.hellermanus.com/imagezoom_hm.cfm?fileid=%25%25X%5F%28YM%29P%0A&ProjectID=%25%24HK%2F%5BM1P%0A&categoryid=%22%24H36%0A

[WonderlandPark]

Man, SF has a lot of action now. Glassy and classy.

[urban_encounter]

Very nice.........

But for some reason the rendering make it look taller than a typical 33 story office building.

[FourOneFive]

perhaps its the crown? with the crown, i bet the tower actually tops 500'. :D

[BTinSF]

Seems like the tuquoise tint kind of matches that color on its next door neighbor at 101 Second St. too:

http://www.hines.com/toolkit_images/Project%20Photos/101%20Second%20Street/101%20Second%20Street%20-exterior_lres_web.jpg

http://www.hines.com/toolkit_images/Project%20Photos/101%20Second%20Street/101%20Second%20Street%20-%20Signature%20shot_lres_web.jpg

http://www.hines.com/toolkit_images/Project%20Photos/101%20Second%20Street/101%20Second%20Street%20-%20Atrium%20-%20night_lres_web.jpg

[quashlo]

It would have been nice to have at least one of the towers in this area be taller. Just seems like all the buildings on that block of Mission are about the same height: the JP Morgan Chase building, 101 Second, that monstrosity on Mission/First, and now this.

[Wheelingman04]

It looks like a shorter 7 WTC to me also.

[BTinSF]

It would have been nice to have at least one of the towers in this area be taller. Just seems like all the buildings on that block of Mission are about the same height: the JP Morgan Chase building, 101 Second, that monstrosity on Mission/First, and now this.

If things pan out, the next 2 blocks (toward the Bay) will have the really tall ones, starting with the Millenium Tower but also the 3 850'+ buildings of the TransBay group. There was to be The Century but fate was against it.

[tech12]

I really like the design, i wish they'd add just 50-100 feet or so to it though.

[hella good]

i like it, its simple and sleek

[quashlo]

If things pan out, the next 2 blocks (toward the Bay) will have the really tall ones, starting with the Millenium Tower but also the 3 850'+ buildings of the TransBay group. There was to be The Century but fate was against it.

Yeah. It's hard to imagine this entire area twenty years from now... It will look quite different.

But in any event, Mission is really shaping up as a nice little streetwall of towers. This is just one more project to fill in the gaps. :yes:

[Reminiscence]

I always thoght this tower had higher potential, like say 600+ feet. But, oh well, its still pretty tall I guess, so we cant complain, lol.

[AK47KC]

Finally this project is moving along.

[Reminiscence]

Is 482 feet the height all the way to the top of the crown or just to the top floor only?

[AK47KC]

To me, it seems like the top floor only. If you look carefully between the old and new rendering, you can see the new rendering is a bit taller than the old and I think the old rendering had the building at 482' or 147 m, but I am not sure about any of this.

[Reminiscence]

Yeah, I was estimating that in total it would be somewhere around 510 feet or so. Too bad I havent heard any official anouncements over this one.

[AK47KC]

^^^If that height figure is true than this project is the first office skyscraper over 152 m or 500 ft. erected in the 2000's for San Francisco, but anyway at 147 m, it will be the tallest office tower erected in almost 20 years if there are no other taller office projects.

[Reminiscence]

:previous:

I just hope that its not another 20 years before we see another office building taller than this one. :no:

[AK47KC]

Well, the office vacancy rate is going down for downtown San Francisco, so there will be more office projects in the future if the vacancies continue to go down.

[Reminiscence]

Yeah, they had mentioned that, and I immediatly took it as welcoming news. Hopefully the trend continues. We must also be carefull not to overindulge because that might cause a counter-effect driving those rates back up. :(

[briankendall]

I think there will definitely be a strong trend in demand. The demand for the upper floors of buildings is very strong right now commanding high rents.... I think I read something in the SF business times recently talking about this. And some towers such as the transbay trio may very well be mixed use to spread the risk.

[Reminiscence]

Well, this is why the towers themselves should be allowed to grow more and more to meet the maximum amount of demand possible. But even so, too much of anything is always bad, so carefull planning is needed.

