1395 Clayton
We first reported on the lot on Clayton which was approved for subdivision and construction of two 4,000 square foot three-story single-family homes when heavy equipment was hard at work last year. Today, one of the two newly finished homes has hit the market with four bedrooms and three and one-half baths over 4,000 square feet and listed for $2,999,000.
1395 Clayton Kitchen
∙ Listing: 1395 Clayton (4/3.5) 4,000 sqft – $2,999,000 [MLS]
Heavy Equipment Hard At Work At 1399 Clayton (We Do Believe) [SocketSite]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by radar

    Nice finishes as seen from photos, good square footage, pleasant exterior, garden, decks, big garage and views !………Seems to have most of the components that buyers are looking for but it will be interesting to see how these 2 sales play out as the block and neighborhood are somewhat non-descript. Lot’s of continous traffic and as I remember from the winter months, a lot of rain water ends up coming downhill to this area. I’m sure this would have been addressed with a French Drainage system or something equal.
    Good job but I think these may sell closer to $2.5 to $2.7mil.

  2. Posted by tipster

    ^You’re nuts. Flies off the market in a week.

  3. Posted by scurvy

    I’ll buy it just to flip it a week later for $3.5M

  4. Posted by Footie

    This location with views is so much better than 171 Valley in that wonky neighborhood by the freeway with no views (also listed for $3M)

  5. Posted by mikey woodz

    ^yea but the facade on this is horrible and its a bust street with the 33 bus making a U-turn in fron tof it all day long….true more sq footage than valley but cheaper (already dated) finishes and a busy street

  6. Posted by ex SF-er

    Rainwater may come down the hill here, but it keeps going downhill so not a problem.
    great neighborhood, great house. not too far walking distance to hear to of Castro (cough, I mean “eureka valley” or whatever).
    Overall I really like this place… kitchen isn’t my style but I LOVE that they have a good work triangle! that’s an A+ in my book just right there!
    I never chime in much about pricing, but this is a great property.
    🙂

  7. Posted by MichelleL

    Did the right house next door ever sell? The one with the beautiful courtyard, amazing views and elevator? I recall that languishing on the market for awhile then eventually going to rental…

  8. Posted by steve

    a walk score of zero.

  9. Posted by vanillablue

    I drive by here every day, so it’s been interesting watching them carve out the hillside and build the houses. The funny thing was that after they put up the large rear frame wall for the houses (not sure if that’s the right technical term), it was almost immediately covered in graffiti. I wonder if they bothered to remove it before building the rest of the house?

  10. Posted by around1905

    The pricing here is what gives me pause.
    $750.00/square foot for a nicely finished, but not especially expensively done house, seems rich. The lot has a view but the busy street fights it — so say its 700K standalone. That leaves $575/sf construction cost. Since retail construction costs are around $200-$400, my guess for this developer is no more than $250/sf. That leaves $325/sf profit.
    Forget the graduate degree in comp sci, the six years at starup#1, and hitting it lucky at startup #2, to come up with enough equity to afford the mortgage on your silicon valley salary. Just get your contractors license and start printing money.

  11. Posted by ryan

    @around1905 yeah it’s that easy

  12. Posted by apropos

    ^completely agree with ryan. around1905 obviously has no clue, and all the comments coming from these armchair “experts” on this site are a little tiring. If you know not of what you speak, don’t speak. It’s that easy.

  13. Posted by inmycountry

    The kitchen is the best thing going here. Functional and serene. My only knock is, I wish the sink would have been set to the corner so you have more counter space to the right. Looks like there’s only about 8 inches. Assuming the window could shift too.

  14. Posted by AmyP

    I like nearly all of the house except the kitchen (sunshine, lots of space, restful shades of green and blue paint). I’m sure it was very expensive to do the kitchen, but it’s just not very exciting.

  15. Posted by around1905

    A softer version of my main point (there were two) is that the offer price for this home — in fact for most new SFR/small multiunit construction in SF — is higher than the builder’s cost, plus a reasonable profit, would indicate. That ‘cost plus’ is the true ‘value price’ floor where supply would start to really fight back against falling demand. As it is, ‘price to market’ (and management of that market) appears to be alive and well in SF.
    As for my cost estimates — they are informed, but not expert. If anybody has issue with them, I’m sure many readers here, in addition to myself, would welcome more refined guidance. People should feel empowered to pencil out numbers for themselves.
    As for the comparison between builders and software-engineers-at-successful-startups — my tone was too flippant but the underlying point is worth considering. Builders (and many skilled tradespeople) in the SF area are earning significantly more than masters degree-holding software engineers and designers, and have had to invest far less money in their educations. Moreover, those engineers have zero wriggle room with their taxes and expenses. While it is true that builders are a little less busy then in previous years, they aren’t yet pressured enough by this to lower their prices or bids.
    There is still a social premium over working as a ‘white collar’ professional, but listings like this one should remind us all that skilled trades and the builders often do much better than wage-earnering software/engineer folks in tech companies — something that has yet to be absorbed by our political establishment, or by anxious parents swung by the marketing machines of our major colleges and universities.

  16. Posted by [anon.ed]

    Totally agree with apropos. This thread is pretty silly. Cases in point:
    “great neighborhood, great house. not too far walking distance to hear to of Castro (cough, I mean “eureka valley” or whatever).

    No.
    “everything around1905 wrote”
    No.
    “something about graffiti at a constructions site being relevant”
    No.
    “This location with views is so much better than 171 Valley in that wonky neighborhood by the freeway with no views”
    No.

  17. Posted by sparky-b

    “As for my cost estimates — they are informed, but not expert. If anybody has issue with them, I’m sure many readers here, in addition to myself, would welcome more refined guidance.”
    I’ll spend a little time on this for you;
    1) “The lot has a view but the busy street fights it — so say its 700K standalone.” I think you are saying it sells for $700 a foot and not asking. Okay, let’s just say it does and start from there.
    2) “That leaves $575/sf construction cost.” I think you left out a few sentences, not sure where you got to this number. Are you saying the purchase cost was $125/ft = $500K. Don’t know what they paid but if you have that information then okay.
    3) “my guess for this developer is no more than $250/sf.”. That is fine too for starters but you have to build lots of other things that aren’t in the square footage. Retaining walls, garage, deck, stairs, fence, landscaping, driveway, sidewalk, new services, etc. (+/- $45/ft)
    On top of that you missed:
    4) You need to carry a mortgage and a construction loan for a couple of years. Plus you have closing costs and fees on those loan creations. You have taxes for several years as well. (+/- $75/ft)
    5) You need to pay for the permit, the plans, the engineering, the soils, etc. ($15/ft)
    6) When you sell you have to pay for the agents, the staging, more taxes, and some more closing costs. ($55/ft)
    So the actual cost is more like; $565/ft.
    Now the thing is they aren’t going to get $750 or $700 a foot. They are going to get under $625.
    And as for you other point about who’s making what money:
    “Builders (and many skilled tradespeople) in the SF area are earning significantly more than masters degree-holding software engineers and designers, and have had to invest far less money in their educations.”
    In this case the builder invested a lot less in his education, but is putting a ton of money at risk on each property. At least $200K to purchase the lot, $60K to permit it, $300K of the construction or more, $200K for the carry and taxes. So they put in $760K of their money into this house alone. How much of your money was at risk in startup#1 or startup#2? How much did your degrees cost you?
    Printing money? No. Big risk for a good return? Probably.

  18. Posted by Simca

    I drive by this house every day — no way is this anything other than an extremely busy and noisy street. I suppose you could hike down into the Castro or Cole Valley but you’ll probably want to cab back up. In addition to non-stop traffic, you do have the good old 33 roaring by. Add heavy traffic to tiny, sure-to-be noisy backyard, and you lose the family with small kids crowd. Additionally, as someone else noted, there is a better-looking property (IMHO) just up the hill that I don’t believe has ever sold. For what it’s worth (and I’m an interested amateur only), I can’t even see 2.5 for this.

  19. Posted by Eww

    Went to the open house. The layout’s terrible. Perfect for someone who prefers three floors of catacombs to an open floor plan.

  20. Posted by SocketSite

    The list price for 1395 Clayton has just been reduced 7 percent ($200,000), now asking $2,799,000.

  21. Posted by SocketSite

    The list prices for both 1395 and 1397 Clayton have just been reduced 3.5 percent ($100,000), now seeking $2,699,000 a piece.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles