September 22, 2006
Broderick Place: 83% Sold
From what we’ve been told, 3% deposits have been received on about 58 of the 70 condos that make up Broderick Place. And while it looks like they are now targeting Jan/Feb for initial closings and occupancy, rumor has it that the retail component (which includes a Peets, Faletti Fine Foods, and Da’ Lessio Delicatessen) could open as early as next month. Available inventory:
∙ Broderick Place #307 (1/1) 671 sqft - $510,900
∙ Broderick Place #400 (1/1) 671 sqft - $510,900
∙ Broderick Place #206 (2/2) 949 sqft - $680,800
∙ Broderick Place #303 (2/2) 970 sqft - $689,900
∙ Broderick Place #313 (2/2) 1,063 sqft - $696,999
∙ Broderick Place #403 (2/2) 970 sqft - $695,900
∙ Broderick Place #406 (2/2) 944 sqft - $695,900
∙ Broderick Place #311 (2/2) 975 sqft - $696,900
∙ Broderick Place #305 (2/2) 1,056 sqft - $697,900
∙ Broderick Place #315 (2/2) 970 sqft - $697,900
∙ Broderick Place #308 (2/2) 976 sqft - $698,900
∙ Broderick Place #320 (2/3) 1,424 sqft - $808,900
Keep in mind that parking is not included in the price of the condos (but is available for $35,000), and “all homes must be owner occupied.”
∙ New Developments: Broderick Place [SocketSite]
First Published: September 22, 2006 12:44 PM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
I've been watching this developement since construction began. It is one of only two (that I have seen - the other being Showplace Square) in the city that uses steel/aluminum "2x4s" rather than wood. I assume this is for cost. Does anyone out there know the facts on this type of construction? Is it stronger or is sound insulation better? Personally, I like Broderick Place because it has much more style and is more interesting that the majority of fake stucco covered condo boxes being thrown up in SF.
Posted by: CameronRex at September 23, 2006 10:47 AM
I'm not an engineer but I do know steel is far more expensive than wood and increases the construction costs significantly. Presumably the only reason to use it therefore would be it would be higher quality.
Posted by: B at September 23, 2006 11:12 AM
Steel is much more sturdy than wood, and doesn't burn. :-) "B" is correct, it does cost more.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 24, 2006 9:27 AM
Those metal studs do burn, but the reason they were used in this building is for structural reasons as there are far fewer structural steel beams in this building than if wood studs were used.
Posted by: Anonymous at September 24, 2006 12:01 PM
The steel studs don't burn but they can deform under intense heat (ie they melt) but it's gotta be really really hot. They don't warp and they are dimensionally stable. All in all an upgrade from wood and definitely not a cost savings item.
Posted by: susapix at September 24, 2006 2:32 PM