[AK47KC]

Well, there might be up to 20,000 people living in the Rincon Hill-Transbay Terminal Area once many of the condo towers are finished and those 20,000 will need jobs, unless they happen to work elsewhere or they are just buying a vacation apartment.

[BTinSF]

Well, there might be up to 20,000 people living in the Rincon Hill-Transbay Terminal Area once many of the condo towers are finished and those 20,000 will need jobs, unless they happen to work elsewhere or they are just buying a vacation apartment.

An awful lot of these high end units go to either retired empty nesters moving in from the suburbs or wealthy suburbanites wanting a pied-a-terre so they can crash after the opera or symphony without having to drive back to Mountain View or Atherton. In other words, a lot of the people buying them don't need a job.

[Reminiscence]

Boy, I wonder what its like to have a 'crashing' place on one of these towers on Rincon Hill. I'd be super lucky to have that same place be my permanent home :haha:

[BTinSF]

Boy, I wonder what its like to have a 'crashing' place on one of these towers on Rincon Hill. I'd be super lucky to have that same place be my permanent home :haha:

Go to law school. Marry a classmate. Forget about kids.

[AK47KC]

Is the building to the left of 555 Mission in the new rendering Phase II of this project? Or is a separate project or something?

[BTinSF]

:previous: That's 535 Mission, now a Tishman-Speyer project. It started out in the dot-com era as an office buildling, then became a condo project but under T-S is back to being office. With the latest change of developer and use, though, I think they are doing some redesign work (but I assume they'll stay within the existing entitlements). Here's the last rendering I know about--note the small, narrow old building that remains between 535 and 555 Mission:

http://www.sfnewdevelopments.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/142171.jpg

[Reminiscence]

I imagine that both those towers will be more or less the same size. If so, then that building in the middle could actually be used for the project.

[BTinSF]

I imagine that both those towers will be more or less the same size. If so, then that building in the middle could actually be used for the project.

Not sure what you mean. It IS being used right now as a construction office--last time I walked by it appeared at least partially gutted. But the towers aren't the same size (at least with the present design of 535). 555 is roughly 10 stories taller: 34 stories vs about 24. See the most recent rendering of 555 posted above.

[FourOneFive]

:previous: That's 535 Mission, now a Tishman-Speyer project. It started out in the dot-com era as an office buildling, then became a condo project but under T-S is back to being office. With the latest change of developer and use, though, I think they are doing some redesign work (but I assume they'll stay within the existing entitlements). Here's the last rendering I know about--note the small, narrow old building that remains between 535 and 555 Mission:

http://www.sfnewdevelopments.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/142171.jpg

Just to clear up some points here. The entitlements to 535 Mission, which was originally owned by Monahan Pacific, is now owned by Beacon Capital Partners, which purchased them in April of this year for $30 million. Monahan Pacific wanted to build a office tower in the late 1990s and switched it to residential after the dot com bust. After escalating construction costs, they decided to sell the entitlements to another developer.

The rendering above was the one released by Monahan Pacific in 2000 when it was originally an office project. This is NOT the design of the new tower on the site.

If Beacon Capital is able to acquire the low-rise next to 535 mission, look for a much larger building that what was previously proposed by Monahan Pacific. Although the parcel is in a 550' height limit district, any previous proposal has been limited because of the lot size and FAR limitations.

[Reminiscence]

I guess it would only make sense to acquire the smaller building next to it as well. If it means increasing your potential size, it would be a good deal. All they need to see now is by how much they can increase it.

[BTinSF]

The rendering above was the one released by Monahan Pacific in 2000 when it was originally an office project. This is NOT the design of the new tower on the site.

If Beacon Capital is able to acquire the low-rise next to 535 mission, look for a much larger building that what was previously proposed by Monahan Pacific. Although the parcel is in a 550' height limit district, any previous proposal has been limited because of the lot size and FAR limitations.

To clarify further, it's back to being office as I said (although you are right about the most recent owner being Beacon):

Citing an "overheated" residential construction environment, developer Monahan Pacific has scrapped plans to build a condominium tower at 535 Mission St. and has unloaded the prime south financial district land to Beacon Capital Partners for $30 million. While the property is approved for a residential complex, a spokesman for Beacon Capital confirmed the company plans to build an office tower on the site, the latest example of what is shaping up to be a revival of new Class A office construction in San Francisco.

Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/04/24/story5.html

And the little building next door seems problematic, though we'll see. As I also said, it appears to be being used for the construction next door which suggests T-S owns it. If so, when they are done with it, they might sell it to Beacon. But if Beacon doesn't plan to go through the entitlement process all over again, I don't see how they can radically change the design.

[craeg]

The little building next door was just recently completely renovated. The first floor is under the process of converting the space to a restaurant. Additionally there is a street between the little building and 555's site. I'd imagine it would be tough to get that closed.
I dont think the little building is going anywhere anytime soon.

[BTinSF]

The little building next door was just recently completely renovated. The first floor is under the process of converting the space to a restaurant.

Ah, so that's why they gutted it. My bad for assuming the work was related to next door since it started about the same time they began driving test piles for 555.

[AK47KC]

They should really change the design. 535 Mission looks outdated and that flat roof is unappealing to me and probably to the SF Planning Commission, as well.

[Reminiscence]

:previous:

I was thinking the same thing because I know that the Planning Commision doesnt like flat roofs with machinery and such visible. They should give it a roof similar to that of the Millenium Tower.

[FourOneFive]

clarification again. this is the current design of 535 mission. if beacon capital wants to "massage" the design (as tishman speyer did with 300 spear), they have to return to the planning commission. i'm assuming they will return to the planning commission with an altered design because the current one was designed for a residential use (i.e. look for the balconies to be removed).

http://63.240.68.122/FirmFiles/25/images/birds%20eye%20view.jpg

[Reminiscence]

Doesnt come as much of a surprise to me. I cant think of too many highrises that have, or will have, balconies :(

[BTinSF]

Well that design puts it at about 35 stories--just like 555--then. Clearly, it would have to have more "square footage" at 35 stories than it did at 24. Does anyone know if we are coming anywhere close to using up the banked square footage limits for office development (senility prevents me from remembering the number of the prop that set those).

[AK47KC]

^^Oh, then I meant a better design of the office tower of 535 Mission, not the residential one.

[Reminiscence]

If Beacon Capital is able to acquire the low-rise next to 535 mission, look for a much larger building that what was previously proposed by Monahan Pacific. Although the parcel is in a 550' height limit district, any previous proposal has been limited because of the lot size and FAR limitations.

Hmm, sounds intresting. How much more do you think Beacon Capital could add to whats already there?

[AK47KC]

I'd say they should at least add some more height to the tower like pushing it up to 500' (152 m).

[Reminiscence]

Yeah, a splendid idea. It would be nice if they could at least make it leveled with its neighbor.

[EastBayHardCore]

^ It would be nice? Sorry but every other damn tower in SF is level (see tabletop effect). We need variety.

[BTinSF]

^ It would be nice? Sorry but every other damn tower in SF is level (see tabletop effect). We need variety.

Most of us complain about this but it's clearly the result of the Planning Dept. policy of setting height limits in the downtown core where it can be expected that all developers will build to the limit, whatever it is, meaning all buildings will be about the same height. The real question is, "why do they insist on setting limits rather than judging each building's environmental effects (effect on the skyline, shaddowing, views etc) individually"?

[Reminiscence]

^ It would be nice? Sorry but every other damn tower in SF is level (see tabletop effect). We need variety.

You know, no matter what height the tower ends up being, eventually some people will always have something to say. People whine when I say make it taller and people whine when I say make it leveled. When I said make it leveled, its not because I like it, its just that I was trying to push the height closer to as much as it could be. I wasent sure what the height limit was for this parcel, so I assumed it was the same. BTinSF has it right though, each building could be different if its designed differently.

[SFView]

535 Mission is one of the smallest new buildings within the planned unlimited height and FAR zone. It is nearly centered between the Transbay trio as seen here:

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m96/mrayatsfo/transbay-aerial1.jpg

Buildings of greater than 600 feet in height within the new zone will need to be spaced greater than 200 feet apart. If the new building across the street is greater than 600 feet tall (it looks about 600 feet tall in this conceptual rendering), then 535 Mission should be shorter than 600 feet. 555 Mission is just to the left of 535 Mission in the rendering. There may already be enough height and density planned for the area as is.

[BTinSF]

If the new building across the street is greater than 600 feet tall (it looks about 600 feet tall in this conceptual rendering), then 535 Mission should be shorter than 600 feet.

The "building across the street" is the tower Renzo Piano is designing and my understanding is it may be as much as 850 ft or so. It will actually be on the corner of First & Mission but will, I believe, include the adjacent and now-empty lot directly across from 535 (and east of Golden Gate University where they formerly had classroom trailors):

Superstar architect Renzo Piano has tentatively agreed to design an 850-foot tower at First and Mission streets, a significant coup for city planners as they build support for a denser, taller neighborhood around the Transbay Terminal.

The building would be constructed on a development site that has been quietly assembled by David Choo, the president of commercial mortgage lender California Mortgage and Realty. In the past three months, Choo's company has paid about $50 million for three buildings on the northwest corner of Mission and First streets.

Source: http://sanfrancisco.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/05/29/daily47.html?t=printable

Looking again at the rendering posted by SFView, there appears to be a second new tower on the north side of Mission, more or less across from 555, that he may be referring to. I have trouble understanding this because I don't know of a buildable lot in that location. It is pretty much where Golden Gate University and/or the plaza next to the JPMorgan building sits.

[FourOneFive]

Looking again at the rendering posted by SFView, there appears to be a second new tower on the north side of Mission, more or less across from 555, that he may be referring to. I have trouble understanding this because I don't know of a buildable lot in that location. It is pretty much where Golden Gate University and/or the plaza next to the JPMorgan building sits.

The Sofitel Hotel was supposed to go into that site:

http://www.som.com/resources/projects/2/4/6/sofitel3_601.jpg

Based on the proposed buildout, it seems as if the Planning Department is hoping that the site could accomodate a 550' - 600' tower on that site. I believe the current height limit is 500'.

[Reminiscence]

I dont know if I see 555 or 535 Mission St. under the emphasized color in this rendering. It looks to be more to the left. But I would doubt that they are zoned for 600', 500' sounds more reasonable.

[WonderlandPark]

^^ man I am sorry that Sofitel is cancelled, I always thought that was an interesting tower, but the new Federal building sort of makes up for it.

[Reminiscence]

Yeah, it did have an awkward but eye-catching design. The only part I wasent so sure about was the base, but it was still a good project.

[AK47KC]

^^^Let's hope a better, taller tower is proposed on the same site, but Sofitel was cool.

[Reminiscence]

Yeah, I want to see more towers like this. Towers that are architecturally different than the rest. After a while, you get bored of seeing the same shaped concrete towers. Maybe in the future they'll revive this project? Lets hope so ...

[AK47KC]

Drove by the site; there's lots of green fencing around it, some excavators, bulldozers, a sign with the rendering and a lot of dirt.

[Reminiscence]

Oh, it seems the preliminary construction phase in is progress. I guess this is good though, I dont recall any news of this project.

[AK47KC]

I don't think the tower will have a deep foundation like 300 Spear did, so it shouldn't be too long until the first bits and pieces of the foundation appear, but it's really hard to see with the green fence around the site.

[Reminiscence]

Yeah, unless someone has access to a window nearby that is taller than the green fence.

[BTinSF]

The Sofitel Hotel was supposed to go into that site:

http://www.som.com/resources/projects/2/4/6/sofitel3_601.jpg

Based on the proposed buildout, it seems as if the Planning Department is hoping that the site could accomodate a 550' - 600' tower on that site. I believe the current height limit is 500'.

The Sofitel site is closer to the First street corner in this rendering--pretty much where the gap is between the two buildings on the north side of the 500 block:

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m96/mrayatsfo/transbay-aerial1.jpg

and I believe I read it would be part of the Piano-design building site (otherwise it would be right next door). That's why I say, I don't think there's another site on that side of that block. But we'll know when Piano produces his design.

[Reminiscence]

If Renzo's tower is to go here, then I'm glad they decided not to build this hotel here. But then again, Renzo better come up with something superb or we'll all be somewhat dissapointed. I think Sofitel should be revived but in a place closer to where projects like the Intercontinental Hotel Tower is going up. It would be a nice addition in that part of the city :)

[BTinSF]

If Renzo's tower is to go here, then I'm glad they decided not to build this hotel here. But then again, Renzo better come up with something superb or we'll all be somewhat dissapointed. I think Sofitel should be revived but in a place closer to where projects like the Intercontinental Hotel Tower is going up. It would be a nice addition in that part of the city :)

The developer that has hired Piano bought the three old buildings along First St. including the one on the corner to assemble the site but someone posted elsewhere that the vacant "Sofitel" lot was also part of the site as envisioned by the Transbay plan. That could be wrong, but if so the additional building would be right next door to Piano's design or else they could use only the western half of the site for a tower and put an "open space" between that tower and the Piano design more or less like the 555 building is putting a small plaza between itself and 201 2nd St.

[AK47KC]

delete this post.

[Reminiscence]

More confusion huh, this is turning all too regular in SF :rolleyes:

Well, I would guess that what they put on the western site, would depend on how big the space is. If the space calls for another model of 555 Mission, then they should go ahead with that instead.

[AK47KC]

This thread has gone on too long without a construction picture.
Like 631 Folsom, not much to see yet.
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l181/AK47KC/DSCN7474.jpg
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l181/AK47KC/DSCN7475.jpg

[AK47KC]

Update: Passed by the site again, still nothing much to see except for a one story pit. It will probably be like this for a while.

[botoxic]

Still not a whole lot to see at 555: Condon Johnson, a construction firm specializing in foundations work, has several employees onsite. They appear to be concentrating mainly on shoring up the site perimeters.

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2012-30/S4010059.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2012-30/S4010061.jpg

Rincon rising in the background:
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2012-30/S4010063.jpg

[BTinSF]

This is how foundations of buildings in sites with existing adjacent buildings are built--a careful process to avoid destabilizing the next door neighbor. The excavation can take as long as the later construction phase. From what I can see in your photos, things are proceeding apace.

[botoxic]

The first excavator is removing wet, clay-like material from the pit, and the second excavator is replacing it with good dirt placed on fabric. The site is shored a good 30 feet deep; for a sense of scale, look for the geotech engineer standing on the hill between the excavators.

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010051.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010052.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010053.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010054.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2001-28/S4010055.jpg

[SFObserver]

The landlord for our building on Market Street received notice on the 30th that pile driving is going to start on February 1st. It's scheduled to continue for about 5 weeks, subject to weather delays. :)

[botoxic]

Has piledriving begun? This weekend, the crane had been brought in but was not yet fully assembled, and there were no pile on site yet. I took a very crappy picture which turned out hella blurry, and I'm embarrassed to post it, but at least it shows the most recent changes at 555...

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2002-04/S4010053.jpg

[Reminiscence]

Oh, they've dug pretty deep. Maybe they'll begin piledriving in about a month?

[SFObserver]

No kidding, especially now that the rain is back.
No pile driver on site yet.

[botoxic]

Even before this most recent round of storms, the site seemed to be having dewatering issues. The contractor had excavated at least three wells on the south side of the project and were pumping water every time I went by the site. I suspect they let those pumps run 24/7, and still the water kept coming...

Hopefully their dewatering system remains effective and they will be able to resume construction activity with the next available weather window.

[CityKid]

I first heard the incessant pile driving yesterday from my office on 2nd street. Any ideas how long this phase lasts?

[SFObserver]

Our building management was told 5 weeks depending upon the weather.

http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/3265/1909039imgmo9.jpg

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/7060/1909042imgnu3.jpg

[Reminiscence]

Its good to hear this project is finally progressing, although I was expecting something closer to 2 months. 5 weeks is encouraging news.

[BTinSF]

The foundation doesn't really seem all that deep--two floors or maybe 3?

I recall when they built 560 Mission across the street they had to keep the pumps running too. Could well be an underground stream in that part of town.

[mthd]

^^ not a stream per se, but the entire water table is barely two levels down in most of the flat parts of downtown, but particularly in south of market as you get closer to the shoreline. construction dewatering is a must as are completely waterproof basement floors and walls - unless you like permanent dewatering, which means $$$$ to the city.

the uplift gets pretty severe past 3 levels if you aren't putting a very tall building on top of it... but rarely do people go 4+ levels down unless they're building something big on top. moscone center would be the exception and is tied down like crazy.

i am really looking forward to seeing this one go up - i think it's going to show admirers of 1 rincon, the infinity, and millenium what an all-glass curtain wall building SHOULD look like. ;)

[SFObserver]

http://img455.imageshack.us/img455/8484/1909075imgqm9.jpg

[Reminiscence]

Nice update, thanks for the pictures :)

I heard the rain has been coming down lately, seems like winter came a tad late this season. Piledriving, however, seems to be coming along nicely.

[botoxic]

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0281.jpg

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q149/btgibson/SF%20Buildings%2003-03/IMG_0282.jpg

[Reminiscence]

Hmm, I had not seen the excavation from the angle of the first picture. The building next door (to the east), might tarnish the image of the completed project. I'm not really concerned at the moment, but it would be a little bizarre to see such a beautiful glass building next to something like that :(

[rocketman_95046]

Hmm, I had not seen the excavation from the angle of the first picture. The building next door (to the east), might tarnish the image of the completed project. I'm not really concerned at the moment, but it would be a little bizarre to see such a beautiful glass building next to something like that :(

Is that building getting torn down when 535 mission goes up?

[Reminiscence]

Is that building getting torn down when 535 mission goes up?

I was aware that it would remain standing and that 535 Mission would be on its other side. In other words, you'd have 535 Mission, that building, and then 555 Mission. Sort of like a midrise between two buildings. I could be wrong though, I'm not too sure.

[rocketman_95046]

I was aware that it would remain standing and that 535 Mission would be on its other side. In other words, you'd have 535 Mission, that building, and then 555 Mission. Sort of like a midrise between two buildings. I could be wrong though, I'm not too sure.

yea, it looks like from the rendering that that building will stick around... but that blank wall will be right up against a blank wall of 555 mission...

it will be interesting if there is a gap between the two buildings but i doubt it..

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/4362/577954000ll0.jpg

[Reminiscence]

yea, it looks like from the rendering that that building will stick around... but that blank wall will be right up against a blank wall of 555 mission...

it will be interesting if there is a gap between the two buildings but i doubt it..

Well, I would think that depending on whether or not there is a significant gap between the two buildings or not, would determine whether or not we will see a glass curtainwall for that segment. It would not make too much sense to build a glass wall facing a blank wall, in my opinion. I think the same deal is going on at the Intercontinental Tower.

[BTinSF]

:previous: First of all, I'm pretty sure this blank wall won't be exposed but even if it were, there are examples of exposed blank walls all over town and some of them are very interesting. Right across the street, I believe, at 560 Mission, a blank wall of the Golden Gate U. building got exposed and they covered it with tall bamboo--looks great. At 199 Fremont, blank walls were also covered with a screen of vegitation to creat a very nice minipark. It's no big deal.

Also, I happen to think one thing that adds a huge amount of interest to downtown San Francisco is the mix of modern and older structures. Usually, the older buildings have lower rents and so are commercially viable for things like lower-priced restaurants that simply couldn't exist if the only places they had to locate were modern highrises. Prior to the demolition for 555 Mission, there was a very popular cafeteria-style Chinese place on the lot and I missed it when it closed. I am quite sure nothing like that would ever occupy space at 555 and, unfortunately, the little remaining building you're worried about probably isn't big enough, but maybe something to relieve the hard and relatively uninteresting lobbies (unless you work there) of highrises on the block will go in there.

[Reminiscence]

Good points, I mean, I'm not saying they should demolish it or anything. Perhaps maybe a paint job or so, or what they have accross the street. I was actually aware they had just renovated the interior of the building, which if its the case, demolition would most liekly be out of the question, at least in the visible future.

[SFObserver]

Our building management just received the following notification:

Please be informed that pile driving activity at 555 Mission Street was completed at 1:00 PM yesterday, Wednesday, March 7th.
:) :) :)

[Reminiscence]

Great news, I guess those people annoyed by the loud noises are finally getting some relief, heh. I look forward to the next update.

[BTinSF]

Our building management just received the following notification:

Please be informed that pile driving activity at 555 Mission Street was completed at 1:00 PM yesterday, Wednesday, March 7th.
:) :) :)

Jeez. Looking at botoxic's 3/3/07 photos, it's hard to believe they could be finished. I mean there aren't many pilings visible in the photos; just a couple of small groupings, perhaps under the elevator banks or something.

To my eye, the building has a relatively shallow foundation as well. But I guess they know what they are doing. :fingerscrossed: