3444 Washington

From a plugged-in Sleepiguy when the rather handsome 3444 Washington hit the market last May asking $17,500,000: “This property sold a couple of years ago for 16.5 million.”

From the MLS today: now asking $15,750,000 with an “official” one day on the market.

UPDATE: It appears as though sleepiguy (or his agent) might have been thrown by an asterisk. From a plugged-in FSBO:

MLS shows the 1/31/2006 sale price as $16.5M with an *. Current assessed value is $15.8M – so the actual sale price was probably about $15.2M or so…

Cheers. And something tells us we’ll see another one when this sells (asterisk that is).

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by tipster

    What a dump!
    I wouldn’t live there if you PAID me $30K!
    That’s not the REAL SF!
    Looks like a TRAILER stacked on top!
    It’s on a, a busy…
    Crap, we give up.

  2. Posted by DataDude

    That’s only $2.63 million per bedroom. What a steal!

  3. Posted by eddy

    Wrong Heights for this kind of price. They are presenting this home much better than before. This place was overpriced in May 2008 and the current price still wouldn’t have moved this home at that time. Maybe if it was on Pacific or Broadway with a killer view. But not in “Presidio” Heights.
    There was a period where lots of homes were selling north of $10M. I’ll be shocked if we see another $10M+ home sale for anything but a premier home. There is currently nothing priced above that mark in SF right now that could sell above that mark with maybe the exception of 2845 Broadway. Someone would probably pay $10M for 2901 Broadway but it just doesn’t seem worth the trouble.
    This is going to put some downward pressure on this years Decorator Showcase @ 2830 Pacific.

  4. Posted by LMRiM

    This might be The Real SF ™, but because it’s going to sell for less than its last sale price, it’s definitely not primo.
    Oh, and the last seller overpaid anyway, so what’s the big deal.

  5. Posted by kthnxybe

    Hehe, I just saw this on mls and came running over here to read the comments that are so far exactly as I expect.
    That grass-and-granite-lawn still gives me the heebeejeebees.

  6. Posted by ex SF-er

    They did a good job with the photography.
    they picked sunny days.
    the pic of the TV room is great, with the GG Bridge framed in the background.
    it’s a very nice place. usually you want “stunning” to be part of the description, but you often find stunning lacking in SF luxury RE, so it’s not a big deal.
    I don’t know the difference between primo and prime and the affluent and the uber-affluent areas of SF. I doubt I’ll ever set foot in any of those homes!

  7. Posted by Jake

    Beautiful house but at 7950 sf, this is still almost $2k a square foot. And as larger properties tend to go for less psf, I think this has a looooong way to fall in this market before there are any takers.

  8. Posted by Salarywoman

    I’d want to know a little bit more about those brick walls.

  9. Posted by Sleepiguy

    I have mixed feelings about this house, actually. Somehow, it initially went from pretty great (back in 05) to blah. The staging is a bit better this go round, but not much. With the right decor and some new baths, you could tart it up a bit and it would look “stunning” I think.
    Part of me prefers Presidio Heights to Pac Heights these days, and I wouldn’t feel hesitant about paying 10+ that block of Washington. That said, it’s simply not going to sell at 15. The owners will just have to find a way to stay put or….
    It’s also funny that Eddy mentioned 2845 Broadway, because the house next door to this one is also owned by Sperling and has also been vacant for probably 5 or 6 years at least.
    *Also, I may have mentioned that this house somewhere in the 2s back in the early? mid? 90s, I think as part of a divorce settlement.

  10. Posted by sleepiguy

    This house was updated by a reputable contractor sometime in the 90s (I think). However, I have no idea if it’s a UMB or not.
    OT: One of the many, many houses I was talking about just put their sign up. It’s on the corner of Broadway and Scott, and it’s a Malin listing. Nothing on the MLS or her site yet. They tried and failed to rent it. It’s small, but super great location!
    [Editor’s Note: That would be the William Wurster designed 2580 Broadway which was recently seeking a rent of $12,500 per month.]

  11. Posted by FSBO

    MLS shows the 1/31/2006 sale price as $16.5M with an *. Current assessed value is $15.8M – so the actual sale price was probably about $15.2M or so. (Why was it so necessary to mask that information?)
    The 2006 seller purchased the house for “only” $1.3M in Dec 1993 (way below its asking price then of $1.8M). How about that compound appreciation rate – 12X increase in 12 years! As sleepiguy noted, some renovation was done in the 90s.

  12. Posted by eddy

    Sperling is the guy I mentioned in the other thread about this home. My guess is that his comps were used by the current owner as justification for his close price. It’s pretty clear that those comps are invalid. He’s got 3 or 4 vacant homes and I’m sure he doesn’t care.
    I agree that Presidio is gaining ground in terms of perception/quality, but that doesn’t mean Presidio should command Pacific prices. I think the current market equilibrium has a slight increase in price for Presidio but more of a decrease in price to Pacific.
    The current owner simply overpaid. 1500psf would be fair at $12M but I would still be surprised if the buyers are out there right now.

  13. Posted by eddy

    Which corner?
    [Editor’s Note: Northeast (see note to sleepiguy above).]

