Tower race

P

pharmerdave

Guest
Tower Race: Developers vie for high-rise rewards
Boston Business Journal - June 15, 2007
by Michelle Hillman
Journal staff

At least five developers are in a shovel race to see who can build the city's first new office tower.
The winner gets a major tenant, rental income for the next 10 to 15 years and the potential for huge returns in the years to come. The losers? They may get a lot of heartache.
Just ask Dean Stratouly if being first matters.
In 2001, he missed the development cycle by about six months and has been paying for it ever since.
Stratouly struck a deal to build a 33-story tower that year, when the Boston office market's vacancy rate was about 10 percent. By the time he finished acquiring the site where 33 Arch St. would be built, the vacancy rate dipped to 5 percent. When he started construction of the 600,000 square-foot tower in June 2001, the vacancy rate in Boston was a startling 2 percent.
Then the terrorist attacks of 9/11 slowed the economy and caused Stratouly to build into a down market cycle. A recession hit, and the building opened with no tenants except for Stratouly's company, Congress Group Inc.
"The first guy in is always in much better shape than the last guy in, so there's definitely a race," said Stratouly, who still has three floors left to lease at 33 Arch.
John B. Hynes of the Gale Co. had a different experience entirely. He started construction of One Lincoln St. in 2000 and was able to open the building in 2003 -- a full year ahead of Stratouly. Hynes landed State Street Corp. and then sold the building for about $700 million, or twice as much as it cost him to develop.
Developers surveying the market today all want Hynes' experience: to time the market exactly right so their office tower opens when tenants are still desperate for large chunks of Class A space, as they are today. There are at least 3 million square feet of office space in Boston's development pipeline, with the first buildings scheduled to open by 2011.
Hynes is again vying for a first-place finish and is placing a bet on his project at One Franklin St. in Downtown Crossing. If all goes well, Hynes hopes to break ground this September.
"My experience is the building that's in the ground first is the one that's going to capture the most attention," said Hynes.
There are office projects proposed all over town, but only a handful have a serious chance of getting started this year, according to real estate executives. Developers are ratcheting up plans or at least moving as fast as they can to stay on schedule.
"Absolutely there's a competition, so we're advancing our planning effort," said David Perry, senior vice president of Hines Interests LP, which is developing the South Station project, which includes a 49-story, 1 million-square-foot office tower.
Perry said he will break ground by the end of the year and has "a lot of people working very fast" to make sure plans proceed according to schedule.
While Perry and his competitors don't have committed tenants, developers are confident once their buildings begin to take shape tenants will get more serious about signing leases.
That's the case at Fan Pier, where developer Joseph Fallon plans to break ground on a "spec" office building this fall. Fallon said he's building into a market that has been improving since the beginning of the year.
"The interest in the building has been very strong," said Fallon, president of the Fallon Co., which is developing Fan Pier. "A number of potential tenants have said they'd like to be here."
Fallon will break ground on Fan Pier's first 500,000-square-foot office building this fall. There's a chance that one or two towers could come out of the ground at the same time. If that happens, tenants will probably play the buildings off each other to achieve better deals, said John Miller of Lincoln Property Co.
A survey by real estate firm Meredith & Grew Inc. indicates the market has continued to improve since 2004, when the overall vacancy rate for Boston was 17 percent. Preliminary figures show the vacancy rate for Boston at the end of the second quarter will be 9.5 percent.
Asking rents for low-rise tower space are between $45 and $55 per square foot, while asking rents for high-rise space are between $55 and $75 per square foot.
If the market absorbs about a million square feet a year until 2010, the vacancy rate could drop to 6 percent, said Mary Kelly, senior vice president at Meredith & Grew.
"That shows there's a clear need for much of the office space that's in the pipeline," she said.
Miller is ready to go with permits, partners and money to build in hand. His project is much smaller and not considered a direct competitor for buildings twice the size of Two Financial.
Still, Miller will break ground on the 215,000-square-foot mid-rise building next week.
"When you get into single-digit vacancy, and it's so hard to get out of the ground in this city ... the timing becomes critical," said Miller. "It's a great timing play vis-a-vis the market. We're not Russia Wharf, 400 feet above the harbor, but it's well timed, well positioned."
 
It's a shame that such a tower race won't leave us with the same landmark buildings as did the tower race in New York in the 1920's.
 
