As we wrote about 2209 Pacific Avenue a year ago, almost to the day:

Purchased as a 4,960 square foot four-bedroom home for $5,150,000 in late 2005, and since remodeled to become a 5,900 square foot home with three bedrooms and seven baths, 2209 Pacific Avenue has returned to the market listed for $9,500,000 in 2011.

According to permits filed for the project and from which fees would have been billed, it was an estimated “$150,000” remodeling job, a budget that probably wouldn’t have covered the cost of the new kitchen, and perhaps not even the new theater below.

While the estimated remodeling costs per permits were “$150,000,” according to the now live property website “close to $4 million dollars” in improvements have been made to the property. It’s funny how that happens.

Having been reduced to $7,950,000 and then withdrawn from the MLS after eleven months on the market last month, as a reader notes, 2209 Pacific has just returned to the market at that price but with an official one day on the market according to industry stats.
According to the new listing, however, the property is now a five-bedroom home and the cost of renovation was “over $4 million” for a total of over $9 million invested.
∙ Listing: 2209 Pacific Avenue (5/6.5) 5,900 sqft – $7,950,000 [McGuire]
2209 Pacific Returns Remodeled And Asking Three Million Per Bedroom [SocketSite]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by SusieQ

    The clueless owner hired a clueless agent from the peninsula. Clueless owners get burned when they don’t use in city agents who know the market. This property is best left to the Barbara Callans and the Malin Giddings of the world. The owner deserves to get burned on this deal, total stupidity! Worst part, its still over priced and on the WRONG side of the street. Let the low ball offers roll in!!!

  2. Posted by TomKat

    The problem with this place is not that it is on the “wrong” side of the street, plenty of excellent view properties are on the South side of the hill facing the bay, the problem with this place is that it has a lovely view of the grotesque apartment building across the street and not a lovely view of the bay. Its all about the views. It’s still over priced by a million or two.

  3. Posted by [TomKat]

    Just another McMansion in the city with no view.

  4. Posted by Denis

    I’m sure Alain Pinel does fine in Palo Alto, but using that agency to list a home in Pac Heights is like the kiss of death. The move to McGuire was probably a good thing… I still say 6.5, but seeing that Greenwich remodel (ugly block, hideous facade) go into contract while asking 5.5 is still pretty shocking. I’m wondering if this home may be too traditional for younger buyers snapping up all the clone McMansions…. Maybe the owners should raid a Room & Bored sample sale and restage this thing…

  5. Posted by Denis

    Lol.. Maybe we should have another debate on what constitutes a McMansion in SF… Just because this place has remodeled (?) baths and that tacky theater, I’m not sure this qualifies…

  6. Posted by radar

    I believe this is more ‘seller pricing’ than agent recommendation. No other county agent, Malin or Barbara can sell this home at near $8M. They are just hoping that the seller wears down.
    While the home has great architectural details, it feels dated with the furnishings. Has that ‘grandma’s house’ kind of vibe.
    Should sell plus or minus $6M…..IMHO.

  7. Posted by BobN

    that tacky theater
    Yet more evidence that the 1% just don’t like to snuggle…

  8. Posted by Lori

    It should be interesting to see what happens because now it IS Barbara Callan’s listing. Personally, I don’t think the building across the street is “grotesque” either. It’s not an apartment building, it’s a co-op that is very well maintained. I have friends who live there. (It used to be apartments and has since converted.)
    The house isn’t my style, it’s a little too traditional, so it doesn’t totally appeal to me. But I could have done without the busy wallpaper. However … I think one of the secrets to a happy marriage is separate bathrooms, so there’s that.

  9. Posted by lol

    Yet more evidence that the 1% just don’t like to snuggle…
    No need for a large couch when you have a skinny trophy wife.

  10. Posted by bubblesurfer

    “While the estimated remodeling costs per permits were “$150,000,” according to the now live property website “close to $4 million dollars” in improvements have been made to the property. It’s funny how that happens.”
    Why is it this editor keeps suggesting something nefarious is happening when project “costs” as listed in permit documents are different than the final and real “cost” paid by the owner. We exhausted that topic a while back and readers here should remember the simple answer – plan checkers at DBI evaluate a project scope then refer to a chart to establish the “cost” of the project. DBI plan checkers don’t ask what kind of tile, plumbing fixtures,light fixtures, appliances, windows etc that are to be used in a project that will come to toal an owners “out of pocket” cost – your continued purposeful misunderstanding is annoying editor

  11. Posted by thanks

    Yeah, I get the point that actual remodeling costs can be different than estimates on the permits. But there is different, and there is $4mm vs $150k. . . That is worth pointing out and a lot of readers appreciate it and somehow are not annoyed at the editor.

  12. Posted by SocketSite

    The list price for 2209 Pacific has just been reduced $450,000 (5.6%), now asking $7,500,000.
    Once again, purchased for $5,150,000 in late 2005 with “close to $4 million dollars” in improvements made since.

  13. Posted by Denis

    This is finally in contract..

  14. Posted by eddy

    The condo next door went into contract in 72 hours at $3M+.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles