November 12, 2008

Inside The St. Regis Penthouse: The Rendering Scoop And Details

St. Regis Penthouse: Living

It’s a plugged-in tipster that catches a couple of the elusive and exclusive renderings and additional details for the two-story penthouse atop the San Francisco St. Regis.

St. Regis Penthouse: Dining and Deck

The numbers: 20,000+ square feet (including 2,900 of terraces); six bedrooms, seven full baths, four powder rooms; 2,500 square foot master suite (including the closet of dreams below); thirteen-seat home cinema designed by Keith Yates; 22 foot floor-to-ceiling glass walls in the living; and four terraces, four fireplaces and six car parking.

St. Regis Penthouse: Master Closet

Penthouse (and Sex in The This City) worthy design by Orlando Diaz-Azcuy Design Associates. And yes, asking $70,000,000 fully finished. Calling Mister (or Miss) Big.

And forget the housewarming, just get us in for a tour.

UPDATE: Another rendering of the 22-foot ceiling and windows:

St. Regis Penthouse: Living

And that 2,500 square foot master suite's 525 gallon infinity tub:

St. Regis Penthouse: Master Tub

And we take it back, let’s not forget those invitations to the housewarming. We’ll be bringing (a lot of) bubble bath. And fins.

[Full Disclosure: The listing agent for the penthouse atop the San Francisco St. Regis advertises on SocketSite but played no part in this post. And yes, we would have featured it regardless.]

Museum Tower Penthouse atop the St. Regis Hotel [gregglynn.com]
St. Regis Penthouse Asking $70M: Is San Francisco All Growns Up? [SocketSite]

First Published: November 12, 2008 11:00 AM

Comments from "Plugged In" Readers

If I had a closet that big I would have never come out of it.

Posted by: sf at November 12, 2008 11:12 AM

Gregg is a great listing agent. I hope his client becomes a more realistic on the price so he has a chance of selling it.

Posted by: anon at November 12, 2008 11:14 AM

why doesn't that cat have some colored shirts?

Posted by: irreverent at November 12, 2008 11:19 AM

Now THAT is what a penthouse should look like.

Posted by: toni at November 12, 2008 11:20 AM

Wow! Great space!

You don't need colored shirts when you walk around in a tux all day, going from party to party with Grandpappy's money!

I can only imagine what the HOA fees are? Probably the GDP of a small country?

Posted by: tipster at November 12, 2008 11:34 AM

So THAT's how the other half lives...

Posted by: waiting2nest at November 12, 2008 11:42 AM

WOW! But a floor plan would be nice... And on the other hand, One Rincon Hill needs to come up with renderings of their penthouse.

Posted by: flaneur at November 12, 2008 11:54 AM

Let me liquidate some of my stocks to buy this. I've been waiting for something this amazing to come around!

Posted by: Lex at November 12, 2008 11:55 AM

Nice renderings.

Posted by: eddy at November 12, 2008 12:21 PM

wow, that is pretty unbelievable. great place.

so... how long until something like this sells and for how much? i'm going to guess (if it sells at all) that it goes in about 285 days for $61m

Posted by: garrett at November 12, 2008 12:30 PM

That's a lot of white polos.

Posted by: lolcat_94123 at November 12, 2008 12:31 PM

My seat is very wet. Oh my...

Posted by: Ryan at November 12, 2008 12:37 PM

EVERYONE at ODADA wears the standard issue white smock.

wouldn't be surprised if they insisted all the potential buyers wore them so they could appreciate the design from the correct point of view.

Posted by: jose at November 12, 2008 12:40 PM

Oh No! You have to be pre-approved to view the property website... I've seen it all now.

Posted by: Ryan at November 12, 2008 12:40 PM

Wow a place only carrie bradshaw could love.

At one point, I think things get too big...

Posted by: jessep at November 12, 2008 12:49 PM

Those are all artist renderings, right? the actual unit doesn't look like that? if that's true, that's one heckuva rendering. wow.

