As we outlined earlier this year:

Purchased by the former CEO and co-founder of Twitter for $2.4 million in early 2009, the finishes of the Owen Kennerly designed home at 313 Duncan Street were then further refined. And the upgraded Noe Valley pad was sold to an employee at Genetech for $3.2 million in August of 2013.

The contemporary interior of the four-bedroom home is open but compartmentalized, with an enviable roof deck off the pentroom and a detached one-bedroom, well-appointed cottage out back.

And having returned to the market priced at $4.695 million this past February, the re-sale of 313 Duncan has now closed escrow with a contract price of $4.5 million, representing net appreciation of 40.6 percent since the third quarter of 2013 or roughly 4.5 percent per year and versus a 63 percent increase in the index for Bay Area home values over the same period of time.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Ohlone Californio

    What a bizarre pooh pooh of a word salad.

  2. Posted by Dave (Seattle dude)

    I like it. Modern look with an intimate feeling. White walls but lots of wood too. Love the living room ceiling. Nicely done.

    As to appreciation, the best gauge is to compare to baseline SF prices as well as include baseline Bay Area prices The past year has seen a huge divergence in gains with some counties up 16% and most up around 10%. But SF is up just 1%. IIRC those are median price numbers but still.

  3. Posted by Mary Morris

    That gleaming white kitchen feels like a mis-match to the adjacent rooms.

  4. Posted by L'Urbanista_SF

    I’m always a bit surprised to see downlights used in this type of design. You’d think that folks would have learned their lesson after sooooooooooooo many terrible examples over time.

  5. Posted by sparky-b

    C’mon no mention that the last post for this house asked “If you think you know the market in Noe, now’s the time to tell.”

    1)Ohlone: I think it will go for near asking ($4.695)
    2) jenofla: I’m going to say high 3’s. 4.1 max
    3) jimbo: $3.87M
    4) Dinah Sore: I don’t think I’d like to plonk down $4M to be in my neighbor’s gaze
    5) sparky-b: 4.4m

    • Posted by Notcom

      So IOW – and depending on what you call an acceptable margin-of-error – most people got it right
      (I’m including that sweet girl from Thennessee since we’ve no reason to think she’d now like to ‘plonk’ down $4M)

      • Posted by Ohlone Californio

        Or, conversely, Sparky and I got it close to right and everyone else doesn’t know what they’re on about whatseover. Tomato tomahto.

        • Posted by Notcom

          A fuller reading might be that you said “close to asking”, which in an efficient market place would (almost) always be the right answer; but this is real estate – SF real estate !! – after all, so you’ll get credit for knowing when asking looks right… or not.. How you and ‘sparky’ would have done w/o the suggestion of an asking price will be two little secrets.

          • Posted by sparky-b

            well that’s not real estate. You can never guess the sale price of a house that isn’t on the market and if it’s on the market it has an asking price. You can only play the team in front of you, as the saying goes.

        • Posted by jumjum

          “and competition might even send it higher.”

          Kinda dropped that part of your prediction though.

          You called near or above asking and it actually went below asking.

          • Posted by Ohlone Californio

            Clearly competition did not send it higher. But I said, “might,” and near asking. Hey, I was wrong. I’ve no problem saying so. Not nearly as wrong as the others save Sparky-b but that’s what happened.

    • Posted by jenofla

      Sparky-b gets the tiara, Ohlone gets to politely clap, and I’m perfectly happy with my participation ribbon!

  6. Posted by MyOddCommentHandle

    at least they did the concrete in front of the house.

    i’m so sick of these expensive houses with their remodels and the sidewalk and driveway look trrible.

    • Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

      Old though still serviceable concrete is just fine. Replacing concrete after it starts cracking (and it always does) is a waste of resources. Embrace the decay 🙂

      • Posted by DAA

        Agree with Milkshake, busted old sidewalks have a sort of charm—until the city points out exactly where it disagrees in spray-paint. They did do a nice job on the concrete work though. I’d guess a remodel that extensive required replacing the sewer connections so it was all torn out anyhow.

    • Posted by deepak

      Oakland requires owners to do sidewalk maintenance since 2019. When you buy a house, the seller has to get a sidewalk inspection. SF should pass something similar.

      • Posted by Alai

        SF does require owners to do maintenance. They come through and mark all the damaged areas, and send you a letter. If you don’t do anything the city’s contractor does it and you get the bill. At $10 per square foot a few years ago, it seemed like a reasonable rate?

        [Editor’s Note: Out, Damned Spotted Sidewalk! Out, They Say!]

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles