Designed by renowned architect Joseph Esherick and built in 1962, the Mid-Century Modern ‘Larsen House’ at 2610 Scott Street traded hands for the first time thirteen months ago, listed for $9.75 million and fetching $11.75 million or roughly $2,525 per square foot.

Six months later, the “exquisite and rare” 4,656-square-foot Pacific Heights home suddenly returned to the market listed anew for $11.75 million, a price which was subsequently reduced to $10 million, a sale at which would represent an apples-to-apples loss of 10 percent ($1.75 million) for the rather stunning home over the past year.

And this past weekend, the listing for 2610 Scott Street was withdrawn from the MLS without a reported sale.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Some guy

    Emperor’s new clothes. Sorry but the facade looks like any other 1950s thru 1980’s era cheesebox apartment or condo, nothing sublime.

    Aside: Save Ferris!

    • Posted by Serge

      Indeed. No character in that whatsoever. Looks no better than stacked shipping containers with windows cut out.

    • Posted by bananas

      You do not know what you are talking about- this is beautiful! If you lack the sense to tell one box from another that’s your issue.

  2. Posted by Jim

    Taste is in the mouth of the beholder. I respect Some guy’s opinion, although mine is completely different. Architecture is not about facades. Contemporary architecture is about space and light. He should go in, and experience the space. Note the detailing. It is sublime.

    The price problem is that $11.75 was completely ridiculous for what is actually a 2-bedroom house with 0 yard and only oblique views of the bay across neighbors’ back yards. The basement contains “bedrooms” 3 and 4: the tiny former maid’s room looking at a fence 3′ away, and another room later carved out of the garage/storage area looking out on the driveway.

  3. Posted by Gene Keenan

    A facade is just that: A facade. The interior spaces and light in this home are stunning. I wouldn’t pay $10M for the right to live in it however. I personally need more outdoor space.

  4. Posted by Conifer

    No one is more opposed to white-boxification than I, but this house is not in that category.

    The work of Esherick and his firm, now known as EHDD, is the principal Bay Area representative of an important architectural aesthetic developed worldwide in the 20th century. His houses, and those of his three partners and their successors, are superb examples.

    The price is another matter, but if you want beautiful and comfortable and modern, here it is.

    • Posted by Orland

      I agree the interior is absolutely elegant and would make you want to host a party every night.

  5. Posted by Outsider

    Regarding the architecture: Classic, timeless modern architecture inside. Even the facade works for me.

  6. Posted by d-b

    If this house is relisted and held open it is worth seeing. It has great light and a dramatic staircase. The common rooms are large with nice outlooks. The ceilings are very high making going up and down the staircase somewhat of a chore and somewhat dangerous due to its spiral tread design. I recall there is an elevator. Access to the garages was tight via a narrow driveway.

  7. Posted by REPornaddict

    Ouch. If you’re going to throw ridiculous money at a house, then it’s at least partly justifiable if you plan to stay there for a significant chunk of your life.

    That kind of outrageous overbid, then re-listing six months later makes no sense at all.

  8. Posted by SF Social-lite

    Plans change. There is clearly no upside in overpaying and then reselling 12 months later.

  9. Posted by Mark F.

    Looks great, but the lack of a yard would be a deal killer for me.

Add a Comment

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