Jump to content

Goldman Sachs Office Tower


Recommended Posts

Hunt Realty Investments is planning an 11-acre development called North End, located between Victory and the Woodall Rogers freeway. The development will include office, hotel, and residential towers, with the tallest office tower potentially anchored by an 800,000 SF lease to Goldman Sachs. The tower could rise as high as 80 stories. Kohn Pederson Fox has drawn initial plans for the development. Dallas City Council approved $18 million in incentives for Goldman Sachs yesterday, which is choosing between Dallas and a few other cities for the new office, although Dallas already has their second-largest office after New York. Most of the employees for the new office would come from that office.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/real-estate/2022/06/10/goldman-sachs-office-tower-near-downtown-dallas-will-be-the-largest-in-a-generation/

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/real-estate/2022/06/22/goldman-sachs-would-bring-5000-jobs-to-new-dallas-office/

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, H-Town Man said:

Hunt Realty Investments is planning an 11-acre development called North End, located between Victory and the Woodall Rogers freeway. The development will include office, hotel, and residential towers, with the tallest office tower potentially anchored by an 800,000 SF lease to Goldman Sachs. The tower could rise as high as 80 stories. Kohn Pederson Fox has drawn initial plans for the development. Dallas City Council approved $18 million in incentives for Goldman Sachs yesterday, which is choosing between Dallas and a few other cities for the new office, although Dallas already has their second-largest office after New York. Most of the employees for the new office would come from that office.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/real-estate/2022/06/10/goldman-sachs-office-tower-near-downtown-dallas-will-be-the-largest-in-a-generation/

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/real-estate/2022/06/22/goldman-sachs-would-bring-5000-jobs-to-new-dallas-office/

 

 

FWIW, there is no indication (and it is highly unlikely) that the Goldman Sachs Tower will be anywhere near 80 stories.  Hunt's marketing material for the entire development includes a pretty rendering of an 80+ story tower that would be hotel/residential, along with another residential tower and several office buildings.  The Goldmans Sachs deal approved yesterday only involves one of the proposed office buildings. As mentioned, Goldman Sachs is to lease 800,000 square feet, so more likely something in the range of 40 stories, if that.  There has been no timeline given for any of the other buildings in the development. The 80+ story hotel/residential tower seems pretty unlikely to happen any time soon.  (And the timeline for the Goldman Sachs building only requires the shell and core of the building be completed by December 31, 2027.)

Edited by Houston19514
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

FWIW, there is no indication (and it is highly unlikely) that the Goldman Sachs Tower will be anywhere near 80 stories.  Hunt's marketing material for the entire development includes a pretty rendering of an 80+ story tower that would be hotel/residential, along with another residential tower and several office buildings.  The Goldmans Sachs deal approved yesterday only involves one of the proposed office buildings. As mentioned, Goldman Sachs is to lease 800,000 square feet, so more likely something in the range of 40 stories, if that.  There has been no timeline given for any of the other buildings in the development. The 80+ story hotel/residential tower seems pretty unlikely to happen any time soon.  (And the timeline for the Goldman Sachs building only requires the shell and core of the building be completed by December 31, 2027.)

What I read (and I am paywall-blocked from the whole article) said "offices with as many as 80 floors." Your guess of a 40-story tower with 800,000 SF for Goldman Sachs assumes that they would be the only tenant in the tower, which is exceedingly unusual. Typically an anchor tenant takes 25% to 50% of a tower, although there are no hard and set rules. Other tenants will want to be in the same tower as Goldman Sachs, including those that do business with them, those that are drawn to the prestige of their name, and those who simply want to be in Dallas' newest highrise. If a lender or equity partner sees Goldman Sachs taking 800k SF, they wouldn't bat an eyelash at signing on to a much larger building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Dakota79 said:

Ugh! Now Dallas and Austin will have taller buildings than us.

So? It's not like building height has anything to do with quality of life or anything else important. Buildings over about 50 stories are not as economic to build as shorter buildings, and make lower profits.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, H-Town Man said:

What I read (and I am paywall-blocked from the whole article) said "offices with as many as 80 floors." Your guess of a 40-story tower with 800,000 SF for Goldman Sachs assumes that they would be the only tenant in the tower, which is exceedingly unusual. Typically an anchor tenant takes 25% to 50% of a tower, although there are no hard and set rules. Other tenants will want to be in the same tower as Goldman Sachs, including those that do business with them, those that are drawn to the prestige of their name, and those who simply want to be in Dallas' newest highrise. If a lender or equity partner sees Goldman Sachs taking 800k SF, they wouldn't bat an eyelash at signing on to a much larger building.

Some times Steve Brown (the DMN Business reporter) gets so excited about tall-building proposals he loses track of the facts.  Some of his reporting on this development has suggested there would be more than one building above 80 stories.  There has never been any suggestion of that from the developers. The site plans released by the developer showed one building of 80'ish floors and it is a residential/hotel building. It also showed a shorter residential tower, a low-rise mass timber office building, and two office towers, neither of which approaches 80 stories. One of the office towers is said to be just over 1 Million square feet; the other just over 800,000 square feet, each with some ground-floor retail taking part of that square footage.

I think you exaggerate the unusualness of single-tenant office buildings (State Farm, Liberty Mutual, ConocoPhillips, Marathon, Occidental in The Woodlands, Hess, come to mind; I'm sure there are plenty more).  It's also noteworthy that on more than one occasion Goldman Sachs has been the sole tenant in new office buildings it leases.  And it's certainly not unusual at all for companies to want to have a building or campus to themselves. The examples of that are practically endless.

 

1 hour ago, Dakota79 said:

Ugh! Now Dallas and Austin will have taller buildings than us.

No.  Even if the proposed 80-story building is built, it is not slated to even be the tallest in Dallas, let alone Houston (it's residential/hotel, not office, so shorter floors...)

Edited by Houston19514
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

I think you exaggerate the unusualness of single-tenant office buildings, especially in DFW, it seems (State Farm and Liberty Mutual come to mind; I'm sure there are plenty more).  It's also noteworthy that on more than one occasion Goldman Sachs has been the sole tenant in new office buildings it leases.  And it's certainly not unusual at all for companies to want to have a building or campus to themselves. The examples of that are practically endless.

I think you are failing to distinguish between what is normal for suburban corporate campuses (single-tenancy) and what is normal for downtown office buildings (multi-tenancy). Goldman Sachs is currently the anchor tenant at the Trammell Crow Center, where they have 200,000 SF in a building of 1.2 million SF. Although it is possible that they could want a single-tenant building, it is also quite possible (if not likely) that they would have a situation similar to their current one of being the anchor tenant in a larger building.

When you say "site plans released by the developer," do you mean the rendering? A site plan typically shows building footprints within a site boundary. If you know of a site plan, can you link it?

Edited by H-Town Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

I think you are failing to distinguish between what is normal for suburban corporate campuses (single-tenancy) and what is normal for downtown office buildings (multi-tenancy). Goldman Sachs is currently the anchor tenant at the Trammell Crow Center, where they have 200,000 SF in a building of 1.2 million SF. Although it is possible that they could want a single-tenant building, it is also quite possible (if not likely) that they would have a situation similar to their current one of being the anchor tenant in a larger building.

When you say "site plans released by the developer," do you mean the rendering? A site plan typically shows building footprints within a site boundary. If you know of a site plan, can you link it?

I think you are failing to notice how many single-tenant building leases are out there, in both suburban and urban situations.  😉Goldman Sachs West Street, Manhattan.  Goldman Sachs Jersey City.  Hess downtown Houston. Chevron downtown Houston (initially leased the entirety of 1400 Smith before buying it 5 years later).  

Having said that, I have no interest in chasing down a rabbit hole of whether or not G-S will be the sole tenant.  It's little more than a hunch that this will be a single-tenant building; it is entirely possible it will have some room for others, thus also allowing for expansion room for Goldman Sachs.  What it will not be is 80 stories of office space.

file.php?id=3667&mode=view

http://dallasmetropolis.com/dfwu/download/file.php?id=3671&mode=view

 

Edited by Houston19514
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

I think you are failing to notice how many single-tenant building leases are out there, in both suburban and urban situations.  Goldman Sachs West Street, Manhattan.  Goldman Sachs Jersey City.  Hess downtown Houston. Chevron downtown Houston (initially leased the entirety of 1400 Smith before buying it 5 years later).  

Having said that, I have no interest in chasing down a rabbit hole of whether or not G-S will be the sole tenant.  It's little more than a hunch that this will be a single-tenant building; it is entirely possible it will have some room for others, thus also allowing for expansion room for Goldman Sachs.  What it will not be is 80 stories of office space.

 

Like I said, multi-tenancy is normal for downtown office buildings, single-tenancy is much more common in suburban corporate campuses. The Chevron and Hess buildings are about the only single-tenant buildings I can think of in downtown Houston, besides government buildings. Hilcorp is another.

Please confirm if you have other info on this besides just the unlabeled rendering in the article. You seem positive this won't be 80 stories.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

Like I said, multi-tenancy is normal for downtown office buildings, single-tenancy is much more common in suburban corporate campuses. The Chevron and Hess buildings are about the only single-tenant buildings I can think of in downtown Houston, besides government buildings. Hilcorp is another.

Please confirm if you have other info on this besides just the unlabeled rendering in the article. You seem positive this won't be 80 stories.

 

Like I said, and you seem to now kinda sorta acknowledge, single-tenant office buildings are not exceedingly rare. 😉

I base the conclusion it will not be an 80-story office building on a combination of what the developer has shared (which has zero indication of an office building anywhere near that size) and knowledge of the Dallas office market and office space/buildings in general.  An 80-story office building would probably be at at or near 2.5 million square feet of office space or more; certainly above 2 Million.  (A tenant like G-S is likely to want bigger floor plates - for example, their Jersey City building is only 42 stories tall and has 1.5 Million square feet.)   With G-S taking 800,000 square feet, that's another 1.2 - 1.7 million square feet (possibly more) dropped on an already wildly oversupplied office market (downtown/uptown Dallas has more than 11.5 million square feet of office space available, and that doesn't even count Deep Ellum, which adds another 3/4 million).  Not happening.

(And see the links added to my prior response).  

Edited by Houston19514
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Like I said, and you seem to now kinda sorta acknowledge, single-tenant office buildings are not exceedingly rare. 😉

I base the conclusion it will not be an 80-story office building on a combination of what the developer has shared (which has zero indication of an office building anywhere near that size) and knowledge of the Dallas office market and office space/buildings in general.  An 80-story office building would probably be at at or near 2.5 million square feet of office space or more; certainly above 2 Million.  (A tenant like G-S is likely to want bigger floor plates - for example, their Jersey City building is only 42 stories tall and has 1.5 Million square feet.)   With G-S taking 800,000 square feet, that's another 1.2 - 1.7 million square feet (possibly more) dropped on an already wildly oversupplied office market (downtown/uptown Dallas has more than 11.5 million square feet of office space available, and that doesn't even count Deep Ellum, which adds another 3/4 million).

(And see the links added to my prior response).  

Single-tenant office buildings are fairly rare in downtown areas, which is what we're talking about. The three examples I named in downtown Houston illustrate that point, unless there is just a ton of others I'm forgetting. 

So you're basically using the rendering to say that the DMN reporter was wrong when he said that the office building could be up to 80 stories. That's fine. Just wanted to clarify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The title was changed to Goldman Sachs Office Tower
15 hours ago, H-Town Man said:

Single-tenant office buildings are fairly rare in downtown areas, which is what we're talking about. The three examples I named in downtown Houston illustrate that point, unless there is just a ton of others I'm forgetting. 

So you're basically using the rendering to say that the DMN reporter was wrong when he said that the office building could be up to 80 stories. That's fine. Just wanted to clarify.

So you started out telling us single-tenant office buildings are "exceedingly unusual", full stop, to "fairly rare in downtown areas".  Just wanted to clarify.  😉

As I said above, I'm using the renderings, the site plans, knowledge of what the developer has said, knowledge of the central Dallas market and knowledge of office development in general, oh, and also very important, knowledge of the excitability of the DMN reporter, to say that the DMN reporter was wrong. 

Edited by Houston19514
Link to comment
Share on other sites

New information:   During the presentation to and questions and answers with the Dallas City Council on Thursday, the representative from the City's Office of Economic Development (the ones who negotiated the deal with Goldmans Sachs), referring to the Goldman Sachs building said that "this building is somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 to 20 stories."

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

So you started out telling us single-tenant office buildings are "exceedingly unusual", full stop, to "fairly rare in downtown areas".  Just wanted to clarify.  😉

As I said above, I'm using the renderings, the site plans, knowledge of what the developer has said, knowledge of the central Dallas market and knowledge of office development in general, oh, and also very important, knowledge of the excitability of the DMN reporter, to say that the DMN reporter was wrong. 

I said it would be "exceedingly unusual" for an anchor tenant to be the only tenant in an office tower, which is different from saying that single-tenant office buildings in any location whatsoever are exceedingly unusual. The word "tower" in my post, and the fact that we were talking about a downtown location, are important context. You then quoted a bunch of examples of single-tenant office buildings, almost all of which were suburban buildings: "State Farm, Liberty Mutual, ConocoPhillips, Marathon, Occidental in The Woodlands, Hess, come to mind)." The "come to mind" was a nice touch, since the list was probably the product of furious googling, like most of what you post on this forum. But I should go easy on you, since it probably didn't even occur to you that suburban vs. downtown location made a difference in likely tenancy.

I've asked you already to give us a link to a site plan if you have in fact seen one. Can you link the site plan for us please?

27 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

New information:   During the presentation to and questions and answers with the Dallas City Council on Thursday, the representative from the City's Office of Economic Development (the ones who negotiated the deal with Goldmans Sachs), referring to the Goldman Sachs building said that "this building is somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 to 20 stories."

Was this information not already on the site plan that you've seen? Why didn't you mention it before?

Edited by H-Town Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

I said it would be "exceedingly unusual" for an anchor tenant to be the only tenant in an office tower, which is different from saying that single-tenant office buildings in any location whatsoever are exceedingly unusual. The word "tower" in my post, and the fact that we were talking about a downtown location, are important context. You then quoted a bunch of examples of single-tenant office buildings, almost all of which were suburban buildings: "State Farm, Liberty Mutual, ConocoPhillips, Marathon, Occidental in The Woodlands, Hess, come to mind)." The "come to mind" was a nice touch, since the list was probably the product of furious googling, like most of what you post on this forum. But I should go easy on you, since it probably didn't even occur to you that suburban vs. downtown location made a difference in likely tenancy.

I've asked you already to give us a link to a site plan if you have in fact seen one. Can you link the site plan for us please?

Was this information not already on the site plan that you've seen? Why didn't you mention it before?

I provided the links several posts up.  FWIW. the site plan will probably have to be tweaked to allow for an office building with something like 40,000 square foot (or more) floor plates.   No, this late-breaking information was not on the site plan.  I just became aware of this information late last night and watched the council meeting recording this morning to confirm it.

http://dallasmetropolis.com/dfwu/download/file.php?id=3671&mode=view

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Houston19514 said:

I provided the links several posts up.  FWIW. the site plan will probably have to be tweaked to allow for an office building with something like 40,000 square foot (or more) floor plates.   No, this late-breaking information was not on the site plan.  I just became aware of this information late last night and watched the council meeting recording this morning to confirm it.

http://dallasmetropolis.com/dfwu/download/file.php?id=3671&mode=view

 

 

The first link didn't work for me and I am blocked on the second one, I guess because I am not part of the dallasmetropolis forum. 40,000 SF floor plates would be huge, typical of back office space. Most office towers are in the 20,000 to 25,000 SF range. Their current office at Trammell Crow Center has 24,124 SF floor plates.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

The first link didn't work for me and I am blocked on the second one, I guess because I am not part of the dallasmetropolis forum. 40,000 SF floor plates would be huge, typical of back office space. Most office towers are in the 20,000 to 25,000 SF range. Their current office at Trammell Crow Center has 24,124 SF floor plates.

 

Yep.  We might now be seeing why they are moving and why they wanted new-build rather than utililzing some of the widely-available space all over downtown and uptown Dallas -- They wanted bigger floor plates for what is largely going to be back-office space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

Yep.  We might now be seeing why they are moving and why they wanted new-build rather than utililzing some of the widely-available space all over downtown and uptown Dallas -- They wanted bigger floor plates for what is largely going to be back-office space.

Are you sure that they want 40,000 SF floor plates? Very strange to build back-office space in the most expensive submarket in the city where land values are so high. Also very strange that they would move all their downtown workers from Class A space typical of a CBD to back-office space on large floorplates. As to why they want new build rather than some of the existing vacant space in central Dallas, most of which is from the 70's-80's, I'd say that is pretty easy and follows the trend we've seen of well-heeled companies preferring new space over 80's vintage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, H-Town Man said:

Are you sure that they want 40,000 SF floor plates? Very strange to build back-office space in the most expensive submarket in the city where land values are so high. Also very strange that they would move all their downtown workers from Class A space typical of a CBD to back-office space on large floorplates. As to why they want new build rather than some of the existing vacant space in central Dallas, most of which is from the 70's-80's, I'd say that is pretty easy and follows the trend we've seen of well-heeled companies preferring new space over 80's vintage.

I don't know G-S's innermost thoughts and desires.  I can only surmise that they want big floor plates based on the facts that they (1) are taking at least 800,000 square feet and (2) are having built for them a building that will be "somewhere in the neighborhood of 15-20 stories". Mathematics tells us that leads to a minimum floor plate of 40,000 square feet. I am further presuming that Hunt is proposing to build for Goldman Sachs a building that meets Goldmans Sachs's specifications.

Interestingly, the typical floor size of G-S's Jersey City building is 38,500 square feet.

Edited by Houston19514
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
×
×
  • Create New...