As we outlined in early May:

Listed as Project 16-693 in Bone Structure’s portfolio of buildings, the contemporary Claremont Pines home at 6226 Acacia Avenue, which sits above Oakland’s Rockridge neighborhood and overlooks the Claremont Country Club, was built with steel framing and finished in early 2017.

The main floor of the five-bedroom home, which measures a little over 4,000 square feet, features a 12-foot-high wall of sliding glass doors which open to a 40-foot deck, with a living room, family room, dining room and high-end kitchen wrapped around a central floating staircase which leads up to three en-suite bedrooms (and down to the fifth bedroom, den and deck).

Purchased for $3.1 million in April of 2017, the contemporary Claremont Pines home returned to the market listed for “$2,995,000” last month.

And the re-sale of 6226 Acacia Avenue, the driveway and two-car garage for which is actually reached via Alpine Terrace, has now closed escrow with a contract price of $3.3 million, 6.5 percent over its second quarter of 2017 price (or 10.1 percent “over asking”).

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by curmudgeon

    love everything except that glass enclosed stairway. Talk about a maintenance nightmare….

    • Posted by I don't do any window type glass enclosures

      That is what the “house keeper” is for…. 🙂

  2. Posted by SFMichael

    Nice looking house, although I agree with curmudgeon, that glass enclosed stairway…

    But the staging is horrible. Most of it doesn’t go together and doesn’t show of the place. But they got their number, so I guess it doesn’t matter

  3. Posted by Jeffrey W. Baker

    Still angry that the city will permit an AirBnB hotel at 4000 sq ft but won’t permit a duplex of any size. Shaking my head etc.

  4. Posted by kit

    With taxes and costs of buying and selling, maintenance,
    they lost money big time.

    • Posted by SFRealist

      Even including the rent they would have paid over the last two years?

      • Posted by SocketSite

        And subtracting the cost of capital, in terms of any debt and/or opportunity cost, to finance the $3.1 million outlay over the last two years?

    • Posted by Notcom

      My thoughts, too: assuming the seller actually lived there, (imputed) rent, maintenance and taxes – tho maybe ‘kit’ means transfer taxes – would all be normal living expenses…plus , of course, the selling price was a gross PROFIT of $200K. But oh look! my horoscope reads “pessimists abound, humour them”.

      • Posted by SocketSite

        The sale price represents asset appreciation of $200K, which is NOT the same thing as “gross PROFIT” (the calculation of which would require accounting for transaction, financing and other holding costs).

        • Posted by Notcom

          Wouldn’t that be net profit? Or maybe that’s an oxymoron…I’ll offer up “gross margin” (Revenue – COGS…before accounting for SG&A). But whatever the semantics, the point I was making – of course – was that selling price was quite a bit higher than the purchase price. (Whether/not enough to cover transaction costs isn’t as clear).

  5. Posted by Brian M

    It is a shame that even at the $3 million point one only gets a garage door dominant boxy snout house. They don’t even dress the car hole up at hall-just a blank wall of cheap paneling.

    • Posted by Notcom

      It has a great view, is walkable to stores, a top school…even BART. Take the $million+ you saved by not buying in SF, purchase a Ferrari – or two – park it in the driveway, and no one will be the wiser what your garage door looks like.

Add a Comment

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