I'm not sure anything is worth $70M, but this is one of the best penthouses I've seen. It really deserves the name penthouse as opposed to "top floor unit".

as for it going for $60M, I'd have a hard time believing that. Even Manhattan has a hard time selling condos for that price (I know Martin Zweig's co-op sold for $70M, but other than that I can barely think of any that sell for over $30M).

I would say $20M to $30M. that said, I have absolutely no idea whatsoever and I just made that number up. Just like the seller.

[Editor's Note: Yep, renderings. And do keep in mind that the raw space was purchased for $30M in 2005 and a small army of craftspeople have working on it ever since (or rather up until it hit the market in August).]

Posted by: ex SF-er at November 12, 2008 12:55 PM

i'm going to guess (if it sells at all) that it goes in about 285 days for $61m

Garrett, you could be right on the "if it sells at all" part. 2845 Broadway has been sitting there for more than 2 years at $65M. The air is really thin up there and the stock market crash is not helping, I think.

Posted by: San FronziScheme at November 12, 2008 1:00 PM

The market crash continues unabated. Sadly, but not surprisingly, google has now broken through into the 200s. I think it's tough to sell anything at that range, and could be for awhile. If any place can get that price, that place can!

If Google stays on that trajectory, it's going to start approaching its first day close, adjusted for inflation. DNA, the "sure thing headed for 120", is now at 80. Apple is about half where it was in August. Cisco is about where it was in October. Of 1998, that is. Every Cisco option granted in 10 YEARS is under water. Tough to buy real estate with option money that is negative!

Posted by: tipster at November 12, 2008 1:27 PM

The market crash continues unabated

Nope. It's all about the "Head and Shoulders" reversal.

Wait...it formed a second head.

Never mind. See you all at Dow 7K.

[Editor's Note: And now back to the St. Regis...]

Posted by: San FronziScheme at November 12, 2008 1:42 PM

http://thefrontsteps.com/2008/11/12/on-top-of-the-world-at-the-st-regis-san-francisco/#comment-6646

(link to my post on TheFrontSteps. I'm just trying to break down the numbers into something we can at least understand.)

[Editor's Note: Sophie's post:

Just for fun, a 20% downpayment is $14,000,000 a jumbo loan at 7.5% (today’s rate) gives $391,560 in monthly payments
so basically, you have to choke up about $12,900 (mortgage) + $2,400 (property taxes) DAILY! + a twenty each time a valet parks one of our cars.
Assume you pay cash, it’s still $6,400 (amt over 30years) + $2,400 (taxes) daily. How much would such a place rent in daily, weekly or monthly fee? more than $8,800 a day? $61,000 a week? $240,000 a month?
if you need help paying for the water to flush those 11 toilets, you can always recycle your 500 gallons bathrub water with a [[link to previous post]] pump.
(I guess this is the type of properties made for the Rich Ones [in McCain definition of the term]).

And once again, if you have to ask (or run the numbers)...]

Posted by: Sophie at November 12, 2008 1:50 PM

And do keep in mind that the raw space was purchased for $30M in 2005 and a small army of craftsmen have working on it ever since (or rather up until it hit the market in August)

ok, you've persuaded me. I'll move my range up to $25-40M.

I see no reason why this person won't lose money on this deal, just like millions of other homeowners who bought at the peak and then overinvested in their homes.

If somebody can show me a list of $45M+ SALES (not listings) for a condo then maybe I'll change my mind. But very very very few condos go for over $30M, even big ones. Yes even in Manhattan and London. It is rare to even find a MANSION that costs $70M.

TO my knowledge, only 2 condos have ever sold for around 45M in Manhattan. One in the Plaza Hotel-Sanford Weil's place, final price was 42-45M, and the other was Daniel Loeb's monstrosity in 2005 for $45M.

I'm sorry folks, but I think people are high on kool aide around here if you think that a SF condo can go for $60-70M. Especially with this market. (I don't think it could have gone for that even at peak).

Posted by: ex SF-er at November 12, 2008 1:51 PM

ex-SFer:

I agree with you for once (shocking...). I think the air gets very thin at anything above 5 M.

Once you get between 5-10 M, I think buying a condo doesn't really make a lot of sense.

People looking to buy property in that price range (note: I don't mean people with that kind of money, but people who want to buy real estate in that price range) generally do not prefer an extremely urban environment.

Posted by: jessep at November 12, 2008 2:19 PM

this insane price range should be reserved for the absolutest primest areas in the world; and that doesn't include SF. especially not when you have homeless, drug addicts, crack dealers, downstairs.

Posted by: condoshopper at November 12, 2008 2:26 PM

You can buy your own private island in the Bahamas, 250 acres of it, for less than half this price. Then again, if you really wanted to be in SF, you could probably just buy land and build an entire custom midrise building for much less than this.

But I doubt they'll need to lower the price. Where are GRMs in Soma these days, around 18-19x? So they'll just rent it out for $350,000 a month. Remember, rents are screaming! Plus, they're not just going to give it away.

Posted by: Dude at November 12, 2008 2:42 PM

A condo in L.A. sold for 47 million to Candy Spelling, so since soooooo many San Francisco boosters feel that our city should be worth so much more than Lala land, I guess we will have to wait and see. I would rather live in the penthouse of 2006 Washington or 2500 Steiner, myself.

Posted by: anoncensorious at November 12, 2008 2:53 PM

anoncensorious,

I wouldn't pay a nickel to live in LA. How does that sound?

Does that make me someone who thinks our city should be worth more than LA, just because I want to live here and I don't want to live there?

Just a thought.

Posted by: jessep at November 12, 2008 2:58 PM

UPDATE: A couple more renderings have been added to our coverage above.

Posted by: SocketSite at November 12, 2008 3:02 PM

Sorry, I thought my sarcasm was obvious. Wouldn't want to live in L.A. myself. (Though I don't mind going there for the weather, shops and museums now and then). I would like to add 999 Green to my penthouse wishlist btw.

Posted by: anoncensorious at November 12, 2008 3:07 PM

The place just feels, I dunno, a little claustrophobic.

Posted by: Binnings Team at November 12, 2008 3:25 PM

The 3 units that made up the shell sold for 23M at the end of '05, not 30M FYI.

Posted by: killbotkondo at November 12, 2008 4:00 PM

Does the price include the prostitutes that frequently "work" the lobby bar. I've seen these cracked out working girls hanging out by the valet station and in the bar on a few of my visits.

Unless you are a billionaire whose into low rent skank, you're not gonna appreciate pulling up in your Bentley to the St Regis to that circus.

Posted by: sf_housedude at November 12, 2008 4:26 PM

How does Al Gore roll when he's in town? A Prius, a Chevy Volt? Bentley is still working on a hybrid model.

Posted by: FSBO at November 12, 2008 4:35 PM

killbotkondo,

Your purchase figure is inaccurate.

San Fraonzi Scheme,

The Broadway residence may require at least $20,000,000 more to complete and another year plus of construction time. The offering price of $70,000,000 for the St. Regis Penthouse is for a turn-key, ultra-luxurious and larger residence.

Likely multiples of $10,000,000 have been spent since 2005 on this residence...Not to mention the value of three years out of anyone's life to combine the previously three penthouse residences into one magnificent residence.

If you use the example of the Century City sale to Mrs. Aaron Spelling, yes C.C. not Beverly Hills,Bel Air or Malibu, where she paid $47MM for a much smaller shell and is expected to spend $25+MM more to complete then this begins to fall into the good value, if not bargain, category. There have been numerous sales of Cooperatives and condominiums in Manhattan for between $50MM and $75MM and over $100MM in London for luxury flats.

Posted by: well informed reader at November 12, 2008 4:51 PM

There have been numerous sales of Cooperatives and condominiums in Manhattan for between $50MM and $75MM and over $100MM in London for luxury flats.

Have there been?
I am aware of the two I listed above ($45M for Loeb's place, $42-45M for Weil's place)

And there was Zweig's $70M co-op (the Pierre Penthouse). However, it seems I was mistaken. Upon doing research ZWEIG'S PENTHOUSE NEVER SOLD.

Zweig's penthouse in Manhattan, a premier property in manhattan, did not sell for $70M

Can you give EXAMPLES of these numerous condos SELLING between $50 and $75M in Manhattan? Because I simply can't think of any.

Since Zweig's Penthouse never sold, to my knowledge, the highest priced condo sale ever in Manhattan was Loeb's $45M price tag.

And so I am supposed to believe that a shell of a condo in a dumpy part of San Francisco during a horrific financial crisis is going to sell at a level that one of the most sought-after properties on Earth could not sell for during the height of the bubble?

I'm sorry y'all... no way. no how.

===
I don't know much about London so I can't comment on that. However, the big news was One Hyde Park where 4 penthouse condos sold with an asking price of 86M pounds. One sold for more than 100M pounds ($200M).

but you're crazy if you justify SF pricing based on London, especially One Hyde Park with the St. Regis. Those 2 markets aren't even comparable.

Posted by: ex SF-er at November 12, 2008 5:37 PM

Those sales in NYC and London were almost a month ago!

That was a dirrerent era.

Posted by: tipster at November 12, 2008 5:39 PM

Per the SF Assessor site, the three penthouse units at the St Regis (188 Minna) have a combined assessed value of $28.36 million.

Question for well-informed-reader: You stated that killbotkondo's estimated 2005 selling price of $23M was inaccurate. Do you know the actual price?

Question about property assessments: If the original purchase price was $23M or $28M or $30M (or whatever) and the owner has been spending 10's of millions more over the past 3 years, why is the assessed value still at $28.36M? Why hasn't it been raised? Recall that 37 Raycliff Terrace had an assessed value of "only" $2.6M for its improvements - and many felt that over $10M had been spent. Our assessors wouldn't miss this, would they? I mean it's not like a city assessor has ever been found of wrongdoing, have they?

Posted by: FSBO at November 12, 2008 5:41 PM

"this begins to fall into the good value, if not bargain, category."

ROFLMAO.

"Likely multiples of $10,000,000 have been spent since 2005 on this residence...Not to mention the value of three years out of anyone's life to combine the previously three penthouse residences into one magnificent residence."

If that's true, the developer is going to get a lesson in post-crash synergies: 1 + 1 + 1 = 2.

Posted by: Laughing Millionaire Renter in Marin at November 12, 2008 5:44 PM

This is not not how the other half live.
This is how the other .000016 percent live.

Posted by: Salarywoman at November 12, 2008 5:49 PM

FWIW:
the Spelling condo seems to be about the same size as this. It is 16,500 sq ft NOT including terraces/balconies, etc.

This condo is 20,000 sq ft INCLUDING 2900sq ft of terraces (so about 17,100 sq ft living space)

I'm not sure how much money Mrs. Spelling will need to finish her condo. where did you get this information?

there seem to be a lot of people making claims about this property being fairly valued, but I still am struggling to find any American comp for this level.

I'm sticking to my (revised) guns.
$25M to $40M.

(actually, it'll just get pulled off the market after a long time sitting).

Posted by: ex SF-er at November 12, 2008 5:53 PM

The penthouse at Time Warner cost $50M and rents at $30,000 a day. Not sure what that would sell for, but probably more than $50M, or how many people actually stay there. And this one looks nicer although never been to either. Regardless of price, this is an amazing space. Hope someone actually gets to enjoy it at some point.

