The listing currently notes banked owned, but we don’t think it is. And if you caught the estate sale you probably knew it was coming and might have already peeked inside.
If not, here’s your chance to peruse the Edgar Mathews designed home at 2421 Pierce with gorgeous original woodwork, leaded glass and details.
∙ Listing: 2421 Pierce (6/6) – $4,950,000 [MLS]
Hmmm, fireplace in the foyer? $709psft?
This is a red flag that tells me to look to make sure the upstairs bedrooms have a vent to the furnace. I don’t see ducts in any of the photos.
A very few of these old houses had lots of fireplaces and never had any forced heat to any of the upstairs bedrooms. A furnace was added to heat the basement levels and first floor, but it was too difficult to run ducts any higher (without ruining the beautiful detail of the building) and so they never got added. When you see extra fireplaces, always look for this problem.
As an example, 2721 Pierce had fireplaces in every bedroom. No forced heat, except on the first floor. It sold for $1000 psft in 2005. Absolutely beautiful interior, but no heat. They probably would have had to wreck the interior to add it, so they passed.
I don’t know if this place has the same problem, but the extra fireplace and the lower psft price makes it show up as a red flag that should at least be investigated.
Why would anyone with a shred of accountability insert that sort of speculation into a public space? People use inspectors these days, Tipster, for every purchase. There’s no place for your nonsense any more.
Understood about the inspectors (tho not sure why it’s nonsense), but it doesn’t hurt to check before getting too attached to something that has major problems, and it takes all of 5 seconds to do it.
I simply do not understand why, in your constant attempts to talk about substantive issues pertaining to real estate both large and small, that you think it’s OK to insert wild speculation and innuendo, sight unseen. I’ll never get that about you. You want to know what a red flag is on this website? Your name, “Tipster.” Is that what you wanted? That’s what you’ve created.
Floor registers are clearly visible in the photographs of the foyer and dining room above, and also in one of the bedrooms in the listing.
If this house had central heat when built, and I’m sure that it did, then there was ducting to the upper floors. Unless, it had steam/radiators . They may have changed the type of fuel used. These weren’t forced air, they were gravity.
Nice comfortable temps.
On the very slim chance there is no ducting to the upper levels, that would be good to check before hiring an inspector. I’m not sure I would check for such a thing. I’d think that there being heat to the lower level…..there must be heat to the upper levels.
I forgot, I love this house.
What about the estate sale? Any details on that.
I always thought that a fireplace turned a mundane every-house-over-1700-sqft-should-have-one entry hall/foyer into a receiving room. Plus with the double overlook for an orchestra, the room would make a great makeshift ballroom.
And if the upstairs isn’t under air, which I doubt, than a high velocity HVAC system would solve the prob nicely with min intrusion.
Salarywoman,
Ducts to rooms in lower floors are usually easy to run. No need to check for them because if they aren’t there, it’s not difficult to run them yourself.
You can plainly see the duct in the foyer, but a foyer is likely to be on a lower floor. Ignore it.
It’s only on the upper floors that is the issue. I don’t want to belabor this point, but when you see an extra fireplace or two, especially in an unusual location like a foyer, take a few seconds and check for upstairs ducts. It can save you from investing a lot of time into a property that has a serious flaw. Most of the time it won’t be an issue, but it takes all of a minute to check, so it’s easy to do.
The only duct I could see in a bedroom is in photo 15 on the MLS photos, but it’s up at the ceiling. Original ducts are low at the floor because heat rises. That looks like it could be in a ground floor bedroom where a duct to that bedroom was added when adding the easy duct work to the underside of the main floor, and they just tapped a line under the main floor into that bedroom. The listing says one bedroom is on the lower level. So again, that one may not count.
Probably not an issue, but easy to check. Note also the wiring bolted to the ceiling in photo 16. In a $5M house?
As an opposite example, one day I walked into an open house in a city well into the east bay. The summers are blazing hot there, every house has air conditioning, and it was a typical hot summer day when I went in. The agent said “this is a RARE hot day here.” I immediately did a similar calculation (rare hot day? WTF?!?!) and asked “does this house not have air conditioning?” “Why, no, in fact it does not” said the helpful realtor. No AC. No ducts to put AC in. No nothing. Rare hot day indeed.
Gosh, how did I know enough to ask, in a city in which virtually every house has AC? You have to be alert for clues, because the agent sure as hell wasn’t going to volunteer that information.
If you see an extra fireplace, and a duct up too high, go upstairs and look for ducts. Takes all of a few minutes. Usually you’ll find the ducts and that’s the end of it. But it helps to be alert for the clues and it doesn’t take much time to investigate. That’s all I’m saying.
I’ll take it, heat or no heat, I’ll wear one of those sweater/blanket hybrids as seen on TV.
Oh, people are supposed to believe your anecdotes now? Good luck with that.
Such an interesting interior hidden behind a ho-hum facade. Pretty much ALL these old Pac Heights houses are serious disasters inside. Anytime you see, “1st time on market in ___ years!” translates to, “You get to rip out everything and start over!!” This house actually looks like it’s in OK condition so a little rehabbing probably won’t cost a fortune, but I seriously doubt it’s in move-in condition.
Maybe it is not in move-in condition, but I think this home is a very well done example of its period. PLEASE, whoever buys this, try not to DWELL the interior and work with what is already there in an understated updated way. The exterior is rather discreet, but I like it.
yuck. it’s so dark and has no windows. like a dungeon museum.
tipster, thanks for the comments! I think they’re very interesting- both from a historical perspective and to be reminded that what we take for granted should be checked. It doesn’t hurt and could save a lot of frustration in the future.
Why don’t you quit while you’re behind anonn? Your objections aren’t even coherent these days.
Tipster’s comments added information. Being aware of things to look for is never a bad thing. Unless you’re a realtor™ trying to put one over on your “clients”.
Why don’t you mind your own business, diemos? Tipster throws everything at the wall, at all times and sees what sticks, and you know it. Nice one. LOL
In the right hands this place will be spectacular. Agree with the poster above — hope trash the woodwork.
Just put up a Diebenkorn or two and you’re good to go.
Normally I’m not into cramming ancient and modern into the same property line but… wow. They nailed it here. I love this house.
Anonn, Tipster’s anecdote is a good one. I hope it encourages people to consider important and nonobvious things like climate control when they’re touring houses. It’s unclear why you’re trying so hard and unsuccessfully to shut him up. What is your motive?
This is a splendid house, in a superb location, at a fair price. It will sell quickly.
The warning not to paint the woodwork is well-taken. I remember when 2508 Green, another Matthews’ house, had it original dark wood on the main floor. Some fool decided to paint it.
Is it really just a matter of paint remover? I would think that much paint remover would remove the stain underneath as well.
this house either sells quick, or it could easily sell at 550 psf. it’s much more shabby than these pics appear. But I think it will sell.
If eddy is right, and this house sells for 550 psf, then tipster is right, prices are falling, and there is a recession in Pacific Heights and similar places.
The location of this house is really PRIME Pacific Heights, unlike many of the houses which receive this label liberally from some real estate brokers. It is at the end of the Pierce block coming down from the center of Alta Plaza, and on the corner of one of the best Pacfic Avenue blocks.
It is also large, a great SF Arts & Crafts treasure by one of SF’s most creative architects.
2421 Pierce has a new central heating system. It is not bank owned. It is a splendid home in the best location.
There was a total gut fixer on Jackson that sold for around $500psf or so. This is a superior home and has views. No yard to speak of, and needs help. Looking forward to seeing it on tour this week to get a better look at the bones. There was a similar home just up the block on Pacific & Scott (see name link). I think it was about $1k psf in late 2007. It was in about the exact same place from what I can tell from the pics of this place. 2421 is already a pretty good deal by that comp and it has a view. I’m very interested to see what happens here. I’m still predicting a fast sale but you just never know.
At Christmas you could realize both sides of that twisted pun in this house. You could have chestnuts roasting on an open fire. At the same time there could be chess nuts boasting in an open foyer.
Speaking of chess nuts, wasn’t Sam Sloan one of Arden Van Upp’s roommates at the Bourn mansion ?
Wow, does that kitchen fall flat. What a disaster. Completely inappropriate for the era of the home.
What is the status of this hous? Sold?
I saw it, and it is even more wonderful in person. Real SF in a real SF location.
Finally made it to see this home for an extended viewing as opposed to my initial run thorugh. It’s very large, but not as large as some of the listing pics make it out to be. The views are great but they are not front and center, so you have to look out at an angle to see them with exception from the upstairs bathroom that has the best view. Zero outside space other than a front entry walkway, but no playing with the kids in the yard, of course Alta Plaza is 75 ft up the hill.
It’s an interesting situation, you could buy it and move in tomorrow with little cost, but to bring it to modern standards and change this home to make it superb is going to cost $1.5.
Overall, I really like this house, but I understand why it hasn’t sold yet. A developer wont touch it since you’re looking at 6.5 of cost and getting $7M is going to be a stretch given the market conditions / direction. Too much rist for maybe a 500k return. And folks with $5M aren’t looking for a project like this one.
Conifer and I discussed this home vis a vis with Baker street and my takeaway is that both are 600-800k over priced to attract interest. But I would take Pierce as-is and just deal with the older house issue that one would inherit with the property over Baker street which seems a bit more move-in /fit/finish, but not as optimal in terms of location and general craftsmanship.
I don’t know if the boom market will return for these homes but as it stands this is a pretty classic home. I’d drop the price 500k and my guess is that it would sell to a developer (who will hopefully take some effort to preserve some of the nice details of this home). My revised prediction for market price on this home is between $600-620 per sqft. No way this home sells for $550 as I had intimated earlier in the thread.
Eddy, Thanks for the update. Meanwhile, just down the road 2420 Pacific appears to be headed for the auction block on Sept. 8. That property is 7,263 sq.ft. (7 bed,4 bath) and the Prop 13 mitigated taxes ($3,195.76) on that place are less than mine. The owner of 2420 Pacific appears to be Renaissance man and San Francisco real estate investor Dinesh Maniar… India-born Maniar, who also owns thoroughbred race horses as well as Diamond Oaks Winery in Napa. Troubling times in the City…
EB, very interesting. May I ask where you found this information? I don’t see this information anywhere. Always looking for a good data source!
Eddy, I knew you’d like that one. Occasionally I trawl RealtyTrac (map view) to look for “promising” properties with auction dates. I then use Zillow to find the address from the listed square footage and ProperyShark for the owner information. And of course, a sanity check on the SF County Recorder’s website to make sure I’m not saying anything inflammatory (or defamatory, for that matter).
… Or you could just get a subscription to ForeclosureRadar, but where’s the fun in that when the information is already out there (just not complete in one repository.)
Thanks for the tip. Hadn’t checked out RealtyTrac. Very interesting. There goes my afternoon!
A bit more about 2420 Pacific Ave and Dinesh Maniar. I can confirm from the SF Recorders website that a NOTS was filed on June 24, 2009 for 2420 Pacific. That seems to be the least of Maniar’s worries though, judging from civil court records. Far East National Bank is going for a judicial foreclosure on the Maniar owned properties at 234-40 Front Street where they have first and second liens totaling $6.9 million. Okay, now I can say I’ve seen at least one property this downturn going the JUDICIAL foreclosure route. I know I’m a junior developer wannabe, but shouldn’t a LLC have been used to shield the developer from personal liability.
Here’s another Dinesh Maniar (commercial) property facing judicial foreclosure (through his Montgomery Realty Group, Inc): 710 Sansome. What I found so astounding is that it appears the property was rebuilt by Maniar during the last boom (circa 1989). Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities… what could go wrong?
EBGuy- what is the deal with judicial forclosures? Isn’t there a risk in picking them up at auction over one that goes the more traditional foreclosure route?
This place is in escrow, btw.
What happened to 2420, Sept 8th has come and gone?
What happened to 2420, Sept 8th has come and gone?
RealtyTrac is now showing Sept. 17 for 2420 Pacific (anyone want to go to the courthouse?)
@Auden, I am far afield discussing judicial foreclosures, but since these are multi-million dollar projects (over $5million), the banks, I think, prefer to go after the ‘deep pockets’ of the developers via the judcial route (well, deep until they declare bankruptcy). Currently, both the Sansome property and Front Street development are in receivership. From what I gather, the lender will, many times, not market the property until after the redemption period. Here’s a pretty good article discussing the various routes a commercial lender can take with a judicial foreclosure.
RealtyTrac is now showing an October 8 auction date for 2420 Pacific.
Apparently RealtyTrac is some type of scam… So I’m not sure it’s the best source of information for foreclosures.
http://www.trulia.com/voices/Foreclosure/How_can_I_avoid_the_scam_of_RealtyTrac_racking_up_-16521
@sleepiguy, RealtyTrac has worked out well enough for me (that’s how I found out about 2420 Pacific), but then again, I tend not to sign up for FREE 7 DAY TRIALS on the internets as I know it is extemely likely that my credit card will get charged. I simply take the square footage numbers from RealtyTrac and triangulate the address using Zillow. As I stated in my post in September 2, 2009, a NOTS was filed on 2420 Pacific on June 24 (confirmed on SF Recorders website). The tax basis on this property is around $250k, so I would think that Dinesh Maniar is in active negotiations with his lender to forestall the inevitable(?). That might explain the “moving” auction date…
A little bit more on Dinesh Maniar and his Montgomery Realty Group. The building at 447 Battery (bought by Montgomery in Sept, 2007) received a NOD on June 22, 2009. According to this summary: On July 6, 2009, Montgomery Realty Group, Inc filed a voluntary petition for reorganization under Chapter 11 in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California. RealtyTrac is now showing an unpaid balance of ~$2.5million for 2420 Pacific (which is owned directly by Maniar).
The sale of 2421 Pierce Street closed escrow with a reported contract price of $4,614,500 (7% under asking and $661 per square foot).
Been meaning to comment on this sale. I think this is a pretty good deal for this home. Done right this could easily be $1k psf material and it certainly wouldn’t take 300psf in build costs to get it to that point. The new owners already have their construction crew working on this place.
Is the new owner a flipper?
A couple of updates on 2420 Pacific Ave., which I’ve been documenting on this thread. There was another NOTS (this time we’re serious) filed on December 24, but it looks like things might have (for the time being) been settled as a NOD Cancellation was filed on January 7.
Oh wait, here’s an update on the owner. Both Vichon and the Mondavi portfolio were sold, and the property switched hands again in 2003, purchased by Diamond Oaks proprietor Dinesh Maniar. A real-estate developer, Maniar at one point owned 550 acres of vineyards in Napa and Sonoma, but recently filed for bankruptcy and has been selling his holdings.
2421 is getting the major overhaul with a new pent room dormer that will have a killer view. This was a good buy and is a good example of a local buyer for a high flying tech company with some stock wealth putting it to work. Congrat’s to the buyers here. This was a great deal and should be a fantastic home when all done. Sort of hoped it was going to flip but glad someone is making it a home.
Heard that 2421 will be finished soon and is going to be flipped? Not sure this is true – does anyone know?
Public records seem to indicate that this is not a flip. Don’t know for sure.
This house is coming along well.