September 6, 2007
Mo' Modern, Mo' Modern, Mo' Modern (But No Nelly) Over In Noe
A few quick details on 8 Kronquist Court: glass, steel and stucco; roof terrace, radiant floors and solar panels; and a wall of fold away glass doors that make us want to cry (in a very good way). The architect: Jonathan Feldman.
UPDATE: And yes, a "Garden Party" preview showing this evening (9/6) from 6 to 8. And no, we don’t accept any compensation for highlighting these places, open houses, or opportunities.
First Published: September 6, 2007 10:51 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Posted by: eddy at September 6, 2007 11:10 AM
Absolutely ridiculous! Very well designed.
Posted by: SC at September 6, 2007 11:25 AM
Drop dead stunning. That stairwell is real estate porno.
Posted by: deshard at September 6, 2007 11:42 AM
Drop dead gorgeous. But the way the stairway is exposed to the street would make me nervous.
Posted by: Salarywoman at September 6, 2007 11:47 AM
The street is a short cul-de-sac quite rare in SF; there's no traffic passing by and just a handful of nice neighbors (I used to live across the street.)
Still, I'm not sure I'd wanna be on display when I run downstairs for a glass of water in my skivvies... ;-)
Posted by: David at September 6, 2007 1:09 PM
its actually Biggie Smalls (RIP), not Nelly.
good site tho, i like it.
[Editor's Note: Thanks and strong work on the Notorious B.I.G. reference (the 'No Nelly' reference, however, was actually a bit more complex).]
Posted by: Plug1 at September 6, 2007 1:37 PM
The folding glass doors seem to open onto a cement wall.
All I could think of when I saw the bathroom photos was water spraying everywhere when someone takes a shower. That's where the glass doors should be!
Posted by: bgelldawg at September 6, 2007 1:37 PM
Can't you people just enjoy the aesthetic of it without the whining about things that you have no way of knowing whether or not they're even an issue (splashing water, visible stairways)? Sheesh, too many "Designed to Sell" fans.
Posted by: deshard at September 6, 2007 2:36 PM
You people!? Sounds racist! JK.
Anyway, the home was well put together. Absolutely beautiful.
Posted by: J at September 6, 2007 2:43 PM
I'm spent :-) great SFH's today, love it!
Posted by: Observer at September 6, 2007 2:58 PM
Very nice but no sub-zero? Not sure why the developers didn't go all-out at this price. For $2.3 million there is no excuse not to have the highest level of finishes.
Posted by: anon at September 6, 2007 3:12 PM
What do people think of the price for the house in the area?
Posted by: eddy at September 6, 2007 3:36 PM
anon 3:12 -- for what it's worth, a sub-zero would be a step down. We have one at home (over my objection -- but sometimes, I mean all the time, my wife wins those debates) and we have four at work. What pieces of mechanical junk. They are in constant need of repair. They do look nice, but are built with the Jaguar mentality -- elevate aesthetics over engineering.
Posted by: Trip at September 6, 2007 3:54 PM
Personally, I think this Noe Valley house will have a higher re-selling value over the next 5 to 10 years than the one in Bernal Heights that's also selling for $2.3 million.
Posted by: SC at September 6, 2007 4:07 PM
Yeah, Sub-Zeros are pieces of ca-ca. I can't figure out why anyone would pay extra for a refrigerator that doesn't work well even when they're working. Check out Consumer Reports before spending thousands on an appliance...
Posted by: David at September 6, 2007 4:14 PM
Been on the market before as i recall - didn't sell then.
Posted by: noname at September 6, 2007 4:23 PM
Posted by: artsybroad at September 6, 2007 4:34 PM
This house is very similar to 15 Kronquist which was a total redo by the same architect and sold for $2.185 early last year. #8 Kronquist was purchased at the same time for $1.235M and given the scope of work involved there is going to be very little $$$ made on this one. I would love for socket man to take the "before" and "after" pics from the MLS and post them side by side...just to show what a lot of creativity and 600-800K can do.
BTW...this is incomparably better value to 306 Mullen.
Posted by: wayne at September 6, 2007 7:30 PM
personally, i think 306 mullen is a more compelling design. it just really grabs you, and i think everything flows very well, design-wise. i'm not as impressed with this bldg. anyone else agree with me? (and no, i'm not talking about 'value', etc., as one is in a prime noe spot and the other on the back end of bernal.) but, man, i really think 306 mullen's design is really unique and good use of an odd shaped lot.
at any rate, the wife and i are going to take a peak at mullen this weekend, as we hope to trade up in the next 3-5 years and build/heavily modify; maybe we'll go modern- this is one of the few SF modern's that have grabbed me recently.
Posted by: AMITinSF at September 6, 2007 10:24 PM
I am guessing that if the house didn't need to be torn down that the project was done sensibly from an economic standpoint - don't know what the premium over similar homes in the neighborhood is though. The design is definitely worth something - so if its on par with other homes a buyer might get the design thrown in for free so to speak. Feldman does really good work. Definitely worth checking out.
Posted by: mvmodern at September 7, 2007 9:01 AM
"anyone else agree with me?"
I like this unit much more than Mullen. Mullen is very attractive, but I couldn't live it. I think Mullen would be ruined if curtains, blinds or window shades were installed, but I would feel too exposed if they were not installed. This unit seems to have more privacy, despite the exposed stairwell.
Posted by: anon at September 7, 2007 9:24 AM
anon: I disagree, and AMITinSF: I agree -- this is decent "nice modern" (as Dwell's tagline used to say). Its not very adventurous design-wise, and just not as compelling architecture as the Mullen house. That said, its certainly much better than the standard crap around this town...
Posted by: citicritter at September 8, 2007 10:55 PM
Looks like something you'd find on a small plot in Marina Del Rey or Palm Springs. Airy feel but tiny rooms. My main gripe is that it looks out onto a cul-de-sac of ugly 50-style homes. For that kind of money, you can find much nicer on upper Liberty Hill or Buena Vista.
Posted by: Dean Perry at September 9, 2007 5:39 PM
Beautiful design, but the construction crew must have been blind. The quality of workmanship is absolutely appalling. The architect must be weeping.
Posted by: Jim at September 10, 2007 8:23 AM
The Chronicle must have gotten wind of this house.
And I thought it was new construction! All the more amazing that its a remodel.
[Editor’s Note: Didn’t know it was a remodel? That's probably our fault (as we should have pointed it out). Of course you could have listened to Wayne last week…]
Posted by: flyerinsf at September 16, 2007 8:59 AM