2005 19th Street
New construction in Potrero Hill, 2005 19th Street offers four bedrooms, three baths, two parking spaces, and an elevator to connect its four floors. Listed for $2,279,000.
2005 19th Street Living
∙ Listing: 2005 19th Street (4/3) – $2,279,000 [] [MLS]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Fishchum

    Meh. Another “designer” home that would look drastically different if someone were actually living in it. I can’t imagine keeping that kitchen clean. Too light-colored.
    The “deck” off the bedroom is ridiculous. What’s the purpose? It’s small, there’s no view, and I can’t imagine it gets any sunlight. What would you use it for? To step outside for a post-coital cigarette?

  2. Posted by [anon.ed]

    That deck is trained right at the cityscape, with the Bay and bridge at like 2 O’clock. Sure it’s small, but if the idea of walking out and getting a breath of air/taking in a nice view is alien to you they you’re probably in the minority.

  3. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    Was this done by the same team that built the house next door to the left ? It looks very similar.
    I like the choice of the stain on the wood siding because it is a lot closer to what that wood will eventually fade to.
    Unusual little light well/porch on the back lower level. My guess is that its purpose to make that bottom floor room an official bedroom. Without a window it would be only storage space.
    [Editor’s Note: That’s a bingo!]

  4. Posted by Fishchum

    anon.ed, I’m referring to the deck space immediately adjacent to the bedroom, not the main deck.
    Although it appears the to see anything from the main deck, you’d have to be tall enough to peer over the wall to see anything.

  5. Posted by meep

    not a huge fan of protero hill
    and i don’t know it very well
    but this has some positives
    easy commute to downtown
    nice view
    it’s not next door to the housing projects
    4 bedrooms 3 baths
    but it seems as if you can get a similar size older home in nicer neighborhoods without housing projects for that price

  6. Posted by [anon.ed]

    Right, the deck in the upper lefthand corner of the facade. It’s there because it offers the property’s best views.

  7. Posted by ***

    Yah I think the deck is off the back subterranean bedroom. no view there.

  8. Posted by Marten

    No bathroom on main level.

  9. Posted by EBGuy

    No mention that it’s a condo. I’m shocked I tell you… shocked. Truth be told, if I ever sell my SFH (its actually a detached condo) I’d want it marketed that way to reach the widest possible audience. Oh the tales we tell…

  10. Posted by Oceangoer

    Whatever happened to curves? Everything is so squared off … not a gentle curve in the place. Brrrrhhhh its like living in a big white box.

  11. Posted by rolltide

    I was there last night for an evening showing. It really is beautiful. The finish choices and the warmth created by the walnut really worked. Not cold at all. It is a detached condo with all the aspects of a SFH… would work for me if I had the family to go with it. I personally thought it was a unique property and well done with great views.

  12. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    What is the difference between a townhouse condo like this with zero HOA dues and an attached SFH ?

  13. Posted by meep

    i agrree with milkshake
    how is this any different than a attatched single family house ?

  14. Posted by Evan

    In response to the convo about the subterranean deck, it’s intended to be a family home, and thus, I’d assume that the designers were looking for a little nook in the house where the teenagers could smoke weed in peace –> the deck. Just my opinion though.

  15. Posted by EH

    Not so much the next-door building, was this done by the same team that did the 24th/Church (Jersey, really) building in Noe Valley?

  16. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    To clarify, I’m not stating that a zero HOA condo townhouse is equivalent to an attached SFH but rather trying to understand the differences, if any. I’m asking a question rather than trying to state fact.

  17. Posted by tipster

    I like the idea in photo 16 of a low window right behind the toilet so that I can “moon” my neighbors whenever I use the toilet.
    A completely subterranean bedroom, not so much. Even with a pretty light well. The well would work as time out space for the kiddies, though. Send them outside, shut that sliding door and let them tantrum away.

  18. Posted by EBGuy

    What is the difference between a townhouse condo like this with zero HOA dues and an attached SFH ?
    For one, you and your neighbor own an undivided interest in the land beneath your feet. Insurance is also where it can get a bit tricky. I’m not attached, but carry a normal SF homeowners policy with the same insurance company as my neighbor (who is member of the HOA). Cross your fingers if someone gets injured on your (and your neighbors) land (that’s why we insure through the same company – we don’t want different insurance companies bickering about whose going to pony up). These units (and the back decks) are fairly self contained; any yard areas would probably be designated as exclusive use for the respective units. Not sure if a regular SFH policy works for semi-attached (as this place is listed in the MLS), but if it’s zero HOA, it sure better.

  19. Posted by BobN

    I think the outside it beautiful. It’s an elegant and stylish modern home. I like the inside, too, except for the odd soffits all over the place.
    As for the deck with the views, I suspect they did that do “articulate” or whatever to avoid “encroaching” in our collective airspace or something. Me? I’d have preferred the additional square footage indoors like the floor below.

  20. Posted by sharkjack

    noearchitect, how are they getting by with only one exit in what is clearly a 3 story building?
    No half bath on the living level would be a deal killer for me at this price point.

  21. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    Thanks EBGuy. So it seems as if there is a small legal difference due to the shared parcel. So this is not exactly equivalent to a SFH in the sense that all legal issues tied to the parcel are referred to the HOA. Your insurance example is the most likely though other things like future parcel specific requirements (like toxics remediation) would be dealt with the same way. So in the end it seems to be roughly the same as a SFH except when there are parcel specific issues at which time things become a little more complicated.
    BTW : +1 for including street trees on this project.

  22. Posted by sfrenegade

    What is the difference between a townhouse condo like this with zero HOA dues and an attached SFH ?
    For one, you and your neighbor own an undivided interest in the land beneath your feet. Insurance is also where it can get a bit tricky.”
    There were my thoughts exactly. Legally speaking, it’s very different. Also, the zero HOA dues sound questionable to me. There might indeed be no common areas as EBGuy said, but there are issues that could cause joint liability (e.g. if the property had a retaining wall). Also, this says “semi-detached” in the description, so presumably there could be an issue in the building itself that has to be allocated. This may feel like a SFH, but legally it’s more like a condo.

  23. Posted by Lawslave

    I saw this property this week and was very impressed with the design, layout and finishes. The house was built toward the top of Potrero Hill to seize the views, which are magnificent. I think the multi-level layout works well for a family since it provides privacy for everyone yet is tied together nicely by the staircase. I also disagree with the writer who found it cold just because its painted white. I’d rather pick out my paint colors to match my furnishings rather than work with paint selections made by the builder. Found the exterior clean and tasteful too.

  24. Posted by EBGuy

    Bear in mind, there are CC&Rs (that get recorded, if my memory serves me correctly). If the developer doesn’t really care, they may just be boiler plate. However, if CC&Rs are done correctly (and who knows, maybe the ‘developer’ will live in 2001 19th St. ala Zack/deVito — $250[or 500]k tax free in two years), they will address site specific issues (trees, planter maintenance/watering, the retaining(?) walls to the right). We currently do zero HOA dues and it works out fine. The only shared cost with our neighbor is a garbage bill that we informally split. And I just remembered, the DSL line.

  25. Posted by sfrenegade

    “We currently do zero HOA dues and it works out fine.”
    I don’t know anything about your arrangement. However, this place says it’s semi-attached — some more detail on this would be nice. Hypothetically, if the neighbor ignored some required maintenance, it could potentially affect the owner. Zero HOA dues doesn’t necessarily seem realistic for all situations. I could easily see a fight over a retaining wall in this economy (“well, it’s on your side of the property, so it’s your problem”). There are any number of things a “semi-attached” neighbor could do that would affect your structure, even things that could affect the foundation.

  26. Posted by wifey

    Love the decor. Very appropriate for three day weekend

  27. Posted by John

    I’ve been watching this place go up for a while now. Does look superficially similar to some other recent buildings in the immediate area (but, I thought, a bit less interesting from the outside). This was an undeveloped hillside, but it was obvious that the building next door had a penthouse with great views and these would be pretty good too.
    Thanks for the heads up so we can look inside.

  28. Posted by John

    Feels a bit conservative, doesn’t it? Perhaps accentuated by the staging, but seems like they didn’t want to go too modern. Shooting for a particular demographic?

  29. Posted by john

    So, for the price, which do you prefer, this or 4381 26th St? I’m thinking 26th street.

  30. Posted by Troy

    This place kicks ass as livable architecture IMO.
    Price is about 2X of what I would pay, but this is one of the few listings I see here that I would enjoy living in.
    For the money I’d rather have some very nice mid-century space up in Lexington, I guess.

  31. Posted by rodney

    I can’t decide which is more boring and dated…the architecture or the staging. At this price point I’d expect the architecture of the house to blow me away…..not remind me of the dotcom boom. and the staging feels like a vacation rental – the dead animal horn on the kitchen counter is kinda gross (i know “edgy” was the intention but it’s a miss). good luck with this one!

  32. Posted by [anon.ed]

    Sold for 2.15M

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles