Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
SF is a city where it seems every downtown highrise is considered a trophy building
A few recent sales:
101 California sold in for $851 million
50 Fremont sold for $640 million
One Market Plaza sold for $600 million
One Rincon Hill North sold for $400 million
225 Bush sold for $350 million
SF is a city where it seems every downtown highrise is considered a trophy building
A few recent sales:
101 California sold in for $851 million
50 Fremont sold for $640 million
One Market Plaza sold for $600 million
One Rincon Hill North sold for $400 million
225 Bush sold for $350 million
You mean real estate in SF is prohibitively expensive across the board.
Blasphemy to any of the Bay faithful how could it be with the hallowed city by the bay
and agree to me Philly, Boston, and SF all are so much closer to each then different in terms of quality of the DT. Philly is the laggard in main line retail, not barren but not as much as the other two yet to me it actually stays active in the core moreso then the other two which may be there is more mixed residential and nightlife which extends while Boston and SF may have greater peaks during the day into early evening, the later it gets may be where Philly stays more active but on the whole I see these three all as more similar then different...
I am also enjoying the dialogue on the 555 CA building, while interesting not sure is an architectural dream
so to me rank these three in any order behind NYC and Chicago and I wont really argue as they are more similar then different
Downtown-wise, Boston seems more like the outlier in the group and seems smaller and quainter than either SF or Philly, though maybe much of that is in the impressions left from the winding streets.
Downtown-wise, Boston seems more like the outlier in the group and seems smaller and quainter than either SF or Philly, though maybe much of that is in the impressions left from the winding streets.
I agree with that. Philly is a bit bi-polar. Feels larger in the Market West area, but then when you're walking along Quince in the Gayborhood area, it's hard to believe you're in a large city. One of the greatest things about CC is the diversity of the hoods within it. Old City, Society Hill, Chinatown, Rittenhouse, Midtown/Gayborhood, Fitler Square, Logan, Callowhill...all so completely different from each other.
I agree with that. Philly is a bit bi-polar. Feels larger in the Market West area, but then when you're walking along Quince in the Gayborhood area, it's hard to believe you're in a large city. One of the greatest things about CC is the diversity of the hoods within it. Old City, Society Hill, Chinatown, Rittenhouse, Midtown/Gayborhood, Fitler Square, Logan, Callowhill...all so completely different from each other.
Yea, and mostly running into each other without interruption. It's a great downtown.
The fact it's more valuable does say something about the downtown. Whether it's more in demand, more popular, higher rents, higher occupancies of course it means something.
Center City still has some vacant patches (I'm looking at you, 8th and Market), but these are in-filling fairly rapidly (Right on Walnut has provided an inventory of these developments earlier). This is one big reason CC is still a relatively inexpensive office market. The other, perhaps just as signupificant or more, is that CC offers a "relief valve" with UCity blossoming just across the river. Greater supply results in lower prices.
The price of real estate in a city has absolutely zero bearing on the quality and appeal of the architecture. San Francisco is an expensive coastal city. Philadelphia is a much less expensive inland city. Why is everything always about money and wealth with you? Even something not relating to it at all.
And where are you getting these numbers from? Seems completely made up. Even if it's not made up, 555 California sold at the height of the economic boom in 2007. Three Logan Square sold at the bottom of the economic bust.
If Three Logan Square sold today, it would fetch at least $400M.
Center City still has some vacant patches (I'm looking at you, 8th and Market), but these are in-filling fairly rapidly (Right on Walnut has provided an inventory of these developments earlier). This is one big reason CC is still a relatively inexpensive office market. The other, perhaps just as signupificant or more, is that CC offers a "relief valve" with UCity blossoming just across the river. Greater supply results in lower prices.
Yes, and a re-organized business tax structure would do wonders for demand with office space. And while doing so would be a good thing for the city, there is good with the way it is now. The ability for individual restaurateurs, entrepreneurs and others to launch a business has made the city so incredibly interesting and rich in culture. I'm not sure why anyone would parade around the fact that their favorite city is prohibitively expensive.
The price of real estate in a city has absolutely zero bearing on the quality and appeal of the architecture. San Francisco is an expensive coastal city. Philadelphia is a much less expensive inland city. Why is everything always about money and wealth with you? Even something not relating to it at all.
And where are you getting these numbers from? Seems completely made up. Even if it's not made up, 555 California sold at the height of the economic boom in 2007. Three Logan Square sold at the bottom of the economic bust.
If Three Logan Square sold today, it would fetch at least $400M.
So I dont know about 3 Logan Square fetching $400 Million now. Probably not.
Also, Vornado/ Trump paid $575 per sq ft for 555 California which is $1.03 billion.
http://www.costar.com/News/Article/Vornado-Strikes-$18-Billion-Bi-Coastal-Blockbuster/87813
And dont cry okay. If u want to go up against a city of SFs caliber, you cant avoid desirability. Welcome to the Big Leagues.
So I dont know about 3 Logan Square fetching $400 Million now. Probably not.
Also, Vornado/ Trump paid $575 per sq ft for 555 California which is $1.03 billion.
http://www.costar.com/News/Article/Vornado-Strikes-$18-Billion-Bi-Coastal-Blockbuster/87813
And dont cry okay. If u want to go up against a city of SFs caliber, you cant avoid desirability. Welcome to the Big Leagues.
Have fun stepping in human feces while you're admiring all the sub-par architecture that's selling for absurd prices.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
