1703 Octavia Kitchen

Forget the duel between gas and electric ranges, the dual stoves at 1703 Octavia are back. And yes, there are dual pot fillers, sinks and dishwashers as well.

1703 Octavia Stoves

Purchased for $1,870,000 in 2007 but then remodeled and expanded by enclosing an existing porch, the Lower Pacific Heights property is now back on the market and seeking $2,995,000 or $894 per square foot.

UPDATE: Following our post the listed square footage was changed from 3,200 “per owner” to 3,350 square feet “per architect” which we have since incorporated above and below.

∙ Listing: 1703 Octavia (5/3.5) 3,350 sqft – $2,995,000 [octaviast.com]

21 thoughts on “Not Dueling But Dual Stoves (And Pot Fillers To Boot)”
  1. can they exclude the golden retriever from the purchase price? I don’t want to have to pay 1.15% yearly on that dog for the rest of my life!

  2. Is this an extremely orthodox jewish home design or something? I knew the plates thing, but…this just looks silly.

  3. This seems like a bit of a disaster. I’d love to see a floorplan here. There are ways to modernize these stick vics but this is how you don’t do it. Lots of odd shaped rooms most buyers today don’t want. Lots of odd transitions and ill decisions. No one pushed back on the home owners here and no designer (it seems) was involved to smooth out some of these design decisions.
    The dual ovens here make absolute zero sense and the dual openings into the kitchen are equally as odd. Here is the reverse angle from the dining room into the kitchen:
    Why wasn’t this wall removed entirely to make this one big room and configure the whole thing as one great room?
    Anyway, D7 pricing in D6 isn’t going to cut it. But it’s a nice enough home in one of the better locations in LPH. I’m guess $2.5 – $2.6. This could be a hard sell.
    Oh, and here are some walkthroughs:
    PreConstruction (2007)
    Final Walkthough:
    My criticism here is only meant to be constructive. I recognize that this is someones dream and lots of thought / effort went into the design.
    I also don’t think it is appropriate to bring religious / faith aspects into this discussion, @curmudgeon. Not to mention I don’t even under stand the plate comment. (yes, I recognize that I’m asking for clarification here on a topic that I essentially just condemned, sorry. 🙂
    Anyway, good luck to all.

  4. I have seen orthodox Jewish homes with two ranges and two sets of every appliance — is the refrigerator actually two side-by-side as well, or one huge one?

  5. eddy, the issue here is keeping kosher. Many orthodox Jews use 2 sets of plates and silverware. Some who take it even more seriously use separate cooking surfaces. This seems like a home of the latter.

  6. Looks like the typical orthodox jewish kitchen, designed to keep kosher. See this more often on the East Coast. I think it’s nicely done. Hopefully easy to re-intall single/larger stove, etc. for those who don’t keep kosher.

  7. nice to see two bathrooms both equipped with Toto washlets, the next best thing to bidets. They require a $200-300 for the wiring and $900 for the washlet itself, but are still way cheaper and save a lot of space compared to an actual bidet. Some say they do the job even better.

  8. That wall you want to knock down to open up the kitchen holds the frig, microwave, wine frig and some cabinets. Unless you wanted those appliances to extend into the dining area (or into that little nook) or you wanted to get rid of a set of windows, there’s no other place for them.
    I’m fine with that touch.

  9. yes, Eddy, my comment certainly wasn’t meant in a demeaning way. Just that I’m familiar with separate plates for keeping kosher, but I’ve never been aware of separate appliances. Sorry if it seemed otherwise. (I still think it looks silly, but that’s my non-kosher perspective.. 🙂 )

  10. Couple of errors, the actual square footage is 3350 sf which puts it at $894 sf. Also it was more than a ‘little’ bit remodeled. It was a complete back to the studs remodel that took several years to complete and encompassed the non-sexy items such as a new roof, retaining wall, etc. It was architect designed to make best use of the old Victorian floor plan. I do have floor plans but opted not to put them on the web site because there were slight changes from the actual build. Our best comp very similar in 6-C is 2148 Pine which listed for $3.2m and closed for $3,388,833 a couple of weeks ago.
    Anyhow, I usually try to stay out of the arguments here, especially on my own listings, but they are pretty important facts and this site gets too much visibility to not take the time to correct.

  11. Couple of errors, the actual square footage is 3350 sf which puts it at $894 sf.
    The square footage was pulled directly from the listing which was subsequently changed from 3,200 square feet “per owner” to 3,350 square feet “per architect” following our post. We have since changed to the architect’s number above.
    Also it was more than a ‘little’ bit remodeled.
    We never used the word “little” but did qualify the extent of the remodeling after 2007 based on a review of the issued permits online. No slight was intended and we have since removed the “bit” from our wording above.

  12. “Looks like those videos are all marked private.”
    Evidence of a discrepancy between what was permitted and what was done?

  13. After three months on the market at $2,995,000 without a sale, the listing for 1703 Octavia was allowed to expire and now notes the property is “OFF MARKET, but can still be shown by private appointment.”
    An hour before being delisted, however, the list price was quietly increased to “$3,200,000” which will appear to be the last list price at which the property didn’t move.

Leave a Reply

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