October 2, 2006
True Luxury Condos At 45 Lansing?
As first reported by J.K. Dineen at the San Francisco Business Times, 45 Lansing, a parcel entitled for 305 condominiums and across the street from 50 Lansing (cater-cornered from One Rincon Hill), was purchased by Turnberry Associates with sights set on developing a 40-story tower.
Turnberry President Bruce Weiner said the project . . . would be the most upscale development the new neighborhood has seen, with “exotic” marble baths, Italian Snaidero cabinetry, Gaggenau cooking appliances, Jacuzzi hydrotherapy tubs with built-in TVs, individual security systems, and 12-foot penthouse ceilings. He said prices have not been set, but compared it to the Turnberry Ocean Colony project in South Florida, which is priced between $1.8 and $4 million per unit.
And yes, the 305 condominiums have been added to the extended pipeline in our Complete Inventory Index (Cii).
∙ Miami cash to produce skyline flash [bizjournals]
∙ The Lansing (50 Lansing): Reductions And Recent Sales [SocketSite]
∙ One Rincon Hill (425 First) [SocketSite]
∙ SocketSite’s Complete Inventory Index (Cii) [SocketSite]
First Published: October 2, 2006 12:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Interesting. Sounds like the South Beach/Rincon Hill counterpart to the Four Seasons, St. Reg, and the Ritz.
Just imagine what the traffic will be like when both 1 Rincon towers and 45 Lansing are done. At least the Met will be deserted though...
Posted by: Anonymous at October 2, 2006 10:12 AM
This will further impact OneRincon's views. Hope the buyers there are aware of this...
And good point about the traffic. With the Met, OneRincon, and now 45 Lansing, along with traffic leading to the bridge onramp, that area might become a day long gridlock nightmare (and it already is during afternoon commutes)!
Posted by: RinconFan at October 2, 2006 11:54 AM
Traffic is the real problem with parts of Rincon Hill, in my opinion. I'm not SO concerned that the properties themselves are going to throw many more cars on the street at rush hour....logic suggests that residents will be traveling in counter commute directions...and hopefully many of them will be walking to the financial district, and not adding to traffic. However, I simply wouldn't want to live on a freeway on-ramp...and that's what several of the streets essentially are. It's going to be difficult to make these streets as pedestrian friendly as they really need to be to become a great neighborhood.
In contrast, South Beach/Mission Bay have pretty decent traffic patterns, even with King Street acting as the 280 freeway extension.
Posted by: curmudgeon at October 2, 2006 12:47 PM
I don't really see it as living on a freeway on-ramp. If you're 20 or more floors up you've got great views and nice units.
I hope the traffic flow can be improved (is it even possible?) because I can see it being frustrating if you have to plan your driving around the rush hours.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 2, 2006 2:13 PM
Lots of talk about traffic. I would assume most of the people living in SOMA, like myself, actually work in the city and can walk to work. Or they work in BART-friendly areas. Although the noise from cars, horns, exhausts, etc. would be miserable on the lower floors.
Posted by: Dude at October 2, 2006 2:52 PM
If you walk the site of the 1Rincon development, which I have done numerous times, the impact of the 45 Lansing tower on the views from the northeast corner of tower I will be minimal. The 1Rincon tower is set back and up from the site where the 45 Lansing tower will actually be located and will not be located directly on the corner where the Unocal station is now located. My understanding is that that spot will developed as accompanying mid-rise townhouses . The actual tower will be built adjacent to the station, where an old brick building currently stands so it really doesn't obstruct the views in any meaningful way.
As for the traffic issue, yes, that one is more problematic to dismiss.
Posted by: 1RinconBuyer at October 2, 2006 2:58 PM
Smoke, smog, noise, honking, pissed off commuters, endless lines of cars and trucks, etc... Not my idea of luxury living. Pay a million and get this?? At least there's the views, but that's really it. I think if anyone pays a million for a 2 bed condo, some of the amenities should include peace, quiet, and clean air, not just views.
Sure, when you're 40 stories up, it's luxury living. But I heard the outdoor pool, bbq area, terraces will be near ground level so it will be loud, dusty and polluted most of the day...
I don't see how they can improve that area. That first street onramp is here to stay...
Posted by: Anonymous at October 2, 2006 4:00 PM
Let's face it: these days a million dollars won't buy you much of anything in SF.
Posted by: SaveYourMoney at October 2, 2006 5:23 PM
How important is a view guys? I have friends with view, and they say they get inured to the view in a matter of WEEKS! Instead, what they want is MORE SPACE in the condo/house rather than the view.
And then, you have people without a view, saying they wish they had a view.
Personally, i'd rather have lots of interior space than tight quarters with a view.
Hence, I'm not a fan of $1.2 million 1,100sqft condos with view in SOMA.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 2, 2006 6:26 PM
If you want peace, quiet, and clean air, you probaby won't find that anywhere in the Bay Area. As long as you're higher up in these new developments, at least the 15th floor, the higher the better, then it's great.
Good point about the pool and BBQ areas, as the Bridgeview's common areas are so noisy that it's almost unbearable. Nothing could be worse than their pool and sun deck.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 2, 2006 6:34 PM
As for commute congestion, its hard to beleive that some type (any type) of impact study wasn't done for the area in question to determine if the new property developments would have substantial impact to the surrounding streets/on-off ramps/bridge traffic during peak commute times.
On the surface, somebody must have realized that these new towers with so many total units (when combined) would have to have negative impact on the streets below - whether in current configurations or the new configurations once completed.
Does this mean that those studies predict a huge percentage of occupants in those towers will not commute, or use alternative transportation? If its alternative transportation, does anybody know that those plans are? Seems to me that there's a heck of a lot of people in a very small area with a need to quickly get in and out of that area. I find it hard to beleive that this won't quickly become a mess once all those towers are on line...
Posted by: Anonymous at October 2, 2006 8:19 PM
It's all very well saying live on a high floor, but to me one of the advantages of living "downtown" is the ability to be able to walk to places in the neighborhood. I just don't see the attraction of walking around freeway on-ramps.
Posted by: Amen Corner at October 2, 2006 8:32 PM
I think it's important to remember the segment of the population we're talking about here. More likely than not, the people buying in this area will be on the younger side or people who just need a place to lay thier heads whenever they happen to be in town or people who simply like living in a hectic, bustling environment. It's hard for me to see families with children living here. Thus, the need for peace and quiet, while still desireable, is lower on the list of must-haves.
Whenever I drive by the area, I note the on-ramps, the off-ramps, and the ridiculous amount of traffic in general. But then I look up and the construction of the Infinity and One Rincon and think, "man, those are gonna be sweet." And isn't that what these developments are all about? Living in the middle of one of the most beautiful cities in the word, within walking distance to shopping, dining, and entertainment, and yet having a little cubby-hole to kick back in? That, to me, is the draw. If you want peace and quiet, I'm sure Orinda or Hercules or Walnut Creek will accomodate you.
Posted by: 49Giants at October 2, 2006 9:35 PM
Does anyone know if the gas station just next to the
site will be removed, once all the construction on the towers is finished and people actually start living.
Posted by: sf94102 at October 2, 2006 11:05 PM
Sorry 49Giants, I don't buy it. We're talking about million dollar luxury condos here. Of the worst place I can think of to put a high-end highrise, building right next to one of the busiest onramps in the city gotta be the worst.
We all know SF is one of the great cities of the world. And within SF there are some great locations to live. Places that are central, yet quiet. Even within SOMA/Rincon/South Beach district, there are some pretty nice areas. The Brannan is pretty quiet, Infinity is a block from the Embarcadero and the bay. But OneRincon has gotta be the worst location. It's got a great view, but as you can see from other postings, views are not enough when you're paying $900-1000 SqFt. For that amount of money, the environment outside your unit counts just as much.
And I can't help but wonder how people will feel when they go down to street level and see nothing but constant traffic and noise, not to mention the dangers of crossing a very busy intersection.
One Rincon will be great to look at, but doesn't mean it will be a wonderful place to live...
Posted by: Anonymous at October 3, 2006 12:16 AM
I guess my idea of an awful location is different from most others. It is very true that One Rincon, along with most of the area, is basically surrounded by a sea of traffic. And not only surface street traffic, but freeway traffic at that. And I keep thinking about these things, but I always come back to the basic question of "so what?" When I decided upon One Rincon, I didn't even consider the traffic; it was a given.
And I don't mean to be dismissive, but really, it is a part of living in a very urban environment. If it's not for you, you really should be looking elsewhere. It's kind of like the people living right across the street from The Phone who complain about the noise and debris when the Giants are in town. Are you serious? What, may I ask, were you expecting? We can't really be this pansy, can we?
I'm sure it'll be loud and noisy, but hey, that's ok. No really, it is. Because those who don't mind it will live there. For those that do, SF has plenty of other neighborhoods that are much quieter, much more serene. That is one of the reasons why SF is so great, isn't it? Each of our neighborhoods takes the good, the bad, and the ugly, and somehow it turns out beautifully.
Posted by: 49Giants at October 3, 2006 3:01 AM
This doesn't seem to be the usual SOMA/South Beach project. Seems more high-end like the 4 Seasons, St. Reg, and the Ritz. 12-foot high ceilings? Wow.
Many of the units at the Four Seasons (for example) are above 2,000 sq ft, which is greater than or equal to the average Sunset/Richmond home. Not to mention the amenities available to you. With this much space, views, and amenities, I wouldn't mind having the lobby of my building near (not on) a freeway onramp.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 3, 2006 8:42 AM
Granted you have to take the good with the bad, i.e. noise and congestion to live in a city. But I think it's more of a question of value. I seriously doubt people on the younger side, as 49Giants puts it, will be buying here given the price tag. Count families out as well. Who does that leave? Wealthy business people, probably, or corporations that want apartments for executives. But if I had that kind of money and wanted high luxury, I'd rather go to Nob Hill or Russian Hill than buy here. But that's just me.
Posted by: Dude at October 3, 2006 9:22 AM
Dude brings up an interesting point. I, for one, would love to see the demographics expected for these towers - and why they would be expected to buy in this area, instead of other more well developed and established locations in the city. I'm sure the developers ran all this data before puttng a penny into any commitment.
For example, I've been told that the top floors of the Watermark are essentially second home owners (read: established financially; transient, not permenant to the community) - not exactly the types of folks who add to the mix of a developing community on a day to day basis...
Posted by: Anonymous at October 3, 2006 10:04 AM
We'll see how people feel after the units are open. I expect people are underestimating the noise, grime, and general hassle of living on an offramp.
Posted by: Mike at October 3, 2006 10:05 AM
Talking of the Watermark, it looks awfully "dark" at night. Second homes or simply that a lot of units haven't been occupied yet?
Posted by: Amen Corner at October 3, 2006 10:21 AM
49Giants has a point that there's different neighborhoods in San Francisco each with it's pros and cons and that's what makes the city so great.
But I would have to agree with the previous post that paying $1000/sqft to live on an onramp is a stretch. Paying a million dollars for a small condo should not only include the luxury unit, but also a million dollar location. And I just don't see that with OneRincon.
It'll be interesting to see what happens 3-4 years from now when a few of these towers are finished. Will the towers next to the onramp flourish and appreciate? Or will they follow what's happening at the Met? It's half a block from the onramp and many are selling their units. One must wonder how many are fed up with the location and noise...
Posted by: John at October 3, 2006 10:46 AM
The Watermark looks like a 'ghost' building. I only see a few lights on at night. Even if half is sold to second home buyers, there should be more lights than that! Something's not right with that building...
Posted by: RinconFan at October 3, 2006 10:54 AM
$1000/sqft for 1Rincon would not be worth the investment given all of the con factors that have been discussed ad nauseum on this blog site over the past 5 months. Not to mention all of the surrounding construction that will be taking place generally over the next 3-5 years.
However, I am 5-7 year outlook buyer and was fortunate enough to buy at $800/sqft because I got in extremely early. However, I get the feeling that I am in a small minority of 1Rincon buyers.
Posted by: Get In Early or Don't Get In at October 3, 2006 11:04 AM
There sure are a lot of OneRincon bashers out there! I agree location-wise it's pretty bad. What was the city thinking approving a huge high rise project a few feet from a major freeway onramp??
Posted by: SF Living at October 3, 2006 6:05 PM
the whole area is just a money making machine for the city. most people who buy there are single professionals or wealthy people who use it as a vacation home in the city. these ppl will pay tons of property tax to the city while not requiring social services or even schools since they are not families.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 3, 2006 8:47 PM
Further to SF Living's point, is it just me, or does it seem like many of the bloggers here often cross the line that separates friendly dialogue and plain ol' fashioned bashing when it comes to any development within the Rincon Hill neigborhood? There seems to be a distinct difference in tone whenever the topic of the Infinity or 1Rincon comes up. I can't tell whether it's legitimate criticism or jealousy because the tone just seems so nasty.
Why all the hostility? I think it's been made clear at this point that this area is right for some, and wrong for others. I for one would never live in any part of the city west of the Divisadero, but hey, that's me, and I realize that. I've seen many "removed by Editor" banners posted in some of the earlier blogs and to tell you the truth, that's a little embarrassing.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 4, 2006 9:35 AM
Anonymous: It is certainly interesting, isn't it? Whenever something is posted regarding the Rincon area, there are comments galore, and yah, they have a bit more bite to them. Curious.
Posted by: 49Giants at October 4, 2006 9:46 AM
I don't think it's so much the Rincon area as it is the actual location of the building.
Simply put, I don't think there's ever (in the history of Bay Area construction) been a building built in a location as controversial as OneRincon. It could have been any major onramp in SF. Stick a 50 story highrise 10 feet from a freeway and the criticism will be severe.
Having said that, I notice comments/criticism of the Infinity has been near non-existent the last few weeks. Sure, the appliances may be slightly lower end, but the location and design certainly doesn't have many detractors...
Posted by: SF Living at October 4, 2006 10:40 AM
Having thoroughly evaluated both 1Rincon and the Infinity before deciding which condo to purchase, I can tell you that the Infinity (except for its superior location and its indoor pool) is flat out an inferior product to 1Rincon.
Everything from the floorplans, to the design details, to the finishings are emperically inferior at the Infinity. So I had to ask myself, do I prefer pure location, over the actual quality of the unitI was purchasing. For me, the answer was easy. When you're 20+ floors above the ground living in a modern building with double-paned windows and state of the art soundproofing technology (and that's not even taking into account the additional height of the hill crest itself), you aren't really thinking too much about what's going on down below. But again, that's a completely personal choice.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 4, 2006 11:38 AM
Sure, see how you feel when you're trying to get home on a Friday evening and realize there's an accident on the lower deck of the Bay Bridge and it'll take you an hour to wiggle thru the mile long traffic jam in front of your dear home...
Views are cool, but location, location, location always wins out! Not saying Infinity is anything special, but 1Rincon's location is absolutely HORRIBLE!
Posted by: John at October 4, 2006 2:51 PM
John, take it easy, pal. Don't blow a gasket. We're just discussing here.
First of all, the only "wiggling" that I will be doing is with my feet. I guess you've missed the point of living in the area in the first place. Cars really don't come into the equation. For examply, I work in the financial district, exactly 5 blocks from where the tower is going up, so I'm not exactly sweating your hypothetical. But I do appreciate the concern. And for those persons out there that are similarly situation, I doubt they are either. 1Rincon is definitely not a condo development for the family with 1.6 children, a labrador and a mini-van, but then again, it's not being market that way, so try to keep some perspective.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 4, 2006 3:19 PM
No problem Anonymous. Nothing wrong with defending your million dollar investment.
It just seems 95% of people that has any opinion on 1Rincon are very critical of the location and I happen to be one of them. I just don't understand how to city could approve of that without doing any kind of impact study on the traffic, noise, pollution etc...
I guess as stated in an earlier post - "the whole area is just a money making machine for the city". I just hope the home owners are not the ones to suffer when everything is said and done...
Posted by: John at October 4, 2006 4:36 PM
One Rincon and the Infinity are off the same exit. If you can't get to One Rincon, you can't get to the Infinity. But then again, that's only a problem if you go to San Mateo to party on those Friday nights. Do you know anyone that does that? Me either.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 4, 2006 4:51 PM
John, just curious, if you've chosen not to purchase a condo at 1Rincon (which is clearly the case), why is there so much hostility towards this development? If I didn't know better, I'd think that the developer literally had ran over your dog when you were a child and you've hated him ever since. Just what exactly is the impact of 1Rincon's success or failure as a condo development on your life? Are you planning to start developing a new development down the road and are worried about competition, because that's the only conceivable reason I can come up with for the tone of your comments (aside from the dog hypothetical).
Note to the Editor: You might want to think about starting up a sister site called the "Days and Night's of Rincon Hill" because it seems as though that topic alone has been a hot bed for firey comments and very heated exchanges among the bloggers here. I'm still trying to figure out why. You never know, you might have another award nomination on your hands. Or you might just think about posting a new topic on Socket Site as a retrospective and pull out some of the juiciest exchanges that have taken place on the topic of Rincon Hill its many new developments. Just a suggestion.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 4, 2006 5:00 PM
No hostility toward the developer(don't even know who is the developer) or building.
Just completely dumbfounded on the location. The building itself, will be spectacular to look at.
Also, it's interesting to rile up buyers or fans of the development. It's truly a hot button topic and i'm sure everyone here enjoys the comments/opinions...
Posted by: John at October 4, 2006 5:30 PM
I love it!
Posted by: 49Giants at October 4, 2006 7:33 PM
I'd rather live in one of these new high rises next to a freeway onramp than the high rises on California St in Nob Hill. (1200 Cal, 1201 Cal, 1177 Cal, etc.)
honk honk ding ding cable car ding ding 40-year old buildings full of senior citizens ding ding ding...
Posted by: Anonymous at October 4, 2006 11:34 PM
Is that a serious comment Anonymous? In the mist of defending your freeway onramp development, slamming a stately neighborhood like Nob Hill is a little over the top...
Posted by: Huh? at October 5, 2006 11:05 AM
Let's not get carried away guys. First of all, you're comparing apples to oranges. Nob Hill is Nob Hill and Rincon Hill is Rincon Hill. They are two entirely different neighborhoods with two entirely different feels and are two entirely different stages of their respective lives. I have purchased a condo at 1Rincon and I can still say absolutely that if I could have purchased an equivalent older upscale in Nob Hill, I would have done it in two seconds. But then I'd also be paying $2MM, which was not realistic. Let's at least try to keep the comparisons within the same universe. Rincon Hill and in fact, the entire Transbay project area is somewhat of an anomaly within the city because it's a former industrial area that is still in the early stages of its transformation into an urban/downtown residential neighborhood. It's appeal or non-appeal really cannot be discussed with any intelligence until about 10-15 years from now.
Posted by: 1RinconBuyer at October 5, 2006 11:55 AM
I agree with the person above. Nob Hill will always be Nob Hill. I've been in several of the buildings you list, and yes, some are 40 years old and in need of some new life - both in terms of acoutrements and residents. But the view from the top of California & Jones (both bridges and, on a clear day, the Pacific itself) is among the best in the city. And I'd rather walk to work past Grace Cathedral than a freeway ramp. Cable cars dinging vs. SUV horns? C'mon...
I live in SOMA right now, but it ain't Nob Hill regardless of the stainless steel floors, hardwood counters, granite appliances, and plasmas in bathrooms.
Posted by: Dude at October 5, 2006 12:02 PM
Hah! Stainless steel floors and hardwood counters. Dude, you're messed up.
But I also agree about Nob Hill and Russian Hill. They're great areas. So the units are old? Renovate! You'll have a better view than in SoMa, you'll be in an actual neighborhood, and you'll have a completely different product than all the other places on the market.
Posted by: Damion at October 5, 2006 12:37 PM
I don't know why everybody is comparing Rincon Hill to Nob Hill or Russian Hill. To get a place with a view in a new luxury building on Russian or Nob hill is way more expensive than Rincon. They are not comparable.
Also...1Rincon is not the first development near the freeway. What about the other buildings on Harrison such as the Bridgeview? What about the clock tower lofts? Their windows look onto the lower deck of the bay bridge. Those are million+ units too.
Maybe people are just bitter they can't afford to buy in these new buildings. Perhaps some people in SF just don't like to see change.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 4:34 PM
In response to the post:
"Or will they follow what's happening at the Met? It's half a block from the onramp and many are selling their units. One must wonder how many are fed up with the location and noise..."
I actually heard that a lot of the people selling their units at the met are buying units in the new towers. The Met used to be the highrise in town. Now its the Infinity or 1 Rincon. If this is true, then it makes a stong case that residents on Rincon Hill like it.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 5, 2006 4:46 PM
Maybe people are just bitter they can't afford to buy in these new buildings.
I can afford, but I won't.
It's not a question of affordability, but a question of value. Sure I can afford a $1M 1BR, but that would be unwise when there are better areas for the same money that give you walkable streets and a much better sense of community. This area is "in progress" and should be priced as such. We'll see what the market says.
Posted by: San FronziScheme at November 6, 2008 9:49 AM