July 28, 2006
Watermark Update: 78% Sold (And Discounting)
Okay, while these aren’t official sales office sanctioned statistics, they’re also not just some wild ass guesses. (We like to think of it as deductive reasoning.) That being said, here’s our take on the current state of affairs at the Watermark:
Prices and Discounting: At the low end, $695K will now get you a 15th floor one bedroom “F” floor plan, while three months ago it would only buy a 4th floor unit. At the high end, both three bedroom “K” floor plan penthouses remain priced at $3.2M and $3.3M. In the middle it’s a bit more convoluted.
It appears that two bedroom units on the lower floors have been reduced by up to $140K (11.5%). For example, the only remaining “A” floor plan unit on the 4th floor is now advertised at $1.06M (was $1.2M) and the 4th floor “G” floor plan unit is now $1.04M (was $1.15M). Not as much discounting (or inventory) on the higher floors. That being said, $1.7M will now get you a three bedroom “M” floor plan on the 19th floor, while in April they were asking $1.73M for units on the 17th floor.
Inventory and Sales: We estimate that roughly 30 of the 136 condos are still available (78% sold). That would suggest an average of about six sales a month over the past three months.
No word on whatever happened to unit #6C (which is no longer active in the MLS), and as far as we know, no new resales have hit the market.
First Published: July 28, 2006 1:25 PM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
So, SocketSiters, if I'm interested in a $925k unit at 188 King (just up the Embarcadero from the Watermark) that's been on the market nearly 60 days, would I be crazy to go in with an offer of $832.5k (10%)?
Posted by: RanchoGuy at July 28, 2006 2:37 PM
The Watermark is such a ugly, cheap-looking building, I'm not surprised it's taking so long to sell.
Posted by: Mike at July 28, 2006 4:24 PM
Why is everyone so negative on the Watermark? The building actually is quite nice. The exterior is a bit monolithic, but if you like modern architecture, it's not that bad. Also, you really can't beat the views you get from the inside.
Posted by: DesignGuy at July 28, 2006 5:19 PM
I thought the apartments I looked at at The Watermark were spectacular. I passed because I thought they were overpriced (maybe I should take another look :-)), but mainly because I didn't have much confidence that the development in front of the Watermark for the Bryant St Cruise Liner terminal would actually happen in a timely fashion, leaving the area either incomplete or under construction for the forseeable future. Seems like that's exactly the way it's playing out.
Posted by: Amen Corner at July 28, 2006 6:08 PM
Sales are slow there because people are now flocking to OneRincon and Infinty as their prices are on par (or even lower) than Watermark.
Location and view wise, OneRincon and Infinity are far superior to Watermark.
And Amen Corner is correct about the future Cruise Terminal. It's an eye sore and will take 5-10+ years to develop that area...
Posted by: John at July 31, 2006 12:24 PM
Dear John & Amen,
I guess both of you are friends of Monique Moyer, the director of the Port. As, I don't think the Port wants to wait 5-10+ years to see that Pier get improved.
As to location for both 1 Rincon Hill and The Infinity, when was the last time you tried to get to either of those sites between 4:00 PM and 7:00 PM daily?
What's type of gridlock will there be when the 600+ condo's at 1 Rincon Hill are occupied & the 40 story building planned for the 76 gas station across the street & the new building on the other corner at 1st & Harrison? Not to mention (1)1,400 units at The Infinity, 400+ Units at 1st & Mission, The Californian or the rest of the new buildings/apartments proposed for the TransBay terminal area (2 850 ft towers and 1 1,000 ft tower).
Now, as to views. When you visited the 1 Rincon Hill sales office or The Infinity and saw those smashing videos & drawings, where were the mark ups of all the new buildings that are (1) under construction, (2) approved and (3) proposed.
SF Business Times states over 27,000 units are in the "pipeline".
It's called Buyer Be Ware!!
Now, those views and traffic issues at The Watermark may not be so bad, after all.
Posted by: Frederick at August 3, 2006 10:16 PM
i agree. who wants to live on a bridge on ramp anyway? i group one rincon with the metropolitan. talk about terrible location. you might as well be living in la.
Posted by: DesignGuy at August 6, 2006 1:13 AM
No doubt OneRincon and the Met has the worse of it. Traffic at Infinity will be better though they will see their share of traffic during afternoon commute hours.
And, if buyers do their research (like Frederick apparently has done), they'll figure out that units facing east towards the bay have mostly unobstructed views (except for the 2nd Rincon and Infinity buildings). So yes, there will be views blocked as more towers go up in the Rincon area, but when it's all said and done, many East views from Rincon and Infinity will be awesome!!
Frederick, do you know of any updates on the Cruise terminal pier? Last I heard the primary developer backed out and now they are back to square one. That's why most folks think it will be 5+ years to finish whatever they have planned for that place...
Posted by: John at August 6, 2006 8:36 PM
I've heard similar about the pier. Apparently Lend Lease pulled out, which destroyed the consortium. I've seen reports here and there about the port commission with a request for new developers.
Posted by: DesignGuy at August 8, 2006 6:50 PM
Can you please help? My friend is looking to purchase a penthouse unit at the Watermark and has been waiting almost a year but cannot move in because they do not have the TCO for the penthouse floors. The sales office has NO IDEA when it will be available. Does anyone have any idea what is going on ... is there something wrong?
Posted by: Joe at August 10, 2006 2:34 PM