Yes, but this is still some good news/good article. I wish it was as easy to get buildings built here as it is and always has been in New York, but at least buildings will be getting built a lot faster (hopefully) now for the next few years like it says in the article. Then we will definitely see a change in the skyline of Boston with some of the new high rises (SST being one)
 
vanshnookenraggen said:
It's a shame that such a tower race won't leave us with the same landmark buildings as did the tower race in New York in the 1920's.
General absence of design culture aside, could it be that the most beautiful NYC skyscrapers of that era (Woolworth, Chrysler etc.) were built as vanity projects or corporate PR by owner-occupiers (as was Boston's last great one, the Hancock), rather than developers looking to build and rent out?

justin
 
I know there are differing views to the merits of the project, but that is what Trans National Place largely is - a vanity project (albeit clearly subject to economic pressures). Whether it gets built and is faithful to its original vision remains to be seen.
 
They make it sound like only one tower will be built. That wasn't the case in the last cycle and is unlikely to be the case this time either (same as 80s and 70s booms). When the market goes cold, the last guy will be the one in trouble, but he will eventually be OK too. You don't need to have the first building of a cycle to be successful. One Lincoln came after 111 Huntington for example. There are such big barriers to entry in Boston, it's almost impossible to lose in the long run.
 
^ Exactly. The Empire State Building was the "last one in" during the 20s boom in New York; it was completed during the Depression.

could it be that the most beautiful NYC skyscrapers of that era (Woolworth, Chrysler etc.) were built as vanity projects or corporate PR by owner-occupiers (as was Boston's last great one, the Hancock), rather than developers looking to build and rent out?

I believe the ESB was also built on spec.
 
...yeah, therein lies the problem with Boston's loss of traditional industries' corporate headquarters. Back in the day, Hancock could sponsor a vanity tower. Small mutual fund enterprises and biotech labs are less likely to do so.

Somehow, developers don't feel the same pressure to be architecturally innovative.
 
tocoto said:
They make it sound like only one tower will be built. That wasn't the case in the last cycle and is unlikely to be the case this time either (same as 80s and 70s booms). When the market goes cold, the last guy will be the one in trouble, but he will eventually be OK too. You don't need to have the first building of a cycle to be successful. One Lincoln came after 111 Huntington for example. There are such big barriers to entry in Boston, it's almost impossible to lose in the long run.

Exactly. Once someone breaks ground on a new tower, say for example SST. Other people aren't going to drop their designs and proposals because their buildings will be unfilled and useless. What it means is that if say 5 or 6 (yeah right) towers are built, it's going to be more difficult for the last tower (possibly last two) to fill up as quickly as the first cycle. Unless of course it's a specific company HQ and those don't get built all that much around here.

Look at how many people want to build in Boston and either can't because their proposal is cut down so much that it's pointless or they just don't want the hassle. I'd gladly be the last guy to get something built in this city because in 10 years, this same cycle will occur as it does every 10-15 years.
 
For reference, the last "boom" was from about 2001-2004. Buildings over 400 feet that were built in this cycle:


Millenium Place Tower I 475ft. 38 Floors (2001)
Millenium Place Tower II 445 ft. 36 Floors (2001)
111 Huntington 554 ft. 36 Floors (2002)
State Street Financial Center 503 ft. 36 (2003)
33 Arch Street 477 ft. 33 Floors (2004)

State Street was actually delayed after approval due to low office vacancy rates, so there's always cycles but if this one extends like it seems to be it will be a pretty big boom.
 
czsz said:
...I believe the ESB was also built on spec.

And to this day the building has never been fully leased either.
 
Ya it is allright, but during that 2001-2004 "boom" we got some good looking buildings....I mean State Street, Millennium Towers, and 33 arch have all become pretty prominent buildings in Boston now and I like those ones a lot. This next boom is gonna bring a lot of great buildings I think, as long as they get freakin built. A lot of great ones have been approved but they need to be constructed for gods sake!!! Anyways, I can't wait if this boom goes as planned, we will get SST, Trans National Place (if approved), Russia Wharf, The Clarendon, Columbus Center, 45 Province St, W hotel, the new dorms, and more hopefully. Boston is definitely growing!!! This is too exciting lol
 
I have to agree. I'm surprised so many buildings are being proposed. 2 Financial is going up. There are two plan towers now announced at the Pru, one at 265ft and the other 340 feet. The Filene's Tower is going up soon at 495ft. Other proposal include the tower at Aquarium and the Seaport district area has a bunch of high-rises going up. The Dainty Dot building, if approve, will the first of its kind to go up in Boston. This is the biggest boom since the 1970s for Boston.
 
Boom Town
In wake of Big Dig and harbor cleanup, buildings sprout up
By Steve Bailey, Globe Columnist | July 13, 2007

Today I take a break from my usual cranky self for 700 words of optimism. The reason: Boston, and some of its surrounding towns, are in the midst of the kind of building boom we haven't seen in more than a decade.

While residential foreclosures remain high, a legacy of the subprime mortgage bubble, and home prices are soft, the pace of construction in Boston is reaching a level not seen since the last great boom, from 1987 to 1991. What is most striking about this construction wave is just how broadbased it is: from the hospitals and universities to hotels and residential, and now even office and industrial space.

And it is happening across the city, downtown, and in the neighborhoods. Meanwhile, Waltham is in the middle of its own building boom, and in Cambridge commercial rents are exploding as Blackstone Group jacks up prices after buying Equity Office. (Call it "the Blackstone effect.")
Consider: In June, there were 75 projects under construction -- 11 million square feet in all -- in the c ity of Boston, according to the Boston Redevelopment Authority, or the equivalent of 10 Prudential Towers. That represents $3.3 billion in investment and 13,000 full-time construction jobs.

"It is an unprecedented square-foot-per-year we are dealing with," says Kairos Shen, the BRA's director of planning.
Look around the city. After years of delay, work has started on a 25-story W Hotel and condo building on a parking lot in the decrepit Theatre District.
Related Cos. of New York and Beal Cos. of Boston are building a 32-story condo and apartment tower at Stuart and Clarendon streets.
Another long-delayed project, the 12-story Two Financial Center office building, just broke ground at South Station. Yesterday, developers broke ground on an apartment complex in the Bulfinch Triangle near North Station.

On and on it goes. Russia Wharf, with its base of classic Boston red-brick buildings now latticed in scaffolding, will finally get underway as the city's next big office tower, as soon as Boston Properties repairs the "alien on the park" design. The huge $700 million redevelopment of the Filene's block in Downtown Crossing -- with its 500,000 square feet of office space, 125 condos, a hotel, and retail -- is set to begin in September. Boston developer Joe Fallon promises to start construction on at least one building on Fan Pier this fall, but considering the history of that windblown parking lot I will wait and see.

And Arthur Winn? If the reluctant developer, with all the help from his friends at the State House and City Hall, cannot get his too-big Columbus Center started in this environment, he should let someone else do it.
All this activity is being driven by Boston's robust university and hospital sector, an office market where rents have risen by 50 percent and vacancies have fallen by half in 18 months, and gobs of global money chasing real estate deals. It is also the payoff for the $20 billion-plus in public infrastructure investment in the city over the last two decades. While we don't say it very often, the pols and the courts got it right when they bet big on the Big Dig, the harbor cleanup, and the new convention center.
"In the next five to 10 years, we're going to see the largest building renaissance in the history of New England," says John Fish, chief executive of Suffolk Construction. Adds development consultant Michael Vaughan: "It is happening all over the city. I go to Dorchester, and people complain their neighborhood is being overwhelmed by development. Isn't it wonderful that people actually want to invest in your community?"
Managing all this growth and preserving what makes Boston so attractive in the first place will be a challenge. (Hiring a strong BRA director would help -- but there I go again.) Growth is a wonderful thing. It has a way of making everyone seem a whole lot smarter.
 
Damn, this article makes me even more excited, just to think of how big this is for Boston. I can't wait to look at Boston in 10 years and see how much of it has changed and how many additional buildings have been added to the skyline. This is just what Boston needed, and I can't believe it is finally happening. I am gonna cross my fingers and hope for the best, I hope some thing doesn't happen to ruin all this. The only thing I can see happening that would stop all buildings from progressing would be a nuclear attack, so I am gonna hope that doesn't happen anytime soon.
 
The NIMBYs must have freaked upon seeing the "equivalent of 10 Prudential towers" graphic.
 

Back
Top