Having hit the market priced at $6.95 million last month, the nearly 9,000-square foot Queen Anne Victorian on the northwest corner of Franklin and California, which sits on the southern half of a 10,654-square-foot Pacific Heights parcel, has just sold with a $7.0 million contract price.

As we first reported at the time, the historic home’s parcel at 1701 Franklin Street was recently subdivided into two legal lots and the home’s backyard is now buildable.

But as the home’s historic designation extends to its parcel, the development of the new lot would require a Certificate of Appropriateness to proceed. We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by anon2.5

    The empty lot should get built up, but we can mourn the loss.

    • Posted by Futurist

      Why? Is there something wrong with cities having beautiful open spaces just for that enjoyment?

      Not every piece of land needs to be built upon.

      • Posted by oakland lover

        I agree with you here Futurist! I wish they would leave the lovely well cared for park alone (even if its private).

      • Posted by pal

        So true.

      • Posted by Serge

        Completely agree with you.

  2. Posted by Just My Opinion

    relative to other trades in SF, this is a steal, even considering the busy corner, IMO.

  3. Posted by Notcom

    “…development of the new lot would require a Certificate of Appropriateness to proceed.”

    I wonder what those sell for these days.

  4. Posted by Brisket

    “Certificate of Appropriateness” – what an extremely vague sounding document.

    • Posted by Serge

      Sounds like something out of 1984.

  5. Posted by Eddy

    Very good deal. A better use for all three lots would be a high rise condo. 🙂

    • Posted by Just Me

      Why even bother to have a San Francisco? This city is now pearls before swine.

  6. Posted by Conifer

    This is not the first house in PacHts and PresHts with a garden that became a buildable lot. This includes some houses on the best blocks, including outer Broadway, and many others. I do not know anyone who owns an original house that did not wish the previous owner had kept the garden. Some of the gardens sprouted buildings that are 1960s ugly, and others have modern mansions. It is sad to see this go.

  7. Posted by pal

    I don’t get the low price. Maybe it’s in bad shape inside or they paid some $ under the table.

  8. Posted by David C

    This home and the new buildable lot may be situated on the corner of Franklin and California, but for the purposes of this thread, it might as well have an address on that proverbial Memory Lane…

    Some folks who oppose or lament change in our City might be well served with a trip to the Library’s “SF history” room chock full of photographs, maps, and stories that will place their trip down Memory Lane in the broader context. Most of the comments in this thread would be appropriate at any point in the City’s prior history. And without a doubt, (obviously through some other medium or forum than this site), those same comments would be heard on the stroll down Memory Lane.

    • Posted by Futurist

      I don’t “oppose or lament change” of The City. But long term, thoughtful urban planning also respects existing open space that is important to balance against increased density.

      It’s not about Memory Lane at all, but about respecting history.

    • Posted by Just Me

      Because all of you auslanders want San Francisco to have all of the charm of Atlanta.

  9. Posted by SF Real

    If the lot is not found appropriate for building, perhaps they could sell half of it to the home next door, which has been on the market for years sans any real outdoor space…

    • Posted by Serge

      That’s actually a clever thought.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles