Listed for $3.95 million earlier this year, the 1,870-square-foot, 2-bedroom unit at 15 Guy Place, the lower unit in the new two-unit, roughly 7,000-square-foot building at 15-17 Guy Place which hit the market priced at $15 million in March of 2021, positioned as a new single-family home “located amongst San Francisco’s most prestigious luxury towers and residences and in one of city’s most dynamic and oldest neighborhoods, Rincon Hill,” has sold for $1.73 million.

While the final contract price for 15 Guy Place was less than half its original list price, the sale was officially “within 4 percent of asking” according to all industry stats and aggregate metrics, such as Redfin’s Compete Score, as the list price for 15 Guy Place was reduced multiple times, including to $1.795 million last month.

At the same time, the 5,115-square-foot, 5-bedroom upper unit (17 Guy Place) remains on the market having been relisted anew for $6.955 million.

28 thoughts on “Modern New Place Fetches Less than Half Its Original Ask”
  1. I’m kinda astounded by the fact that it sold for that much. Sure, it’s new construction with high-end finishes, but still: $1.73 M for what amounts to an in-law unit or nanny’s quarters for the condo above? Wow.
    Anyway, I don’t think that 17 Guy Place is going to sell for anywhere near the current $6.955 M asking, or even the previous price of $5.850 M the seller was asking in Fall of this year.

        1. The windows look reasonably high-end to me too, and the floors are well done (and the fireplace, if that’s how you want to use your space). This doesn’t look like a home depot/IKEA job. Hardly one of the city’s “most dynamic neighborhoods” though, and I don’t think being on a ground floor condo “located amongst San Francisco’s most prestigious luxury towers” is a plus! (Check out the sad “views” from this place.)

          1. Indeed: being “amongst” luxury buildings would seem to be mostly of value to a panhandler…if anyone.

      1. I guess if you’re really bourgeois they aren’t “high-end”, but you have to keep in mind the price point. If you go to the listing’s web site (still available as I write this), under features, it calls out:
        Kitchen with Calacatta Italian marble.
        Miele appliances.
        Next-gen Crestron home automation system allowing full interaction with lighting, powered shades, music, access control, video intercom, security & surveillance from day one (which will come in quite handy in this sub-neighboorhood).
        Custom white oak media console with built in fire feature and TV lift.
        Master suite with imported Carrara Statuario Italian marble.
        Secondary bathrooms with natural limestone floor tiles and imported Calacatta Italian marble.
        …among other items.

  2. Suitable as a starter place for a young techie with more money than taste or experience. The finishes do not matter much since this unit lacks the three most important criteria according to brokers: location. For the same price one could get an apartment in “real SF.” If not Pac Heights or Presidio Heights or Russian Hill, perhaps Lake or Cole Valley. I hate to reach back to ancient times, but Herb Caen would probably agree.

    1. my sense is that the people who buy these places dont actually live in them most of the time; otherwise they would choose a better location

  3. Upper unit has secure garage parking, private elevator, better views. Marble bathrooms look fine. Upper unit should sell higher than $925/SqFt. Upper unit estimate $6M range.

    1. There is ZERO chance that unit sells anywhere close to $6mm. Anyone spending that much money on a residence in SF will have numerous options with multiple parking spots, views, and a much more suitable neighborhood.

      1. Its considered “new” construction which helps give it a bump. Then there are buyers in this price range who aren’t 5th generation californians, and don’t need to live in presidio heights. But one negative that won’t go away is that it is in the shadow of over-size building next door.

        1. Right, so the new Californians with the money to buy in the $6mm price range definitely don’t want any of those views they’ve seen prior to moving to California? They definitely don’t have more than one car either.

      2. I agree that there’s going to be some premium associated with new construction, and the ultimate buyer is going to be someone impressed with the “modern” design of the overall building. But, as I mentioned above, a buyer could have made an offer on 17 Guy Pl in the range you specified anytime after July of this year, when the asking price was lowered to $6.2 million, but it didn’t sell. I don’t know, maybe the listing agent thinks that now that interest rates for jumbo mortgage loans have peaked, a less price sensitive buyer will appear.
        Just going by the listing information and the aforementioned property website, it doesn’t appear that the parking is deeded exclusively to the upper unit. The description for the garage is the same for both 17 and 15 Guy place and it mentions “Parking Total: 1” and a “Mechanical Lift” in both, which if accurate is going to be an awkward thing to negotiate on a day-to-day basis if the owner of the upper unit isn’t the same one as the owner of the lower unit and they both have cars — a virtual certainty at this price. Which should involve a reduction in what a buyer would be willing to bid.
        Like I said, the lower condo should be thought of as an ADU for the upper unit.

        1. Strictly analyzing this on $/SqFt basis, if the lower unit sold for $925/SqFt, then the upper unit would only need to sell for $1173/SqFt in order to achieve sale price of $6M. The values increase in condo buildings the higher the floor. Since there might not be any easy to find comps for the building and the neighborhood, an appraiser would have to get creative to “adjust” for that. How much are the views worth? I think it has bad fengshui next to that massive building next door, maybe not?

          1. Oh, Okay. I thought you were forecasting the upper unit alone going for $6 million. I agree that your value for 17 Guy Pl is in the ballpark of “reasonable” given the current overall market conditions, as it would represent a 13.75 percent decrease from the current asking on a per ft.² basis.
            I also agree that finding another recent sale for a 5 bedroom, 6 bathroom 5,115 ft.² upper level townhome with a < $605 per month HOA fee might be quite challenging.

  4. Not sure what it’s like these days with fewer people commuting, but accessing Guy Place by car during the afternoon commute used to be absolutely hellish with all the traffic heading up 1st Street to get on the Bay Bridge.

  5. “… in one of city’s most dynamic and oldest neighborhoods, Rincon Hill,”

    That statement is a bit of a reach. While Rincon Hill was indeed a vibrant and affluent place in the latter half of the 19th century, it was more recently a dump for several decades.

  6. Is Rincon Hill considered South Beach market? Not sure if Compass data is useful, but they are claiming average condo $1073/SqFt for South Beach, most of those weren’t new construction. With most expensive condo sale at $5,450,000. I’ll let the luxury condo agents argue about that, not my job.

    1. It shouldn’t. Rincon Hill is above (northwest) of Bryant St. until Folsom St.. South Beach is below (southeast) of Bryant St. down to and including the waterfront, hence the name. I’ve found that if you’re searching on a real estate site, the difference between the 94105 and 94107 zip codes isn’t granular enough to distinguish between the two neighborhoods, you’ll find listings for both using either code.

    2. The listing, at least on realtor dot com, calls the neighborhood that 17 Guy Place is located in “Rincon Hill” in the property detail description, but “South Beach” under the section headed “Neighborhood” and indicates that the median (not the mean) price per ft.² is $1,122 in the area. For other listings in the area, homes are described as being located in “South Beach’s Rincon Hill”.You could, if you were willing to incur the derision of certain commenters here, accurately call the area that this condo is located in the East Cut. But I don’t think our local members of the real estate guild don’t take maps too seriously.
      As of today, the Ruby Home Luxury Real Estate (whose main office is in Los Angeles) landing page for Homes for Sale in The East Cut says there are 46 listings in the area at 139 average DOM. Their average is just over $1,350 per ft.² a number no doubt skewed to the right by the presence on the market of Grand Penthouse A atop the Millennium Tower, currently asking $14 million or 79.5 percent higher than the next most expensive property for sale.

      1. Has anything sold recently in the Millennium Tower? I can’t imagine that people would be willing to take a chance on that building. My gut feeling is that it’s just a matter of time until they start to take it down.

        1. I don’t agree, but you indirectly bring up an interesting issue: given that the units are individually owned, how would one go about tearing down a condo-building?? That is to say, what if a tenant objects? Obviously it’s not possible – execept in rare case – to just tear down around the holdout(s), so does the Condo Assoc get to enforce a kind of eminent domain and force everyone to sell…whether they want to or not? And if so, are there some kind of guidelines – simple majority or majority of value or two-thirds, or….??

          1. Notcom – The most likely scenario to have a condo building torn down is if the city condemned it as being unsafe for occupancy. This scenario may play out in multiple sites after the Big One. Newer buildings may remain standing, but they might be so damaged that they are not certified for re-occupancy. My gut feeling is that the Millennium owners are safe for now and the building might even remain safe after a big seismic event.

          2. Thanks MOD, but I meant in a more general sense: say someone – maybe even a tenant – says, “I want to tear town that (condoed) buidling and put up [whatever]”; how does that process even start, since there isn’t a single “owner”. I guess they would contact the condo assoc, but then what ?? Can a single owner block something in perpetuity (or at least until they aren’t an owner anymore)?

        2. I am not a real estate agent, but in the absence of a member of the local property guild answering here, I will say: Yes! And there have been multiple units in Millennium Tower sold recently.
          One sale that took place just over a month ago was a 3 bedroom, 3.5+ bathroom 2,170 ft.² apartment for $1.975 million ($910 per ft.²) which previously sold in 2016 for $3.5 million. Apt 27B a little earlier that same month went for even less at $726 per ft.².
          Barring some type of massive seismic event which damages the building even more and a subsequent declaration that the building is unsafe to occupy, I would feel quite comfortable betting against Millennium Tower being imploded a la Vegas hotels during my lifetime, and I am someone who thinks having fewer luxury condos in San Francisco would constitute an improvement.

          1. From what I understand, a corner of the building has had piles driven down to bedrock but the rest of the building is on still-settling soil. I’m probably too risk adverse but if there is a seismic event, and there probably will be a decent one in the next 30 or so years, it seems different parts of the building would handle the shock differently. I know people tend to think that greater minds have things under control but hey, they built the thing in the first place.

Leave a Reply

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