Purchased for $2.595 million ($1,411 per square foot) in mid-2015, the two-level penthouse unit #505 at 3590 20th and Valencia (a.k.a. the “V20” building) returned to the market listed as “the ultimate luxury living in the best part of the Mission” for $2.349 million ($1,277 per square foot) this past January.

And having been reduced to $2.195 million in March, the sale of the three-bedroom unit with parking, a private roof deck and views has just closed escrow with a contract price of $2.0 million or roughly $1,088 per square foot, representing total depreciation of 22.9 percent for the units on an apples-to-apples, versus Bay Area Index or Median Price, basis since the second quarter of 2015.

The adjacent penthouse unit #504, which was also purchased for $2.595 million ($1,433 per square foot) in July of 2015, quietly resold for $2.239 million ($1,236 per foot) this past October.

16 thoughts on “Another “V20” Penthouse Takes a Big Hit in the Mission”
  1. A ~$600,000 haircut (not including closing, broker, staging fees) is a tough pill to swallow for anyone.

  2. At $1100 for 3 bdr plus roof deck and parking, this seems like a really good deal. Maybe the HOA fees are high or there were a string of recent special assessments?

    1. The original buyer of #505? The original buyer of #504? The original buyer(s) of the other units in the building which were priced accordingly? Or an original buyer of another unit in the Mission whose purchase was based on the V20 comps?

      1. Your question makes me dizzy. But I meant #505. I don’t think that area of the Mission is worth that much and current buyers agree. I only paid $370 a Sq. Ft. for my last condo purchase with windows on 3 sides, even the bathroom, just off Van Ness in 2011. I have an condo on Valencia, I only paid $73 a Sq. Ft. for in 1981

  3. And HOA dues is only $711? $1088 per square foot, plus parking and roof deck is totally an amazing deal.

    I see run down victorians getting high price than this. What happened?

    1. The average price per square foot of the (listed) homes in contract in San Francisco is currently running around $900, based on list prices, which is down around 5 percent since the beginning of the year.

      1. Does that average include sunset and bayview and all that? vs. center of most desired part of mission.
        And does the average include includes all the old victorians and apartments and houses that need overhaul? vs. new place from 2015 with high end finishes?

  4. Socketsite editor, we keep telling you, we get it. We understand that SOMA condos are down, and we have repeatedly told you that the price drop is limited to that area and that area ALONE! Yet you continue to list these things as if this is happening all over the city.

    SOMA is DEAD at night, so people don’t want to live there. The weekends are desolate. OF COURSE these SOMA condos are collapsing in value. There are few bars and restaurants to…


    What’s this?

    Right smack in the center of the Mission?!

    Hmmm. Apparently the real estate agents and boosters telling us the declines were limited to SOMA were talking their book. 23% in under 3 years. They are out $700,000. That’s more than most people’s life savings, and this is worse than most people were losing during the financial crisis.

  5. Animal skin rug? Rly? Who stages a place with an animal skin rug?

    That is part of the price problem right there. Hire a sale stager that didn’t get the furnishings from a wildlife park. 🙂

    1. It was probably a stager who wears animal skin shoes, or perhaps even eats one from time to time. And that poor endangered cow, with its incomprable pelt now a rug. It should be running free in the jungle.

  6. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence and three times is enemy action”

    As I said before, maybe it takes 5-6 of these -20% from 2015 sales before they get stop being tossed out as outliers. But these are setting comps and will eventually make it into people’s models. Anything past -15% is basically blowing even a 20% DP when selling costs are taken into account. And who wants to save for a decade (or finally hit the IPO lottery) and see that all wiped out? And how feasible is low/no down payment lending in a market segment when people’s skin in the game gets wiped out in a few years?

Leave a Reply

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