For future (and perhaps current) reference, let’s get the facts straight with regard to the first tower of One Rincon Hill. The tower will rise fifty-five (55) stories above grade (not including the rooftop stabilizing water tank) with five (5) levels of parking below.
Floors are numbered one (1) through sixty (60) with the first level of underground parking being floor number one. The ground level lobby is located on floor number six (6), floor number seven (7) houses building amenities, and residences are located on floors eight (8) through sixty (60).
The bad news: If you’re looking to live ten stories above the top of the hill, you’ll actually want to find a condo on floor fifteen (15). The good news: If you should somehow crash through a window on the “sixth floor,” you won’t have far to fall.
UPDATE (3/22): While we focus on the facts, a “plugged in” reader focuses on an explanation. “I spoke with One Rincon today and they explained their reasoning behind the flooring scheme. One person’s [comment] was correct. [Actually, two.] The floors in tower one and tower two match up with each other. Since the lot is on a hill, tower two’s first floor lines up with the street at Harrison and Fremont.
Socketsite stated it perfectly.
The 1st floor is actually floor #1 of UNDERGROUND parking.
And the GROUND level is the 6th floor! Go figure…
Am I the only one that feels the 1Rincon developer is trying to pull a fast one?
Is there any justification for a lawsuit down the line since a lot of buyers are now 60+ feet lower than they thought when they first went into contract?
Something fishy going on….
How about trying to assume SOME personal responsibility buyers, maybe a litttle ??? Oh forget it, call you’re lawyer. You deserve each other.
Yes, there is nothing “fishy” going on here, nor is the developer trying to pull a fast one. Residential high rise developers have been counting the underground parking as a “floor” for years. Anyone who bought here and didn’t stop to figure this out has no business trying to sue.
Is it possible that they numbered the floors so that the tenth floor in tower one at the top of the hill is at the same level as the tenth floor in tower two at the bottom of the hill? I wouldn’t characterize it as “fishy” but I can see how it could be confusing (although not “lawsuit” worthy).
Is this true at similar developments like The Infinity?
“Residential high rise developers have been counting the underground parking as a “floor” for years.”
Can you name another building in San Francisco that has a ground floor level that’s numbered higher than one?
The first floor of the Infinity is the ground floor. Just as the first floor of just about EVERY other high rise in SF is the ground floor; even if they have underground parking. Whether or not a buyer should notice this deception, this is deceptive and and an unusual method of making a building taller.
This deception is made even more effective by selling property that is not yet open. I feel bad for the people who did not notice that they will have purchased a 10th floor unit only to move into a 5th floor unit (they should have noticed, but it could still happen).
Can you name another building in San Francisco that has a ground floor level that’s numbered higher than one?
Avalon Towers, Watermark, Bridgeview, etc, etc…..these are just ones that are within a block of One Rincon, but I’m sure there are many others throughout the city.
High-rises sometimes call a tall lobby by more than more floors than it should be, that is pushing it. This, is just dishonest.
In my building there’s one level of underground parking (P1) and three above grade levels (P2-P4) of parking. The condos start on floor 5, which is, amazingly, on the 5th floor!
Counting underground levels as “stories” is bogus.
Speaking for the comment above about the Watermark, the ground floor lobby is “1,” the same as the street level garage. The garage is three floors, with the top garage floor labeled “3.” Note that there is a small lower portion of the garage on 1 that goes down a half level, but that floor is not accessable by the lobby elevators. I would have to assume that this lower section is still “1”, while technically, one could argue it’s actually “-1.”
Which leads me to my comment about the numbering scheme at 1Rincon. Why didn’t they simply lable the garage levels “G1-G5,” and then label the at-grade lobby “1?”
I believe this floor numbering scheme will make more sense when (if) they build out Tower Two, which is located on the downhill end of the site. Then it will be obvious that the Tower One entry level named Level 6 is 6 levels above grade from the entry level of Tower Two.
“Avalon Towers, Watermark, Bridgeview, etc, etc…..these are just ones that are within a block of One Rincon, but I’m sure there are many others throughout the city.”
I think you are misunderstanding what the problem is here. 1Rincon uses below ground parking as stories. The buildings you list do not. The Watermark actually has a ground floor of 0 and the first floor above that is floor 1.
I still cannot think of any other buildings that does this.
“Which leads me to my comment about the numbering scheme at 1Rincon. Why didn’t they simply lable the garage levels “G1-G5,” and then label the at-grade lobby “1?”
This is so true. Which makes me and lot of people think the developer was trying to artificially raise the height of the building and give the buyers the sense they were higher than they actually will be.
Probably not suable, but a deceptive, sneaky move by 1Rincon…
I feel sorry for the buyers on floors 8,9,10 that won’t even clear the townhouses. Or even the floors in low teens that won’t clear the Met or the Bridgeview.
Imagine their reaction when they walk into the lobby and see they’re on the 6th floor and think “uh oh”, then go up to their unit, look out the window and say, “what the *&$^%”!
I have not seen “0” anywhere at Watermark. The elevator stops at “1,” which is the same level as the lobby (at-grade) enterence as well as the door from the first floor of the garage (from which you can pass through to the sidewalk) if you wish.
You have to wonder what other deceptive things the developers of Rincon are up to?
“You have to wonder what other deceptive things the developers of Rincon are up to?”
This was actually my thought when I read about this. When you buy new developments, you are forced to put trust in the builder because you can’t view or ask about every detail. Unless they have a VERY LARGE disclaimer informing buyers of this artificial inflation of floor numbers, I would not want to trust them to take care of all the other details. I would not buy from them.
Creative and slightly confusing but not deceptive. As has been previously noted, it will probably make more sense once the second tower at the bottom of the hill is selling and the “floors” match up between the two buildings. Of course that’s assuming the ground level of tower two is the “first floor”…
I think the only way the whole “tower two” scenario works is if the two lobbies are connected to each other and there is no step up or down to walk between the two lobbies. Then they are both on the same “floor.” Is this the plan?
Does anyone know if there’s BMR units at One Rincon and Infinity? I remember Daly securing a deal to place 20% for affordable housing. Sfgate had an article but I cant find it anymore.
If there are BMR, wouldn’t the developer place the units on the lower floor?
This is very, very silly. Creative marketing by a developer who obviously went to the Donald Trump School of Floor Numbering.
As silly as this in, if you are 40 feet up you are still forty feet no matter what floor they call it, and everyone should be able to figure this out before closing on $750,000 investment.
There is no BMR at Infinity.
In recent news, the White House floor numbers have been renumbered to take into account the underground bunker levels. The enterence is now on the 82 floor.
“As silly as this in, if you are 40 feet up you are still forty feet no matter what floor they call it, and everyone should be able to figure this out before closing on $750,000 investment”
The issue here is some folks may think they’re 60 feet higher than they actual are. That will cause some to fuss when they do their walk-thru (or whenever they find out).
Sure they should’ve done their research, but at the same time isn’t it NORMAL to assume floor 1 is ground floor and floor 6 is approx 60 ft higher? I can’t imagine anyone would need to ‘research’ that…
The real silly thing really is everyone here bitching and moaning don’t even own a condo in Rincon. All the Rincon owners were told of the flooring numbers. Just another opportunity for Rincon bashers………..
What no BMR @ the Infinity? How did the developer get away from this? Thought they HAD to have 20% BMR ONSITE for the deal to go through?
“The real silly thing really is everyone here bitching and moaning don’t even own a condo in Rincon. All the Rincon owners were told of the flooring numbers. Just another opportunity for Rincon bashers………..”
How were they told. O got pretty close to buying a unit on the 20 something floor and had no idea. People talk about due dillegency, but asking whether the 27th floor is 27 floors up did not seam like a necessary question; especially when I waws shopping at other developments that did not do this.
So, I was never told and don’t think I would have been told had I signed up.
Was it disclosed in the contract?
Another thought. When it comes to reselling your unit, how will this affect the value? If say you’re on the 15th floor and holding an open house, how will condo shoppers feel when they step in the evevator and realize they’re just going up 9 floors instead of 14? Explaining this concept to potential buyers could turn into a real headache…
It’ll probably have to be included in the disclosures.
A developer can build X% onsite or X%+Y% off site.
I believe both the infinity and one rincon chose the latter.
“The real silly thing really is everyone here bitching and moaning don’t even own a condo in Rincon. All the Rincon owners were told of the flooring numbers. Just another opportunity for Rincon bashers………..”
Not true, I was close to buying there last summer and was never told of the flooring layout. The sales lady never went out of the way to tell me the lobby is on the 6th floor and my unit is only 20 floors up instead of 26.
I could have easily went into contract without knowing this. I’m sure there are other buyers that don’t know this. Especially out of towners.
And as mentioned earlier, one would never think to *research* which floor # is the ground floor lobby. Isn’t it common sense to think it’s the first floor??
i was told by the salesperson before i signed any docs that there was five stories of parking underground and that the lobby was in fact the sixth floor and the gym and court yard is on the seventh. this whole floor numbering issue is not new to BUYERS of rincon, just to those rincon-haters (the one’s who ALMOST signed)!
[Removed by Editor – Do us a favor and don’t abuse the option of posting “anonymously.” For example, if you post under one please name don’t turn around and post under a different name in order to agree with your most “excellent” point.]
“i was told by the salesperson before i signed any docs that there was five stories of parking underground and that the lobby was in fact the sixth floor and the gym and court yard is on the seventh. this whole floor numbering issue is not new to BUYERS of rincon, just to those rincon-haters (the one’s who ALMOST signed)!”
That’s a red light right there. “Five stories of UNDERGROUND parking”. Why not number them G1-G5 as mentioned earlier?? They are *undergound*, not on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th story.
It’s just weird they did this, and I have yet to see reasonable explanation other than to artificially raise the height.
Makes me think the developer/sales people are trying to pull a quick one on us and are really not trustworthy…
[Editor’s Note: And here’s where we step in and say…asked and answered. In terms of a “reasonable explanation,” we’re going with redseca2’s/Michael’s. Or simply…it is what it is (and worth knowing).]
Makes me think the developer/sales people are trying to pull a quick one on us and are really not trustworthy…
Posted by: Anonymous at March 19, 2007 12:02 PM
What do you mean “…trying to pull a quick one on us”? are you a owner???
Did Infinity tell all it’s perspective buyers that they’re on landfill??? Did the Infinity salespeople tell every perspective buyers that there eventually be other highrise buildings surrounding all four sides of the first tower???
I don’t see any actual BUYERS of either Rincon or Infinity voicing their concerns or fustration. And that’s because WE WERE ALL AWARE OF THESE ISSUES!!!
Wow, angry dude.
Regarding Infinity, they have all the new buildings laid out on their model of the neighborhood. It’s in their sales office. It’s no secret.
And yes the landfill is in the disclosures and they also disclosed the pillars are driven deep into the bedrock and bolted down. Just like many other buildings in downtown. That’s standard building code in SF for highrises…
I think the core question is: Why was this done? I can’t think of any good reason other than to artificially inflate the floor level. and, I don’t think that is a good reason.
I think Redseca2 has the best response. And in looking at the renderings, he/she may be right. If and when tower 2 is built, their true 7th flr is the tower 1’s 7th flr court yard and amenities flr. I honestly think the builder was thinking the future…….
I would like to sit down with the developer and ask them why they did this. Sure they could use the excuse that the 2nd tower’s lobby is the 1st floor (though if it’s a separate foundation, they can’t claim this).
But I’m sure in the back of their minds the *other* reason is to artificially raise the height and that’s dishonest.
then would you say the buildings that don’t have the 13th floor and goes from 12th to the 14th dishonest too????
The foundation comment is a good point.
If the 2nd tower has it’s own separate foundation then they’re considered 2 separate buildings.
If they’re 2 separate buildings, then how can we say the 2nd tower can match up their floors with the 1st tower??
Yeah, going from 12 to 14 is dishonest. Why do they do that? Is that something that was only done in the old days? Do any modern (5 years old and newer) buildings skip the 13th floor?
Concerning the “missing 13th” floor quesiton, the Watermark goes from 12 to 14. Not sure about the other newer bildings.
Not sure its dishonest (It’s obvious to see on the elevator panel) as much as an old legacy that keeps on going and going…like the Energizer Bunny.
Missing the 13th floor has been around for ages. Not only in US, but many foriegn countries do this as well. It’s not even really an issue since it’s so common. One new building I know of that will skip the 13th is SomaGrand.
Now, what 1Rincon is doing, well that’s not common…
Please say they’re going to label the elevator buttons as P1-P5, or G1-G5– I hate going into a building and not knowing where the lobby is. You know, those buildings where there’s a G, an L, a P, and then the next button says, like, 15. 302 Bryant is sort of like that — very confusing, and I always end up getting out on the wrong floor.
Please. Elevator buttons need to be stupid-proof!!
Interesting use of floor numbering I must say. 🙂 I like all the greenery I see in the picture – hope it develops in real life.
-jamie
http://www.RinconHillSF.org
Floor scam apart. This is SUCH a hideous building. It looks like an Oil Tycoon’s corporate headquarters in Dubai. Sans character or soul. Ah, I wonder if this will make it on any postacrds in 20-30 yrs. As a City planner- I’m all for density- and understand the quaint vitorians I romanticize about dont allow density/ verticaly. But this? What a god awful solution.
See Renzo Piano’s Aurora place in Sydeny for what contemporary condo’s should aspire to be.
[Removed by Editor]
(I live in a handsome TIC across Dolores park, so dont tell me I’m envious I cant afford a house.)
I don’t know about the other buildings mentioned, but the Watermark lobby is at the ground floor and is labled Floor 1. Further, the Watermark has no undergound parking. It’s all above grade (Floors 1 through 3) because of the high water table. Don’t know for sure, but I imagine that Infinity has a similar situation. My previous condo, 77 Dow, which was built within the last 7 years, labled the grond floor (where the lobby was) Floor 1 and the two levels of below grade parking were P1 and P2.
Anonymous at 3:18PM, you sound sooooo angry. I truely do think youre envious and cant afford the multi million dollar condos in Rincon and decided to verbally abuse the project. Thus, 1 Rincon condo = 3 Delores TIC’s. Freaken idiot!
Hideous??
The picture above doesn’t do it justice. It’s actually much uglier than that. The windows are darker, and the thick white stripes much more pronounced. It looks like a huge black and white candy cane. A real monolithical albatross.
And think, the developer wanted to make this thing look taller with the floor scam? Please… let’s make it shorter, much much shorter…
“Anonymous at 3:18PM, you sound sooooo angry. I truely do think youre envious and cant afford the multi million dollar condos in Rincon and decided to verbally abuse the project. Thus, 1 Rincon condo = 3 Delores TIC’s. Freaken idiot!”
Dude, who’s the angry one? Again, 1Rincon fans flies off the edge. And what’s with the name calling? Bashing 1Rincon is one thing (it’s almost like a tradition now), but no need to get personal with calling folks offensive names…
Totally agree it’s out of line to call anyone an idiot, especially a stranger… Let’s keep the name calling out of this please
[Removed by Editor]
There are some wonderful properties in Dolores Park. One could even make a case that Dolores Park is a real neighborhood with cafes, mom and pop stores, etc close by. Heck, given all the negatives people keep on pointing out on Rincon Hill, some would say Dolores park is a more desirable place to live…
Is this why the Infinity is raising their prices 2% next month (so rumor as it)? — a flood of upset 1 Rincon buyers. Just kiddin’, so relax.
i’m totally with anon at 3:18pm on this one. maybe coz i’m in the arts/ design too. gimme a victorian near dolores park anyday! i guess to each their own. for me-this is an ugly building, im sorry. the good news is if rich people like this, it makes it easier for folks like to me buy the kinda houses we like.
read the architects website and there is some lame verbiage about how the curved facade “gestures” towards the city. (click my name to read it). oh please. and the rendering is not accurate- the building isnt slender or elegant, its FAR more clunky in real life.
and i dont own anything, i rent- so lemme have it.
😉
I was almost rushed into purchasing 1Rincon and am glad I did not. I had my appointment to go in and sign the paperwork and still had not been told about the floor naming trick. I also thought the model was beautiful, but now that I commute past it every day, I must say that I am not impressed.
I’m sure it will do fine and buyers will not bail on their deposits merely because it is not as good looking as they expected; but I’m pretty satisfied that the building I chose just keeps looking more and more beautiful as the glass is being finished on the top floor.
Yes I have to agree with 3:18pm and 3:46pm posters. I live in Potrero Hill and that hideous structure ruined my view of the bridge and bay. i wouldn’t mind if it was more aesthetically pleasing pleasing to look at. At least make it interesting without the ugly white stripes. but instead it’s going to be most atrocious structure to go up on SF in a long long time… i don’t know how people can defend that thing or even consider living in it.
Like anon said earlier, it’s big black monolithical albatross.
And yes I rent too and very happy about it, so lemme have it as well… 🙂
No doubt One Rincon isn’t very exciting architecturally, but I fail to see how it’s so hideous. Maybe we just have differing tastes but I think 80+% of the Victorians in the city are architecturally much more hideous than the very boring One Rincon.
I hate to say it, but here goes: any chance that 1Rincon may look OK once its completed (no, I am not a depositor nor do I intend to live in the building)? Since they are about 2/3 done with the height and there’s a lot of missing glass, I can see how some people may say it doesn’t look slender and its hideous.
Maybe we table this specific topic until the building is topped out and totally enclosed in glass?
Anyway, the floor thing still seems to be a minor issue; I think they should have gone with G/P1-5. At least its now this is out in the open.
Also, the crane seems to be grinding its way back up the side of the building. Looks like it may not be two weeks of downtime?
[Editor’s Note: We’ll second the suggestion to reserve judgment until the tower is closer to completion. Keep us posted on the crane, it’s been down for a week.]
No, it’s pretty ugly now and I can imagine it’ll still look pretty ugly when it’s finished. The website says it’s slender with gently curved walls, but it’s more chunky and clunky instead…
My fear is that when completed, if 1Rincon does not end up looking much much better, the public could go back to the mind-set that all new towers are “bad” and start forcing SF Planning to not allow any more high rise construction. The location, which many of us pass by will become part of the daily urban experience of living in San Francisco. If this becomes the eye sore some predict, it could ruin our chances of towers that would be far more attractive than 1rincon ever being built in this city.
Anon at 12:14 PM: Please only speak for yourself, I am the 1Rincon buyer and I’m very frustrated with this floor numbering system and I was not told the first day so I WAS NOT AWARE OF THIS ISSUE either. (For other building buyers, it could never be an issue, however for us 1rincon buyers it is a really BIG ISSUE)
Looks like the crane is just about at a construction ready level. They seemed to waste no time getting back on line. I wonder if the powers that be on this issue with the crane read this blog? So much for two weeks…
Now, to divert the subject since others have already done so, what’s up with the seemingly stop of outside construction on the Infinity tower? Its been weeks since the concave areas of the tower have received any glass. They seem to have stalled at about ten stories below the top on at least the south and west sides. Also, it looks like the crane hasn’t moved in some time either.
I wonder if somebody blew the order for the concave glass (too much convex, not enough concave – oops!), or its backordered…
One more thing, most of the buildings when you step in the lobby elevator and going to underground parking , you will see B1 first then B2, B3, B4…(the number is going up when you go even lower level) however in 1Rincon, if you do the same thing, you will see 5 then 4 then 3, 2, 1 for undergroud parking, how odd is that!
Do we allow the developer to name the floor any number they want in this country? Is there any gudieline to follow?
“Now, to divert the subject since others have already done so, what’s up with the seemingly stop of outside construction on the Infinity tower? Its been weeks since the concave areas of the tower have received any glass.”
Possibly backordered though Infinity is working on 4 projects simultaneously – 2 towers, 2 midrise buildings. Possibly they’re working on the other buildings or the interiors for now…
[Editor’s Note: And now back to One Rincon (or at least the numbering of floors)…]
I’m not crazy about the way One Rincon looks on the outside — but how is that supposed to effect the value of living INSIDE the building? I thought the big draw is that it has amazing views of the whole wide world. The appearance of the outside should only really matter to those who will end up looking at it all the time — like Brannan owners.
An apt quotation for the ever-defensive, hostile, and now downright insulting Anonymous commenter, who can’t let any comment critical of 1Rincon pass without hysterical reply: in the face of the clearly deceptive floor-numbering scheme and the one claimed buyer who states they were not informed of same, “thou doest protest too much”!
Remember how buildings used to put spires or radio towers on top of buildings? That’s so 20th century!
What they should do for tower 2 is to drill for oil before they build it, then leave the hole there and start numbering the floors at 50. It would be like the spire or tower, but upside down.
Is it deception when they intentionally misnumber the floors? My vote is no. It’s just more very clever marketing by the One Rincon folks, but not for the reason of deception, because I am sure they disclosed it. The reason they did it was so that someone who bought on floor 10 can tell his friends he’s on the 16th floor. THAT guy will be sure to forget to tell any of his friends that he’s really on the 10th floor. And that’s worth something.
Is it deceptive? I don’t know but, people give U.S. savings bonds because they say $100 but only cost $50. People like to be able to make it seem like they are bigger big shots than they are. If you look at that building, *everything* is sort of a fake. It’s just an ugly building in the middle of nowhere by the freeway at $1000 psf. The developers created an “aura” and suckered people into it. I think the floor number is just part of the “aura”, and if they explained it, it is not only not deceptive, but I am sure a lot of people considered it a plus.
Sort of like making everyone who works for a bank a vice president in order to pay them less. The developer gave everyone 6 more floors and charged a bundle. I think those guys are geniuses. I say: drill for oil and up the floor count by 50.
Tipster, do you have anything better to do than right page length bashing posts about units you can’t afford? You have a lot of time on your hands.
Back to the topic: I am a buyer and was told immediately of the flooring scheme. They DO have a big model of the building in the sales office so who wouldn’t ask where their unit was on the model? It was the first thing I did. Oh, I am on this floor….please show me where this is on the model!
When you are spending 850k+ on a unit, I hope people would do their research. If views were one of the main selling attractions, who wouldn’t ask where their unit was?
Many things are deceptive to people who do not pay attention.
Tipster, you say a lot of things, a lot are funny, some makes sense. This comment makes sense if you really think about it:
“If you look at that building, *everything* is sort of a fake. It’s just an ugly building in the middle of nowhere by the freeway at $1000 psf. The developers created an “aura” and suckered people into it. I think the floor number is just part of the “aura”, and if they explained it, it is not only not deceptive, but I am sure a lot of people considered it a plus.”
The marketing team ARE geniuses. The developer was also smart to hire them. Are they deceptive? Only to the buyers they didn’t disclose all the negatives to (and you can bet there are buyers that didn’t get it).
So let’s see, we have an ugly building, right smack against a busy freeway, a constantly busy onramp, smoke, exhaust, noise, no amenities in site, valet parking only (even if you wish to park it yourself), no deeded parking, and now a brand new flooring scheme that makes sense to absolutely no one (except the developer), and what do you have, 1Rincon!
I’m almost scare to think what we’ll find out next…
Anon 10:45 – so when somebody doesn’t agree with your position/purchase it must be that they “can’t afford” it? Classic. $850K is more or less a median priced home/condo in SF. It’s great that you’re happy with your purchase, but you’re far from being one of the qualified few.
why is everyone referencing 10th floor? I bought 10th floor damnit! As if I didn’t feel bad enough. haha.
>>Many things are deceptive to people who do not pay attention.
I’d say it does not matter how much you want to pay attention to what they told you, you still could be tricked by those sales at 1Rincon.
And I won’t be surprised if some buyers file a law suit againt the deveoper, since they do need a lesson and learn how to do business honestly.
Verbally telling buyers is not enough, this should be a bold disclosure in the contract. That is what contracts are for, to embody all the terms of the agreement, important disclosures, and waivers of rights; this would be an important disclosure.
Here’s some advice to those of you who “forgot” to tell your friends that your 20th floor apartment is only 14 floors up.
Buy the obligatory telescope for the view, but then turn it around so that the bigger lens is facing you. Then when you look through it, everything will seem farther away. Point it towards the ground and viola, 6 extra floors of distance!
“Verbally telling buyers is not enough, this should be a bold disclosure in the contract.”
The altitudes of the floors are included in the contract. They are in the assessor’s report. So people should have looked it up before buying.
Also, I am not sure if this makes a difference but could it be possible that the driveway in front has been built above the grade of the lot? We are building in LA and the city used one of the lower points on our lot to reference the height of the building. I know the east side of the lot is much lower than the driveway and you can even see two complete walls of all 5 stories of the garage on both the north and east sides. So they are underground only on two sides.
Floor numbering – definitely odd although if it is tied in with the 2nd tower there would be ‘some’ logic to it. Regardless, 10th floor of 1 Rincon will be higher than any other 10th floor in the area. Potential resales are more likely to be decided on actual view vs whether the 10th floor should rightly be called the 10th or the 4th…in my opinion.
1 Rincon vs. Infinity or just plain 1 Rincon bashing…can we just stop it already. No one is writing anything new and subjective taste is by definition personal. I’m not a fan of 1 Rincon’s location, but PERSONALLY I think the building is quite attractive. The huge grid growing on its west side looks very cool as you approach the Bay Bridge from the west.
It is getting tedious when reading an interesting discussion about, say, floor numbering for example and it it devolves into yet another “1 Rincon how I hate you, let me count the ways….”
[Editor’s Note: Amen. Time to ratchet up the “censoring.”]
I live within 2 blocks of the construction site so I often walk right by the site on Harrison Street.
From a disclosure perspective, I would agree with those that say it is borderline sneaky, but definitely not deceptive and not worthy of a “lawsuit” (give me a break), and here’s the reason:
When standing on the sidewalk off Harrison Street directly in front of the tower, it’s obvious that the lobby floor (i.e., floor #6) is at least 50 feet higher than where I am standing. If you assume that a story is roughly 10 feet, then the fact that they have designated the lobby as floors 6 and 7 is accurate.
I think people forget that the tower is actually built on top of a little hill that is itself on top of a much bigger hill. I guarantee you that the people on floor 8 are just as high in feet above Harrison Street as those on floor 8 of the Infinity are above Spear, Folsom or Main.
….now can we move on to another non-1Rincon related topic already?
Is Socketsite hosted in China? With all this censoring, you might think so.
I don’t believe my post deserved to be removed anymore than a lot of the others here.
Last time I post on this board for a while. Not a big deal since I think the quality of info here has deteriorated.
[Editor’s Note: “I think the quality of info here has deteriorated…” Us too, and that’s exactly why we’re cracking down on wayward comments. It’s not always fair and we can only hope that you’ll understand. Regardless, thanks for “plugging in.”]
I can’t believe my post was removed completely by BIG BROTHER! I didn’t use any profanity or name-calling. I was not angry or yelling. I just made a simple joke equating this whole floor numbering thing to buying a car ‘assuming’ that there would be an engine in it.
[Editor’s Note: Really? Perhaps it was this line: “LOOKING AT ALL THE RINCON & INFINITY GROUPIES TEAR EACH OTHER APART IS FUN-FUN-FUN!!!!!!!!!!” That’s not what we’re about.]
“[Editor’s Note: “I think the quality of info here has deteriorated…” Us too, and that’s exactly why we’re cracking down on wayward comments. It’s not always fair and we can only hope that you’ll understand. Regardless, thanks for “plugging in.”]”
Thanks for the response. Okay….I was pissed off that my post got removed but the choice to censor certain posts should be objective and not subjective. There is no reasoning why my post got removed while other people’s posts–I won’t mention any names–stayed. They were far more insulting and there merely to get a rise.
I do think the quality has deteriorated but it truly is at the hands of certain posters and on certain subjects.
>>When standing on the sidewalk off Harrison Street directly in front of the tower, it’s obvious that the lobby floor (i.e., floor #6) is at least 50 feet higher than where I am standing. If you assume that a story is roughly 10 feet, then the fact that they have designated the lobby as floors 6 and 7 is accurate.
This is such a joke, since when we judge the floor number of the lobby by standing outside of sidewalk?
Can I say: “When standing on the sidewalk off 1st Street and Folsom directly in front of the tower, it’s obvious that the lobby floor is at least 150 feet higher than where I am standing. If you assume that a story is roughly 10 feet, then the fact that they have designated the lobby as floors 16 and 17 is accurate”?
yes, we should call the lobby floor 16 instead and F6 sounds way too low!
Thank God in SF we could see so many high rises build on the top of the hills, I believe when you step in the lobby, it should be called F1, not by how high from the sidewalk.
to be most accurate, it should be designated by the number of feet above sea level to bring all buildings to par. e.g. I live on 400-410 feet. Then again, this be another lawsuit waiting to happen when people start bickering that the carpet is not as thick as the hard wood and those with hardwood floors should be 400.05 to 410. If you regress further, measurements would need to be taken at STP by a certified measurement and elevators that measured to
“This is such a joke, since when we judge the floor number of the lobby by standing outside of sidewalk?
Can I say: “When standing on the sidewalk off 1st Street and Folsom directly in front of the tower, it’s obvious that the lobby floor is at least 150 feet higher than where I am standing. If you assume that a story is roughly 10 feet, then the fact that they have designated the lobby as floors 16 and 17 is accurate”?
yes, we should call the lobby floor 16 instead and F6 sounds way too low!
Thank God in SF we could see so many high rises build on the top of the hills, I believe when you step in the lobby, it should be called F1, not by how high from the sidewalk.”
When someone is this clueless, it’s almost impossible to carry on a rationale discussion so I’m afraid that I am unable to respond to your nonsensical rambling. Have a nice day.
How is that clueless??
I didn’t post that comment, but he/she made a good point that since when do we number floors based on standing somewhere on the sidewalk away from the building? Seems reasonable that the lobby, which in this case is sitting on ground level to be numbered floor 1…
“How is that clueless??”
It’s clueless because the comment in no way acknowledges the unusual topographical nature of the site where the the tower is built relative to the street and sidewalks immediately surrounding it. Clueless is probably not the right word in any event. It’s more like ignorance because, unlike me, I’m guessing that this person has never set foot within a block of the construction site, whereas I’ve walked by it maybe 50 times.
The most ironic thing about this whole silly discussion is the fact that, just like me, I’m guessing that the poster has absolutely no stake whatsoever in whether or not the labeling of the floors should be one way versus the other. He or she is just bored, whereas I was actually attempting to offer up a reasonable explanation, based on my close up observations of the construction site, for why the floor numbering scheme used at 1Rincon is not necessarily deceptive or inaccurate.
Amon 11:51 AM: you probably only prove yourself “clueless” by using your “sidewalk” theory since no one will use it.
“Amon 11:51 AM: you probably only prove yourself “clueless” by using your “sidewalk” theory since no one will use it.”
It’s not a theory, it’s reality. But maybe that’s my fatal error in this dialogue, trying to apply logic to reality since it’s apparent that fantasy reigns when it comes to discussing real estate.
Maybe you think it’s reasonable explanation, however, it’s not at all.
And it really does not matter how many times you walked by,
And I’m a 1rincon buyer, I was not told the floor number scheme, I was not bored, I believe people needs to pay attention how this developer doing business, I live in the same neighborhood, I am very aware of how it looks from the sidewalk.
So get yourself a lawyer and sue…it sounds like you’ve been seriously wronged and the value of your condo is probably 20% less than what you paid.
Get real.
The developer should be smart enough, correct their misleading/confusing floor numbering scheme before more buyers find out when they are ready to walk through later.
You’ve got several hundred buyers at 1Rincon. It’s probably safe to assume a few dozen probably either don’t know about the flooring scheme or are confuse or felt misleaded. We’ve seen a couple buyers or potential buyers already that weren’t disclosed this info.
The builder should get real about this whole situation. It may not be deceptive marketing, but it’s certainly not conventional that they made the FIRST floor undergound instead of calling it P5 or G5…
“You’ve got several hundred buyers at 1Rincon. It’s probably safe to assume a few dozen probably either don’t know about the flooring scheme or are confuse or felt misleaded. We’ve seen a couple buyers or potential buyers already that weren’t disclosed this info.
The builder should get real about this whole situation. It may not be deceptive marketing, but it’s certainly not conventional that they made the FIRST floor undergound instead of calling it P5 or G5…”
Personally, I think that’s a totally reasonable suggestion, at least from a disclosure perspective, but I still stand by my original position that someone on the 10th floor of 1Rincon is just as high above the intersection of Harrison and 1st as a a person on the 10th floor of any other building in this city.
This forum will be really interesting when we adopt the sky lobby concept then most residences will be on the negative x floor. If you look at the bridgeview on a lower floor 1BR, it feels like you’re underground until you get to the 8/9th floor since the building backs to a hill. The building’s first floor should really on the 4th floor if you took the average of the elevations. The 8th floor of Rincon looks at the 10th floor or so of the Bridgeview. I personally think there is a reverse argument for 1Rincon since they don’t disclose that the base of the building is 10 floors above the base of rincon hill.
“This forum will be really interesting when we adopt the sky lobby concept then most residences will be on the negative x floor. If you look at the bridgeview on a lower floor 1BR, it feels like you’re underground until you get to the 8/9th floor since the building backs to a hill. The building’s first floor should really on the 4th floor if you took the average of the elevations. The 8th floor of Rincon looks at the 10th floor or so of the Bridgeview. I personally think there is a reverse argument for 1Rincon since they don’t disclose that the base of the building is 10 floors above the base of rincon hill.”
This comment raises an interesting point because I think that there is a much more legitimate argument for deception in the case of buyers that have purchased units that face the bridge, whereas the buyers that have purchased units that face Harrison Street are in a much different situation.
I wonder the pricing was so as to take this difference into account?
Maybe this is simple. Everybody is using the driveway as the place to calculate height.
If anybody noticed during construction, you can see every floor including the “basement” floors on the east and north sides of the building. It is built against a hill with the driveway being the highest point.
We are building condos in LA on a sloped lot. The city used one of the lowest points on the lot to calculate how many floors. Could it be that the driveway is actually built above the grade of the lot?
Pricing and floors is such a subjective thing to be calculating. There is no standard that says a unit on the 14th floor should be this much.
What are you guys talking about?
“Could it be that the driveway is actually built above the grade of the lot?”
Not only “could it be”, IT IS, which was my entire point. But that said, I would have to agree that it’s a totally different story for people with units that face the bridge as opposed to be people that face toward downtown or Twin Peaks.
Only on a One Rincon thread could you get close to 100 responses on the issue of floor numbering. This building is going to be filled with Einsteins. Thanks for the great entertainment….
“Only on a One Rincon thread could you get close to 100 responses on the issue of floor numbering. This building is going to be filled with Einsteins. Thanks for the great entertainment….”
Sorry, but I’m not making the connection between a bunch of blow hards (substantially all of whom presumably are not 1Rincon buyers) giving their opinion on a fairly silly topic and the building being “filled with Einsteins.”
Wait, maybe that’s because I’m one of the Einsteins. Man, do I feel dumb…
Although it’s true, the person on the 10th in 1Rincon is high above any other person on 10th of any other building in the city, however, this is not the point, the point is, they did not discose the strange/uncommon floor number scheme and misled the buyers.
If you live in a 4-story building on top of the twin peaks, you won’t call yourself live on F100, right? You probably will still describe yourself live on the 4th floor of a buiding on twin peaks.
“Although it’s true, the person on the 10th in 1Rincon is high above any other person on 10th of any other building in the city, however, this is not the point, the point is, they did not discose the strange/uncommon floor number scheme and misled the buyers.”
Yes, hence the comment that preceded the statement regarding the 10th…
“…I think that’s a totally reasonable suggestion, at least from a disclosure perspective…”
I’m confused.
Did the developer have documented disoclosure about the lobby starting on the 6th floor or not?? Or was it just verbal??
All this back and forth is giving me a headache…
While we focus on the facts, a “plugged in” reader focuses on an explanation:
“I spoke with One Rincon today and they explained their reasoning behind the flooring scheme. One person’s [comment] was correct. [Actually, two.] The floors in tower one and tower two match up with each other. Since the lot is on a hill, tower two’s first floor lines up with the street at Harrison and Fremont.”
The explanation is certain to seem reasonable to some, while to others it will not. Regardless, we do believe this one has been asked and answered (and then some), and we’re moving on.
Wow.. I guess I’m not an Einsteiner. I did buy at One Rincon and was one of the first buyers and had a choice from most of the units in the building (my agent rocks!). Though in the pressure and excitement, I said floor 20ish was high enough even though my agent explained the starting on the 8th floor concept. Thinking back, I would have gone to high 20s if I was an Einsteiner. Still very excited about getting my water and water view for a cool meelion though.
Happy 1Rincon Owner, what was the prices for the water view units 30ish floors or higher during the presale??
Judging by the sqft of 2 bed units, looks like you got in around 850/sqft. Not bad…
yeah – curious to know what others paid for their units. i got my 2br in the upper 20’s flrs, city/twin peak views for around $850/sq ft.
2br on an upper teen floor for $802/sq ft….
Anon @ 2:06, what stack are you in?
“yeah – curious to know what others paid for their units. i got my 2br in the upper 20’s flrs, city/twin peak views for around $850/sq ft.”
I got my 2br in the upper 20’s for $725/sq ft
That’s strange how one ‘first day’ buyer got in at $850/sqft, and another at $725/sqft.
What’s with the huge descrepency? Direction of the views?
Or is the $725 person a ‘friend or family’ of the developer?
The 725 is a phenonminal rate and I have to say that I was part of the friends and family and my rate wasn’t that good. It may depend what the 725 thinks the square footage is and what high 20’s really means. Since the 02 is larger and only slightly higher in price, it would be really tough (and a deal if true) to beat 750 a foot if at all. I’m looking at a mileeon for 1300 square feet as still being above 725 a foot and that’s not close to the high 20th floor… Must be the wife or brother of the developer! It could be the monkey in the middle outrigger floor on 28 but most opted for the corners.
“I got my 2br in the upper 20’s for $725/sq ft”
Take it with a grain of salt. Folks can put anything in here…
Well, they say the one bedrooms on facing east went up about 5k per floor. So is probably more for 2 bedrooms. Also, some units are more desirable than others. Some have balconies, some don’t. There is not enough information here to make any comparisons about square feet.
The floor 1Rincon numbering issue seems incredibly trivial to those who wouldn’t choose highrise living in the first place.
But those who enjoy highrise living are also often highrise “buffs” and obsess (in the best sense of the word) with such details.
Folks who put down deposits during the Pre-occupancy period experience alternating episodes of joy and anxiety that are pegged to construction schedules and sales figures. The disappearing/reappearing tower crane last week had to be a perfect example of that. It’s all part of the experience.
In the late 80s, I lived on 77 at The John Handcock in Chicago. There.. floor number, location and view direction combine like a formula to set your place in a ‘pecking order’ of sorts (92nd>45th and N,NW>S,SE etc.)
I remember the first person I met after moving in asking me how much x-brace my apartment had. X-brace is a constant topic of discussion among Handcock residents.
For the record… John Candy was #1 (92nd/N) Jerry Springer was about #7 (90th/E)
My friend with an awesome place on 45 (the lowest residential floor) referred to 45 as the ‘wrong side of the tracks’
Living there did drive me a little crazy sometimes. For example: there’s an inconvenience that comes with elevators, and you often find yourself talking to your guests’ backs because they stand facing the windows most of the time.
Overall however, it was great! I’m certain 1Rincon residents will love living there despite the opinions of naysayers.
>>I spoke with One Rincon today and they explained their reasoning behind the flooring scheme.
To explain to you today is one thing, they did not disclose and explain to me and all the other buyers is the other.
“Overall however, it was great! I’m certain 1Rincon residents will love living there despite the opinions of naysayers.”
I am sure they will. In particular with the earthquake thrill which you weren’t able to enjoy in the John Handcock. That is worth an extra $10K per floor at least.
“I spoke with One Rincon today and they explained their reasoning behind the flooring scheme.”
“To explain to you today is one thing, they did not disclose and explain to me and all the other buyers is the other.”
I did not care what the reasoning behind the flooring scheme was when I bought since I knew exactly where my unit was in the model. First thing they said to me was that the residential floors start on 8. Naturally, I asked where floor 8 was on the model and then counted up to my floor.
I only asked for the reason now, to set the record straight. It is not deceptive marketing by the big bad evil developer, rather there is a very valid reason for the flooring scheme.
Most buildings built against a hill start the floor numbering at the most bottom exposed level. That would be Fremont and Harrison.
>>Most buildings built against a hill start the floor numbering at the most bottom exposed level. That would be Fremont and Harrison.
Really? Could you give me any name of the buildings in the city?
Bridgeview.
How about Metropolitan?
“Most buildings built against a hill start the floor numbering at the most bottom exposed level. That would be Fremont and Harrison.”
True, but the difference here is that the first exposed level of this tower is the “sixth” floor and I’d argue that the second tower is a different “building”. As has been pointed out previously, the two towers have separate foundations. They are part of the same complex/development, but they are not the same building.
plus, if the tower2 project got cancelled by some reason, will they have new floor number scheme for tower1?
Having a floor number scheme based on another tower even does not exist yet is even more odd!
Since the tower1 is the first project, it seems more reasonable to me to have tower2 floor number scheme based on tower1’s if they really want to make those 2 towers floor related to each other
Please let us focus on the topic and discussion…
Yesterday I was driving home from Oakland, on the Bay Bridge I noticed the 10th floor looks like only on the 4th from the side facing the bay, when you see the number “10” hanging so close to the ground, you just can not convinced by the explanation posted here earelier.
Check it out when next time when you are driving on the Bay Bridge, stay on the right most lane, you will know what I’m talking about…
LAWSUIT. Does anyone know a laywer who could go over the contract and determine if a lawsuit is possible based on the flooring scheme? I think to be fair, One Rincon Hill needs to reduce the price of their already “reserved” units. The buyers would be a little happier. Marketing is not a valid exclude. It’s lying.
The fact is, the majority of buyers WERE discepted into buying a floor #, and they did not disclose properly (or at all) how parking lots came into play.
Let’s stop all the bashing and just sign a petition on paper for a lawsuit. This is really not fair. And some of the writers here work for One Rincon Hill (so don’t be discouraged about the impossibility of a lawsuit).