  14. Posted by eddy

    Thanks. It’s on MLS and SFP now @ $4.2M. No pics so it must be a bit outdated inside. What would you rather have 150k/yr in rent or $4.2M outright? At $4.2M your taxes are going to be about $50k alone. Yikes. Sorry to get off topic.

  15. Posted by tipster

    Could the asterisk have been for “furnishings”, a way to knock $100K off the assessed value by throwing in some junk furniture that the parties then used to pretend the price for the property was lower than it really was.
    Could that have been why sleepiguy ignored the lower assessed value and stated it as the sales price? Because sg knew full well that the assessment was wink wink, nudge nudge too low.

  16. Posted by Juju

    I used to live few blocks from this house. Presidio Heights is just as good as Pacific Heights. The difference is Pac Heights has Golden Gate views whereas Presidio Heights has presidio views (and sometimes Golden Gate depending on what street you are on). The plus side for Presidio Heights is the playground in Presidio park for the kids to run around (it’s very wasp-ish if you are into that kind of stuff) . It has a more neighborly feel to it than Pacific Heights since some parts of it is more flat than the hilly Pac Heights. Washington is a good street to be on because it’s close enough to the park but it’s higher up than the ones on Jackson. The ones on Jackson tend to have big flat backyards which is rare in SF. Presidio Heights also has Bryan’s Grocery which has the best protein selection in town. Also Presidio Heights has very limited apartment buildings whereas Pacific Heights have tons and tons of them. With that said, I would rather live on the Gold Coast than the blocks on Jackson/ washington between Cherry and Walnut any day of the week (except the house on Lyon and Broadway where everyone in the city goes up and down that stairs to no end and high school kids hang out on weekends).

  17. Posted by FormerAptBroker

    Eddy wrote:
    > Wrong Heights for this kind of price.
    Then Juju wrote:
    > I used to live few blocks from this house. Presidio
    > Heights is just as good as Pacific Heights. The difference
    > is Pac Heights has Golden Gate views whereas Presidio
    > Heights has presidio views (and sometimes Golden Gate
    > depending on what street you are on). The plus side for
    > Presidio Heights is the playground in Presidio park for
    > the kids to run around (it’s very wasp-ish if you are into
    > that kind of stuff) .
    If you went to a top 5 B School, work in Banking, PE or VC and want to get in to the PU Club (and want your kids to go to Town/Burke) you will pay a premium to live in Presidio Heights (Pac Heights even West of Scott is less desirable)…

  18. Posted by tipster

    Banking, PE, VC, and even the PU club are SO pre-October 2008.

  19. Posted by eddy

    123 Laurel takes a 20% reduction in ask. -750k to $2.95. Kudos to the agent and family here for marking this place down to an attractive price. I’ve yet to get inside this place by the pics don’t make it look too bad. But the pics are primarily of just one or two rooms. Have to go check it out now. Now my interest is peaked. Note my earlers comments on here somewhere that these guys had a lot of room to negotiate given that they were in this place for 40+ years and have lots of room. Sad thing is that $3.5 was probably gettable in 2007 and early part of 2008 here. I predict that we’ll continue to see some eye popping stats this year….

  20. Posted by eddy

    2830 Pacific Ave is finally on the market listed at $12.9. I think this shows some pretty good restraint on the agents to put this house on the market at this price. Hard to sell anything above 6 right now; but this is as prime as it gets. They really did an overhaul on this place.
    [Editor’s Note: 2830 Pacific: 2009 Decorator Showcase Opens Its Doors (And Kimono). And cheers.]

  21. Posted by SocketSite

    The listing for 3444 Washington expired without a sale.

  22. Posted by SocketSite

    The listing for 3444 Washington is now once again active.

  23. Posted by EBGuy

    And around the corner from here 3209 Jackson is scheduled to hit the auction block today (8/26). Approx. 2900 sq.ft. and an unpaid balance of $2.1 million. There goes the neighborhood…

  24. Posted by Conifer

    3362 Jackson, nearby, was the great bargain of the year at $2.5m for 4000 square feet, next door but one to the Dolbys, with GG view. Even though it looks like half a house, it is on its own lot. Very realSF exterior, and probably interior.

  25. Posted by sleepiguy

    I’m puzzled by the 3209 foreclosure. That house could sell tomorrow for 2.1 million. They just painted it last year.
    Conifer, I went in 3362 Jackson, and it was a total nightmare. I’m surprised they even let people in the open house considering most of it was rotten. There was a ton of mold, and the upper floor had giant holes in it. Nothing in the house was remotely salvageable. Great exterior though..

  26. Posted by Conifer

    3362 Jackson: sleepiguy.
    That is amazing in that neighborhood. It must have involved serious illness on the part of the owner. How very sad.
    Even so, someone got a bargain.

  27. Posted by sfrenegade

    What ever happened with 3209 Jackson? Typical postponing of the foreclosure sale? If the unpaid balance is $2.1M, then they cashed out a 7 figure sum. They paid the first half of property taxes late for 2009-10.

  28. Posted by EBGuy

    What ever happened with 3209 Jackson?
    sfr, It looks like the NOD was canceled on August 29, 2009.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles