October 5, 2006
One Rincon Hill’s Fall Newsletter And Update
A tipster forwards a copy of One Rincon Hill’s Fall newsletter. And yes, we were equally as surprised to see SocketSite so prominently excerpted (see “Bloggers love us, they really do!”).
A couple of interesting items from the newsletter:
“Construction is precisely on schedule. Crews have poured the 10th floor and are forming the 11th floor. The contractor will soon begin pouring a new floor of concrete every three days. On Oct. 1, installation of the glass curtainwall will begin. Concurrently, work will start on the interiors.”
“Floors 8-27 will be ready for closing and move-in sometime late 2007. Floors 28-60 will be ready for closing and move-in sometime early 2008 (anticipated).” [Yes, move-in on the lower floors while construction continues above.] “Construction on the second tower will start sometime in 2008. An official date will be announced in coming months. Estimated completion for Phase II is mid-2009.”
“There are still more than 30 one-, two- and three bedrooms with great views available, ranging in price from $600,000 to $2.5 million, as well as 13 [out of 14] luxury townhomes along Harrison Street, starting at $1.4 million with private entrances and outdoor patios, and all the amenities in the tower homes.” [For the record, we estimated 36 available tower condos when calculating our initial Complete Inventory Index (Cii) and did not account for any of the townhomes.]
And of course, “[t]he far left lane on First Street will be a designated lane that commuter traffic cannot use. You will be able to drive straight into One Rincon Hill’s driveway and parking from there. Also you’ll be able to enter from Harrison Street traveling east or west.”
In summary, construction is on schedule, and after a blow-out opening week (“In the first week alone, buyers snapped up more than 90% percent of the 390 homes available”), it appears that net sales have been negligible over the past four months (if 43 homes remain available, it’s now 89% “sold” ).
Despite the recent slowdown, 89% "pre-sold" with over a year until occupancy is still a stunning achievement and success (as we wrote three months ago, "we’d be surprised if One Rincon has any difficulty selling out in record time"). In the back of our minds, however, we can't help but consider the predicament of The Palms (60% pre-sold ten months ago, 65% sold today).
UPDATE: No need to download the newsletter as a pdf as we've redirected the link to an online version.
∙ One Rincon Hill View Fall 2006 [onerinconhill.com]
∙ SocketSite’s Complete Inventory Index (Cii) [SocketSite]
∙ First Impressions: One Rincon Hill Sales Center [SocketSite]
∙ The Palms (555 4th Street) Update: 65% Sold [SocketSite]
First Published: October 5, 2006 10:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Rincon will likely stay that sold because unlike the Palms, those that are left in contract now stand to lose their deposits. The construction I anticipate will happen ontime or early - reportedly there are huge bonus' that the construction company wont care to lose by being late.
Posted by: Rincon insider at October 5, 2006 7:38 AM
The newsletter says phase II is anticipated to open in 2009. Is "anticipated" for phase II code for if market conditions are not right, phase II will not be built?
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 8:31 AM
Yeh, I presume the same thing is true of the second tower at The Infinity:- appraise the market conditions in '08 before deciding whether to proceed or delay. Only thing that makes sense really.
Posted by: Amen Corner at October 5, 2006 8:57 AM
How is this possible?
"Floors 28-60 will be ready for closing and move-in sometime early 2008..."
I thought Rincon One was just 55 stories!
Posted by: Localyokel at October 5, 2006 9:36 AM
All the owners' cars are valet parked. Why would anyone pay that kind of money for a condo when there is no assigned parking is beyond me. No assigned parking is a deal killer for me.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 9:51 AM
I've heard the same thing. Is it true there is no deeded parking? Normally, a single deeded underground or garage parking space is worth between $75,000 to $125,000 in SF.
Does this mean buyers basically over paid for their unit by 75-125K??
Posted by: SF Living at October 5, 2006 10:54 AM
Nope. It’s still deeded parking, just not a designated space. In fact, some might consider “valet” (i.e. no having to drive/walk through the garage) to be worth more than an assigned space.
Posted by: Michael at October 5, 2006 11:39 AM
I still haven't decided whether I like the valet parking concept yet or not, but that's precisely what condo boards are for.
I can say one thing that I absolutely hate, although it wasn't a deal killer for me, is the ventless dryer requirement. How hard is it to install a vent system, even on a 55 story tower? Those European condensing washer/dryer combos completely blow (no pun intended).
Posted by: 1RinconBuyer at October 5, 2006 11:48 AM
I find the comment about traffic flow highly entertaining. The left lane on First Street will be closed to commuters, and will flow right into our building. It makes it sound like it's a special deal they've worked out with the city, as opposed to the way traffic has already flowed for years, with the left lane a dedicated left turn lane onto Harrison Street. Which, btw, commuters ignore and block regularly.
Posted by: Jennifer at October 5, 2006 12:03 PM
It's nice to have valet parking. But it should be an option. There are pros and cons to valet. What if you want fetch something from your car? How long will valet service take during busy hours or the middle of the night? How well will they take care of your car? Can you walk down to your car withour valet escort? I love having valet service when I'm staying in some fancy hotel or resort, but to HAVE to use it day in and out can be tiresome...
I guess the board can decide if it's a permanant service or not. And if they do decide have self parking as an option, who decides who gets the spaces closes to the elevator or who gets a space at the far end of the lot, or who gets standard vs compact parking etc(or is a space # already deeded to you in the contract?).
Posted by: SF Living at October 5, 2006 12:25 PM
I think the valet parking will feel pimpy for about a week. After that, I think I'd feel like a member of the oppressor class. Then it'll really hit the fan after coming home from a fun filled day of shopping at Costco. Cat food, 40 bottles of Kirkland water, and a gallon of mayonnaise. I hope they have bell hops!
Posted by: 49Giants at October 5, 2006 2:25 PM
It can't be "deeded parking" when there is no designated space. I heard that it's the same developer who built the 88 King complex. It's the same parking situation there, that's why I didn't buy there. They have to use this arrangment at 88 King because there are not enough parking spaces for every unit, so they have to use the valet concept. Sometimes, cars have to be blocked by other cars. I suspect that's the same situation at One Rincon. I think that's the biggest pain in the rear end, and that's the major reason why I am not buying there.
I didn't know about the ventless situation for the dryer. How can they vent out the kitchen, but not the dryer??
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 3:04 PM
It's not a deed, it's a license, there is a legal difference, and the assigned value of the license is $10K. If you choose to forego the license, your price will be reduced by $10K. But that's basically resale suicide, so I imagine noone will do it, unless they plan to die while living in their condo.
As to the ventless question, good point, I don't know, but it's unbelievably annoying and I wish I could get enough of the current owners together to make enough noise that they would consider altering that aspect of the building, if at all possible.
Posted by: 1RinconBuyer at October 5, 2006 3:21 PM
Your contract should state whether you have a deeded parking space or not. It will state the floor and parking #. If it is indeed a license and not deeded, it may affect the value of the unit since you don't own a 'space'.
Infinity has deeded parking space which is specified in the contract. You have an actual space #. If you decide to forego the space, Infinity will reduce the purchase price at least $75,000.
I'm starting to wonder whether OneRincon is really such a great deal if you don't own any parking... If could be a deal breaker for many folks.
Posted by: RinconFan at October 5, 2006 3:53 PM
I do not think Rincon buyers are paying over for the parking situation. Residents may not get a deeded space but they do get a license to park their car through valet. What's the difference? Perhaps some people don't like valet, others don't like parking their own cars. At the end of the day you still get a parking space if you live in the building. It's subjective. They will also offer valet parking for guests as market rates. This is very convenient.
Posted by: Sean at October 5, 2006 4:12 PM
It's not a question of whether it's a good deal or a bad deal, it's a question of whether you must have an assigned space or not. If you want your own dedictated #'ered space, then don't buy at 1Rincon, it's pretty simple (at this point, at least, it seems as though close to 350 owners don't mind not having an assigned self-park space) .
That's the great thing about this City, everyone is different and places different values on different priorities at different times. And I'll say it again, that's why condos have boards.
Posted by: 1RinconBuyer at October 5, 2006 4:14 PM
What is venteless dryer?
Posted by: Jason at October 5, 2006 4:22 PM
In a word, "annoying", but seriously, see below.
Posted by: 1RinconBuyer at October 5, 2006 4:38 PM
Let's hope the 350 or so buyer at really understand the situation. Judging from this blog, some don't. I know at The Brannan complex, an extra parking space is worth up to $100,000 now. At Infinity it's valued at $75,000+. I really hope all the buyers do understand the situation cuz I'm sure some expect they'll come with one parking space.
Having said that, let's hope Patrick Catalano's not reading this blog or he'll have an idea for a Rincon lawsuit! ;-)
Posted by: RinconFan at October 5, 2006 4:38 PM
Forced valet parking would get tiresome over time. But what's equally as bad is a garage designed for valet parking that is later converted to self parking. I've been in this situation before. You end up with a too-tight garage that is difficult to navigate and was not designed for the residents themselves to use.
Regarding the deeded vs. assigned parking space issue. (Again, I've experienced both.) As long as you are guaranteed a space, it really isn't a big deal. It could even work out better to have an assigned rather than deeded space--if you don't like the space you're assigned, you have the option of having management give you another one when it's available. However, if your unit has a deeded spot, you're stuck with it. In large condominium buildings in San Francisco, there will almost certainly be more demand for spaces than are available, so buyers would be wise to take a space when they purchase a unit (assigned or deeded); you'll always be able to rent it to someone in the building who's looking for a second space. Or the HOA may simply be set up to knock it off of your dues (they collect the revenue from renting it) and then reinstate it if/when you want your space back. But if you permanently release rights to a space at the time of purchase, your unit will always have a resale disadvantage, which would be particularly negative in a large building where there will likely always be comparable units for sale.
Posted by: Christopher at October 5, 2006 4:39 PM
They do understand the situation, because it's all laid out in detail when the purchase contract is signed. However, that said, the bigger question is, haven't you ever heard the phrase, "Different strokes for different folk."
My guess is that not every human being places the same premium on an assigned self-park space as you do. And yes, judgding by the price points between Infinity and 1Rincon, there clearly is a difference. I paid $800/sqft versus 1000+ at Infinity. The valet parking vs. self-parking issue was so far down my list of priorities, it's not even funny.
Posted by: 1RinconBuyer at October 5, 2006 4:47 PM
I cannot imagine ever trying to live with valet parking. Right now I have two very nice motorcycles and a restored early '60's Mercedes - no valet would be allowed to touch any of them.
Posted by: Redseca2 at October 5, 2006 4:59 PM
would one have to tip the valet parker each time??
will they screw up your car if you don't? will you be comfortable leaving anything of value in the car?
are they doing valet because there is only going to be 1 space per unit, but with valet, u can squeeze in more cars to block each other, and thus make more revenue? i dont like the idea of my car having to be moved several times a day even when i'm not using it, it's wear and tear on the engine, spark plugs, transmission, etc.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 5:03 PM
You got in very early 1RinconBuyer! I went to the sales center less than 2 weeks after the grand opening and prices were approaching or over $1000/sqft already! Seems most buyers there paid 900+ to over 1000/sqft so the difference between Rincon and Infinity is not that far off, especially with deeded parking at Infinity.
I don't know about you, but I'm really fussy about how and where I park my car. Even at the BART station or shopping malls, I always look for a particular space that has enough room that my doors don't get dinged by the car next to mine. I'm imagining most people that can afford Rincon or Infinity will have nice cars and are just as fussy as me. Let's hope their cars don't get all dinged up. And what about valuable? Is security a concern?
Posted by: RinconFan at October 5, 2006 5:27 PM
Yes, apparently I did. I plunked down my 3% on the second day of preview week. My good fortune with the pricing also had to do with the fact that this particular development had not yet obtained its final final construction financing (it probably had only some short-term financing in place) and therefore had to assure itself of a minimum number of reservations in order to secure that final financing. My guess is that I was in that first group of reservations, hence my low price point (for a corner unit on around the 20th floor, with a view of the GGB and Twin Peaks, which was great). I might have gone Infinity otherwise.
On the whole car deal, again, it's totally going to depend on the individual. Some people have classic cars that they treat like an actual human and wouldn't even let a relative touch, and other people simply regard their vehicles as a conveyance and nothing more. For me, it's the convenience versus inconvenience question that I'm not totally sure about yet.
But, as I 've said twice already, that's why condo associations have boards and also have amendment provisions to their condo association agreements. My fellow owners and I will have to see how we like this valet concept.
Posted by: 1RinconBuyer at October 5, 2006 5:57 PM
Kitchen hoods can be vented outside or inside. If they are inside, they simply pass the air through a grease filter and shoot it back into the room.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 6:08 PM
The HOA can't change the parking situation if there isn't enough space to delineate a spot for every unit, which is why they are doing it the valet way, I suspect. Look at 88 King and you will understand. By saving space in the garage, they get to build more units in the building, and be more profitable. A simple concept.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 6:25 PM
Has any buyer thought about how many valets would be needed to handle the parking situation during rush hours in the morning and afternoon? With hundreds of units there, people will either have to wait a long time to pick up or drop their cars in the morning and afternoon, or the HOA will have to hire more valets to speed up the process. All that will translate to extreme inconvenience or much higher HOA fees, or a combination of the two. Thanks, but, no thanks.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 6:37 PM
A ventless dryer is totally different from a washer/dryer combo! It's a stand alone (or stacked) dryer that uses a condenser and the same drain as the washer. I have a Miele condenser dryer in my house in Palo Alto. I chose it because the wall behind the dryer is next to my deck and I didn't want hot air blowing out on me if I wnated to eat or read on the deck while the dryer was running. All I can say is that it works beautifully. It may take a smidgen longer to dry stuff than a vented dryer, but compared to my dryer in San Francisco (which is vented) I sure don't notice any difference. If the appliances at One Rincon are high end, the ventless dryer will be a non issue. Frankly I don't know why they are not standard for all high rise condos. The lint that eventually builds up in the vents can be a real fire hazard.
The valet parking issue, on the other hand, is a real problem. What has happened in other developments (except for the 4 Seasons and the St Reg with their sky high HOA dues) is that the residents have tired of the valet system - too expensive, too time consuming - and have opted for the search system. You park in a different spot every time - wherever you can find a space - and you hope that at least someone is out of town (with their car!) because there are fewer parking spaces than there are units. Crazy. And the craziest thing is that the City of San Francisco pretty much requires this in a misguided effort to discourage auto use in the city.
Posted by: Susapix at October 5, 2006 7:32 PM
I live in a building with half the number of units. We have a parking garage. I have lived in the building for 8 years and there really is not much traffic going in and out of the garage not to mention I live in the east bay and most people leave the building in their cars. In SF more residents will be walking.
Personally I like the idea of valet. A sales agent at 1 Rincon told me they might even have an online request system so you can request your car to be ready ahead of time. That would be pretty convenient.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 7:40 PM
I can't imagine anybody would opt out of valet parking for the "search sytem" and have there be a chance they would have to park on the street.
Can you imagine having to park four blocks away with groceries?
Then you would wish you had valet parking.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 7:47 PM
The city is dedicated to reducing the number of cars so you are going to see, moving forward, more and more developments built without 1-1 parking (meaning 1 parking space per unit). Also expect to see more and more car lifts going into new developments. As far as an additional parking space going for a $100k there was only one sale at that price and a lot of people heard about it as it was quite a record. However across the street at 200 Brannan they had quite a few extra parking spaces which they sold for $40k a pop - now those same people who dont want/need them anymore cant get the same price they paid for them....yet. Trick is no one who doesn't live in the building is allowed to own them or I'd imagine someone at the Brannan Towers or Watermark would kill to purchase it for a mere $40k.
88 Townsend is the only place they worked into the condominium map and documents that someone can purchase a parking space who doesn't also own in the building making those spaces moving forward quite unique. Especially given the rental prices for a second parking space at the Beacon and the lack of parking at 310 Townsend.
Posted by: parking moving forward at October 5, 2006 8:57 PM
I concur with Susapix - Meile & Bosch ventless dryers are amazing and very good for your clothes, albiet expensive ($1200 last I checked for a Bosch). Washer/Dryer combos are the bane of all laundering existance and should be avoided at all costs, (just ask the owners of 2002 3rd Street).
Palms too is on a ventless system fyi.
Posted by: ventless dryers at October 5, 2006 9:04 PM
This blog is great, informative reading. I can't help but think most of the 350 or so buyers don't really know or understand the parking situation at 1Rincon.
I am close to buyer there since there are still some great units available. But the parking situation is a deal killer for me.
Just too many questions here:
Is there even enough spaces for self parking to be an option? Will HOA rise if they do this? Can valet parking be optional? How long will it take to find my car during busy hours? What about security? What if my car gets damaged? How many times will they moved my car down there? Can I get to my car in the middle of the night?
Will all this affect the value of my condo?
Just too many questions. It'll be interested to see how this all plays out over time...
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 11:58 PM
I have done a lot of research on 1 Rincon. I think I can answer some of your questions.
Is there even enough spaces for self parking to be an option? No.
Can valet parking be optional? No.
How long will it take to find my car during busy hours? A sales agent told me you will be able to order your car online ahead of time or phone down.
What about security? What if my car gets damaged? Valet company will have insurance covering damage by valet service.
Can I get to my car in the middle of the night? 24 hours.
Will all this affect the value of my condo?
It did not affect the sale price of the first 300 units.
Just curious: what kind of units do they still have available and what price range?
Posted by: Anonymous at October 6, 2006 12:05 AM
I have a ventless dryer and all I can say is I can't wait to have a regular vented dryer again. Ventless dryers take longer to dry your clothes and if not in an area with good room ventilation, will heat up the space...even if there's a closet door closed over the dryer.
When I looked at the Palms, there were several reasons why we didn't buy, and the ventless dryers, though not at the top of our "why we wouldn't buy here list", was on it nonetheless.
Posted by: deshard at October 6, 2006 7:29 AM
Thanks for the answers. The fact they don't have enough spaces for self parking to be an option is bad. That mean valet parking is permanent!
Regarding security and damage, it will always be the owners word against the valet parkers. If an owner complains about a small scratch on his new Lexus or a missing item in the car, the 20 year old part-time valet will care less and try dispute all claims. I see this happening all the time.
And again, I'm one to think that all these 300+ buyers don't really understand that valet parking is a permanent thing and there is no deeded parking and will never have self parking. That's an issue that will raise it's ugly head when even a few owners starting complaining...
A couple weeks ago I went there and I think they have around 40 units available total. A mixture of 1 and 2 beds, from floors in the teens to 40's. Prices from $950+ to $1100+ per Sqft depending on floor and views. Think they've had a number of cancellations...
Posted by: Anonymous at October 6, 2006 11:38 AM
I don't think the residents will have a problem with damage to their cars. I am sure a lot of the tenants will have nice cars. If the valet does not take care of them I am sure there will be complaints to the board.
In regard to buyers knowing, the parking situation is made very clear when purchasing. It is very clear in the contract and project handbook. I personally don't mind the valet parking and never thought it was a possibility to go to self parking.
People just have to accept it. If they don't like it buy somewhere else.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 6, 2006 1:11 PM
deshard - what brand ventless do you own? I respect the comment I've just never heard any complaints from the good name European brands. I don't own one myself but I did have one in a high-end rental and the tenant was very happy with it.
Posted by: ventless at October 6, 2006 1:15 PM
What is the big deal with the parking? If someone does not like it they should not buy it. Plain and simple. If you buy it and don't like what it has to offer you can only blame yourself. I surely hope we don't get a bunch of people moving in trying to change all the rules.
People have to take responsibility for their decisions. Something Americans seem to have trouble doing.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 6, 2006 1:15 PM
I think the point most people are making is that the parking situation might negatively affect the way people view the building.
Bottom line for any real estate purchase is value. If this parking situation is a real negative(and judging from the post, it may be), then the value and appreciate of the property over the long term is in question...
If I was a Rincon buyer, I wouldn't hold any animosity over these comments. They are constructive and informative.
Heck, I knew very little about condo parking before this post, and now I feel I'm an expert! :-)
Keep up the great work SocketSite!!
Posted by: SF Living at October 6, 2006 1:25 PM
I don't think the valet parking will be much of an issue for the property values.
It did not have much of an effect on the sales prices so far. I can't think of why it would have an effect during resales.
This is not the first building to have valet parking.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 6, 2006 2:05 PM
Not really knowing anything about the building, I wonder if the valet parking concept is a result of not being able to build enough parking. The city of SF, in their infinite wisdom, doesn't want developers to build 1 parking per unit. Perhaps Rincon Hill could only build a limited number of spaces and wanted everyone to have one. If so, it's a pretty clever way of getting around it. The other alternative would be to sell some units without parking.
I personally would never buy a place in SF without deeded parking.
Posted by: Mike at October 6, 2006 2:06 PM
As I mentioned in a previous post, both the 4 Seasons and the St Reg have valet parking. And, though I don't know for sure, I'll bet the Ritz will have valet parking also. It certainly hasn't scared away any buyers in these projects, which are some of the most expensive buildings in SF, both in terms of per SF price and HOA monthlies.
It is the case, however, that the 4 Seasons has a limited number of self parking spaces and that these are extremely expensive (approaching the 100K mentioned earlier). That tells you something.
I think that many of the buyers at the 4 Seasons and the St Reg would have preferred deeded parking, but it wasn't available and the amenities and cachet of the project outweighed that particular defect. Plus they may have had some confidence in the hotel management re the training of the valets. The same will probably be true of One Rincon, or not - depending on the quality of the built project and how it is managed. Every project has some flaws and things that you wish were different. So you make up your mind based on the whole package.
In any case, if the City of SF has its way - and why wouldn't it? - deeded parking will go the way of the dodo. From now on, if you want to buy into new condo construction, you'll just have to live without it.
Posted by: susapix at October 6, 2006 3:48 PM
That may be true, but the Infinity has managed to build their buildings and still able to provide one deeded parking space per unit.
I guess it depends on the developer and how much they value deeded parking. 1Rincon certainly has done a good job of cramming as many units as possible into that tiny lot, sacrificing parking spaces along the way...
Posted by: SF Living at October 6, 2006 4:25 PM
To me, it does not make a difference if the parking space is deeded or not. As long as I am guaranteed a space and I am able to transfer the rights to park there to someone else in the building it's really not that much different. You just don't get to park the car yourself.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 7, 2006 12:01 AM
Valet parking is MUCH more space efficient than deeded parking. It is therefore in the interest of BOTH the developers (for cost reasons) and the city (for urban design reasons) to encourage valet parking as a solution. Lifts (which allow storage of 2 or 3 cars in the space formerly reserved for one) are also being encouraged, but are not yet popular here, though they are used extensively in Europe and Asia.
I think this discussion has shown how tightly some people cling to the "my parking space" concept. But the fast sales at one rincon also show that there are many who don't see a problem with valet. I suppose time will tell how the market values it, but I for one do not give a damn. My car is already all dented up (I think that's a badge of honor in the city) and I'm not particularly afraid of having a valet take it over at the front door.
Seriously, parking cars is a HUGE urban design issue...even parking one car per unit takes what, about 100-150 square feet before you even begin to consider circulation space? Does it strike anyone as funny that we are so concerned about how to store our cars when we're talking about actually living in 600 square foot apartments? I, for one, would rather maximize the space I actually get to enjoy, and let a valet cram my car (if I have one) into as small a space as he/she can find. And, as a consumer, I would rather not have to PAY for all that space devoted to my precious automobile. Which is perhaps part of the reason that One Rincon has been perceived as a better deal than some of the competition.
But that's just me. As many in this chain have said..there are many options out there, and we are all free to decide what makes sense for us.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 8, 2006 7:28 PM
Have not checked the site for a while, but saw this topic about the parking today. Hate to burst the bubble of any buyers at 1R, but the HOA will not be able to 'see' how they like the valet parking system. There isn't enough space for 1 deeded space per person. This is why you will have a parking license, why there is valets and why they are talking about getting car lifts eventually put in to help with the situation.
The thing I keep wondering is wether the developers really thought this whole valet thing through. When it actually comes into reality, what is going to happen in the morning rush when 75 people or so all want their cars around the same time. What happens when Mrs. Rockerfeller comes down from the 60th floor and makes a stink demanding her car before the other 50 people in front of her? What happens when you are totally running late for work or have to get to the airport in 30 minutes? Evening rush will be interesting too. Not just coming home, but what if someone wants to leave around 6 p.m. on a weekday night and try to get on to the bridge. The garage exit is on Harrison and most people who have been sitting in traffic are not going to want to let the car exiting 1R make the left turn there. You could end up with a back up in the garage. Maybe all residents will have to make right turns only out of the building. Hope they have a good system planned.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 14, 2006 2:09 PM
I was browsing the web and came across this thread by accident. I own two homes in SF (a rental in Lakeside and a home in Westwood). It's been 25+ years since I've looked at real estate properties and I am curious and incredilous about some of the comments here (> $75K for parking spaces or valet parking). For about the same price you can own undepreciable and real land in SF forever without having to depend on a community (and all their communistic behaviour or policies) or pay monthly fees (isn't this like extra tax?) or both.
I didn't understand it then and I still don't understand it now, ie. why would anyone not want to buy a lot and a house and buy a condo instead? I am puzzled. Convenience (why not use a taxi or just make it a life /career strategy to not work in a place without parking? Surely if you can afford these prices you're smart enough to manage your life and career also). Please educate me. What am I missing or overlooking? Where is my blind spot? Thanks.
Posted by: Uneducated at April 4, 2007 10:53 AM
Hmm, can you tell me where you can buy land (a lot) in the city for $75K? Or even for $300K?
Lots have changed in the last 25 years, and for those of you that bought 25 years ago, congratulations on the incredible multi million dollar boon that fell your way in terms of appreciation.
I would love to buy a little plot and build my own modern house (and not buy some 100+ yr old Victorian that creeks).
Actually, if you can send me private message on where I can get that price for land here in SF... I wouldn't want all the other bloggers to beat me to it and bid up the price to the market rate...
Posted by: For uneducated at July 9, 2007 5:26 PM