April 24, 2008
Officially "Coming Soon" (As In This Afternoon): 1226 2nd Avenue
Alternative (but rejected) headline: “Interactive Floor Plan Porn, Simple But Not Plain.”
First Published: April 24, 2008 11:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
what about the "Details" section? They have written about the house to the "tune" of Gilbert and Sullivan's "I am the very model of a modern major general" from Pirates of Penzance. Weird, don't you think?
I like the house a lot. But I don't really like the bathroom remodels.
Posted by: E at April 24, 2008 11:40 AM
Very well done property website. Like any good come-on, a movie trailer say, it reveals as much as it conceals and makes you want to visit the property.
With the strong colors, heavy furniture, and camera angles, it is impossible to judge the more than skin deep condition of the property.
Posted by: redseca2 at April 24, 2008 11:44 AM
great house, great pics... looks like some of the realtors are learning and putting up better advertising for their properties.
I am one of the people who loves this part of town. yes, it's pretty foggy, but I love the shops/restaurants on Irving, the N Judah is right there, you can walk to GG Park and Haight, and it's perfect for UCSF staff especially (if they can afford it, most can't).
also, it's one of the few places that is QUIET (except for traffic on Lincoln, not sure how much that noise travels to this particular home).
IMO this area has everything, except for sun.
I used to live on 3rd, and loved my "commute" which was walking 1/2 block to work.
Posted by: ex SF-er at April 24, 2008 11:55 AM
Count me in as well. This is undoubtedly one of my favorite parts of the city. Call me crazy, but I'd rather live here than Pac Heights, Marina, or Noe any day. Great neighborhood.
Plus this place looks fantastic from the pictures. Obviously a total renovation inside and out. Although I did find the first-person poetry a bit strange (no offense, Kathleen).
But, like ex SF-er, I have to wonder how many Inner Sunset fans can afford a $1.8MM sticker. Or, to frame it another way, how many people who can afford a $1.8MM home want to live in Inner Sunset? We'll see, though. It sold for $1.3MM in 2003.
Posted by: Dude at April 24, 2008 12:08 PM
What an absolutely fantastic marketing job, including an aggressive price on a perfectly wonderful home.
I'm sure it will fly off the market.
Kathleen, anyone who is looking to sell their home has to take notice of the great job you did on this one. From the ultimate critic, you've done a great job here.
Posted by: tipster at April 24, 2008 12:11 PM
Amazing what they do with plywood and 2x4s these days.
Posted by: king at April 24, 2008 2:02 PM
OMG that "morning in America" takeoff is hysterical. Are real estate websites supposed to be this irreverant? Love it!
Posted by: curmudgeon at April 24, 2008 2:03 PM
The 2nd - 6th area up to Kirkham is nice and SFH's don't linger for long. That said, this is too close to Lincoln for those $. Would prefer something less polished above Judah on 4th or 5th.
Posted by: simpr at April 24, 2008 2:29 PM
One or 2 blocks higher and a nit more east would have been nicer, and a great view like on upper 3rd, Hill Point, or Hill View.
The brick patio is a fantastic idea.
Warm, simple, easy maintenance, and particularly inviting. I want one.
Posted by: San FronziScheme at April 24, 2008 3:54 PM
Great marketing job. The mourning in America is a little much for me. I didn't see any junkies in the GGP shots. She must have photo shopped them out!
Great voice over! It should sell quickly a little under the asking.
Posted by: jimmythekid at April 24, 2008 5:05 PM
Just goes to show you that marketing works. This place is overpriced. Some sucker will probably buy it at asking -- maybe they will set an offer date and get over-asking.
The poem was disturbing. But I do love the interactive floorplan!
Posted by: eddy at April 24, 2008 10:40 PM
"SF is more prosperous and SAFE than ever before" ...from the You Tube video under "Details" at http://www.1226-2ndavenue.com/index.htm
I guess the Realtor doesn't know our homicide rate.
Posted by: tloin at April 25, 2008 7:35 AM
I can't do without sun so this is not for me, but I love the house and I applaud Kathleen's marketing.
Posted by: Oceangoer at April 25, 2008 8:31 AM
I have no idea if the house is overpriced, but it's a bit ridiculous to claim there's "no sun" here.
It's flat, walkable and bikeable to lots of great stuff, assuming you don't have a hellish commute and can enjoy everything. And when you get sick of taking the N Judah everywhere, there's room for both your cars in the garage!
I think it's a neat place, tho I agree they were a bit heavy-handed in the bathrooms. As for the price, who can say? It's only a problem for first-time buyers (but this is not a starter home), and it's possible someone with bubble equity or extra option money will roll right in. It's a perfect family house!
Posted by: dub dub at April 25, 2008 9:11 AM
I personally never said there was "no sun" but I will tell you that it is on the "wrong side of the tracks" fogwise.
I lived for years on 3rd ave just below the Parnassus campus. I can't tell you how many times it would be dreary and foggy there, but warm and sunny and beautiful if you took 17th just over the hill towards the Castro.
but that aside, this area was my favorite by far of the entire city. close second (for me) was in Duboce Triangle near CPMC.
Posted by: ex SF-er at April 25, 2008 9:45 AM
Nice place, but the idea that this neighborhood, which gets cold and miserable in the summer, will somehow fetch Marina prices seems laughable.
Then again, as someone said above, some sucker will probably fall for it.
Posted by: Foolio at April 25, 2008 9:46 AM
ex SF -- fair enough. I actually prefer this area to Noe Valley (where I lived for years), which is admittedly sunnier, but *so boring* -- the best thing about NV is it's easier to get to the peninsula/SOMA (and your property values have gone up faster than average) :)
Posted by: dub dub at April 25, 2008 9:54 AM
Marina prices? A home this size and in what appears to be good condition would fetch way over 2 mil in the marina.I agree with ex-SFer, this part of the inner sunset is cool. Much more like the Haight or Cole Valley than anyhing west of 5th or 6th. May be pricey for the area still.
Posted by: cat at April 25, 2008 10:17 AM
Very nicely done. Some of the video pans were a bit too quick but overall great job. Why the tribute to Hal Riney?
Posted by: Lori at April 25, 2008 1:02 PM
This place sees *lots* of daytime traffic from UCSF staff and patients circling the block looking for parking, myself included. Just a few blocks west and south (around Kirkham) or east (Willard or Woodland) it's quieter and nicer.
Posted by: ucsf doc at April 25, 2008 9:09 PM
Body count for the city - 2007: 69
Body count for the Inner Sunset 2007: 0.
The policeman at Nothern Station said he could not recall a homicide in the last three years in the neighborhood, outside of the tragic dog mauling involving a mom, her kid, and two dogs.
Yo, UC DOC- Willard is not quieter, neither is Edgewood and the price point on both these streets is a million plus more.
This is Lincoln by the triangle park before Kezar Drive intersects. No Lincoln Avenue noise, close to Sharon Meadow. Boculic. Sublime.
It is quieter than Seattle and has better weather.
The only foot traffic is residents on parade to one of the top ten teaching hospitals in the world.
Go outside and fall in the street if you have chest pains.
It is a wonderful home for folks who want their children sleeping on the same floor as the parents.
And want the grandparents sleeping in the attic.
It is a family home.
Posted by: Kathleen at April 25, 2008 10:53 PM
Well, I hope that cop knew what he was talking about, because it's the Park district police station that covers this neighborhood and not the Northern police station.
I think most people know that 90% of the homicides were committed in the eastern part of the city.
I agree with ucsf doc. I see people constantly circling this neighborhood for parking as well.
Posted by: Satchelfan at April 25, 2008 11:54 PM
ucsf doc/satchel fan are correct.
there are tons of people circling/parking in the morning on M-F but I'd say it's mainly restricted to 7am to 5pm (when most of us are at work anyway)... especially 7-9am (morning rush) and then 1130am-130pm (lunch rush)
lotta people park on lincoln, kezar,frederick etc since UCSF doesn't have enough parking for everybody.
however, it is very rare to hear honking noise except on Lincoln and Parnassus, and the traffic down 2nd/3rd is relatively slow due to the small size of the street and the hill, so the traffic tends to be quiet. the N Judah isn't too loud usually in this neighborhood, except for where it turns at 9th.
most of the lincoln traffic veers down kezar at 3rd and so I don't think that 2nd ave would get too much of that noise either.
as for hippies/druggies/crime: there are tons if you walk down to Sharon Meadow (far eastern part of GG park just to the west of Kezar Drive and north of Kezar stadium). it's literally like a 2 minute walk.
HOWEVER hippies NEVER come out of GG park to this neighborhood. Never. I never once saw a hippie or druggie come out of GG park this way. They all go into the Haight. I swear to god there is a crime/hippie/druggie forcefield on Lincoln Way. Hippies/Druggies/criminals are not able to penetrate it.
(actually: I think the real reason is that hippies and druggies would have to walk UP the hill to get here... not gonna happen especially since the Haight is level with Sharon Meadow and the Haight is so enticing for hippies/druggies/criminals...)
A rarity in SF, I knew about 1/2 the people on my block on 3rd ave between Parnassus and Irving.
NONE of us were worried about being outside alone at any hour of the day, especially weekends and late in the evening (this place is quiet as a morgue when UCSF is shut down... for the better IMO). NONE of my neighbors was harassed or bothered or panhandled or anything. ever.
Even on Irving (the business area/restaurant area etc) the area is clean and cute and safe, especially at 3am on a Saturday (you'll be the only person walking around). that goes for women and even kids...
a SF oddity for sure...
this is why true-inner-sunset is my favorite neighborhood in ALL of the city (even more than Duboce Triangle/Pac Heights etc) despite the fog (which is very significant).
this house is unaffordable to most UCSF staff (even married UCSF docs or married UCSF researchers-UCSF pays like crap, some of the lowest salaries in the country) unless they have an inheritance or whatever... however, that isn't to say that someone can't afford it, as some of the docs/researchers have money outside of their medical careers or maybe their spouses make money in another field!
it is funny to me however that doctors cannot afford to live in this neighborhood. (which is why I don't live there! oh yeah... and wife hates the fog)
Posted by: ex SF-er at April 26, 2008 1:39 AM
Hey ex SF-er, I'm glad you felt safe here. I guess you see crime in every neighborhood, but I'm surprised that with the proximity of the park and the Haight that there aren't more druggies and hippes here. I did pull up the stats for the past 90 days from crimemaps and although most of the crime in this neighborhood tended to be vandalism/petty theft type, there were three cases of aggravated assault within in a block or two of this address. One assault happened at 10:20 in the morning.
Posted by: satchelfan at April 26, 2008 11:08 AM
We went this afternoon, and it's nice, as expected. The house isn't as deep as I thought (more up-and-down than back-and-forth), but the yard is fantastic, and the garage/workout area is larger than I thought (but lower ceiling too) -- surprisingly easy access to the backyard from there which did not come thru from the interactive floor plan. Nice nooks and crannies everywhere, but you'd better like climbing stairs.
As I mentioned above, I think they overdid it in some bathrooms, but that's my taste -- I doubt I could use the hammered basin thing on the main floor with a straight face -- but it practically forces you to leave the washroom door open :).
I have no idea if it is overpriced, but if the current owners don't need to sell, there's no harm in going for it -- it's possible someone with a few 100k of bubble equity/ option money might fall in love and buy it anyway.
Beautiful sunny afternoon in the inner sunset, but we had to park on 5th! :)
Posted by: dub dub at April 27, 2008 6:42 PM
Great yard and spacious on main level. Not all windows updated. Looks out from yard to other houses, including one downtrodden multi family with broken blinds hanging in the window. The garage is 2 car inside but only a 1 car door, so would require some jockeying. The proposed financing options include 20% down with 7-9K+ per month outlay, including a tax break. Nice house--too bad only the rich can live there!
Posted by: fred at April 28, 2008 11:31 AM
We went to see it as well, and I think it's probably one of the overall nicest homes Ive seen in that area (or anywhere near that area actually) I'm not as convinced it's overpriced---we saw one about a month ago one street over for 1,650,000. It sold I think at or near asking and was not nearly as nice. It had 1 car parking, much smaller---maybe around 1,000 square feet smaller, and definitely didn't have the same sense of quality. The yard was great I agree, and really large by SF standards. I can't think of anything I didn't like, except maybe the weird paint job in the kid's room, but that's easily fixed.
Posted by: cat at April 28, 2008 12:27 PM
This is one of the nicer houses under $2 million that we saw anywhere in the City. As nice as it is though, definte flaws. Two cars side by side maybe, but one better be a really really small car. The brick patio is way overscaled for the size of the yard and the marble in the overdone bathrooms has gotta go as does SOMA-like bathroom fixtures on the first floor. No Edwardian DNA in those. Although the neigborhood is nicely treed and no utility wires overhead, it can't be that quiet with UCSF up the street. There are also some pretty trashy homes in the neighborhood, probably medical student rental units. Parking turns out not to be a problem...if you dont mind paying extortion at the UCSF garage. Nice house, decent price, we'll wait.
Posted by: Yeoman at April 28, 2008 2:56 PM
Readers & Editors take note:
This is amzingly similar to a home one block away that you editors recently featured here, 1212 Arguello (editors?) that sold for the ask @ 1.63M. It's very similar in terms of layout, space, and finish, so look and compare for yourselves before you say it's a deal or not.
I see positives and negatives vs 1212 but will keep them to myself.
Posted by: 1212 Arguelo looker at April 29, 2008 2:57 PM
I can not see the inside of 1212 arguello, but based on SS comments (search), one said it was "shabby", and would be "a beaut" after two or three years of elbow grease -- the 2nd ave house is good to go.
Also, 2nd ave house is less exposed than that part of arguelo (some will like that). Finally, according to mapjack, the arguello house looks like it needs roof repair (but atleast they got rid of that ugly yellow).
1212 Arguelo sounds like a perfect SF fixer for 1.63m :)
Now is 2nd ave "worth" an extra 250k (15%)? Who knows, but I bet it is, to the right buyer. As I said above, no harm to give it a shot -- this is frisco, baby (my revenge for hearing one too many "the mish")!
Here's the arguello mapjack link
Posted by: dub dub at April 29, 2008 3:43 PM
Thanks for the comments, dub dub.
1212 was definitely NOT shabby, not a fixer, and is good to go.(3rd story office/ playroom not nearly as nice as 2nd st but not 250k more shabby)
It was redone well over the last few years by the resident architect. (Let's get those pics going, eds)
My point was, "buyer, be educated"
Posted by: Arguello Looker at April 29, 2008 4:05 PM
Interior shots of 1212 Arguello:
Not shabby but more modern plus in-law.
Posted by: toni at April 29, 2008 4:16 PM
Yes, this is nice (I like the color scheme better than 2nd). I *personally* would not pay an extra 250k for 2nd ave over this :)
I'm kind of wondering about the commenters on the SS thread for 1212 -- I had a picture in my mind of what it would look like based on them, as they were so negative (2-3 years of elbow grease?)
Thanks for the info!
Posted by: dub dub at April 29, 2008 4:28 PM
I don't know if 2nd ave is worth 250,000 more than 1212 argeullo, but I saw both homes and the 2nd ave home really is much nicer, IMO. Much better kitchen, really 4 bedrooms if you count the 3rd floor, way better garage and definitely bigger overall.
Posted by: cat at April 29, 2008 6:03 PM
I live a few streets down and felt compelled to comment on the difference between 1226 2nd and 1212 Arguello. I've been to both open houses. The floor plan of 1212 Argeullo shows ~2500 sq. feet, including about 720 (360 each) both Ground level and Attic/ playroom. There are floor plans, but no sq. footage for 1226. But my sense is that 2nd ave is a bit bigger on the 2 main floors, putting it at about 2400 sq.feet? If you then add in even the 3 rd floor (not the ground level) that's gotta be another 900, so apples to apples is 2500 vs. 3300. Plus 2nd has 2 car parking,and a bigger yard. soooooo, the extra ~800 sq ft of 2nd is going for about $300 per ft. Not bad.
Posted by: hajers at April 30, 2008 11:24 AM
i live in the neighborhood and have seen both properties (saw 2nd yesterday). 1226 2nd is definitely larger in terms of both square footage and usable square footage in the attic. the attic for 2nd ave is surprisingly tall so you don't have to crank your head over as much when you get close to the walls. 1212 arguello's attic was definitely tighter. the finishes on 2nd are nice, although you have to share their tastes as has been mentioned. there was another house that sold up on 5th ave for 1.73mm, that is in a better location imo, but wasn't as big or as nice as this house.
Posted by: 1226 at April 30, 2008 11:53 AM
A question Arguello looker...have you been in the 2nd ave home? Or were you basing your comments on the pictures and floor plan from the mls listing? Because I don't think they were all that comparable. Certainly not in the sense of spaciousness nor quality of finishes. I've got no axe to grind, I'm retired and waste time looking at real estate I can't afford, but your comment about educating buyers seems irrelevant to me. They are not comparable properties.
Posted by: cat at April 30, 2008 5:21 PM
response to cat's question:
I am in the market for a single family home , so educating myself and trying to help other potential buyers remeber what has traded is relevant thank you very much. 1212 is a data point for value comparison. To a potential buyer in this neighborhood, these two properties a block apart with very similar layout and usable square footage are absolutely comparable in many ways. Comparable doesn't mean the same.
Posted by: Arguello looker at May 1, 2008 12:48 PM
Sold 06/10/2008: $1,879,000
Posted by: steveS at June 29, 2008 11:58 PM