While we can’t verify the given reason for the latest 180 (and now a complete 360), according to a plugged-in tipster One Ecker Place is back to being a condo project and the sales office should reopen soon. From our tipster:

I had one of the condos at “One Ecker” under contract.. As you know those condos were switching to rentals.. well a couple days ago I was contacted by a sales rep. he said that the condos are once again going on the market. He said that the reason behind the change of mind was because it looked like they were going to get a high rise permit approved. So they were going to lease Ecker for a few years, then start construction on a tower. Well I guess that didn’t fly/ get approved so they are going to stick to the original plan of selling them. They said they are doing showings for their model unit next week by appointment only…

Perhaps a reader or two would be kind enough to shed some light on the aforementioned permit, tower and now ex-plan. Regardless, and as always, thank you for plugging in (and for the tips).
UPDATE: From another plugged-in reader: “I too was in escrow at One Ecker. I told them to get lost after the 360. What a waste of my time. He can’t get a tower permit. That’s silly to even think about. Besides, the Fleishacker family sold the transferable development rights over 10 years ago, and the property is under the same historic restriction as any other 1906 building.”
The SocketSite Scoop On One (1) Ecker Place: Going Condo Rental [SocketSite]
One (1) Ecker Place Update: Sales Office Open (And A Few Details) [SocketSite]
A Heller Manus Renovation Of 1 Ecker Place [SocketSite]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Dede

    This place should consider corporate rental.

  2. Posted by San FronziScheme

    This place is a commercial building and should have stayed that way, imho.
    There’s no view, the buildings around it are either contiguous or very close and it is right in the middle of the week-end dead zone.
    Curfew in this nabe is Friday 6PM and life restarts Monday at 7AM. Except for Starbucks on 2nd at Stevenson.

  3. Posted by mission

    Was this building part of the Renzo Piano project?
    If so, this could be bad news.
    [Editor’s Note: No.]

  4. Posted by Joe

    This building was not part of the Renzo Piano building project.

  5. Posted by SFGROUNDLEVEL

    One Ecker is a nice building. The brick structure with large modern windows creates a nice image. It’s too bad that these units are switching back to condos. I think the building would have made much better rentals. The prices for the condos were high, especially considering their size and absolutely no real views. The lack of parking is also an issue in the area, and also the limited sunlight. The salesperson there was telling me how the building is historical but that the developer had not yet completed the necessary paperwork. The good thing in the area however is the new transbay terminal that will be developed a block away.

  6. Posted by Mole Man

    Here are two wild theories about what might have happened for which there appears to be zero evidence. First, this area has some premium tennants who might have balked at rubbing elbows with renters based on a perception of chaos being unleashed on this tame haven. Second, a group of interested buyers might have approached the owners as a block with an offer to buy a chunk of the inventory all at once.
    Regarding the units, the location is prime and close to many things. Preference for living in commercial areas isn’t universal or even common, but that is exactly the clientele that made South of Market what it has become today. The units are small and overpriced because they are precious and unique like little snowflakes. There are also lots of places to lease parking around, so there shouldn’t be an issue with that.

  7. Posted by s

    there never was a “permit” or ever even an actual proposal submitted to the Planning Dept for a tower at this site.

  8. Posted by SFGROUNDLEVEL

    I will def. agree that the units are very unique and offer a huge contrast to all the new high-rise developments in the area.

  9. Posted by SFGROUNDLEVEL

    Its possible that the developers felt that they were not going to meet their goals through sales at this time in the market, and they wanted to lease for a few years until the market was really strong again. Maybe now they changed their minds again (not sure why). But I don’t understand returning deposits before getting permit approvals. The building isnt finished and was not at the point where they had to start closing. I think they are using that as an excuse.

  10. Posted by San FronziScheme

    this area has some premium tennants
    ? When I go to SOMA, even in the low street numbers, I don’t see premium tennants. Where are they hiding?
    The units are small and overpriced because they are precious and unique like little snowflakes.
    Nice spin. At 1000/sf to live in a dark canyon, they’d better be unique.
    The only thing missing in this nabe are the tumbleweeds to complement the howling winds on Week Ends.

  11. Posted by Foolio

    Have to disagree with you on this one. Depends on what you like to do on the weekends, natch, but Union Square and the Embarcadero are just a quick MUNI or bike ride away. There are nice eateries/bars/clubs/musuems/public spaces in the area. And, if you need a getaway trip, Bay Bridge access is exemplary.
    Although I do agree that the immediate vicinty gets kinda quiet but for all the Art Institute folks. Still, I think it’s a fine location, although my big concern for the space at that price is the lack of views.

  12. Posted by San FronziScheme

    You’re pretty close to interesting areas but for this money, I’d prefer Telegraph Hill or Nob Hill and both areas offer a view in this price range and real neighborhood life. Why take the Muni where the action is when the real action is at your doorstep for the same price.

  13. Posted by louis

    the developers probably saw the huge sale at mission bay and thought that might be a better exit for them. the lender probably rejected the plan to go rental.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles