CFAH

Plugged-in people knew it was coming, and now it’s officially here. 2755 Fillmore has been listed for $4,995,000. That’s $5,000 less than was paid for 2542 Fillmore two years ago ($5,000,000) which is back on the market (but not the MLS) and now asking $3,995,000.

∙ Listing: 2755 Fillmore (5/4.5) 4,064 sqft – $4,995,000 [MLS]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Denis

    This house was just renovated by Plath & Co. so it should be in move-in condition. Views are unparalleled. Interesting they chose fairly traditional features though for such a contemporary home. Downside is what looks like a slightly awkward, almost tiered layout. Not good for families. Still, I think it’s a fantastic condo alternative/pied-a-terre in SF. It could sell for asking – there’s not currently a lot of move-in stuff out there – but there is competition.

  2. Posted by eddy

    Need to see this one in person before I render a formal opinion but it seems very similar to 2306 Broadway. I think I like this floorplan better than the condo feel. The lack of yard is a killer here. Too bad they didn’t roof deck it, but it wouldn’t have been very private either as demonstrated by the pic here!

  3. Posted by ex SF-er

    who cares about the house, those views are to die for. I just love this vantage point with the Palace of Fine Arts in the foreground and the bridge in background
    I also love the parterre effect on the garage wall… breaks it up and adds interest. wish they would have carried it all the way up.
    and it has TREES!!!! yay!

  4. Posted by PPC

    Oh my. Very impressive.

  5. Posted by Denis

    I could be wrong about this, but I believe that 2300-04 Broadway and this home were all part of the same late 80s development. They really tried to maximize the use of that lot making it more a collection of townhouses than SFRs. I’m not crazy about the end result though. The lack of outdoor space here doesn’t bother me if it’s not used as a primary residence. Less maintenance. One nice thing not shown in the pictures is that it backs up to the Vedanta group’s garden which spans several lots; so, even though you don’t have your own yard you do get to overlook their meticulous landscaping. All the visual benefit of a yard without any of the labor!

  6. Posted by ArtinSF

    Incredible views and finishes really make this home an art collectors dream. VERY sophisticated and tres, tres chic!!! Classic and contemporary at the same time- I like the greenery fronting the house too.
    More privacy than a condominium with very little maintenance. Wide master bedroom wrap-around balcony provides additional outdoor space.
    GREAT VIEWS abound. Not much competition in that department for sure

  7. Posted by Kurt Brown

    Agree — impressive all around.
    But that staging in the family room? It looks furniture from the set from Green Acres.
    Sorry. I’ve been feeling the need to bitch about SOMETHING today and I decided those tufted couches seemed like a harmless target.

  8. Posted by SueR

    This home is fabulous. It has amazing views from almost every room, clean lines, great finishes and versatility to work with different styles. This place is a winner! The outdoor space is perfect – enough room to enjoy the fresh air, but not so much to be time consuming. This will be snapped up quickly!

  9. Posted by Ellen

    I just went to the Special Preview this evening & this house is WOW!!! The views are absolutely Awesome. The finishes are Very high-end. I agree with Kurt, this one will not last & I wouldn’t be surprised if they get more than the list price.

  10. Posted by Michael

    Really? Everyone is being so positive?
    I think it’s one ugly ass house!
    Interior design not inviting at all, views are amazing, but that’s the only good thing.

  11. Posted by marcia

    can’t believe this house is actually on the market!! it is the total package.. exudes class with a view that is amazing. could anyone want anything more?

  12. Posted by Mikey

    ^^ Could the RE shills posting to this thread be any less subtle or more obvious? Let me try:
    “OMG! I would sell my children into slavery to live here!! This house is a steal at twice the price! I predict a bidding war!! Offers due by COB Monday!!”
    Or maybe SueR, Ellen, and marcia are just being ironic.

  13. Posted by geoff

    only house on the block and man is that one steep road. pretty house and it’s been cleaned up very well but there are a couple houses closer to the park in this price range that i’d rather have.

  14. Posted by eddy

    @shills, very funny.

  15. Posted by 4James

    Plain ‘n simple – this house is the bomb!
    I want it to be my bachelor pad, swank swank swank. The patio only needs a hot tub but that’s easy
    This is a great party house, no doubt.

  16. Posted by A.T.

    This place has great views (although not as nice as my office, where, unfortunately I sit on this nice Saturday — views tend to seem less spectacular over time). But it is otherwise pretty plain to somewhat ugly. No yard at all or just no pictures? For $5 million there are way better places available.

  17. Posted by HappyRenter

    Oh My Gawd! it has cawlumns! Who lives here? the pope?
    Seriously, the views are nice, but the interior is pretty bland. It looks like it belongs in the ‘burbs more than the city.

  18. Posted by lolcat_94123

    lol@ these shills, i love when they come out of the wood works. so blatantly obvious. nice digs though.

  19. Posted by ed

    All shills considered, this probably will not last long.

  20. Posted by pacific

    Saw the preview. Great views. I agree on some of the points about suburban style, no yard space, etc. There is a small garden/patio area. It also seems like the remodel was purely finishes and no structural changes. As for the “For $5 million there are way better places available” I’d like to hear some more concrete examples. I searched through MLS from $4.7 to $5.2 and didn’t see anything that seemed “way better.” Enlighten me.

  21. Posted by A.T.

    pacific, broaden the search terms. In the 3s and 4s are about two dozen places that I think are better homes than this (and you have a million or two left over). Don’t get me wrong. This place is very nice. But for $5M it is just so-so.

  22. Posted by pacific

    A.T, If you want to be in district 7, decent views of the bay, within short walking distance to shops & restaurants, it narrows it down quite a bit. Name your top three better homes.

  23. Posted by Oceangoer

    Am I nuts? Are we all talking about a 5 million dollar house. To quote some “The lack of outdoor space here doesn’t bother me if it’s not used as a primary residence.”, and “More privacy than a condominium with very little maintenance.” We are comparing this with a condominium? I think I need another stiff drink. $5 million folks, not 2 or 3 or 4.

  24. Posted by pacific

    Oceangoer, are you addressing this house in particular, or higher end SF real estate in general. If the latter, I totally agree, although it’s anyone’s guess whether it will come down significantly from where it is now. Regarding this house, I need to have some comparisons of other houses that are listed in this range to know if it is badly priced. It’s certainly a better deal than 2542 Fillmore was.

  25. Posted by Denis

    I went to the open house today and was pleasantly surprised. Plath did a nice job here. The quality of construction was better than I expected given the 80s build date. The main living level was bright, open, and of course had spectacular views. The choice of finishes is what you’d expect for a fairly high-end home. All the bathrooms were larger than the pictures suggest. I liked the pale blue-gray and white palate of paint, tile, and stone. The downsides are what I expected: a slightly odd floor plan, tiny bedrooms, and limited outdoor space. I absolutely stand by my earlier comment that this is a townhouse making it more comparable to high-end condos in the hood. If you can find a fully remodeled 4+ bedroom condo (of SFH for that matter) in Pacific Heights that has unobstructed GGB to Alcatraz views for under 5 million, let me know.
    Will it sell at this price? Who knows. In spite of others commentary in another thread, I’m not totally convinced by the health of this market. Unsold SFH inventory is clearly up in D7 since June 1st and I’m just not seeing a lot of these listings fly into contract. Maybe there will be a buying spree in late summer! *crickets*

  26. Posted by kthnxybe

    I think I’d rather go with 2846 Fillmore and a few cans of paint. It’s not quite as big and not as updated, but from the pictures, it looks like the garden is lovely.

  27. Posted by Jim

    I remember viewing this and the next door neighbor on the lot split when this was first built – crashing bores, and a huge waste of such a wonderful site. Nothing but suburban McMansions, with bad floor plans, impossible to furnish, as the current realtor photos show. Adding a kitchen and bathrooms which scream “2010 remodel” will likewise be a crashing bore in 2011.

  28. Posted by Troy

    1023 Vallejo St was listed for $5 last year. Smaller, but more value due to its more uniqie location I thought.

  29. Posted by eddy

    2846 Fillmore is now in contract @846/psf. Who konws where it will close at this point. I wouldn’t think too much lower at this point. The house needs some updating. Should be a good comp for a “B” house with a view in D7.
    @1230/psf for 2775 is a pretty large premium. Should be interesting to see how this all shakes out with 2542. Sadly, we’ll probably never know the final selling price of 2542.

  30. Posted by Denis

    In contract… Faster than I thought!

  31. Posted by eddy

    Curious at the final price, could be over asking. Sort of relieved that this one is selling fast actually. I was starting to get a bit concerned that these view homes we’re going to start going much lower. 2306 Broadway selling for $5.235 last year shows the markets are settling a bit around this range IMO. Indecently, it looks like the corner property @ 2304 Broadway has some scaffolding up. Could be the trifecta turn.

  32. Posted by eddy

    Sold: 4,970,000 (-1%). Very interesting sale price @ 1222/psf. To me, this is about the right price for this home, maybe a bit low. I think the seller jumped at the first bid. Smart buyer. Anyone know who was the buyer agent?

  33. Posted by Denis

    The buyer is local… which is kind of interesting. I’ve also heard the damage from the leak was much more severe than I thought. I’m sure the house is in perfect condition- now – but I think the relatively low ppsf here reflects that rather unsavory disclosure.

  34. Posted by eddy

    Interesting. I never bothered to look into it. I’m surprised the disclosure (or lack thereof) would/could be an issue at this price range/point. Congrat’s again to the buyer. Any clue on buyer rep?

  35. Posted by sfrenegade

    Typo in the original post — this is 2755 Fillmore. And the buyer’s agent was Nina.
    Amazingly, this was bought for $1.6M in 1988 (pre-peak, and a little under $3M in today’s money) and $1.55M in 1995 (closer to trough).
    [Editor’s Note: That there was and would explain why we couldn’t find our own post to report the sale yesterday (which we did note on our piece about 2542 Fillmore). Since corrected. And cheers.]

  36. Posted by SocketSite

    The sale of 2846 Fillmore as reference by a reader above closed escrow yesterday with a reported contract price of $2,975,000 (14% under asking and $790 per sqaure foot).

  37. Posted by Denis

    This is back… Totally renovated at 12.5 million. See URL for website.

  38. Posted by Skirunman

    What is the approx sf on this baby. Seems way overpriced.

  39. Posted by Denis

    They’re asking close to 3k per foot. The footprint of this property didn’t really allow for much expansion. The spa room seems new, but that’s about it. I have no idea if it’ll sell, but I walk up Fillmore daily and the realtor’s been showing the hell out of it. Waiting for that Twitter IPO?

  40. Posted by Skirunman

    Hard to imagine this place selling for more than $9M.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles