2010 Jackson Street Facade

Designed by Ted Moulton and built in 1961 for retired advertising executive and bachelor about town, George Kleiser Junior, the three-level Pacific Heights home at 2010 Jackson Street has just hit the market listed as a “beautiful blank canvas to create [a] dramatic adult house.”

And it’s a canvas for which they’re asking $15 million to acquire.

From the listing with respect to 2010 Jackson’s low-slung design, set between neighboring mansions:

“The façade is quite austere in the modern style. A witty play of classicism makes it appearance with two Greco-Roman statues perched atop the front corners with full width balustrades in between. The eye moves to the horizontal entablature with delicate frieze in a scroll pattern. Tall Ionic columns and decorative ironwork grace the elegant arched entry. Handsome sculpted conical and spherical boxwood hedges are set in river stone along the walkway.

A second level full floor view Master Suite was skillfully added in 1987 with Architect George Livermore. With a slight setback at the front, the only perceptible change in the façade was the addition of a pergola with four pairs of supporting Ionic columns visible above the original roofline.”

The view from the aforementioned second level’s northern terrace:

2010 Jackson Street: North Garden Terrace

Kleiser’s father was a founding partner of Foster and Kleiser, a pioneer in billboard advertising which was acquired by Clear Channel Communications.  George Jr. passed away in 1976 and the home is currently owned by the Jones family.

With a current tax-assessed value of $550,023, the property tax bill 2010 Jackson was $6,797 last year.

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Alai

    Ah, the old “Greek temple with roll-up garage door” look.

  2. Posted by shza

    I love the rewrite of tackiness as knowingly “witty.”

  3. Posted by parklife

    Every time I hear about the tax assessed value on these places, I shake my head. The fact that someone purchasing pretty much anything in SF will pay quite a bit more in property taxes is appalling.

    • Posted by curmudgeon

      No, it’s the fact that the family (including the children) paid so little for so many years is appalling. It’s refreshing that a new occupant will pay “quite a bit more”. Thank you insanity of Prop 13.

    • Posted by curmudgeon

      Sorry, re-read your comment and agree with you completely.

    • Posted by Ricardo de Anda

      What’s crummy is that immensely rich people like these owners can get away with paying peanuts in property taxes because of the cut-off-your nose to spite your face tax freeze of Prop 13. Try being a landlord in Texas where property taxes go up every year. We SF landlords actually have it pretty cushy in this regard. I won’t be crying rivers over rent-control knowing my property taxes are locked down.

  4. Posted by Willie B

    The city needs those taxes to pay those $300,000 pensions

    • Posted by Brian M

      Better The Olds all starve when the “investments” in their privatized investment portfolios all crater.

  5. Posted by Ricardo de Anda

    The City needs those taxes to keep GG Park beautiful. Why do you hate GG park Willie?

  6. Posted by minka

    So bachelor’s don’t like yards. I don’t understand the preference for huge rooms over flowers, butterfiles, birds.

    • Posted by kbbl

      In my experience, a bachelor with a green thumb isn’t a bachelor for long.

  7. Posted by Me

    Was *anything* attractive built in the 60s?

  8. Posted by anontoo

    The 1966 Ferrari 365 California…and Monica Bellucci.

    • Posted by Amewsed

      Good one — kinda like I am gay for pay except when I volunteer.

  9. Posted by eddy

    Surprised we don’t see more closed end and private property transfers to preserve low tax rates. Buy the house for $5M and all the furnishing for $10M.

    Perhaps we have our 2016 decorators showcase candidate here.

    • Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

      Please let one of the designers tackle the garage door facade this time. Venice on the left and Vacaville on the right just doesn’t blend.

      • Posted by Frisco

        no, that’s a “witty play of classicism”

    • Posted by shza

      You’d probably know better than me, eddy, but wouldn’t the city see that as obvious tax fraud? Assuming the deal is all-cash and there’s no independent appraiser hired by a lender, isn’t there still enough of a city assessment process to catch something like that (asking honestly — I don’t know the answer)?

      • Posted by eddy

        Neither do I. Private parties are free to make whatever deals they want. The city regularly flags deals they deem as not arms length so I would assume the burden would be on the city to prove it and I’m not so sure it would be easy to prove if some reasonable fair value was applied.

  10. Posted by BobN

    I’d move in today and only change the spindles on the stairs.

  11. Posted by Mark F.

    It’s not enough that CA has the highest income and sales taxes in the country, we also now apparently have to raise property taxes. Nothing is ever enough! (And arguing against Prop 13 is the dead horse the tax and spend left can’t stop beating) Interesting that the government and its employees can never be “greedy,” only the rich.

    • Posted by shza

      I’d fully support lowering or eliminating state income tax in exchange for revoking Prop 13 and raising property taxes. It’s a backward policy to reward sitting on land but to penalize productive labor.

    • Posted by Tesla

      Alabama and Oklahoma have 11% Sales Tax and most states Tax Food.

  12. Posted by qq

    The (unconfirmed) story I heard on this house: it was built on an empty lot, and the neighbors across the street raised a huge fuss about losing their views and so the planning department limited the height of the house to one story. In response, Kleiser had the house designed to turn its back on the street in the style of a Roman villa to spite the neighbors.

  13. Posted by Denis

    Price cut to 12.5

  14. Posted by SocketSite

    UPDATE: The sale of 2010 Jackson Street has closed escrow with a reported contract price of $11,500,000.

    • Posted by Amewsed

      Congratulations to the new homeowner. Nice place.

      How does the listing agent market/spin this transaction? “I sold it only a naughty bit below asking.”

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles