2015 Forecast
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
SAN FRANCISCO 2Nd Quarter 2014 Office Market Report
SAN FRANCISCO 2nd Quarter 2014 Office Market Report Historical Asking Rental Rates (Direct, FSG) SF MARKET OVERVIEW $60.00 $57.00 $55.00 $53.50 $52.50 $53.00 $52.00 $50.50 $52.00 Prepared by Kathryn Driver, Market Researcher $49.00 $49.00 $50.00 $50.00 $47.50 $48.50 $48.50 $47.00 $46.00 $44.50 $43.00 Approaching the second half of 2014, the job market in San Francisco is $40.00 continuing to grow. With over 465,000 city residents employed, the San $30.00 Francisco unemployment rate dropped to 4.4%, the lowest the county has witnessed since 2008 and the third-lowest in California. The two counties with $20.00 lower unemployment rates are neighboring San Mateo and Marin counties, $10.00 a mark of the success of the region. The technology sector has been and continues to be a large contributor to this success, accounting for 30% of job $0.00 growth since 2010 and accounting for over 1.5 million sf of leased office space Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 2012 2012 2012 2013 2013 2013 2013 2014 2014 this quarter. Class A Class B Pre-leasing large blocks of space remains a prime option for large tech Historical Vacancy Rates companies looking to grow within the city. Three of the top 5 deals involved 16.0% pre-leasing, including Salesforce who took over half of the Transbay Tower 14.0% (delivering Q1 2017) with a 713,727 sf lease. Other pre-leases included two 12.0% full buildings: LinkedIn signed a deal for all 450,000 sf at 222 2nd Street as well 10.0% as Splunk, who grabbed all 182,000 sf at 270 Brannan Street. -
2020-008009Oth
MEMO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE: October 1, 2020 September 24, 2020 Record No.: 2020-008009OTH Subject: Planning Commission Policy: Implementing Proposition E Staff Contact: Corey Teague, Zoning Administrator – (628) 652-7328 [email protected] Recommendation: Adopt the Proposed Resolution Office Development Annual Limit Program San Francisco’s Office Development Annual Limit Program (“Program”) was initially created in 1985 as part of the Downtown Plan. It limited the amount of large office development (projects containing at least 50,000 square feet of office space) that could be permitted each year in the City (the “Large Cap”). The passage of Proposition M the following year amended the Program in various ways, including the addition of a new and separate annual limit for smaller office development (projects containing between 25,000 square feet to 49,999 square feet), which is commonly known as the “Small Cap.” Each October 17th the Program receives an allotment of 875,000 square feet for the Large Cap, and allotment of 75,000 square feet for the Small Cap. Under the original Program, the Planning Commission could not allocate office space to any development in excess of what was available in the relevant cap at that time. Additionally, unallocated office space in one year rolls over to the next year, and unused office space may be revoked and returned to the relevant cap. A net total of more than 12 Million square feet of office was allocated from the Large Cap in the last 10 years, with the most recent allocations for projects within Central SoMa. -
BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project
Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District April 30, 2018 Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Prepared for San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 300 Lakeside Drive, 21st floor Oakland, CA 94612 Prepared by 300 Lakeside Drive, Suite 400 Oakland, CA 94612 April 30, 2018 DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Date of Publication of Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration: April 30, 2018 Project Title: BART Market Street Canopies and Escalators Modernization Project Sponsor and Lead Agency: San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District Contact Person and Phone Number: Janie Layton, (510) 874-7423 Project Location: Downtown San Francisco BART Stations (Embarcadero, Montgomery Street, Powell Street, and Civic Center/UN Plaza). Project Description: The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), in cooperation with the City and County of San Francisco, is working to improve escalator durability and security at station entrances/exits along Market Street leading to the underground Embarcadero, Montgomery Street, Powell Street, and Civic Center/UN Plaza station concourses. The existing entrances/exits consist of variations of side-by-side stairs and escalators leading down to the underground concourse level, and are currently uncovered and exposed to inclement weather and discarded trash leading to frequent breakdowns of the existing escalators. The proposed improvements would include the installation of canopy covers over the entrances/exits, as well as replacement and refurbishment of existing street-level escalators. Each protective canopy would also be equipped with a motorized security grille that would lock at the sidewalk level of the station entrance/exit when the stations are closed. -
Engineer's Report Prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer Certified by the State of California.3
SECTION 10: ASSESSMENT ENGINEER’S REPORT Downtown Community Benefit District Including the Historic Financial District and Jackson Square of San Francisco and South Side of Market Street Formed under the California Streets and Highway Code Section 36600 et seq. Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994, Augmented by Article 15 of the San Francisco Business and Tax Regulations Code DISTRICT ASSESSMENT ENGINEER’S REPORT Prepared by Edward V. Henning California Registered Professional Engineer # 26549 Edward Henning & Associates April 15, 2019 V 3 1 DOWNTOWN COMMUNITY BENEFIT DISTRICT – ENGINEER’S REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS ENGINEER’S CERTIFICATION ...............................................................................................3 ENGINEER’S REPORT: SECTION A: Legislative and Judicial Review ............................................................4 SECTION B: Programs, Improvements and Activities ..............................................7 SECTION C: District Boundaries ................................................................................9 SECTION D: Proportional Benefits ...........................................................................13 SECTION E: Special and General Benefits ...............................................................13 SECTION F: Program, Improvement and Activity Costs .......................................19 SECTION G: Assessment Methodolgy .......................................................................22 SECTION H: Assessment Roll ....................................................................................25 -
The Route for the San Francisco Popos Hike (Privately Owned Public Open Spaces) February15, 2018 Dave Weinstein Copyright 2018 El Cerrito Trail Trekkers
The Route for the San Francisco Popos hike (Privately Owned Public Open Spaces) February15, 2018 Dave Weinstein Copyright 2018 El Cerrito Trail Trekkers. No reproduction without express permission Intro: Mandated by 1985 the city’s downtown plan for new office developments in downtown, these are private spaces are required to be open to the public. Many are open only during business hours but others are public plazas open all the time. Some were created earlier, by developers seeking density bonuses in exchange, or the like. Problem is, people don’t know about many of these open spaces. (Sort of like the trails in El Cerrito.) In 2013 Chronicle urban writer John King wrote a series critiquing the way come owners made their spaces known, and how poorly the city enforced the rules. Since then thanks to John and increased public interest, things have improved. This tour is an update of a tour Trekkers gave in 2013. We will tour not just POPOS spaces but some other plazas and lobbies that are also open to the public, but without the POPOS mandate. We will note how many of these spaces contain excellent art, making downtown very much an open air and lobby museum that itself is too little known. Note: As performed on February 15, we did not get to all of these sites due to time constraints. We got to most, though! Crown Zellerbach 1 One. Meet at 1 Bush Street, Crown-Zellerbach Building. 1959, Hertzka and Knowles, SOM. (Hertzka, Wayne, Knowles, William Howard. 16 and 24th street BART stations, 100 Pine St., at least portions of Lawrence Berkeley Lab) First glass walled tower in city. -
$42,435,000 City and County of San Francisco Finance Corporation Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2007 (Open Space Fund - Various Park Projects)
NEW ISSUE-BOOK-ENTRY ONLY Ratings: Moody’s S&P Fitch MBIA Insured Ratings: Aaa AAA AAA Underlying Ratings: A1 AA- AA- (See “Ratings” herein) In the opinion of Hawkins Delafietd & Wood LLP, San Francisco, California, and Lofton & Jennings, San Francisco, California, Co-Bond Counsel to the City, under existing statutes and court decisions and assuming continuing compliance with certain tax covenants described herein, <i) interest on the Series 2007 Bonds is excluded from gross income for Federal income tax purposes pursuant to Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), and (ii) interest on the Series 2007 Bonds is not treated as a preference item in calculating the alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals and corporations under the Code; such interest, however, is included in the adjusted current earnings of certain corporations for purposes of calculating the alternative minimum tax imposed on such corporations. In addition, in the opinion of Co-Bond Counsel to the City, under existing statutes, interest on the Series 2007 Bonds is exempt from personal income taxes imposed by the State of California. See “Tax Matters." $42,435,000 CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO FINANCE CORPORATION LEASE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2007 (OPEN SPACE FUND - VARIOUS PARK PROJECTS) Dated: Date of Delivery Due: July 1, as shown on inside cover The City and County of San Francisco Finance Corporation Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2007 (Open Space Fund - Various Park Projects) (the “Series 2007 Bonds”), are issued pursuant to a Master Trust Agreement, dated as of October 1, 2006 (the “Master Trust Agreement”), as amended by the First Supplemental Trust Agreement, dated as of October 1, 2007 (the “Supplemental Trust Agreement” and together with the Master Trust Agreement, the “Trust Agreement”), each by and between the City and County of San Francisco Finance Corporation (the “Corporation”) and U.S. -
Transit Center District Plan and Transit Tower
COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ON DRAFT EIR Transit Center District Plan and Transit Tower PLANNING DEPARTMENT CASE NO. 2007.0558E and 2008.0789E STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2008072073 Draft EIR Publication Date: SEPTEMBER 28, 2011 Draft EIR Public Hearing Date: NOVEMBER 3, 2011 Draft EIR Public Comment Period: SEPTEMBER 28 THROUGH NOVEMBER 28, 2011 Final EIR Certication Date: MAY 24, 2012 May 10, 2012 To: Members of the Planning Commission and Interested Parties From: Bill Wycko, Environmental Review Officer Re: Attached Comments and Responses on Draft Environmental Impact Report Case No. 2007.0558E: Transit Center District Plan and Case No. 2008.0789 Transit Tower Attached for your review please find a copy of the Comments and Responses document for the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the above‐referenced project. This document, along with the Draft EIR, will be before the Planning Commission for Final EIR certification on May 24, 2012. Please note that the public review period ended on November 28, 2011. The Planning Commission does not conduct a hearing to receive comments on the Comments and Responses document, and no such hearing is required by the California Environmental Quality Act. Interested parties, however, may always write to Commission members or to the President of the Commission at 1650 Mission Street and express an opinion on the Comments and Responses document, or the Commission’s decision to certify the completion of the Final EIR for this project. Please note that if you receive the Comments and Responses document in addition to the Draft EIR, you technically have the Final EIR. If you have any questions concerning the Comments and Responses document or the environmental review process, please contact Sarah B. -
Investment Sales Activity on the Rise
Research & Forecast Report SAN FRANCISCO | OFFICE MARKET Q2 | 2018 Investment Sales Activity > VACANCY The overall vacancy rate shed 40 basis points to 6.1 percent and continues to reflect historic lows for San Francisco. In the City Class A assets continue to drive market absorption with over 2.8 million square feet year-to- on the Rise date. This has translated into the Class A vacancy rate dropping 40 basis points to 6.0 percent. Vacant sublease space remained flat during the past three months at 0.8 percent. The key driver for the vacancy shrinking during the first half of Cruise Automation snaps this year was the South Financial District which has posted 2.3 million square up the Dropbox sublease feet of net absorption which saw its vacancy rate drop 270 basis points since the Northwood Investors space at 333 & 345 beginning of the year to 4.6 percent. purchased 123 Mission Brannan Street as well as Street for $290 million 301 Brannan Street ($839 psf) > LEASING VOLUME San Francisco experienced a surge of leasing activity during the second quarter of the year which translated into nearly 2.8 million square feet of transactions closing. Technology companies continue to gobble up space in the City and their appetite for space doesn’t seem to be quenched. Four deals closed over 100,000 square feet this quarter and all these deals were companies securing expansion space. The market experienced the largest lease Facebook secures the largest lease in ever signed in San Francisco when Facebook leased all 773,000 square feet at the City’s history, 250 Howard Street (Park Tower). -
The Investment Landscape PRIEST CLAY ST
FISHERMAN'S P WHARF JEFFERSON ST. P P P P P P BEACH ST. P P P P P NORTHPOINT ST. COLUMBUS ST P P . P P BAY ST. BAY ST. ST . AY E VANDEWATER ST. RT MIDW HA P BRET WORDEN ST FRANCISCO ST. FRANCISCO ST. THE EMBARCADERO P WATER ST. HOUSTON ST. PFEIFFER ST. AIR ST BELL CHESTNUT ST. CHESTNUT ST. ST A VENARD P . ST CULEBR WINTHRO NEWELL P 101 LOMBARD ST. LOMBARD ST. P . TELEGRAPH STONE BLACK HILL JANSEN ST GREENWICH ST. GREENWICH ST. T E L E ROACH ST G VALPARAISO ST. R A HARRIS PL. P 101 H RUSSIAN HILL B L V TRIDGE D . AT FILBERT ST. FILBERT ST. HAVENS ST. REDFIELD ALLADIN TER. E ALLEN ST. HASTINGS MOOR MARION PL BLACK PL UNION ST. UNION ST. P WARNER SHAR ROCKLAND . RUSSELL ST. MACONDRAY LN. P DELGADO . P . HAMLIN EASTMAN ST ST Y GREEN ST. TH ST GREEN ST. VE. VE. ST . ST . A . A ST ST ST T RY T A ON ST . VENWOR VI BONITA ST. TTE TA POWELL YLOR ST GRAN N NESS P POLK ST MONTGOMER LEA FRON BA OCKT JONES ST HYDE ST LARKIN ST GOUGH ST WHITE ST KEARNY TA MASON ST OC SANSOME ST VA FRANKLIN ST ST RUSSIAN HILL VALLEJO ST. VALLEJO ST. P . P WALDO GLOVER ST. VIS ST DA BROADWAY BROADWAY S . CYRU ST BERNHARD ST. LYNCH ST. YNE PL COLUMBUS ST SALMON ST WA HIMMELMAN ST MORRELL PACIFIC AVE. PACIFIC AVE. K . P P . BURGOYNE McCORMAC . PL AUBURN ST P LL WA JACKSON ST. -
Responses to Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report Case No
7 HISTORIC AND EXISTING IMAGES DATE: March 7, 2013 TO: Members of the Planning Commission and Interested Parties FROM: Sarah Jones, Acting Environmental Review Officer Re: Attached Responses to Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Report Case No. 2008.1084E, 706 Mission Street – The Mexican Museum and Residential Tower Project Attached for your review please find a copy of the Responses to Comments document for the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the above-referenced project. This document is also available from the Planning Department website, at http://tinyurl.com/sfceqadocs. This document, along with the Draft EIR, will be before the Planning Commission for Final EIR certification on March 21, 2013. Please note that the public review period ended on August 13, 2012. The Planning Commission does not conduct a hearing to receive comments on the Responses to Comments document, and no such hearing is required by the California Environmental Quality Act. Interested parties, however, may always write to Commission members or to the President of the Commission at 1650 Mission Street and express an opinion on the Responses to Comments document, or the Commission’s decision to certify the completion of the Final EIR for this project. Please note that if you receive the Responses to Comments document in addition to the Draft EIR, you technically have the Final EIR. If you have any questions concerning the Responses to Comments document or the environmental review process, please contact the EIR Coordinator, Debra Dwyer at 415-575-9031. Thank you for your interest in this project and your consideration of this matter. -
Board of Appeals, City & County of San Francisco
BOARD OF APPEALS, CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Appeal No. 1S..187 Appellant(s) vs. Respondent NOTICE OF APPEAL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT on November 19, 2015, the above named appellant(s) filed an appeal with the Board of Appeals of the City and County of San Francisco from the decision or order of the above named department(s), commission, or officer. The substance or effect of the decision or order appealed from is the ISSUANCE on November 10, 2015 to GSW Arena, LLC , of a Place of Entertainment Permit (for a mixed use event center open seven days a week from 7:00 AM to 2:00 AM, with proposed entertainment to include family shows, professional basketball games, collegiate athletic events, and concerts, and with food and beverages served on-site, including alcoholic beverages) at Mission Bay South Blocks 29 & 31. PERMIT NO. EC-1352 FOR HEARING ON December 09, 2015 Address of Appellant(s): Address of Other Parties: Mission Bay Alliance , Appellant GSW Arena, LLC, Permit Holder c/o Thomas Lippe, Attorney for Appellant c/o Mary Murphy, Attorney for Permit Holder Law Offices of Thomas Lippe Gibson Dunn 201 Mission Street, 12th Floor 555 Mission Street, Suite 3000 San Francisco, CA 94105 San Francisco, CA 94105 BOARD ()F A.PPEALS Date Filed: OV 1 9 'ut:J CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO APPEAL# / ~~t n BOARD OF APPEALS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF APPEAL I I We, Mission Bay Alliance, hereby appeal the following departmental action: CONDITIONAL GRANT of a Place of Entertainment Permit by the Entertainment Commission which was issued or became effective on : November 10, 2015, to: GSW Arena, LLC , for the property located at: Mission Bay South Blocks 29 & 31. -
Annual Report 96.4% Total Leased Occupancy Paramount Group, Inc
2018 ANNUAL REPORT 96.4% TOTAL LEASED OCCUPANCY PARAMOUNT GROUP, INC. // ANNUAL REPORT 2018 01 11.9MM TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE 02 PARAMOUNT GROUP, INC. // ANNUAL REPORT 2018 TO OUR LEASING continues to be robust and availability is scarce, Leasing and a hands-on approach to managing so we are confident in our position in the market. SHAREHOLDERS our assets remains one of Paramount’s greatest strengths and key differentiators. 2018 was The significant outperformance in San Francisco another in a series of successful years for our and more specifically the success we have had at leasing team since we came public. We signed One Front Street and 50 Beale Street were key leases on just over one million square feet of factors that led us to increase our exposure in space, well ahead of our original guidance of San Francisco with the acquisition of 111 Sutter between 500,000 to 700,000 square feet we Street. More on that shortly. expected at the beginning of the year. All that We ended the year in Washington, D.C. at 98.0% leasing increased our same store leased leased. Parts of the market may be challenged, Once again, with great pride, I can report that occupancy by 310 basis points to 96.4%. To top it but our strategy to concentrate on Class A Paramount continues to meet or exceed our off, we did all that leasing at robust cash mark-to- assets in certain key locations within the CBD goals in executing on our business plan. Those markets of positive 13.3%.