About a third of that is conversion space that we think is going to be less competitive to our product. So we view about 1.8 million square feet of that as competitive. The good news in South Francisco on that is it’s a small number of actual projects. So it’s a decent amount of square footage, but a small number of projects. So when you’re thinking about competing on deals, you’re not going out competing against 10 projects, right, smaller number there. Boston, where we certainly have very little rollover and no ongoing development out there today, there are some big headline numbers. We truly look at as competitive in Lexington and Waltham and West Cambridge our portfolio is there. It really shrinks down to a little over 2 million square feet.
So we feel good about our positioning there and again, no development starts anywhere in the near term as we work through our Airwave entitlements. Then in San Diego, there’s about 5 million square feet in total under construction, but only about 2 million of that is in Tory Pines and Sorrento Mesa. That’s about 30% preleased. So when you whittle down to what we actually view as competitive, it’s pretty manageable in the near term.
Scott M. Brinker: Hey Griff, one other thing, and this — every situation is different. So this isn’t a statement that’s true across the board. But in general, what we’ve noticed is that the new development projects, if anything, in this environment have been a bit harder to lease up. If you think about a new development, usually the tenant needs to invest at least $100 per foot of TI, it could be $200, $300, $400 depending upon their program, that’s a tough ask in this environment. A new development already is going to come with higher lease rents as well as higher operating expenses, just given the amenities and the cost basis. So it’s just less competitive. You think about what’s happening in a real estate sector that’s just a polar opposite of [indiscernible] office, it’s like the 8 plus buildings are the only ones leasing up.
Lab right now is kind of the exact opposite. It’s still kind of well located, lower price point in terms of rent, OPEX as well as TI investment from the tenant that actually is the most desirable and in demand today. So we’re actually benefiting from that quite a bit. We do have some new development to lease up, obviously. So we’re not completely immune from that dynamic, but it actually puts the incumbents with existing operating portfolios in even better shape I think, as you think about who’s going to weather the kind of deliveries over the next 18-24 months.
Michael Griffin: Great, that’s it for me. Thanks for the time.
Operator: The next question comes from Ronald Kamdem from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.
Ronald Kamdem: Hey, just two quick ones or one and a follow-up, I should say. Just on the lab portfolio, I think you talked about in I think last November about the $1.3 billion total peak NOI opportunity. I think part of that was sort of lab development earnings as well as sort of the lab mark-to-market, just half a year into it from those. Maybe can you talk about what the puts and takes are, how do you feel about that $1.3 billion plus opportunity in 2025 or is there incremental upside or incremental downside?
Peter A. Scott: Yeah, hey Ron, it’s Pete here. I think the $1.3 billion you’re referring to was about $200 million of NOI growth over three years. I would say we still feel good about that NOI growth opportunity today; it may take a little longer to get there. That shouldn’t be a surprise. And within that, we didn’t include new development starts that was basically the lease-up and the stabilization of the existing development pipeline. So there were no new starts that was feeding into that. So it’s a good question. Again, we feel good about it. It may just take a little bit longer to get there.
