2416 Gough
Purchased for $3,025,000 two years ago (July 2008), according to a plugged-in tipster 2416 Gough is back on the market, but not yet the MLS, and asking $2,995,000.
2416 Gough Floor Plans
It’s six bedrooms with three and one-half baths across 3,435 square feet.

23 thoughts on “Apples To Apples On A Pacific Heights Tree Lined Street”
  1. Nice row of houses, with a large apartment block at the top of the hill at Broadway. The opposite, west side of the street has a great house on the corner of Vallejo, and the Greek consulate next door, Broadway again with a huge hovering apartment building.
    The facade of this house has been changed, while the others in the row appear original, even if not.
    The biggest problem is the one that cannot be changed: Franklin-Gough freeway. But the Gough blocks from Union south, including this one, are the least burdened.

  2. Why does the left side of this house appear to be chopped off? Also it seems they bastardized the rest of the facade too

  3. A house on the block north went into contract asking 2.9 after a few weeks on the market. In spite of the lovely trees, I’m not sure why this block had been considered desirable in recent years. Faster commute to the freeway?

  4. Eddy,
    That house at Laguna and Union looks gorgeous! Absolutely stunning for under $2 million in a desirable neighborhood on bedrock (I still can’t afford it), but I would be interested, if I could. The only downside about this location is the very noisy bar scene on Union and Laguna (bus stop, etc.) on the weekends. The master bedroom is in the back, which is very nice. I much rather have this house than $3 million for a house on the Gough freeway, no thank you.

  5. Along with the funky facade, this house has some layout quirks. For example, kitchen to dining room means either go past the stairs (and a possible closed door) or twist around through the breakfast area. And then one of the upstairs bedrooms has its closet in the hallway, so it’s not really a bedroom, whereas the “Family Room” probably counts as a bedroom. No true master. And is that a laundry closet in the 2nd floor bedroom? If so, that’s effectively a “Family Room.” And they couldn’t have done something about all the doors banging into each other?

  6. I think the laguna house will sell fast and over, but we’re certainly seeing a lot more homes around the $2M mark in and around the fringes of prime D7. Basically unheard of over the past several years.
    Your “Absolutely stunning” comment is a little shillish ;), but I do like the house also. And kudos for the simple freaking website.
    Something is up with the laguna house though as it shows a 2001 sale at $1.9 and a 2003 sale that has a tax basis of $2.15. So a sale at asking puts us bask around 2002/2001. Odd.
    PS: Sorry for going rogue on the Gough posting.
    [Editor’s Note: The transaction in 2003 appears to have been a transfer to a trust rather than an arm’s length sale. And no worries, in fact, we’re even giving 2816 Laguna its own feature: Priced To Attract (Our) Attention. Now back to 2416 Gough…]

  7. Gough might be a tree-line street in Pacific Heights BUT it is NOT Prime Pacific Heights….and, I would not call any busy street ‘nice.’ It is deceptive.
    If you want that direction of streets, running North-South, in Prime Pac Heights, you are looking at the all cross-streets between Sacramento and Broadway starting at Octavia and going all the way up to Presidio Heights.
    Prime Pac Heights homes near the $3m mark are still going very, very quickly.

  8. Listing link indicates the Gough house as “sold” for $3,025,000. Did that happen really fast or is that the ’08 sale?

  9. Ouch. I know it hasn’t sold yet and, who knows, someone may pay hundreds of thousands over the new asking. But right now they’re looking at a half million dollar loss in 2 yrs 3 mos. I wonder if any homes in Modesto or Stockton lost that much dollar value? SF maybe has done better in % terms but in $ terms the bubble buyers here have done worse. Makes you wonder who should be crowing to whom.

  10. “half million dollar loss”
    More like $650-675k loss after selling costs – even more once you factor in the $35k/yr property tax and the other huge costs in buying it over renting something equivalent. And there were plenty of nicer places available to rent.
    Down roughly 20% since would be a pretty typical result for sfrs in nicer parts of SF. No surprise here.

  11. eddy, I think that by July ’08, when this home was last sold, you couldn’t get a jumbo loan with 0% down any more. You needed 20% or 30% down.
    So they aren’t yet in a position to walk away. And if prices are now falling by 3% per month, they are really accomplishing nothing with their price drops: they are just chasing the market down.
    If I were them, I’d list it for the loan amount right now, which I’m guessing is 2.15 and try to get a bidding war going, in an attempt to try to get 2.3-2.5. Their strategy of dropping the price by 3-4% per month hasn’t been working in this market. Prices have just been falling too rapidly.

  12. You are probably correct. The bubble is going to hurt everyone but it is going to hurt the most in these type of ‘prime’ areas that aren’t really that prime where prices pushed so high cause the supply was so low. You typically had out of town, or new to SF buyers nabbing these homes at really high prices. Curious how long it was on the market for on 2008. Anyway, this isn’t going to end well.

  13. “You typically had out of town, or new to SF buyers nabbing these homes at really high prices.”
    Durn those outside agitators! Another fine mess they’ve gotten us into.

  14. So much for my prediction of 2.5. It sat for a long time at 2.5 (so it isn’t going to sell for that) and now dropped to 2.3.
    That’s $725,000 (24%) under its price 2.5 years ago.

Leave a Reply

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