1606 Castro Living
Rebuilt in 2004 (after which it sold for $1,500,000), then resold in 2006 for $1,750,000, 1606 Castro is back on the market in 2010 and asking $1,875,000 (televisions included).
∙ Listing: 1606 Castro (3/3.5) – $1,875,000 [1606castro.com] [MLS]

15 thoughts on “Apples To Apples To Apples (Plus Televisions) For 1606 Castro”
  1. $1.5M in 2004 = $1.70M in 2009
    $1.75M in 2006 = $1.99M in 2009
    This slots in between, a bit more than halfway towards the higher number. Pricing seems a little aggressive considering what else has sold nearby lately in this size range. Is this materially nicer than some of those?
    Btw, in the 2nd and 3rd bathrooms pictured, are those sinks REALLY wide or is that an artifact from a wide angle lens?

  2. Eddy,
    I was wondering the same thing too. It’s a nice looking place but psf is low. I can’t remember if I’ve seen this one or the next door house several years ago, but the main negative was a tiny yard b/c the lot is next to a corner and the Castro st noise.
    Still a good deal, might need to check it out this wknd

  3. Btw, in the 2nd and 3rd bathrooms pictured, are those sinks REALLY wide or is that an artifact from a wide angle lens?
    Wide angle lens.
    The wider the lens, the more stretched out objects near the edge of the frame appear. One easy way to tell is to look for objects that are known to be round or square near the edge of the photo, and see how stretched out they appear. Another way to tell is to look at lines that should be parallel, and see how much of an angle they are converging. The less parallel, the wider the lens. In the 2nd bathroom pic, look at the lines of the sink and the mirror. In the 3rd, look at the lines of the sink, mirror, and floor tiles. See how they’re converging?

  4. Don’t know what nearby sales Anon E. is referring to, but a similar apple just up the street (1826 Castro) sold in November for about 10% over its 2004 price ($2m/$2.2m). Sellers here seem to be going for a similar spread. Does not seem aggressive to me.

  5. I’m curious as to how anon e mouse calculates inflation. It seems to me that in many asset classes, we’ve had enormous amounts of deflation.
    Just curious as to how these calculations are done and the assumptions being made.

  6. This pricing must be in error, because I have it on every good authority that SFH in Noe are down 45% from peak.

  7. The price for this place has consistently been lower than you’d expect from the photos, which immediately led me to look at the back yard. It’s usually the first place to go when you see a home whose price has been consistently below what you’d expect, and where turnover is high.
    And that appears to be the problem with this home: the backyard appears privacy challenged. There is another building what appears to be less than 25 feet from the rear edge of the house. Most homes have a decent sized back yard, and then the home behind you has a backyard that abuts your backyard, so the space between the homes is significant. Not in this case though.
    The lot depth is a little over half the standard, and then it backs right up to the side of the house around the corner, which probably gives it a very closed-in feel. It looks like people have been buying it for the relatively low price, but then bailing out after only a few years.
    Although it is very pretty inside, it will be interesting to see if this can beat its 2006 price. It initially appears to be a great value, but the small lot and the fact that the backyard abuts the neighbor’s house is probably what is keeping its price low. Add a relatively busy street and a moderate hill (lots of noise all night long as cars try to get up the street) and you can do better in this neighborhood for the money. But it sure has a pretty interior.

  8. Agree with tipster except in one respect. I live nearby and car noise at night is actually pretty rare. It’s a sleepy part of NV with little night action, and there’s not much reason for cars to be traveling up Castro by this house at night, unless maybe someone is taking the scenic route to Diamond Heights. Pretty quiet there.

  9. I am a little tired of seeing posts from people who clearly have not seen the property.
    The home is gorgeous. There is hardly a backyard.

  10. Here’s a calculator based on CPI (standard caveats about CPI apply, but it’s a good estimate of inflation):
    sanfrantim, I seem to remember a place or two on Clipper that sold recently, and one of them had a much nicer yard than this one. The place you mention on Castro sounds like the seller got a good price and looks close to an apple (there was definitely some foundation work done).

  11. Great Home Great Area Great Price. If I was looking in this price range this would be the home I’d buy. No I am not a paid endorsement. What more could you want?

  12. This went pending/contingent after 15 days on market (acc. to a local RE newsletter). Anyone confirm? details? cheers –

  13. The apples to apples sale of 1606 Castro closed escrow today with a reported contract price of $1,862,500. That’s 1 percent under asking (which sounds like a post inspection credit in play) but 6 percent over its purchase price in 2006.

Leave a Reply

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