100 Palo Alto 2015

Built for former San Francisco Mayor Elmer E. Robinson in 1953, the 4,800-square-foot Mid-Century home with “breathtaking views” at 100 Palo Alto Avenue was purchased for $5.625 million in April of 2008, resold for $4.6 million in early 2013, and then traded hands that July for $4.725 million.

Listed for $5.2 million nearly two months ago, the Clarendon Heights home, which sits on the highest residential street in San Francisco, remains on the market and available with a price that’s only 10 percent more than in 2013, and 8 percent less than in 2008, on an apples-to-apples versus “median price” basis.

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Mark F.

    Outstanding views on the few days of the year you don’t have fog and arctic winds. Not at all walkable to anyplace. Nice, but no thanks!

    • Posted by BobN

      At least almost everywhere is downhill.

    • Posted by O.D.Irony

      Views of a skyline that Agnos fought tooth and nail to prevent.

    • Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

      I value a neighborhood’s walkability and would have no problem living in Suburban Heights.

      Why do listing agents omit a major asset of this neighborhood in the photo: Sutro tower. I mean just one look at that thing looming over the house says that your TV reception will be excellent. You don’t even need a TV set, watch KGO with your eyes closed!

      • Posted by Mark R Cooper

        Where do you get this information? It could not be more completely wrong. Sutro Tower disrupts all TV reception to all neighborhoods in the vicinity. 100% of it. We have ZERO reception without paid TV (cable, satellite, etc).

    • Posted by Mark R Cooper

      Not walkable? Are you kidding? Have you ever been here? That’s ignorant funny. There are few places on this earth, certainly few urban places, that are as walkable as San Francisco; this part of SF in particular. I’m 65 & I walk from here to almost anywhere in town. If the neighborhood is not walkable to you, then your mobility problem, not the neighborhood.

      • Posted by anon

        San Francisco is quite walkable overall, but this is definitely one of the least walkable parts of SF. If you don’t know this by living there, well, that’s just weird.

        • Posted by Mark R Cooper

          Are you disabled? If not then do yourself a favor & explore the area on foot. I’m 65 & walk everywhere from my home in this area. You don’t know what you’re missing.

          • Posted by anon

            The possibility to be able to walk in an area has very little to do with its walkability. This area of the city is overwhelmingly suburban-ish, with few services to walk to. You can certainly walk just to walk, but “walkable” means that most people would walk for most daily needs.

    • Posted by Mark R Cooper

      see comments on walkability, below.

  2. Posted by BTinSF

    Former mayors probably don’t have to walk anywhere–they probably have a car and driver on call to take them wherever/whenever.

    • Posted by Me

      Not all of them, I saw Willie Brown on the 1- California once.

    • Posted by shza

      He was mayor of a city, not President of the United States.

  3. Posted by Mark F.

    Still, probably the worst microclimate in the Bay Area.

    • Posted by Mark R Cooper

      Yes, if you were expecting Palm Springs. I’ve lived within a mile of this home for nearly half a century & within a few blocks for 27 years. Like most locals, I love the wind that keeps our air sparkling-clean most of the time, the sun that shines 259 days a year, even on days that see fog, and even the fog itself – Yes, most San Franciscans actually like the fog. We even gave it a nickname: Karl. As in Karl the Fog. Look it up.

  4. Posted by jlasf

    I don’t know this area. Is it foggier than Sea Cliff?
    The view is certainly stunning.

    • Posted by joey

      Hey, there’s always the whole global warming thing to hope for (for improved views).

      Jeez, you guys. It’s 4/20, have some.

  5. Posted by Mark F.

    The fog and cold winds in this area of town make Siberia look good

  6. Posted by J

    It might get the ask if they’d put white marble on the kitchen countertop and paint a couple rooms grey.

  7. Posted by Mystery Realtor

    I saw this on the Realtor Tour earlier this week. The house looks like it has protected tenants living in it (Iheard they were French). They made no effort to clean it up. The view is nice, and Palo Alto is a lovely street, but this house is still at least $2M over-priced.

  8. Posted by Mark R Cooper

    “Protected”? “French”? “Messy”?
    Stereotype much? What does that even mean… protected.

  9. Posted by Mark R Cooper

    While unimportant in the greater scheme of things, it is irritating nonetheless to read so many silly, inaccurate comments about this house & its neighborhood. It’s clear that few if any of the commenters here are San Franciscans, let alone neighborhood residents. From climate to walkability to Agnos politics, TV reception, & the “protected” “messy” “French” tenants (hysterical!), wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. / Quite the opposite. As a 50-year resident, I can tell you that it’s a great neighborhood, extremely walkable, with a cool climate, clean air, & central location (dead center, geographically). It’s San Francisco. You don’t have to like it, but jeeezz, get your facts straight.

    • Posted by anon

      After reading your other comments it’s pretty clear that you do not understand what walkable means in an urban planning discussion. Stick to topics that you have a clue on.

Add a Comment

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

Recent Articles