260 King
Another unit in the Beacon hit the market yesterday (25 units currently Active). Not too surprisingly, 260 King #553 is advertising “A motivated seller and a unit priced to sell.” And no mention of the square footage in the listing…
∙ Listing: 260 King #553 (0/1) – $495,000 [Zephyr] [MLS]
The Beacon Twenty-Two (And Their Dirty Laundry) [SocketSite]
Square Feet Subterfuge [SocketSite]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by rut

    Uh, most listings would include a picture or two of the actual unit. I guess it’s more of the “urban oasis lifestyle” they want you to buy. After the last few days, the developer must be busy fixing all the defects so the agents couldn’t get good interior shots.

  2. Posted by Anonymous

    Impeccable timing.

  3. Posted by Mike

    IIRC, the “Jr. 1 bedrooms” we’re heinous–a little windowless area near the bathroom for the “bedroom.” At 495K it’s about 250K overpriced.

  4. Posted by Anonymous

    They took a photo of the “260” but none of the unit?

  5. Posted by Chris

    This was thrown on at the last minute. No pics of the unit and the description has type-os and strange grammar:
    “So if easy access to the South bay, CalTrans, SBC Park, the East Bay an all that SOMA & S. Beach have to ofdfer is what you’re after,l this is the property for you”

  6. Posted by Looking4aCondo

    Chris wrote “…No pics of the unit and the description has type-os and strange grammar”
    Give the guy / gal a break, Chris! He / she is just a realtor, you can’t expect them to spell and write English as well

  7. Posted by Anonymous

    “Give the guy / gal a break, Chris! He / she is just a realtor, you can’t expect them to spell and write English as well”
    Looking4aCondo, are you working with a realtor in your condo search, as you name suggests?

  8. Posted by Sexy & Sassy in SF

    It probably wouldn’t be very nice for me to say, “I told you so,” would it?

  9. Posted by jeebus

    I personally can’t stand these cracker-jack-box-McYuppie-lifestyle-condo developments
    I hate them even more when they dont show the actual unit. They always show the freakin gym room, pool, and other “amenities” that are totally useless and jack up the HOA to $700 a month.

  10. Posted by Sexy & Sassy in SF

    “I personally can’t stand these cracker-jack-box-McYuppie-lifestyle-condo developments”
    I happen to like them. I just think they’re overpriced.

  11. Posted by Anonymous

    Doesn’t Mission Bay area have an antiseptic, Walnut Creek-like feel to it?
    Chain stores, over-priced and mediocre corporate owned restaurants & bars, all the 30-something clones walking their dogs after work…
    6 blocks (physically) and a million miles away (culturally) from the “real” San Francisco…if that even still exists.

  12. Posted by Anonymous

    cracker-jack-box-McYuppie-lifestyle-condo developments: Beacon, 235-55 Berry, Bridgeview, Portside, 88 King, 200 Brannan, Lansing, 199 New Montgomery, most lofts
    nice yuppie condo developments: Infinity & One Rincon (so far so good), Brannan, Metropolitan, St. Reg, Four Seasons, some lofts
    still undecided: Watermark, Palms, 188 King
    Just my opinion. Yes, I have a lot of time on my hands to sit here and think of how these developments rank against one another.

  13. Posted by Bill Tancer

    Home sales to rebound in Aug, Web searches say
    Queries on homes for sale peaked at 0.0085 percent of all searches in mid-August, from 0.0060 percent in mid-July, Hitwise data shows. The peak percentage brings the interest on the Internet to levels not seen since the beginning of 2006.
    The correlation works because Web searches for ‘homes for sale’ are directly related to home purchases

  14. Posted by Zig

    These developments can keep the “yuppies” out of your beloved Mission or where ever you call home so be happy
    To me the choices was between the development we are getting or nothing in Mission Bay and I personally am very happy with how it looks (though I agree about the chain stores)
    At least the area is being developed piecemeal to avoid the Disney effect
    What would you prefer there?

  15. Posted by curmudgeon

    I’m kinda with anon with the likes and dislikes. And unfair labeling him with the Mission moniker zig….that stereotype would hate EVERYTHING. I think the new development is a definite mixed bag…and sad to think we’re reaching the end of it (for a while) before we get anything truly stellar. Look at Vancouver or San Diego for some really great urban development and be sad…..
    Re: retail. I have never understood how stupidly landlords of new buildings pursue “credit worthy” tenant and end up populating buildings with the like of Quizmos, Starbucks, and Dominos.The Beacon has been dubbed a retail success because it has Safeway (good) and Borders (very questionable…how long can it last?) I’ve seen very little but vacant space in between… Any landlord/developer with imagination in South Beach would realize they need to look for tenants who will give their new neighborhood some real character, and draw both the new residents of the neighborhood, and the rest of the city. What little that’s interesting ends up happening organically in older buildings on the “sidestreets” like Townsend and 2nd. King Street is boring and looks like it will stay boring for quite a while.

Add a Comment

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