January 28, 2009
Just Under $900,000 Originally, Asking Just Under $800,000 Today
Asking just under $900,000 (not including upgrades) when the sales office first opened (acording to a plugged-in Infinity resident). Asking just under $900,000 ($885,000) as a resale last month (and subsequently reduced down to $849,000). Asking just under $800,000 ($799,000) today for 301 Main Street #9E at Infinity.
∙ Listing: 301 Main #9E (2/2) - $799,000 [MLS] [Climb]
∙ Another Infinity Resale (#9E) Within Those "Restricted" Two Years [SocketSite]
∙ Infinity Sales Update: New Contracts Up But Driven By Discounts [SocketSite]
First Published: January 28, 2009 7:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
but it's on a busy street.
Posted by: diemos at January 28, 2009 7:05 AM
These prices are starting to look attractive from a P/E perspective at least based on my crude calculations. With 20% down and assuming a 25% tax bracket, with HOAs and taxes added your net (after tax) cost would be about $4300. Plenty of amenities in the building to justify a premium over other 2 bedrooms in less desirable locations/buildings.
Not a slam dunk, but getting closer to making sense...if you have the $160K down payment that is...
Posted by: weatherman at January 28, 2009 8:51 AM
I would feel too cramped in that area they put the desk. I do however see why they would put it there, though.
Posted by: J at January 28, 2009 8:55 AM
31 photos on mls for this place, but only the first 11 are of the actual unit...I'm all for showing the other amenities of the location but it's not good if less than half are of the actual unit.
Posted by: DanRH at January 28, 2009 8:57 AM
Good assessment weatherman, the 160k is the gotcha.
I think DINK/Ys can get to the 100k downpayment mark, that's a reasonable goal for a lot of folks, but it is the extra 60k where all the pricing pressure is going to be for the next two years, since it is not longer easily bridged with an 'interesting' loan.
Posted by: Observer at January 28, 2009 9:00 AM
So, where does the couches and tv go? You mean is either a dining or a living room area ... just excuse the architect's oversight? Just jam a couch and the tv into one of the bedrooms? But one can still call it a two bedroom with a straight face? Ok, I got it.
Posted by: huh? at January 28, 2009 9:08 AM
Agreed that the down payment requirements (what a novel concept!) are the key factor in the SF slowdown right now. WSJ had an article today noting that about 8% of PRIME jumbos in CA are now at least 90 days delinquent -- nearly triple the rate of just a year ago. Banks have severely restricted jumbo lending in response. The article stated: "Conforming-loan limits top out at $625,000 in the highest-cost housing markets. To buy a more expensive home, buyers must put up larger down payments -- between 30% and 40% -- and pay higher mortgage rates." So even that $160k down might not get you into this place. Looks like the $625k conforming limit may provide some price support at the low end, but with no such support above that level (i.e. homes priced above ~ $750k) the drop will be great.
Posted by: Trip at January 28, 2009 9:10 AM
I wonder what the point is living in a high rise without views. You can get a similar size/quality loft in $600s if you don't mind being blocked off by other buildings inches away. From P/E standpoint, you'd have much easier time renting out the loft at $3k than this unit at $4k.
Posted by: jj at January 28, 2009 9:13 AM
Nice evaluation, but I think your implied rental assumption is high. For a non-view unit, I think the highest wishing rent would be under $4000.
In reality, you could probably get a similar unit for $3500 or less, especially if you're a reliable tenant and can do a 12 month lease.
Posted by: Amir at January 28, 2009 9:15 AM
Anyone know the square footage? MLS listing conveniently left it off.
Posted by: Dude at January 28, 2009 9:16 AM
"about 8% of PRIME jumbos in CA are now at least 90 days delinquent"
First, I question the validity of this WSJ reporting, whether higher or lower, lenders by and large are really slow to act, report, respond, you name it. Secondly I wonder how many of those people are gaming the system, letting it ride 60 to 90 days, destroying their credit, but getting ridiculously low subsidized rewritten notes in return?
Posted by: annon at January 28, 2009 9:18 AM
The Infinity has a great a location, some of the best amenities in the city and a beautiful design. Although I agree with you JJ regarding having a view, not everyone would.
Posted by: Paul Hwang at January 28, 2009 9:23 AM
It is odd that the square footage was left out, that is probably one of the big selling points. It is 1,182 S/F, making it well under $700 per S/F. It is for each person to decide whether that is a good price in their opinion, but I think it is safe to say that is undisputedly the lowest price ever offered in the Infinity.
My sources suggest that the second tower is going to be listed at about 5% more than the first, so I wonder if this seller is drumming up foot traffic so everyone going to the "grand opening" of the second tower will come rushing back to make an over listing price offer on this unit. Who knows.
Posted by: Tom at January 28, 2009 9:24 AM
Developers have to start getting realistic. Even if we were not in a market crash, the thought of paying $800K for something that has a view of another building is just crazy. Places with no view should be no higher than $500K (of course, I wouldn't even pay that much for a place without a view).
Posted by: Lucas Rockwell at January 28, 2009 9:30 AM
Dude @ 9:16AM:
I think this is the "2B" floor plan which makes it 1163 sq ft. The floor plan is horrifying. There is basically no living space. The 1317 sq ft "2B" floor plan is the convex one which is much more open, better for entertaining etc.
I would say that a fair price for one of these crowded, no-view, generic condos is probably in the mid $300k range.
Posted by: Jeffrey W. Baker at January 28, 2009 9:33 AM
A & E units are 2/2's with 1163 sqft (Floor Plan). I'm renting one of these units above floor 20 for ~ $4k/month.
Posted by: unearthly at January 28, 2009 9:35 AM
This is just a cookie cutter box.
That kitchen is uglier and cheaper than the kitchen in my last rental SFR, which was more than 2-1/2 times the size of this place, had an unobstructed view of the Pacific Ocean.
In the first thread on this property, a poster noted the craigslist ad at $4K/mo wishing rent, which obviously could not be achieved. Even $3K/mo is crazy (but perhaps there are enough crazy people still in SF? Perhaps not?)
Intrinsic value on this place, based on the fact that there should be zero pride of ownership or "emotional attachement" reflected in this non-view box, is less than $500K IMO.
Posted by: LMRiM at January 28, 2009 9:37 AM
I gotta tell you that this def is the lowest price / sqft the Infinity I've ever seen in the last two years. Views aren't everything and in this market, you gotta know that the "froth" in premiums/prices are for those units that have views... they were unrealistically priced. This has a $/sqft in the 600's with tons of ammenities. If you think prices will continue to come down thats one thing, but I'm surprised values have gotten this good in such a short time.
Posted by: quant at January 28, 2009 9:40 AM
I think the square units works much better for furniture layout; plus the bedrooms are bigger. The rounded space units couldn't even fit couches/tv and a 5-ft dining table; the big column gets in the way of everything.
In the square unit I can squish my dining table and 4-chairs against the kitchen peninsula. It's still cramped and not something I would look to buy.
Posted by: unearthly at January 28, 2009 9:43 AM
Weatherman - if Unearthly is renting above the 20th floor for around $4k, and has at least some sort of view, there is no way 9E rents at that price, looking into the side of another building.
I remember there was a short sale at the Metropolitan late last year - a one bedroom that ended up selling for $600 psf under pretty bleak circumstances. Even if the owner gets the $799k asking for 1163 sf, that's $687 psf. Accordingly the premium that the Infinity convinced people was warranted over neighboring buildings looks to be fading before our eyes.
Interesting looking building from the exterior and great location mean much less if the interior floorspace is so horribly buggered.
Posted by: huh? at January 28, 2009 9:49 AM
I get city lights (fidi) and partial bay views (ferry terminal and bay) from my unit. The location and amenities are great; plus it has the best workout room of any of the SB/SOMA buildings, and an indoor pool. Still not work > $1100/sqft the unit was purchased for...
Posted by: unearthly at January 28, 2009 10:01 AM
The truth is, whether we think this is still too much or not, it is cheap compared to the building. At this price it is going to move fast to one of the buyers who tours the sales center before or after checking out this unit.
Posted by: Wow at January 28, 2009 10:11 AM
IMO, some of the floorplans at the Infinity makes it really hard for you to arrange your living room and dining room furnitures to your liking. For example, the signature 2bd/2ba corner units in Tower I and II are pretty much shaped like a 1/4 of a circle. The curve-shape in those units seems to only allow small circular tables to fit in the dining area properly, in contrast to long rectangular tables that can sit up to eight people comfortably. Also, the curve in the living room makes it hard for people to arrange their furnitures properly, much like the 2bd/2ba corner units at the Metropolitan.
The 2bd/2ba units in between the signature corner units (I forgot what letter the plan was called, but the living room/dining room separates the two bedrooms. Maybe it's the same floorplan featured in this section?) was also poorly planned. There were no dining room area to speak of.
Also, for a sleek and modern building, the bathroom looks dated and boring. The kitchen looks great, but the colors used in the bathroom should've been executed better.
Posted by: SC at January 28, 2009 10:11 AM
$700 per S/F. It is for each person to decide whether that is a good price in their opinion, but I think it is safe to say that is undisputedly the lowest price ever offered in the Infinity.
Actually - 03.29.07 unit 4b 2/2 was being offered for 1,110,000.00 with est. 1814 sf. = $611.90 psf.
03.29.07 6B same sf @ $622.93 psf
All other units I tracked are mid 700's psf up to $1497 psf 08.15.06 for 34F @ $1,980,000.00.
Interestingly enough 05.28.08 MLS had a listing for 318 Spear 21E at $1,055 psf and 08.15.06 3B for $874psf - not sure what building this was for as the address 318 does not have high floors?
These are quotes I gathered from MLS, friends, and blogs where shoppers posted going rates so they could be off, but it was the best info I could gather.
Posted by: gowiththeflow at January 28, 2009 10:21 AM
"The 2bd/2ba units in between the signature corner units (I forgot what letter the plan was called, but the living room/dining room separates the two bedrooms. Maybe it's the same floorplan featured in this section?) was also poorly planned. There were no dining room area to speak of."
Exactly why I was saying in another post that the 3/2 in the mid rise that are available are a good deal.. views are not as good hence a much lower price point and the reason some are left at what I hear are great prices. HOwever the higher floors either have expansive exclusive use terrace, or have sliding doors (juliette) that open the living to the outdoor space very nicely, no curve and you can easily have either 3 bedrooms, or 2 bedrooms and one private office or convert one to a full dining that can accomodate a long dining table open or not to the living room and make the den the office area.
Posted by: gowiththeflow at January 28, 2009 10:27 AM
Sorry one last post consecutively:
Does anyone this this portion of the proposed stimulus will help with the sales of T2, Millenium etc?
"Enhancing the first-time home buyers’ credit, which was enacted last year. Under current law, the credit, which is capped at $7,500 and applies to purchases of primary homes after April 8, 2008, and before July 1, 2009, must be repaid over 15 years, starting two years after the credit is claimed. In the House and Senate proposals, folks who buy homes in 2009 don’t have to pay back the credit as long as they don’t sell the house within three years." (Kipplinger)
My understanding (correct me if I am wrong) is that the 1st time buyer credit is not just actual 1st time buyers but those that have not bought in a few years right?
Posted by: gowiththeflow at January 28, 2009 10:36 AM
SC, you took the words out of my mouth. We've looked at several Infinity units and thought the same thing: what would we do with our furniture in this place? Guess you could always pay an obscene amount of money for custom round couches if you wanted that Adams Family look (harpsichord optional). And I'm also a big fan of the Infinity's kitchens.
Anyway, it seems nobody knows the exact square footage here, but it's around 1,170, which puts this unit clearly under $700 psf. Not surprising at all. From what I've seen, the going rate in Soma right now is around $650 psf for highrise condos, so I'm not sure why so many seem shocked at this price point. I expect it to fall below $600 psf in the next year, but a lot will depend on how far rents fall.
As for the T2 premium, well...suffice it to say that's probably a figment of the sales office's imagination at this point.
Posted by: Dude at January 28, 2009 10:39 AM
The buyer of this unit would have been better off walking away from his deposit.
Now he has to try to sell in a recession and is going to lose at least 6 figures (and shell out 3 years of HOA dues) in under a year.
Pick off buyers touring the tower 2 sales center? What buyers? The prices are falling in tower 1 and the developer of tower 2 thinks they are going to charge more? Only for the most eager people who buy in the first few weeks. After that, prices will clearly be falling, and probably more than once.
At least I gotta give Tishman credit for not having some closely related party make a fake buy at tower 1 to try to convince the flippers that they have all made money.
In any event, any potential buyer in this building will need to recognize that it was built for a different era. In an era of no-money-down cheap and easy tax deductible loans if you stay under $1.1M, making these kinds of sacrifices can make sense, and lots of people with 0 savings and horrific credit who couldn't rent anything decent would consider themselves better off buying than renting a tiny, no view space.
And it was easy to speculate on such a place with no money down, buying it as a vacation home while you watched it rise 20% Y-O-Y.
However, in an era in which the buyer has to plunk down $160K and have nearly perfect credit, and prices are rapidly shrinking, I don't think as many people will consider the trade off worthwhile, and I think people will find that the buyer pool will start shrinking fast.
Trip's point regarding prime Jumbo mortgages is a BIG problem. The loans are going bad worse than anyone has been able to model, and so many funders of these loans will just sit on the sidelines for a while. Qualification standards will tighten again, downpayments and credit scores will rise, and rates will rise. It would not surprise me to see 10% on Jumbos with 40% down in the next few months.
Posted by: tipster at January 28, 2009 10:50 AM
some people like the quiet when on a lower floor. do you guys who live on a lower floor facing a street hear road noise?
Posted by: quant at January 28, 2009 10:54 AM
799K is the new 899K. In about three months 699K will be the new 899K. Prices may drop further but I'm not an uber bear and expect them to stabilize around this level with very minor ups and downs for the next 7-8 years. (Unless of course unemployment blows past the 12-15% range in California.)
I'm also not sure why so many posters are giving Tishman a hard time. Their ultimate objective is to maximize profits by selling units at the highest price possible. Unfortunately the economy has collapsed underneath them during the sales/marketing window. What do you expect them to do? Pretend that it's still 06? They only have one option and that is to adjust the price list downward to reflect this new reality. This is happening everywhere...
Posted by: Willow at January 28, 2009 11:14 AM
Ouch, hope Infinity residents took Alex's advice and stopped reading blogs after they bought. Just causes worry and heartache.
Ostriches have the right idea.
Posted by: Foolio at January 28, 2009 11:33 AM
The first-time home buyers credit has income limits (phases out after 75K single, 150K married, completely gone at 95K/170K). Unless the government is going to change that phase-out limit I doubt that it will help many prospective buyers of these places. Besides, at less than 1% of the purchase price it's small potatoes.
Posted by: Stu at January 28, 2009 12:12 PM
It would not surprise me to see 10% on Jumbos with 40% down in the next few months.
We'll check back on that one in a few months. Sounds far-fetched.
Posted by: anon at January 28, 2009 12:17 PM
Ouch, hope Infinity residents took Alex's advice and stopped reading blogs after they bought. Just causes worry and heartache.
Well, yeah, but not because of worry and heartache. Because of boredom. All the permabears here post the same thing over and over. What's the phrase--"sound and fury signifying nothing"?
Posted by: anon at January 28, 2009 12:22 PM
Once all the towers are occupied, it'll be great for all residence regardless what they paid. Glad Tower 2 is opening up soon and the project is close to completion.
Posted by: anonymous at January 28, 2009 12:43 PM
I think the bears keep posting the same thing over and over because prices keep falling over and over.
This "permabear" will become a bull when prices stop falling but they haven't.
What's that phrase--"sticks and stones..."?
Posted by: Michael at January 28, 2009 12:56 PM
The Infinity round windows work for me. In fact, once my wife saw the unit, everything else was too square for her (haha). I have a 48" Round Table and a 78" sofa and 2 chairs to the side of the column, and a small half-round bar with a 24" Mac on the other side of the column. i have a 47" LCD mounted on the interior wall. The bedrooms are far separated, the bathrooms are big , and the doors sound proof enough that when i grind coffee at 4am, no one wakes up. The nook is large enough for a 64" wide bookcase and an upright piano. The only sound from close units is when they shut their windows. Sure, there is no pantry and limited storage but maybe you have too much stuff if you can't fit it. Anyway, i'm a happy camper. Any money I lost here would have been lost likewise on stocks like on GOOG and AAPL.
Posted by: rickrockert at January 28, 2009 1:00 PM
True dat, anonymous. Look at the bright side, you may be losing $100K every 6 months, but you aren't at a half finished complex, like some others we know!
Posted by: tipster at January 28, 2009 1:01 PM
The project and property are all ready great. Be that a buyer paid high or get's a rare deal I am happy they will have the opportunity to see why almost every current Infinity resident that posts on here does so with positive comments.
Posted by: gowiththeflow at January 28, 2009 1:01 PM
Here's how I see it. Most desirable to least, from your window you can look:
1. At a "view" (water, city, green space, etc., thrilling to look at),
2. At a pleasant outlook (a garden, handsome houses across the street),
3. At a blank wall,
4. At an unpleasant outlook (anything that makes you prefer a blank wall),
5. Into other people's windows - close up.
This unit doesn't just lack a view. It is at absolute rock bottom on the what-you-see-out-your-window scale.
Posted by: Salarywoman at January 28, 2009 1:15 PM
@anon: I see your Macbeth quote and raise you one:
[He's] a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the [blog]
And then is heard no more.
Sound like someone you know?
Posted by: Foolio at January 28, 2009 1:20 PM
I really enjoy SS for a general pulse on the RE market, but made the mistake of perusing through the comments the last few days. I see the same snarky, disgruntled posters (you all know who you are) that literally spend all day reveling in the misery of others. I'd love to see where these folks live.
Happy to own a lovely home in the city she loves
Posted by: shakingmyhead at January 28, 2009 1:25 PM
what's with the small windows? looks like a prison cell.
Posted by: steve at January 28, 2009 1:34 PM
Salarywoman - Relative to the unit for sale if you don't mind my asking:
Your number 1 scale: Would needing to walk up to the windows maybe twist your head a bit to see the "view" count?
Also does the "view" need to span full window or would say 1/4 to 1/2 or more of a "view" from the window count?
Does just the bridge itself count as a "view"?
Finally does it count as a number 1 if you have a "view" but also have neighbors a cross from you, in this case let's assume you looked at the Infinity tower vs. cute houses? Would that be 1 or 2?
2) Unit for sale relative to "garden":
Would the unit posted although it looks at a wall be ok if it had an enclosed garden say like the bottom floor of the Oriental Whouse lofts, no view but private garden space one can use - would this count?
The unit posted looks out on to a courtyard, landscaped - of course the wall in front is yes just that, a wall. Does the courtyard view give the unit a few more points on your rating scale?
If not why?
I am actually curious to hear your thoughts - I was just having this discussion with some appraisers and each one had different answers.
We all know what truly matters is what the shopper will pay so any feedback is appreciated.
Posted by: gowiththeflow at January 28, 2009 1:36 PM
"I have a 48" Round Table and a 78" sofa and 2 chairs to the side of the column, and a small half-round bar with a 24" Mac on the other side of the column."
I'm assuming the two chairs are for the 48" table. I've yet to see a circular table in those curved units with more than two chairs, else they would essentially be half way into the kitchen ... which is already a bit short on storage space. So, if you and your wife have friends over, do they sit on the couch while you guys get the table? And the half round table for the mac - I assume you have to enjoy doing all your computer work standing up, because it's hard to imagine space for another chair if you have a 78" couch, which must essentially dominate the room. Definitely need the flat screen nailed to the wall because even a smaller low lying entertainment center will be tight. Yet, the people in #20B paid $1.77m for exactly this type of unit. What's that saying about one of these born every minute?
Posted by: huh? at January 28, 2009 3:19 PM
i feel like i'm looking at a unit in the Palms - same kitchen/LR layout. somehow or another #521 at the Palms got $690k with a western view over the roof tops across the way. this Infinity vs. that Palms... probably a wash - superior building/location with no view vs. an ok view and an so-so location/building. So i put this unit's value at $690k. maybe low $700's for those who disagree that the Palms is even a so-so in location or building.
but to the point of views... when you are in a very large building, and you must differentiate yourself when selling, not having a view is a killer... this may get around $700k now only because it is the cheapest thing out there... but as soon as others come on the market there will be more downward price pressure on units that have nothing that makes them stand out.
for views, if you have to walk up to the window and turn your neck, that's not really a view... it's better than staring at a wall, but not by much. Sunlight is also a MAJOR factor in buyer decisions... a bright unit will sell over a dark unit, and in general there's more to look at in a bright unit (even if not a view lovers view) than a dark unit.
last but not least... any outdoor space??? if this also doesn't have a balcony, and looks at a wall, and is dark... yikes... it only sells if someone really wants to be an Infinity owner now and can't wait 6 months to a year for superior units at the same (or lower prices)
Posted by: sfrob at January 28, 2009 6:24 PM
based on the floorplan you can put a 3 cushion sofa with side tables, two side chairs, what looks like a cradenza for your 52" plasma and a table with 4 chairs plus a nice coffee table to fill the void; all with room to spare. Id hate to have been the one that plunked down some cash on the basis of the blueprint only to be disappointed with the finished product.
Posted by: viewlover at January 28, 2009 6:44 PM
Don't know if you can share, but i am curious as to why someone would pay $4K to rent in SOMA, when that kind of money can give you a very nice 2/2 in Pac or Russian Hill?
Posted by: ester at January 28, 2009 11:13 PM
Why do I live in a SOMA 2/2 (very near Infinity), not Pac Hights or Russian Hill? (a) I walk to work in 20 minutes, (b) it knocks ~15 minutes off (each way) getting down to the Silly Valley once or twice a week, (c) the weather is better IMHO, (d) I really like living near water. Different criteria than many of the SS haters.
Posted by: ellbee at January 29, 2009 2:29 AM
reasons i live in soma: 1) close to freeways 2) walk to work 3) newer construction not some 100 yr old building which looks like something out of a museum 4) close to bart/muni rail 5) not all my neighbors are 100 years old 6) weather, less fog
Posted by: yge at January 29, 2009 8:30 AM
yge - I agree 100% with your points and would also add being close to the water and proximity to the ballpark, Embarcadero and Ferry Building as other positives of living in South Beach. I too feel like I've aged by 20 years just by walking into some of those ancient RH and Pac Heights structures. However I clearly think there are better options in the area than what the Infinity offers - the floorplans being the greatest culprit.
Posted by: huh? at January 29, 2009 9:02 AM
Well, I am curious as to why someone would pay $4K to rent a 2/2 in Pac or Russian Hill, when you can rent a very nice 4/3 in Arkansas?
Posted by: anon at January 29, 2009 9:16 AM
TOTALLY AGREE with the last 4 comments. I live in 2009 San Francisco, not 1909 San Francisco. I don't want to live in a museum, either.
I don't drive a Model T, I drive a newer BMW. Does anyone out there take a Model T up to wine country for the weekend? Do you get leeched to remove negative humours from the body? Write letters with a quill pen? Have the phrenologist diagnose your headaches?
No? So why the hell would you want to live in some creaky claptrap that's maybe had a superficial renovation, but is terribly insulated (both sound and temps) with awkward floorplans and dated electrical/plumbing?
I don't mean to bash, but many of us prefer newer buildings with modern amenities and a convenient, walkable location to the relics in those sterile mini-burbs known as "prime SF." I lived in Pac Heights for about a year and couldn't move away quickly enough. But to each his/her own.
I guess we're lucky that so many continue to overlook Soma for those antiques up north...more buying opportunities for us when prices start to make sense.
Posted by: Dude at January 29, 2009 9:31 AM
I've had the same dilemma myself a couple of years ago...The Palms or The Infinity. SS was kind of enough to open up my dilemma to the public.
Ultimately, I went with The Palms unit that was described in the link above and haven't looked back since. The building and the location of The Palms fits me well. The residence at The Palms are mostly young professionals (20's to early 30's) and are all friendly and courteous to each other.
Good luck with your search.
Posted by: SC at January 29, 2009 2:17 PM
I live in the same stack as the featured unit. This is what I love about the unit and the Infinity:
*rock-solid new construction
*absolute silence in the unit
*two zone central heat/air conditioning
*bedrooms on opposite sides of the unit
*room for a full size dining table, between kitchen and LR
*full service building (doorman, security, maintenance staff, etc.)
*best location on waterfront
*quiet location, away from all street noise
*modern fire/life/safety systems
*full gym, which allowed me to quit 24 Hour
*nicest kitchen I've ever used
*all the amenities, finishes, and services of units costing 50% more
Posted by: ATL at January 29, 2009 6:16 PM
Does anyone know if the Infinity - and SOMA in general, is on liquifaction?
Posted by: waiting2nest at January 29, 2009 6:56 PM
How quiet/noisy are the units at Infinity? If you play music or watch TV at 2:00 am, will it disturb your neighbors?
Posted by: Noise at Infinity? at January 29, 2009 7:19 PM
To avoid the risk of liquefaction, the Infinity's foundation is built down to bedrock. This is why the garage, over which the bldg stands, is 5 stories below ground level. The foundation itself consists of fourteen feet of concrete.
Posted by: ATL at January 29, 2009 7:21 PM
My unit is a sound proof vault. I have people above, below, and on either side and I hear nothing at all, just dead silence. That's the beauty of eight-inch thick concrete slabs. The building is built to a very high standard in terms of ensuring overall sound proofing, especially at the demising walls where there is an air gap between the two layers of sheet rock.
Posted by: ATL at January 29, 2009 7:27 PM
completely agree w/ ATL. The sound proofing at the infinity is incredible. I have people above, below, and both sides and never hear anything at all. Asked my neighbors if they ever hear me running my vacuum and they said they didnt. Also, if you jump up and down on the floor, you dont hear anything or feel anything moving. Great sound-proofing.
Posted by: patp at January 29, 2009 9:30 PM
ATL is this true?
I remember the One Rincon people telling me that infinity was built on landfill.
Posted by: jessep at January 29, 2009 10:21 PM
Not only is it true, it's verifiable. The Infinity may be surrounded by landfill, but it's sitting on bedrock. I just wonder if the good people at One Rincon might have a slight motive when they spread misinformation about neighboring properties.
Posted by: ATL at January 29, 2009 10:31 PM
Much of FiDi is built on landfill, but large buildings like the Infinity will have piles driven down to solid bedrock. At the time of the Gold Rush, the block where the Infinity is located was part land (at the tip of Rincon Point) and part under water.
Posted by: anonanon at January 29, 2009 10:44 PM
Some of you may recall reading about the Gold Rush era ship that was discovered when the Infinity lot was being excavated. I walked by the lot and saw the remains of the ship's hull. The discovery slowed down construction for a short period of time. The remnants of the wooden ship will be housed in the SF History Museum, which should eventually be located in the old SF Mint on Fifth.
Posted by: ATL at January 30, 2009 7:51 AM
SC - Interesting link to the post discussing the merits of the penthouse unit at the Palms, which I guess you bought, and the $1000 psf no view unit at the Infinity that you were debating.
Given that #9E (a no view unit at the Infinity) is listed at $687 psf just a year and a half later, I imagine you feel a certain amount of vindication, given the potential -31% loss? That said, I'm sure your property at the Palms has lost value, as all owners around he city have, but I imagine its not nearly as dramatic. Looks like you made the right choice from a financial point of view.
Posted by: huh? at January 30, 2009 9:44 AM
I am honestly shocked - never saw the previous post until now but of all the units I tracked the past few years only those floors 15 (or so) and up were $1000 psf at the Infinity for a 2/2.
I personally never bought into the $1000 psf is ok for a condo bit, never thought it was.
SC yes agreed on this one you made the right decision. Were you really quoted $1000 psf for a 5th floor at the Infinity, no view?
Posted by: gowiththeflow at January 30, 2009 10:24 AM
huh? - You're right. I probably lost some value at The Palms (no more than 5%), but no where quite as dramatic as The Infinity. The view of the city skyline, 2nd deeded car parking, and large balcony/terrace helps keep the value of the unit from depreciating rapidly. Personally, if I paid for a condo in the downtown area for more than a $1M ($1,000 psf), I would like a view of either the city skyline or bay bridge (or even both!). I'm planning on keeping the unit for a while (5+ years).
gowiththeflow - Yes, I was quoted at $1,000 psf for a 5th floor 2bd/2ba condo with no view at The Infinity. But keep in mind that these prices were back in early 2007, when Tower I was still being built. Prices were a bit high back then because the developer believed that the housing market would continue to flourish by the time Tower I was finished. As a result, the developer at The Infinity wanted buyers to pay for premium prices (prices that the developer believes would be a fair market value in late 2007/early 2008) rather than normal prices (prices that reflected the housing market in early 2007).
Posted by: SC at January 31, 2009 3:59 PM
So you paid $1000 psf at the Palms and you think you have presently lost no more than 5%? So you think you'd get $950 psft today?
Posted by: tipster at January 31, 2009 4:24 PM
tipster - I don't think that's what SC was saying. I think he/she was saying that he/she would have to have a lot more "stuff" at the Infinity to be willing to pay 1k/sqft there.
Posted by: Brutus at January 31, 2009 7:06 PM
Your screen name really suits you.
I don't know if you've ever been in a furnished infinity unit if you are questioning a 48 inch table with 4 chair in the rounded units. In fact, I live here and have been in many units of the same floor plan and I have yet to see a table without four chairs. I have a 48 inch table as well with 4 leather chairs. They fit fine and I have room to walk. I also have a 78 inch couch with a 52 inch tv. Everything fits fine with more than 5 feet of walking space between my couch and my island. I also have a bar with two seats and no, my place does not look crowded.
For the people who don't like the floor plan advertised here, there are far worst floor plans out there. Everyone has different taste and different needs. If you don't like it, move on.
Posted by: loving it at January 31, 2009 10:42 PM
listen people, there is no such 5th floor unit that has ever been valued for 1000/sqft, in either tower or midrise, now, or the beginning. Ever. Yes, it was overpriced in the beginning, but thats just plain wrong.
But for the sake of curiosity, which unit are you mistakenly calling 1000/sqft on the 5th floor?
Posted by: anon at February 1, 2009 2:06 PM
"In fact, I live here and have been in many units of the same floor plan and I have yet to see a table without four chairs."
Huh? Are you in one of the units, I believe either B of F, that have the 1/4 circle windows? If so, I'm basing my assessment based on the model units that the sales office shows in T1. There is a rounded support column in those units that essentially divides the room, for lack of a better term. They placed the table and two chairs to the 'kitchen side' of the column. As best as I could tell, it was very tight having four chairs around that table without the chairs either having to be placed at least part way into the already undersized kitchen or being very close/bumping into the kitchen island. I will agree that the island would be several feet from the couch, but the placement of a dining table was cumbersome at best in the B and F units I saw.
Granted, everyone has their own tastes and desires which is why we don't all live in the exact same configuration of home. However, it seems mindboggling to me that people have paid $1350+ psf for such units and was reinforcing the point that others on this thread have made that given the constraints of the 2/2 floorplans, they represent a poor value proposition.
Posted by: huh? at February 2, 2009 8:55 AM
"listen people, there is no such 5th floor unit that has ever been valued for 1000/sqft, in either tower or midrise, now, or the beginning."
Anon - the thread to which SC provided the link was dated 6/2007. SC was posing the question as to what SS readers thought he should do, given the two possible options he was considering purchasing. It seems pretty unlikely that he didn't know the price of the unit at the Infinity he was considering purchasing. Moreover it looks like more people favored purchasing the no view unit at the Infinity for $1000 psf. Given that those hypothethical recommendations are down north of -30%, perhaps some of the posters here aren't quite as plugged in as they would like to believe.
Tipster - Although I haven't seen the unit, it sounds like SC's purchase was a two level penthouse, large terrace, skyline views and two deeded parking spots. While other units in the building may have lost a greater percentage, I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility that that particular unit would still go for $950 psf.
Posted by: huh? at February 2, 2009 9:29 AM
A 48" table must go on the 'living room' side of the condo. The space on the kitchen side of the pole is wasted except maybe you can put a bar around the pole. But I'm happy with that arrangement.
I just toured a 27th Fl Tower II D condo with a killer view of the bay and bridge. Supposedly going for 1.7~1.8. Now the same floor condos facing west are actually blocked somewhat by Tower I so maybe they'll go for $$$ less.
Posted by: huhhuh at February 3, 2009 1:15 PM
Perhaps ha ha is more apt. If the 48" table goes on the 'living room' side, there's no space for the 72" couch to be far enough from the wall to watch a flatscreen TV. No way, no how, unless you want to watch that screen from three feet away. Therein lies the problem with this floorplan, which I believe is identical to units in T2. If it could be set up that way, the model units would have showcased this room as such.
Has anyone checked out the floorplans on the Infinity website for these B & F units, which are 1317 sf? They indicate that there is space for a 3 person couch, a 3 person ottoman and two additional chairs in the living room ... plus a dining table with 4 chairs. This is not just laughable, this is fraud, as there is no way all of that furniture fits in there unless someone made lego sized versions of it. I wonder if owners that bought this unit, sight unseen, having relied on the website's representations (and are now realizing the folly of doing so) might consult a lawyer about whether fraud in the inducement is applicable to invalidate their contract. Any attorneys care to share their thoughts?
Posted by: huh? at February 3, 2009 2:23 PM
huh? now your just being silly. I actually checked the scale of the drawings and although it is not exactly to scale (as most plans typically note) it is not as far off as your lego sized version comparison. The plans are close enough that most people should be able to figure out what works for them or not.. there are also true to scale architectural plans copied for those going in to contract (again a tiny bit off) and true scale versions in the sales office if one really wanted to be so detailed. This does not constitute fraud.
Posted by: gowiththeflow at February 3, 2009 5:28 PM
You obviously have not been into the rounded units. Remember, spaces look smaller before they are furnished. Why would multiple people on this thread tell you that they can fit this furniture just fine, just to lie about it. I push my table closer to the window cause I don't need to sit against my view.
Posted by: loving it at February 7, 2009 4:48 PM
The resale of 301 Main #9E has fallen out of contract and its list price has been reduced to $749,000. Once again, asking just under $900,000 (not including upgrades) when the sales office first opened.
Posted by: SocketSite at June 16, 2009 7:28 PM