One Rincon Hill
So it’s not exactly a rumor (in fact it’s already been printed), but construction on the second tower of One Rincon Hill is expected to kickoff by the end of the year (if not soon thereafter). At the same time, the unconfirmed word on the street (rumor) is that the first wave of closings and occupancy in tower one could happen by the end of the year (2007) as well.
And under the heading of “it kind of sounds like a rumor but it’s really not,” a time capsule will be placed atop the first tower on Friday to commemorate topping off. [Insert snarky comment here about how, and when, they’re going to retrieve said capsule.]

42 thoughts on “One Rincon Hill “Rumors”: Construction, Closings and Time Capsule”
  1. Although I might still end up on my way to Oakland on occasion when I’m trying to get into my driveway, being on the opposite corner of that lot make the second tower much better. Especially if there is a separate entrance.

  2. are these renderings of 1rincon accurate. it seems that in reality, the white stripes are much thicker, and the building less curvy, when viewed from the freeway.

  3. Agreed condoShopper: I’ve seen this building from many angles all throughout the city and it looks much more boxy than curvy, and those stripes are really prominent. This is off topic and has been covered voluminously on this site, but this building did not turn out at all like the original renderings.

  4. I’m excited to see how in the world they can manage to sell their second tower against the Mil. AND Infinity’s second tower. I dunno, maybe they’ll build a $10mil sales center this time.

  5. I was at a restaurant last week at Tennessee St. and 22nd St. While walking back to 3rd Street to hop on the T-Third line to head back home, I looked up Tennessee St. (north?) to see One Rincon Hill looking very imposing … very striking … very in your face. I like the looks more or less… just hope to see the area around it filled in more. 🙂

  6. If they sold out the first (though no contracts yet) they’ll sell out the second. Remember, there were good deals to be had at One Rincon if you jumped in early, especially compared to prices at Infinity. Though with the increased construction costs, it seems likely that buyers in the second tower will pay a premium over those who bought in the first. Do we see quick flips at One Rincon to compete with the developer when Two Rincon starts converting to contracts?

  7. I don’t see Millenium competing with One Rincon buyers for business. Millenium is marketing itself as ultra-premium with units around $1,500 psf. Despite the higher costs at One Rincon II, the buyers won’t be in the same market. One Rincon will appeal to the well off, while Millenium will appeal to the uber-wealthy. Now, Infinity could compete with One Rincon II, but my guess is over the long run, given our tight housing market, both developments will do just fine.

  8. I dunno…
    the people that I know moving into 1 Rincon are paying a HUGE amount. (almost $1150/sq ft).
    I don’t see how that is much different than Millenium, especially if the second tower at 1 Rincon is more expensive than the first.
    Also, as more and more of these units come on line, who will buy them? How many people can seriously afford to live in $1200-1500/sq ft condos?
    looking at the plans for the area, one must think about a possible glut of condos?
    I’ll be interested in seeing:
    -how many of the people will actually close
    -how many of these units will be put right back on the market after completion (i.e. flips)
    the developers may find themselves competing against one another and also with resales in their own building.
    I’m all for building more condos in SF. I’m not sure that the correct TYPE of condos are being built (they are all “luxury” condos). That said, the market will figure it out. The condos will get built and sold, or they will get built and sit there for a long time until prices fall enough to get them sold! voila, affordable housing.

  9. I’ll be very interested in seeing how much the price goes up between the first and second tower at both 1R and Infinity. I know Infinity will go on sale this summer, so we’ll find out with that one first. But, I’m wondering how that will effect the resale price in towner one. For example, if I bought for $1k/ft in Tower one and the comperable unit in tower 2 is going for $1.2k, did I just make $200/ft?

  10. That is one nice looking building! Too bad 1Rincon doesn’t look like that. I don’t know what it is, but it is not nearly as good looking.

  11. “the people that I know moving into 1 Rincon are paying a HUGE amount. (almost $1150/sq ft).
    I don’t see how that is much different than Millenium, especially if the second tower at 1 Rincon is more expensive than the first.
    Also, as more and more of these units come on line, who will buy them? How many people can seriously afford to live in $1200-1500/sq ft condos?”
    The difference between paying 1100-1200/sqft at 1 rincon & 1500-1600/sqft at millenium is huge. For example…the difference in a 1000 sqft condo would be $400k about 1/3 more.
    As far as who will buy them. Right now SF has a ton of money coming in from overseas and/or people buying these as 2nd homes. I agree its not your avg. SF person buying these condos. It seems to be the wealthy from around the world looking to put there money in US real estate and a market like SF is perfect where appreciation has historically been very strong.

  12. “I’m all for building more condos in SF. I’m not sure that the correct TYPE of condos are being built (they are all “luxury” condos). That said, the market will figure it out. The condos will get built and sold, or they will get built and sit there for a long time until prices fall enough to get them sold! voila, affordable housing.”
    This might be true in the short run on a few (realtive) units
    but you can bet there will be no other condos built in the city if it happens. All development will shift to commercial. For the most part only these luxury condos pencil out what with the fee exactions, affordable housing mandates, lunatics such as MAC in the Mission calling for everything to be affordable thereby causing delays on simple condo project etc.
    Its a shame but if this market changes a bit even with the great demand for middle class housing nothing will get built.

  13. the buyers for the seemingly endless supply of condos over here in south beach seemed to be the empty nesters that wanted to move down off the hill or wanted to move to the city from the penninsula. i’m not sure how appealing the downtown type places like rincon and infinity and mil will be to that market. we have a neighborhood now in south beach that will take years to build around rincon. you’ll need to bulldoze all those shelters and union hq’s over there first.

  14. reply to ex SF-er at July 19, 2007 10:26 AM
    “the people that I know moving into 1 Rincon are paying a HUGE amount. (almost $1150/sq ft).”
    Many buyers, probably most, bought for much less than 1150psf. Sure the top floors and certain premium units probably sold in that range or even higher, but most units were between 800-1000 psf.

  15. I know in my family two of my uncles have looked into moving back to the city but both are not sure because of the prop 13 property tax issue but they are of more modest means. I am sure many others can easily make this move and are

  16. “Many buyers, probably most, bought for much less than 1150psf. Sure the top floors and certain premium units probably sold in that range or even higher, but most units were between 800-1000 psf.”
    What a bargain!

  17. How about we put Chris Daly in the time capsule? He could be very interesting to people 100 years from now 🙂

  18. “you’ll need to bulldoze all those shelters and union hq’s over there first.”
    The homeless shelter will be bulldozed this summer to make way for The Californian. The union shelter will be renovated by the developer of One Rincon, to turn it into a community center. I agree that this will take time, but its not as long as you think.

  19. Is that comment about a time capsule a joke?
    I know OneRincon likes to pull silly publicity stunts and often looks for reasons to attract attention, but this one takes the cake.
    The marketing team kind of reminds me of some immature child crying for attention…

  20. I live in the area and have watched One Rincon grow since it was a hole in the ground. I was uncertain if they would be able to deliver what the drawings and models depicted. I have to admit… I am surprised that they have built exactly what the said they would. The perception that is does not look like the drawing depends on which direction one is viewing the project. The most common view seems to be from the West or Southwest where the only thing you see is the Curved white gridlines. The drawing is a view from the northwest which allows you to see the more conventional squared corners and glass walls. I think very few people see it from this angle because it is on the hill and there are buildings between market and Harrison. One surprising view that I really like is from the Embarcadero south of the Bridge. This view does not have the curved white grid lines and the building looks much more slender. I think the project, with both buildings complete, provide an interesting variety of views from different parts of the city.

  21. “If they sold out the first (though no contracts yet) they’ll sell out the second. Remember, there were good deals to be had at One Rincon if you jumped in early, especially compared to prices at Infinity. Though with the increased construction costs, it seems likely that buyers in the second tower will pay a premium over those who bought in the first. Do we see quick flips at One Rincon to compete with the developer when Two Rincon starts converting to contracts?”
    When OneRincon first released, it was the only highrise in town. Infinity was still a month or two from releasing and we didn’t have the Millenium, Californian, Turnberry tower (right next to OneRincon), SF Blu, SomaGrand, Mid-Market towers, etc… all coming online in the next couple years. I bet many of the buyers didn’t even know about all these new towers.
    And the 2nd Rincon tower will struggle to sell. Even the sales center folks admitted it will be priced much higher than the first. I anticipate the resales at the first tower not selling well.
    When you have so much new inventory, all in much superior locations, why would anyone want to own at OneRincon??
    As someone mentioned a while back, in a few years when all the new towers develop, OneRincon will be known as the “Oddball” building next to the freeway that nobody wants to live in…

  22. How convenient! The “buyers” are not locked in and if they have half a brain, they’ll bail. So the developer promises to break ground right after the buyers are committed.
    I predict they’ll float rumors of higher prices per square foot so that the option holders in tower 1 will think they have “instant equity” and sign the papers (at least those who can still qualify). Then , construction on tower two will “inexplicably” be delayed.
    This is the slickest marketing team on the planet. It’s going to be fun to watch.

  23. What is weird is how much attention One Rincon gets. Love it or hate it, it is always in the Chronicle, and always posted on various sites. The Chronicle in particular seemed to have almost an article a week on this project for a while, including a HUGE story on the crane operator, as well as pictures and stories about what the views look like from various floors, and on and on. I myself have no problem with a tall tower down in that location, but why did it have to be such a boring design? Oh well, as was posted earlier, it is just following the tradition in this city of building bland buildings. (Fox Plaza, Marriot Hotel, Soma Bland, etc. etc.)
    The strong identity of this project, even if a bit negative, may actually help the long term value of these units. One thing you have to admit, not everyone has heard of “The Californian” or “The Millenium”, but everyone knows about where and what One Rincon is.

  24. “I don’t see Millenium competing with One Rincon buyers for business. Millenium is marketing itself as ultra-premium with units around $1,500 psf. Despite the higher costs at One Rincon II, the buyers won’t be in the same market. One Rincon will appeal to the well off, while Millenium will appeal to the uber-wealthy. Now, Infinity could compete with One Rincon II, but my guess is over the long run, given our tight housing market, both developments will do just fine.”
    Actually…no. The Mil. targeted the Infinity as its direct competitor down to the smallest details. The Infinity just broke the St. Regis $1800 psf record at $2000 psf, and I’m not talking about the 7 mil penthouse. Now how much do you think the Infinity’s second tower will sell at with better views and better finishes (oops). Comparing ORH’s second tower with the Infinity’s is a joke.
    The Infinity reserved the more desirable tower for higher prices. They’ve raised prices many times and the waiting list is only getting longer. ORH did just the opposite. Now they wanna raise prices and make up the profit they gave up from the first tower when they had to get financing. Combine that with their over-marketing now backfiring and a well known ugly building for visual aid, what do you think will happen at their sales office when Infinity and Mil. start selling? You see, well-developed marketing might be developers’ best friend, but nothing will help if people don’t like your products, not even those branded water bottles and “free wine” sitting in a $5mil sales office that every buyer pays for.

  25. “the people that I know moving into 1 Rincon are paying a HUGE amount. (almost $1150/sq ft).”
    They probably got in much later…I purchased a 2-2 unit on the 20th for $802, but I also reserved on the second day of preview week.

  26. “”the people that I know moving into 1 Rincon are paying a HUGE amount. (almost $1150/sq ft).”
    They probably got in much later…I purchased a 2-2 unit on the 20th for $802, but I also reserved on the second day of preview week.”
    Nope, not much later. I went to the sales office the weekend following the first preview day and prices were already $1000/sqft and higher. Only a few (couple dozen or so) buyers got in at $800-900/sqft… I’d say the majority of buyers at ORH paid $1000+/sqft.
    And those that keep thinking Infinity is priced much higher than ORH are mis-informed. During Infinity’s first week of release many of the higher floor units were going for $850-$950/sqft, not much more than ORH.

  27. “Actually…no. The Mil. targeted the Infinity as its direct competitor down to the smallest details. The Infinity just broke the St. Regis $1800 psf record at $2000 psf, and I’m not talking about the 7 mil penthouse. Now how much do you think the Infinity’s second tower will sell at with better views and better finishes (oops). Comparing ORH’s second tower with the Infinity’s is a joke.”
    Blahhh, which unit at Infinity went for $2000/sqft?? Must be a top floor unit?

  28. Just another high urban Mc-Mansion. Yes, its a stunning landmark but couldn’t they build something better than a giant pez dispenser? A Papa-Smurf head would be perfect on top.
    This has to be the ugliest new building in SF. Did we get a new planning commission in SF?

  29. Overbuilding is sure to occur. it has in EVERY market thus far. SF (and Seattle) are simply behind other markets in their big runup, by about 2 years. they trailed other markets in the run up, now they will trail the other markets in the run down. (San Diego is “ahead” of the rest of the pack by about 1 year or so…)
    I travel a LOT. Since 2001 I’ve been stunned at the condo growth around the country. It is everywhere, even smaller markets like Des Moines and St. George Utah, and Wilmington NC etc.
    All markets have their reasons why “they’re different” but in the end none of them are. They are all following the same script.
    “there’s a shortage of land”
    “everybody wants to live here”
    “boomers and foreign investors will flock here”
    and so on.
    The first few big name highrises go up, and there are lines to buy in. This heightens excitement.
    then the second wave of condos goes in. Based on the first wave, people scramble to get in as well. prices go up dramatically
    then the 3rd wave of condos goes up. Around this time, the people who bought the 1st wave start to sell for various reasons. Also flippers start to sell… and those that realize that $1200/sqft is a lot to pay when you can rent for 1/4 to 1/2 as much… and those that realize they’re overextended.
    it takes YEARS to get a condo project through. Thus, even though condo market is stalling, the developers continue to build. they have to, since they’ve already sunk millions into the problem, and they each think that their particular development “is different”
    Thus more and more condos come on line. The overall condo prices drop as supply exceeds demand. The developers undercut the used condo sellers… who wants to buy a used condo when a brand new one is cheaper? condo owners become stuck in their high priced condos, and given 100% financing, many are upside down so can’t sell.
    after time, condo prices come down to more affordable levels.
    thus, as I’ve said before, I am a HUGE fan of building more condos in SF. It is the best way to create affordable housing. More supply=lower price.
    The only shame is that too many of these condos continue to be small “luxury” 1BR condos… I’d like to see SF start building more 2BR and even 3BR condos
    (if you want to see condo overbuilding, look no further than Miami or San Diego or Boston… 3 highly desireable places that saw rapid boom in condo development, now with striking condo depreciation)

  30. There should be fines involved if the completed building doesn’t strongly resemble the renderings!
    They never look the same!
    I have no doubt that all these units will sell. In fact I think the second tower will be more desirable. Closer to the water, a bit further from the freeway. Wonder what the PSF will be?
    San Francisco has a small amount of desirable housing stock compared to any other city.

  31. I wish people would reserve judgment on this building until it is complete (including the 2nd tower). Better yet, they should reserve judgment until other buildings in the area spring up and that it blends in better with the surrounding structures.
    I personally think that while its not in the best location (right against the on-ramp), the building is already looking quite striking and makes a nice addition to the boring SF skyline. SF needs more bold buildings and I welcome the addition of the other buildings on Rincon Hill, along with the Transbay Terminal area.

  32. Reserve judgment till when??
    It’ll take 2 years to build the 2nd tower and the rest of the proposed buildings around Rincon Hill hasn’t even started yet (45 Lansing just finish their demo job).
    For now and the foreseeable future, OneRincon will hold the mantle as the UGLIEST building in the WORST location in San Francisco.

  33. “For now and the foreseeable future, OneRincon will hold the mantle as the UGLIEST building in the WORST location in San Francisco.”
    Ugliest building???? Just go to almost any neighborhood in the city and you’ll see Edwardians that are much more of an eyesore. Like I said, One Rincon looks sleek and elegant and will look even sharper when complete.
    Worst location? Sure, its not great being right at the on-ramp, but its within walking distance of some great areas and has great views. I find that statement funny, given all of SF’s terrible locations in the Bayview, Hunters Point, Tenderloin, Western Addition, etc. Even with the on-ramp, this doesn’t even compare. How can you make such an idiotic statement?

  34. What’s this? Now we have to tear down all of the Edwardians? Dear SFhighrise, you can build all of the ugly 80’s Irvine office park towers you want down in SOMA and Rincon Hill, but stay away from Pacific Heights. I happen to like my neighborhood full of Victorians, Edwardians, and new modern structures also, and certainly don’t need any dated towers polluting my happiness. What is it about the design of this building that in any way says “San Francisco”? How does the design take into account the bridge, the bay, and the hill for that matter? This building could be in any office park in any city in America. It is not worthy of a great city like San Francisco.

  35. When did Irvine ever build a 60 story, slender office tower? I’m sure that anything modern, tall, and non-industrial looking will bring out all of the NIMBYs who claim that because it is bold and different, that it is not San Francisco. I find that extremely humorous.
    Regarding Pac Heights. Its a great neigbhorhood, with a lot of beautiful mansions. In addition, it has a lot of UGLY, dated, not properly maintained buildings, many of which are Edwardians. I would say that this is more of a shame to a world-class city such as San Francisco, especially in a “prime” neighborhood like Pacific Heights.

  36. SFHighRise–it was precisely your way of so-called progressive thinking that motivated city planners in the 60s to tear down the grand Victorians in the Fillmore area and replace them with ‘better,’ ‘modern’ buildings. Look now at how devastating that was to our city’s heritage, its aesthetics, and the neighborhood itself. For decades that neighborhood greatly suffered, and is only now achieving any recovery (though due to its loss, it will likely never fully blossom). The fact that this trend is resurfacing on these blogs is extremely worrying to me. San Francisco is known for its incredible beauty and architecture (I would say it is one of its key attractions to visitors)–but to mindlessly insert modern architecture into our skyline purely for the sake of progression and without any thought to its relationship with its city will lead to an erosion of our stunningly unique city topography, and eventually our equally unique civic pride. . .just as neighborhood-pride in the Fillmore area was eroded for its residents several decads ago.

  37. CNeilson-
    I can understand your concern, based on past experiences. However, I never said we should go into lively neighborhoods and just bulldoze everything in sight, while building huge, towering cement blocks for replacement. I view the SOMA/Rincon Hill/Mission Bay areas as much different situation. Rather than gutting a lively, existing neighborhood, these developers are tearing down run-down warehouses, lots and such and making way for new buildings. While we can argue back and forth the caliber of the buildings that have been built (I personally like most of them), I too believe that we should challenge developers to construct buildings with high quality and visual appeal. I don’t see these buildings as needing to be fitting into the older parts of the city. Rather, I see them blending closer with what we see in the downtown area and creating new, different urban neighborhoods. Quite honestly, if people are to stop these mammoth towers from going up in Rincon Hill, it’ll just put more pressure to bulldoze those old buildings in settled neighborhoods, to help ease the housing crunch. For these reasons, I just cannot understand why many old-timers here in the city are so vehementally opposed to this type of development. Think about how you’ve probably gone out to eat for years on Fillmore or Chestnut and have loved strolling around those areas. In the coming years, you’ll still have these areas to enjoy, but others as well. As a relatively new resident to San Francisco, I personally like having the choices living of older, established neighborhoods, or new urban ones. What is so wrong with that? I hear people complaining about these buildings destroying their views, but its really not doing so in the grand scheme of things. These are slender towers, designed to enhance the views, not block them entirely.
    Regarding the older areas that you mentioned, you have to admit that many of those buildings could do a better job in terms of being maintained. To allow them to get into a run-down condition to where it is an eyesore is a disgrace.

  38. How does that saying go? The only people who LIKE changes are wet babies. Anyway, One Rincon Hill is far from the worst location in the City. I’d say it easily beats, even with the bridge sitting in its current position and not moved a bit away from the first tower, anything west of Twin Peaks that seems to be 10 degrees colder and a lot less sunny most of the time.

  39. True Jamie, it’s not the worse location in SF. But when you’re talking about luxury 1-2 million dollar 1200sqft condos, it’s still a pretty bad location for high end housing.
    Having said that, the views on the higher floors (40+) will be pretty spectacular…

  40. I don’t see anything today resembling the “Negro removal” of the 1960’s in the Fillmore
    Indeed because of the backlash against redevelopment and downtown we saw almost nothing get built in this city for 30 years (save for those tasteless Irish 4 unit crap boxes that replaced a large number of beautiful old homes all over the City and now that blight it)
    Save for a few old dinosaurs I don’t see much resistance to these new high rises. Most people realize that things always change

  41. SFCurbed has a very funny story about how One Rincon is really just an amazing product placement for the Sharper Image “Ionic Breeze” tower. The side by side images are really pretty funny.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *