313 Duncan

After 105 days on the market the list price for the Owen Kennerly designed “Modern Victorian” at 313 Duncan has been reduced $201,000 (7%). Now asking $2,649,000.

∙ Listing: 313 Duncan (5/5.5) – $2,649,000 [313duncan.com]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by anonn

    This will sell well north fo 2M IMO, even as it is sans views. But they have got a LOT of funk and personal design taste going on. When you walk in the door, immediately to your right there’s a tier, an entire living room, but not a living room … just a weird space. And it has a gap right at the door. Perfect for a child to fall into. Bedrooms are smallish. They are not all on the same floor. It’s a cool house, but you need to be vanilla when you go spec.

  2. Posted by LMRiM

    I guess the idea of renting it out for $15K/mo didn’t work out. What a surprise.

  3. Posted by anonn

    Yeah, they were probably off by about 5K per month. A similar place featured on here went for 11.5 per mo. You know and care a lot about Noe Valley, right LMRIM? That’s why you’re posting about it this morning, because it is important to you in some way?

  4. Posted by Treeman

    A beautiful house to be sure – but who has $2MM+ for a home?!?!? Almost no-one.

  5. Posted by LMRiM

    A similar place featured on here went for 11.5 per mo.
    Really? Which one? (You know I’m very interested in rent ratios, as they are a large component of any fair value analysis.) I’l save you the time in replying, fluj. I already know your respose: “It’s a secret“.
    Another NV house featured on SS, 4545 25th, had a wishing price of $2.7M and, failing to sell, is still seeking $8.5K/mo in rent:
    http://www.sothebyshomes.com/norcal/rental/0084129
    That puts that one at a wishing price to wishing rent/mo ratio of ~320, and that house actually sold for $2.7M a year ago (we have no anchor for selling price with 313 Duncan, because it’s never sold in its current iteration).
    I’d guess your current estimate of $10K/mo rent for 313 Duncan is way too high. Maybe $8K – I’m not a real expert on the area, although of course I knew enough to know that $15K/mo was a pipe dream.

  6. Posted by sparky-C

    “A beautiful house to be sure – but who has $2MM+ for a home?!?!? Almost no-one.”
    Somebody just had $2.1M for Clipper street.

  7. Posted by tipster

    “Somebody just had $2.1M for Clipper street.”
    Bad example, Sparky: even that one dropped half a mil before someone bought it.

  8. Posted by unearthly

    As has been pointed out this house has a funky layout, and somewhat impractical for a family as the bedrooms are small and disconnected. The guest house is smoking though. IMO this house competes with 4251-4253 23rd St which has a better layout, is on a slightly larger lot, and on a better street.

  9. Posted by sparky-C

    tipster,
    So a place in contract for $2.1M is a bad example of no one having $2M to spend? How so.

  10. Posted by auden

    Tipster-What do you mean bad example sparky? Sparky was pointing out that someone just paid 2 million for a home in Noe. Period.
    4251-4253 23rd St does not compare to Duncan to the astute buyer. Cheap materials, average quality of construction. A lot more thought, time, money and effort was put into Duncan and it shows. Duncan is not for everyone, but its a pretty cool house.

  11. Posted by unearthly

    I think your inflating the quality of this place; just because it’s a Dwell knockoff doesn’t mean it’s great. The materials choices are good but not great (oak floors, slate, marble, Marvin windows); and why would anyone put marble in the Kitchen?. Hard to believe this place was architect driven given it’s bizarre layout choices.

  12. Posted by Jake

    “why would anyone put marble in the Kitchen?”
    as long as it’s honed (not polished) and you don’t let spills sit around for days, marble is awesome in the kitchen, far preferable to home depot variety ultimate black granite.

  13. Posted by lolcat_94123

    I looked at the pictures, where is this “gap at the door, perfect for a child to fall into?” I was hoping to get a glimpse of this cavernous abyss waiting to devour an unknown child, but alas, I see and inside that looks pretty cool. Is this “gap” visible on any pics?
    Oh, and I think it’s over priced.

  14. Posted by fair value salesman

    “I looked at the pictures” therefore I feel I can question someone who has actually visited the space, eh?
    OK, lolcat_94123, I’ll bite.
    The gap is immediately to your right when you walk in the front door. And it dominates one’s experience.
    Sorry the pictures don’t do the design quirk justice. I think? Actually I don’t care. Formulate opinions based off internet photos and share your uninformed opines on blogs till the cows come home. It’s all good

  15. Posted by EH

    I also remember somebody playing cagey about the layout when it first came on the market, implying that they had someone interested. Guess that one didn’t work out.

  16. Posted by Treeman

    “no one having $2M to spend”
    Where did I say no-one?
    And yes, there are a few. I guess you could call that demand.

  17. Posted by ms.N

    funky layout?
    I went to see this place and found: 3-bedrooms on the same floor, each with their own bathroom en-suite. There’s a split level with a double-height space, a glass ceiling/floor and daylight coming in everywhere. Sounds awful (drip,drip)!
    To Mr. vanilla: This ain’t Kansas anymore!

  18. Posted by Danny

    Another Friday and another reduction!! After just one week from it’s last reduction: 313 Duncan Street, is now showing a new price of $2,495,000.
    Check it out on their website: http://www.313Duncan.com

  19. Posted by LMRiM

    Wow, another 6% cut after just one week at the already 7% reduced price. Talk about signalling a weak hand (and ZERO real interest in the property) to the marketplace!
    Just based on those dynamics, I’d have to guess that more cuts are necessary. 6% is just not enough, now that smart buyers can smell the blood in the water. But, I’ve been wrong before, and you just need one buyer to fall in love I guess (although you have to think that after 113DOM, that “impulse” buyer doesn’t exist at these prices…).

  20. Posted by Geo

    Certainly no impulse buyer on this on — as you note…Probably have to move it more quickly now…perhaps that the construction loan is due??

  21. Posted by auden

    Duncan just fell out of contract…BOM….

  22. Posted by LMRiM

    Well that’s good news – for the potential purchaser that is. Still a loooonnnng way to fall for NV IMO, and hopefully the future owner of this property will get to enjoy it at a much lower cost basis than $2.5M!

  23. Posted by unearthly

    Funny, looks like 4251-4253 23rd St went contingent (Act. Cont.); let’s see how that one plays out…

  24. Posted by tjg

    Price has been cut to $1.695M per Vangaurds ad in Real Estate Times this week

  25. Posted by diemos

    “Price has been cut to $1.695M per Vangaurds ad in Real Estate Times this week ”
    Website and MLS still say 2.495M.

  26. Posted by LMRiM

    New language in the 313 Duncan listing:
    “Also for rent $8500 main house, $2500 cottage.”
    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/313-Duncan-St-94131/home/1464726
    Sure, I’m going to pay $8500/mo rent, and have some clowns living cheek by jowl with my family in some little cottage out back.
    I don’t understand why these guys just don’t cut the price and get it sold.

  27. Posted by San FronziScheme

    It will be interesting to see what’s the rental market in this segment.

  28. Posted by Geo

    I don’t understand why these guys just don’t cut the price and get it sold.
    because the cost to carry is a cheap option ticket to finding “the” right buyer to pay up…until the construction loan wont be rolled over again or something else comes due…

  29. Posted by LMRiM

    SFS – in my (limited) experience at looking at nice, pricey rental SFRs, I’d say that the bulk of the demand comes from three sources:
    1) recently relocated executives who have their companies pick up the tab while they are looking to buy a place;
    2) recently relocated executives who have their companies pick up the tab and who only expect to be in SF for a short time (1-2 years); and
    3) well-heeled families who are extensively renovating their primary residence and need a year or so in an alternate home.
    With corporate money more scarce, and HELOC money tougher to come by, I’d say these sources are drying up these days. There is not much “natural” demand from families who are willing to shell out $8K+ on rent, even if they can afford it no problem. If you’ve got the cash to spend $8K/mo, you probably own something or your living arrangements are just not that important to you in the overall scheme of things.
    All that being said, if these specuvestors of $7-10MM properties in Tiburon get real and accept rents under $10K/mo, we might be tempted to live like kings too (they are all for sale forever, have been vacant for 6+ months, and are all within a stone’s throw from each other):
    http://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/apa/1066202245.html
    http://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/apa/1066201467.html
    http://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/apa/1066200466.html
    🙂

  30. Posted by matt

    http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/apa/1080765151.html
    Current ask as of 3/18- $9,500 per month rental.
    Contradicts the website which has “Sale Pending” at $2.495

  31. Posted by diemos

    Still Active on the MLS, from the listing:
    “Also for rent $8500 main house, $2500 cottage.”

  32. Posted by LMRiM

    That’s great. Originally, the house + cottage was asking $15K/mo wishing rent. The recent craigslist $9500 wishing rent is for the house + cottage. The MLS listing, which predates the craigslist ad, was asking $11K combined wishing rent for the house + cottage.
    It looks like the specuvestor got his bidding war. Too bad it’s a dutch auction against himself 🙂

  33. Posted by LMRiM

    Speaking about rentals, I know Tiburon isn’t Noe Valley (the houses here generally cost more apples to apples), but this wishing $8K/mo rental caught my eye for this language:
    “Premier luxury property available as rental for first time. Also includes free use of Porsche Cabriolet. Very high value home. Fully furnished turnkey property. Custom woodworking throughout. Incredible views…. Exquisite artwork. Heated swimming pool. Heated marble floors in master bathroom and bathroom upstairs. Gourmet kitchen. Owner pays for housekeeping, yard maintenance, pool cleaning, internet, and phone line (excluding international/900).” Emphasis added.
    http://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/apa/1080987364.html
    That house would cost a fair bit more than 313 Duncan if one were to purchase it, like more than $1M more. It’s been for rent for a few months, notwithstanding the free Porsche usage.
    Unlike what they keep saying on that “other site”, it’s a good time to be a buyer renter.

  34. Posted by LMRiM

    Oh well, the “strikethrough” didn’t work on “buyer” in my post above. I’ll never get work in tech that’s for sure 😉

  35. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    LMRiM – I think that the [strike] tag gets filtered out of comments. [b], [a href…], and [i] seem to get passed through OK.
    Editor : please consider removing [strike] from the filter list so we don’t have to result to nerdy^H^H^H^H^H alternative methods to render strikethrough.

  36. Posted by Noe94131

    “Sold” has just been plastered on the sign. Can one of you look up the selling price? Thanks.

  37. Posted by 94114

    It’s still in escrow, I believe.

  38. Posted by Noe94131

    Thanks. I guess, in this market, agents can’t afford the “pending” signs I used to see.

  39. Posted by anonn

    hahhaha. yeah, or it might be sold and the realtor immediately went on vacation. the admin assistant in that brokerage usually updates the mls, but she got sick. honestly it could be a dozen things.

  40. Posted by [anon.ed]

    ha. LMRIM was always good for a laugh when it came to talking about the local market. If it wasn’t Monterey Heights or rentals in Tiburon, forget it. But he loved to argue though!

  41. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    Yeah, I am pretty sure this was bought by the twitter founder, wasn’t it?
    [Editor’s Note: While A Bird Tweets, A Shark Sings.]

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Articles