March 28, 2008
The Same House In Address Only: A Contemporary 844 Bay Street
In 2004 844 Bay Street (the one with the red door) was a two-bedroom single-family home of two thousand and thirty-five square feet that sold for $1,550,000.
Today it’s a three-bedroom home of four thousand and five hundred square feet with Zen garden and yoga studio; home theater; big bay views; and a rather nice contemporary interior if you happen to like that kind of thing (which we do).
First Published: March 28, 2008 9:56 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
5.25 million for Bay Street? Um, no...
Nice pictures though.
Posted by: sleepiguy at March 28, 2008 10:14 AM
More photoshop nonsense - he's taken out the Larkin Street sign that you can see on Mapjack.
Exactly what "beachside" is he referring to?
5 million to live on Bay Street? No thanks. I use it during commute hours and it's practically a freeway.
Posted by: Fishchum at March 28, 2008 10:26 AM
Nice grammer from an unknown agent!
Posted by: anon at March 28, 2008 10:31 AM
I walk by this everyday and must commend them for restoring the facades so beautifully. However, I assumed this was an owner who fell in love with the structures or something, not a spec deal. This won't end well.
Posted by: gh at March 28, 2008 10:33 AM
When making fun of one's grammar, it's incumbent on the person commenting to watch their spelling.
Good porn. I can't afford a $5M house, so I think I'll buck the trend and not make any big pronouncements as to whether I'll buy it.
Why does that happen here so often, BTW? It's like a bunch of guys sitting around saying they will or won't sleep with Adriana Lima. Guess what? Not many people face the choice.
Posted by: amused at March 28, 2008 10:43 AM
I also noticed that every single light in the place appeared to be on for purposes of photographing. My guess is that it's pretty dark inside absent artificial light.
I wonder if sky lights would have made any difference? Probably not given it's Victorian style architecture.
Posted by: RinconHill_Res at March 28, 2008 11:23 AM
$5M and no bidet? what's up with high-end SF homes? why are they so sorely lacking this basic hygienic appliance? They'll drop $5K for ugly-a5s art on the bathroom wall, but no bidet.
blows my mind!
Posted by: asiagoSF at March 28, 2008 11:35 AM
Huh? Bidets are for French people who are too lazy to wash their *entire* body on a daily (at minimum) basis.
Posted by: anon at March 28, 2008 12:15 PM
anon, bidets are not for or from the French people, although they do carry a French name.
Also, FYI, a bidet is for washing your private parts EVERY time you use the bathroom, not just once a day (gross!). You probably have never used a bidet before, so educate yourself before glibly defending your American way of (unwashed) life.
Now, back to 844 Bay...
Posted by: asiagoSF at March 28, 2008 12:45 PM
What is the material on the roof deck? Photoshopcarpetgrass? Otherwise nice house, won't comment on location or price.
Posted by: anoncomplainer at March 28, 2008 12:45 PM
Posted by: gh at March 28, 2008 1:05 PM
Stylishly done, but $5.2 seems a bit ambitious for that location.
But worth a shot because someone might love the style and view.
I would expect that it will drop down to $4.0 over time.
Posted by: jlasf at March 28, 2008 1:11 PM
To bring this conversation back to that recent one about the other $5 million house on Leavenworth, this REALLY is Fisherman's Wharf, not Russian Hill....
My observation of the Leavenworth price applies here, too.
$5.25 million is just plain dumb.
Posted by: Debtpocalypse at March 28, 2008 1:28 PM
Like the hot tub. Nice roof too... the rest seems kind of dark/cramped...
I think $5,000,000 is a bit ambitious. If I were in that market I might look elsewhere first, alas I am not so I'll just sigh
Posted by: High Rise Harry at March 28, 2008 3:38 PM
@rinconhill and anoncomplainer. The ad is pretty specific. There are skylights in three bedrooms, and the stuff on the roof is some kind of astroturf.
Posted by: Oceangoer at March 28, 2008 4:56 PM
Nice dual Fang masks on the wall. Makes me feel like a trendsetter.
Posted by: Z at March 29, 2008 3:22 PM
The comments about Bay street are valid. And it does look like a lot of the house is lacking natural light, which isn't surprising since a lot of high-end places build out the lightwells to maximize square footage. Their photographic attempt at showing off the skylights was ineffectual imo. The design and photos are quite nice, but the whole place doesn't feel like it's meant to be lived in full-time. I think they're hoping for a foreign touron to fall in love with the wharf clam chowder bowls and then stop by to pick up a nearby home.
However, asiagoSF makes the valid point that it's primarily americans who don't use bidets. (Btw, the french did come up with them first, back in the day when practically no one bathed daily.)
They could always install one of those fancy all-in-one japanese toilets as part of the contract agreement. I will settle for nothing less when I buy my $5 million house.
I'm still debating the utility of a roofdeck bidet, but in SF, I hope one would install a model with a heated seat.
Posted by: kaya at March 30, 2008 3:36 PM
Saw the bldg being built from the ground up, saw the final product, very impressed, definitely one of the better homes in SF. Great quality, great location, great display of neghborhood preservation. Bravo!!
Posted by: plainolneighbor at March 31, 2008 11:24 AM
844 Bay Street closed escrow last Friday (8/8/08) with a reported contract price of $4,600,000 (12% under asking).
Posted by: SocketSite at August 11, 2008 4:20 PM
I heard from a friend that the owner gave outrageous parties there and used to walk around nude from room to room high on coke and champagne and even danced naked on top of her table outside on the roof deck one night in july 2005 !
Posted by: jessep at September 6, 2008 10:59 PM