Designed by Stanley Saitowitz, listed for $7.998 million in April, and withdrawn from the MLS without a reported sale in July, the modern 4,665-square-foot Mission Dolores home at 50 Oakwood Street has just returned to the market listed for a million less ($6.995 million).

Marketed as an “oasis in the city” and “so much more than a house,” the four-level home features floor-to-ceiling walls of glass; a 550-square-foot living room with a 16-foot-long gas fireplace; a 15-foot-long island and custom hidden-wall cabinetry in the kitchen; “up to five bedrooms” and four and a half baths; and multiple terraces overlooking the Mission and hardscaped rear yard.

50 Oakwood Rear

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by dt

    Incredible. But not the ideal level of privacy for living in a city. On a big treed lot perhaps.

  2. Posted by Stop Driving

    The house at 54 Oakwood gets an up close view of everything going on in the house. Saitowitz makes beautiful homes, but never seems to consider what life is like for their inhabitants.

    • Posted by Sam

      Yea, truly a house of its time – in 10 years this will look even more ridiculous than it does now.

    • Posted by Mark

      FLW was an amazing architect, but his furniture was beyond uncomfortable. Sometimes design trumps practicality.

  3. Posted by AnonAnon

    Nice place, but I’d like more greenery in the rear yard, and some kind of greenery out front..

    • Posted by curmudgeon

      the backyard is truly an abomination. All formality, no function. And because of the bizarre circulation, no way of really introducing greenery without blasting out that mass of concrete.

  4. Posted by Mark F.

    It does have blinds. It’s quite a house, actually. But I can understand the price cut.

  5. Posted by heater

    radical fishbowl living for uber wealthy nudist

  6. Posted by 49Giants

    Looking at the house in Google Streetview, the house bears the addresses of 50 and 52 Oakwood. Does anyone know what 52 Oakwood is? Is it a separate apartment in the building? A house on a separate lot out back?

    • Posted by Pioneer

      Zoned RH-2, so guessing that that lower level could be used as a warranted studio apartment or permitted STR.

  7. Posted by SF_Landlord

    Who needs privacy anyways?

    • Posted by SFrentier

      SF landlords need privacy. Shees.

  8. Posted by steve

    stunning, but I can’t disagree with the privacy concerns.

    does anyone know who did the staging?

  9. Posted by jlasf

    I live in a modern glass house like this. But in the country with complete privacy. In the city, it would drive me crazy. As a friend said, “People who live in glass houses…… shouldn’t.”

  10. Beautiful house. I’d be afraid some loon would throw a brick through the windows.

  11. Posted by Kraus

    If you actually visit it and look at the exterior, you’ll see that it’s not particularly well detailed/finished. $7M should at least get you excellent execution when it comes to the detailing/craftsmanship.

  12. Posted by Bogie

    Love Saitowitz. I’m sure it comes with heavy blinds and wonder if the windows are more tinted in actuality than they appear in the photos.

  13. Posted by anon

    Nice hotel, especially the lobby. Anyone know how many rooms it has and how much they go for a night?

  14. Posted by Philip

    Not sure if it’s a fishbowl or a toilet bowl. Completely sterile. Perfect for some soulless rich nerd.

  15. Posted by jack

    Not the first de-list and price cut on this place. It was first listed at NINE million, before being withdrawn and then relisted soon after; they’re down almost 25 percent from the original ask. I own a place across the street, and I can confirm that the level of gold-fish-bowlery is almost ridiculous. The glass walls don’t really make sense in the context of a narrow, tight, urban street. Maybe on top of a hill somewhere, but on Oakwood, you’re basically going to live your entirely in front of my tenants in this house.

  16. Posted by Cliff

    The house looks “nice”, but it strikes me as cold, corporate, and soulless.

  17. Posted by gentrified is a dirty word for clean

    “Soulless” seems to be a popular accusation by those who also use rich and corporate as slurs. You don’t have to be much of a psychologist to understand this site, do you?

    • Posted by Cliff

      Chill out. Is everything a political fight for you? It must be exhausting for you to just get through the day. I like color and warmth in my home environment, and I don’t want my living room to feel like the lobby of a large soulless corporation. There is zero political meaning to that, just my personal taste.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles