Curb appeal? Not so much. Interior? Needs updating (if not an overhaul). The view? Not so bad (and not photoshopped). And the price? Asking under six hundred for eight hundred and twenty-five square feet (and deeded parking).
UPDATE: And while the address didn’t initially register with us (duh), it did with some others (doh!). All of a sudden, the “NO SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS!” note on the listing makes perfect sense (and “Luckily” has been stricken).
∙ Listing: 455 Vallejo #210 (1/1) – $599,000 [455vallejo210.com] [MLS]
∙ Telegraph Hill landslide forces 120 from homes [SFGate]
The closer to Coit tower, the better it gets, and this location is a bit too close to Broadway and the tourist/bridge-tunnel crowd.
Looking out the window to the left, what is that green-domed building?
Is this the place that sits right on top of the unstable quarried rock face?
I hate these automated slide shows. It never works exactly right and there’s no way to just flip through the photos manually.
Wasn’t this building sliding down the hill ala Casa Ken Maley and half red tagged recently?
And all of a sudden, the “NO SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS!” note on the listing makes perfect sense (and “Luckily” has been stricken).
What is that big easter egg on the left?
Nonsense. Everything is fine, fine, I tell you.
Now, drool at some pretty pictures of the outside of the building:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2007/02/28/MNGG7OCLJH1.DTL&o=3
That is a classic view. It seems like someone who would want this unit might still be a tourist at heart, so the location is right at the edge of awesome.
This building is really big, so I think the issue was rocks rolling down onto it from behind. There are pictures and details on the SFGate story that that is linked by the SocketSite story. If anything the rock slide adds some excitement and historical flair, and it also indicates that the land there has bedrock right underneath which helps overall and is much better than crumbly, liquifiable Marina fill.
Whoops, now I see better, but I stand by the built on rock beats fill remark. Not a unit for any scared of cliff dwelling, certainly.
This is historical miracle rock that must be preserved. There is a face/head in the whole right side of the cliff. That is what tourists come to see.
Look at it from the left side of your screen. Or squint. A bearded Greek? William Shakespeare? Hermione Gingold?
Had signed a lease here, but was let out of it, after the landslide hit during the 30 days between signature and when I was scheduled to move in. Different unit, but also a 1/1 ~825 sq ft. That unit was very well laid out w/ great closet space, and had equally tremendous views (the floor to ceiling wrap around views with the Transamerica building are 100x more impressive in person than in the photos, IMO). Location is excellent (provided you don’t mind a bit of hill walking) if you’re socially inclined, with parking and large storage units. Complex has two very large shared decks (in addition to the micro balcanies most units have). I have no ties to anyone there, but would definitely recommend taking time to check this place out if you are in the market for a 1/1 (and can get the place insured).
“bridge-tunnel crowd” San FronziScheme. Who are you referring to specifically? Someone coming in from Marin for the afternoon? I’m befuddled by the tired, wannabe-Manhattan-elitist notion in blogland. Much of the cultivated Bay Area good life happens quietly and importantly outside of SF.
But back to the pic – what in the world is that blue round thing on top of building photo left?
Must of the good life in the bay area happens outside of SF? Which is why it is called SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA! Anyway, enough with the tired conservative picket fence simpleton towns folk, this is a very touristy view indeed. There are many better views in SF, I actually find this to be one of the ugliest views of downtown. The pyramid looks bloated from this angle, due to NIMBYS reducing the height in the 70s by 300′ which hurt the entire design. Sigh.
from wikipedia re: b&t:
“The term applies to those who visit from elsewhere in the New York Metropolitan Area, especially from New Jersey and Long Island, both for work and for the New York nightlife, a trip that inevitably requires passing through a bridge and/or tunnel. It was later adopted in San Francisco, as an ironic reference to this original usage, because party-goers from the East Bay typically drive across the Bay Bridge/ Yerba Buena Tunnel (or take the BART, which goes through the Transbay Tube – a tunnel). The commute into San Francisco from Marin County also involves a bridge (the Golden Gate) and tunnel (the Waldo). The term has also recently been adopted by residents of Taipei, Taiwan when referring to people from Taipei County who take public transportation to go clubbing in the city on weekends. Clubs close to MRT stations, such as Luxy and Lava in particular, are favorite destinations of Taiwan’s bridge and tunnel crowd.
In 1974 I got to stay in this building as the company I worked for in Fresno had one of the units rented for use when the owner needed to be in the city. He let the employees use it whenever they wanted. It was a fabulous building and I have often wondered what it was like currently. In 1974 the rent for a one bedroom was $450.
Average wage in 1974: $8K (source in link below)
Average wage in 2008: $40K (approximate)
Wages have gone up by 5X
Rent for one bedroom in 1974: $ 450
Rent for one bedroom in 2008: $2800 (estimate)
Rents have gone up by 6X
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/AWI.html#Series
Hmm, that dome looks like a decorate element on the apartment next door. Go to 424 Broadway on Google Street View and look to the northwest, over the top of Showgirls. You can see it on Mapjack, too, perhaps a bit more clearly.
Surely I can find a more constructive use of my time on a Sunday morning…
Tipster, FWIW, the 1/1 (one floor higher than this one) that I looked at was renting for $2100/mth w/ parking, storage, etc. This was around Feb 2007.
As for the beige building with the green onion dome… the owner of the apt I looked at said that it was a protected historic building (and that it was actually a SFH). Don’t know more (or if even that is accurate, but FWIW…).
That’s good data, Tony. So maybe the same place from 1974 would rent for about $2300, if it were updated.
So wages up 5X, rents up 5X, though lots of variation due to how updated it is and was.
Did someone break into this apartment to take the interior shots?
The bed is not made up fully. There is stuff lying all over the living room. The TV remote control is balanced on the sofa arm. Is this the proper way to show a property on line? While we may ridicule the “chopped” pillows, this place could use some staging help.