Purchased for $949,000 in April of 2014, the one-bedroom penthouse unit #504 atop The Century at 2200 Market Street has re-sold with a reported contract price of $1,025,018 having been re-listed for $999,000 this past May.
On an apples-to-apples basis, that’s equal to average annual appreciation of 6.5 percent for the Upper Market condo over the past fifteen months.
At the same time, the sale of 2200 Market Street #504 closed escrow at $1,299 per square foot which is 2.8 percent less than the $1,336 per square foot which was paid for the adjacent one-bedroom penthouse unit #502 which re-sold for $1,050,000 twelve months ago. 2000 Market Street #502 was originally purchased for $949,000 in early 2014 as well.
As some might recall, 2200 Market Street #504 failed to sell when listed for “$899,000” earlier this year despite the fact that the seller reportedly “wasn’t going to accept anything less than $1M.”
I visited that unit. It was pleasant enough and nicer than some other comparables in the area. But it lacked parking and was still pretty small for the area. Knowing the market in that area, I think it’s a fair price for the unit.
If the city improves the streetscape along Market? More shops will fill vacant storefronts and the unit will appreciate.
This doesn’t hint at anything: this is one unit, one buyer, one building.
Nothing profound.
A ‘penthouse’ unit in a 4 story building with no views doesn’t really count as prime SF real estate. Not to mention market street is home to most of the impoverished street dwellers that roam along van ness and the tenderloin. I wouldn’t walk down that part of market street in broad day light.
You wouldn’t walk around Market street/the Castro district/Duboce triangle in broad daylight? Are you scared of your shadow too?
First of all, this unit is not Van Ness or the Tenderloin. Second, I guess technically it is a penthouse since it is the top of the building. Third, I don’t think it says it’s “prime” real estate. And last, if you would not walk around the 2200 block of market in broad daylight, you might want to think about another city in which to live or stay locked in your home safe and sound.
This unit is worth what someone was filling to pay for in an arms length transaction.
thanks for the heads up john… your comment proves you obviously you don’t know sf or this property. this is no where near the loin or van ness.
This unit does have views. And what’s the problem walking in the castro during the day?
and this building isnt in europe… are you having trouble counting to 5?
so it sold for more than last time, just a year ago, yet it is hinting at a slowdown? bizarre takeaway, that
if you put your foot on the brake, are you not slowing down. Even if you are going faster than you were 5 minutes ago…
Upper Market is for the over-40 crowd. The tech hipsters and the foreign buyers don’t have the same sense of nostalgia.
I don’t know about foreign buyers, but we walk down that stretch of Market just about every day (my kids’ route to school) and it seems like it is nothing but young-ish tech people. Easy distance to Twitter and Uber etc., and extremely good public transportation are the draws, I suspect.
Look at the demographics in this post regarding “Castro & Upper Market Retail Strategy”: Highest median age and lowest percentage in the age 25-34 group. (Perhaps you’re most observant of those different from yourself?)
Saw that. Median age Castro-Upper Market is 41. Median age Valencia Street (Mission) is 37. Wow. A huge difference (if you can tell the difference between a 37-yr-old and a 41-yr-old, more power to you).
Yes, I am older than the median. And, thanks – I do like to think that I’m observant and cognizant of those that are different from myself. I suspect that a primary driver of “median age” for an SF neighborhood is housing costs in that area. The more expensive, the higher the age group. Probably not a perfect correlation, but pretty close. Castro-Upper Market is a very nice, and very expensive area, so it is not surprising that there are a few more in the over-40 crowd as they can afford it. The Mission, for example, is younger (a bit), cheaper, and poorer.
Or maybe it’s a sense of nostalgia (I have loads of that).
I think you may be confusing the people who already happen to live there from the people who are newly entering the area.
Great location. I live in Linea at Market and Buchanan. Great food, mass transit and youth. It’s great
When you see young, happy techies in your neighb you should turn and point at them and do that terrifying slack-jawed shriek from the original (1978) Invasion Of The Bodysnatchers.
Regardless of the age group, I’m not sure I’d want to live above a bar in the Castro (but then I’m admittedly old)
Upper Market is for the over-40 crowd? Seriously, you are insane! I left the Castro and SF because it’s being overrun by youngish techies and their parasitic wannabes.
The headline is a misnomer. 6.5% appreciation is still pretty sweet. Can’t have double digit increases every year. Shees.
I also noticed an “oldening” of upper market. And Noe valley? Just took a walk there midday midweek…mostly just saw a bunch of old ass boomers on the sidewalks. But maybe it’s the midday midweek thing. Guess all the young tech yuppies are grinding away at their 9-5. The truly rich areas should have a bunch of leisure types hanging around the cafes, etc. Wonder where that exists in SF?
The midday midweek thing is a phenomenon that can be seen almost every large developed city (because most people of a certain age range work). I once was fortunate enough to have a taste of that lifestyle while on an 8-week paid sabbatical living in SF. It is heavenly to stroll into any establishment on a sunny workday and not wait in line, not fight traffic, and have the sidewalk to yourself. If you are early to a popular happy hour you can easily see the transition from empty to bursting. 🙂
yea – boy I see slow down written all over this one – look out – the sky is falling