Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-11-2015, 12:42 PM
 
7,132 posts, read 9,133,368 times
Reputation: 6338

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
It was not under construction in Q2. I was by the site you're referring to last week and it's barely started (I saw some dirt).

Atlanta doesn't have 50 million sf between downtown and Midtown. It only does when Buckhead is added in. Besides, given everything else they blatantly missed in their report, they could have also just missed that construction and still included Buckhead in the numbers.
Three Alliance Center was definitely UC in Q2.

http://oxblue.com/open/TS/ThreeAlliance
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-11-2015, 12:45 PM
 
1,353 posts, read 1,643,598 times
Reputation: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ant131531 View Post
Three Alliance Center was definitely UC in Q2.

Construction Camera: Three Alliance Center (TS/ThreeAlliance)
Then they missed it. But their numbers don't exclude Buckhead. Atlanta between downtown and Midtown is not 50 million sf big. Never was, not by any report, not by any way you even attempt to measure it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 12:48 PM
 
7,132 posts, read 9,133,368 times
Reputation: 6338
Of course. I know that. Downtown ATL only has like 19 million SF of office space and Midtown has like 16-17 million so probably like 36 million combined or so. It's clear the report includes Buckhead in the total number.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 12:51 PM
 
Location: USA
4,433 posts, read 5,346,276 times
Reputation: 4127
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Downtown SFs YTD absorption is breathtaking. 1.2 million sq ft snapped up.

Downtown Detroit is booming too. 600,000 sq ft

On the flip side, Downtown Houston had a net1.6 million sq ft vacated
That was all from one company called Exxon moving from the CBD to it's new campus....

• Exxon vacated 800 Bell in the CBD (1,314,350 sf)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 01:41 PM
 
Location: Washington D.C.
13,727 posts, read 15,751,203 times
Reputation: 4081
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
Colliers update (saw this posted in another thread):

http://www.colliers.com/-/media/file...e.pdf?la=en-us

I definitely see some fallacies in their report when it comes to a few of their figures (Silicon Valley adding 8 million sf when it only has 8 million sf to begin with?!? I know the 8 million sf under construction is at minimum true (some of these campuses going up now are 1-3 million sf just themselves - the Apple 2 campus alone is 3 million sf and is costing $6 Bn to complete). They had Louisville at 44 million sf and Houston at only 43 million sf.

Largest downtowns according to this report.

City / Total / Class A / Under Construction

Manhattan / 504.2 million sf / 318.7 million sf / 4.8 million sf

Chicago / 157.9 million sf / 61.8 million sf / 3.6 million sf (class A space here seems low?)

Washington DC / 143.9 million sf / 89.5 million sf / 2.3 million sf

San Francisco / 88.9 million sf / 57.5 million sf / 5.2 million sf (seems hard to get to the UC number, but definitely something close)

Boston / 63.2 million sf / 44.1 million sf / 5.4 million sf (they got this wrong as they have 2 entirely different #s in 2 places)

Seattle / 56.5 million sf / 33.2 million sf / 7.1 million sf (I presume this is largely Amazon under construction?)

Atlanta / 50.4 million sf / 31.2 million sf / 0 sf (I think they are including DT, Midtown, and Buckhead)

Houston / 42.9 million sf / 30.3 million sf / 1.5 million sf (I think they are including only CBD)

Philadelphia / 42.5 million sf / 30.3 million sf / 2.0 million sf


Sorry if I didn't include your city, feel free to review and post on it yourself.
If D.C. doesn't build another office building over the next 10 years, we would still have way too much office space. I am so glad our focus is on residential construction the last 10 years, but we have so much ground to make up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 02:07 PM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,655 posts, read 67,506,468 times
Reputation: 21239
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
Downtown Houston (and all of Houston) is feeling the crunch of low crude prices. Downtown SF and all of the Bay Area will have its time to see space give backs too. So many companies that have yet to post a profit or show a sustainable business are taking globs of space. Some of that will tank, and it will be at a time when crude is super low and the financial sector and law firms continue cutbacks on premium space. Life sciences will be a savior then, and SF has not put enough eggs in that basket (in fact much of Mission Bay recently is given to tech companies like Splunk and Uber, and the Warriors, not to life sciences as it was originally planned).

Apparently there are issues (funding) plaguing Transbay Terminal and a developer just pulled out of a site there. So don't act like it's all rosy forever.
Who said anything about rosy forever? Ive been tracking the local office market since I was junior high, I worked in local real estate, banking, finance, tech and now VC up and down the Peninsula and in The City before, during and after the early 90s recession, the dot-com bust and the mid 2000s recession-as well as the preceding booms to each of those busts.

The notion of a bust is nothing to me. Been there, done that. That's life in the Bay Area. We always come back stronger, richer, more powerful. This is the price we pay for being the epicenter of the most dynamic and riskiest industry in the world.

So despite the specter of a dire next couple of years, 1.2 Million sq ft this year is quite noteworthy for the reportedly 4th largest downtown office market, especially considering nowhere even comes close except New York, which only slightly beat SF all things considered.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2015, 03:55 PM
 
2,744 posts, read 6,110,118 times
Reputation: 977
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
Thanks, was trying to find it but couldn't. Can't find Baltimore either


what do you think of Grubb Ellis's list??

I left out many suburban districts, just added the CBD of main cities.

For example I left out Uptown ( 29,383,515) and Energy District ( 20,112,905) in Houston. I can't believe Uptown Houston is bigger than DTW Dallas
or that the Energy Corridor has more office space than DT ATL

There is more office space in Sugar Land, NASA/ Clearlake and the Woodlands than in DT San Antonio and they say San Antonio is the best Downtown in Texas??
San Antonio's downtown has about 6 million feet square feet of office space, that's one of S.A's weaknesses, its mostly hotel, hospital, educational, civic, government, and possibly light industrial space. City wide there is nearly 70 million square feet, not sure what the metro total is.

S.A.'s major corporate base the F500 & F1000 and similar sized private corporations are located along business corridors throughout the city. After A&t HQ's left downtown S.A. For Dallas, downtown S.A. was pretty much left without a major F500 corporate tennant. Recently F500 USAA has moved some of its operations downtown and a new large class A office skyscraper is in the design phase as well as other high rises office towers in the pipeline for both giant private corporations H.E.B and CPS Energy that are planning new headquarter offices, and of course more high rise hotels being built.

Another positive note for tourist driven downtown S.A., is that 5,000 residential units have been built in the past two years or are U/C with much more in the pipeline. The city's goal was to build 7,500 units in the downtown area by 2020, the city is already near that goal.

San Antonio does not have the best downtown in Texas when it comes to gleaming office towers or office space in general.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2015, 08:08 AM
 
Location: Upper West Side, Manhattan, NYC
15,323 posts, read 23,915,941 times
Reputation: 7419
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
Colliers update (saw this posted in another thread):

http://www.colliers.com/-/media/file...e.pdf?la=en-us
Does this report, for the under construction part, count conversions from something else into office that is currently going on? For example, there's a building in Chicago which is something like 550,000 sq ft which was a cold storage warehouse before, but was converted into almost all offices very recently (Google moved into it of course). I'm wondering if something like that would be counted in the "under construction" part of the report or not. If not, then I think that would be a big problem of under reporting in a handful of cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2015, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
8,700 posts, read 14,694,435 times
Reputation: 3668
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
Colliers update (saw this posted in another thread):

Atlanta / 50.4 million sf / 31.2 million sf / 0 sf (I think they are including DT, Midtown, and Buckhead)

Philadelphia / 42.5 million sf / 30.3 million sf / 2.0 million sf


Sorry if I didn't include your city, feel free to review and post on it yourself.
So weird that they included DT, Midtown and Buckhead for Atlanta but only count Center City for Philadelphia and not University City or the Navy Yard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-13-2015, 10:36 AM
rah
 
Location: Oakland
3,314 posts, read 9,236,154 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonelitist View Post
Apparently there are issues (funding) plaguing Transbay Terminal and a developer just pulled out of a site there. So don't act like it's all rosy forever.
A single developer ditched a single proposal (they hadn't even released renderings yet), because they didn't want to include 35% affordable housing in the project. Big deal....if the economy doesn't crash someone else will buy the lot and build a tower there. And the rest of the transbay redevelopment district is doing fine. Multiple towers and the terminal are under construction, and multiple more towers are approved or proposed. Funding for the train tunnel to the terminal isn't secured yet, but I'm sure it will be eventually. No one said everything's "rosy forever", but things are going fine right now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top