Posted by: view lover at November 12, 2008 5:59 PM

I really want some of the crack that Victor McFarlane is smoking.

Posted by: jessep at November 12, 2008 6:12 PM

I have nothing to say that hasn't been said, but I'm home with a cold, so I'll just agree with ex-sf and say construction will cease and it'll eventually be pulled from the market.

The renderings are pretty awesome. I can barely comprehend, though, how much it would cost to put something like this together - never mind the time frame! How many man hours are wasted just getting the subs up and down the service elevators. lol Some of my "neighbors" have spent 20+ million on renovations, but nothing of this scale or magnitude.

Posted by: Sleepiguy at November 12, 2008 6:39 PM

"Likely multiples of $10,000,000 have been spent since 2005 on this residence...Not to mention the value of three years out of anyone's life to combine the previously three penthouse residences into one magnificent residence."

And here I thought that it was pretty clear by now that what someone spent to purchase/renovate in the past, or what it once was worth, has little to do with what a property will sell for in the present.

Read the Sunday Chron article about east bay sellers getting a whiff of reality?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/11/09/MNHQ13TF13.DTL

Almost felt sorry for the Richmond lady whose house has been on the market for 2 years, and is still about 40% overpriced. But her house is special since now-deceased husband did everything custom! Chalk it up to greed meets naivete meets sentimentality.

Oh wait, I forgot, the high end is different....

Posted by: West Side Story at November 12, 2008 7:26 PM

Regarding the 47 million dollar Candy Spelling condo in Los Angeles, it prices out at about $2,848 a sq. ft. according to a July 22, 2008 article in the Los Angeles Times.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/22/business/fi-condoprice22

Posted by: Justin at November 12, 2008 8:07 PM

Sorry folks. This is overpriced by about 65 million.

Posted by: gjhgjhgj at November 12, 2008 9:56 PM

I wish I never saw this post. I've been fantasizing about this residence ever since first seeing it this morning. I've been back to stare at pictures 6 times already.

I think I'll just print out the renderings and keep them under my matress.

Posted by: dreamer at November 12, 2008 9:56 PM

The carrying costs on this place are enough to bankrupt just about anyone.

Posted by: tipster at November 12, 2008 10:38 PM

Orlando Diaz and his team have done an amazing job as evidenced by the renderings of the space. He can do my penthouse at 999 Green when Charlotte and George Schultz sell it to me.

Posted by: SocketSiteDailyReader at November 13, 2008 6:04 AM

If you look really close in the rendering of the outdoor deck you can see some administering a Voigt-Kampf test.

Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at November 13, 2008 8:46 AM

SocketSiteDailyReader,

Actually George and Charlotte are selling to me when they move on... Sorry...

Posted by: Ryan at November 13, 2008 10:14 AM

"If you look really close in the rendering of the outdoor deck you can see some administering a Voigt-Kampf test."

Perfect! I was going to say it looks like Bruce Wayne's penthouse in The Dark Knight, but Blade Runner works much better.

Posted by: eastbaymike at November 13, 2008 2:07 PM

Oh...I'm getting a real estate orgasim!

Posted by: Coach at November 13, 2008 3:24 PM

It's gorgeous, but one aspect does not work. The 525 gallon infinity bath tub. You obviously wouldn't drain and fill it up with each bath, but sitting untreated water grows bacteria. So then do you chlorinate (or use saline) for your bath water? Who wants to take a bath in a chlorine or saline? Or is this really meant to be an indoor hot tub? What am I missing.

Posted by: Auden at November 13, 2008 7:29 PM

prediction

20,000 x 2000 psf == $40 MIL

and up to 2 years to close.

Posted by: Louis at November 13, 2008 8:51 PM

For the love of god..it's "Sex AND The City".....

Posted by: pedantinthecity at November 13, 2008 9:30 PM

Auden, what makes you think that you wouldn't fill and empty the 525 gallon bathtub? I imagine that it could continuously recirculate the water, like a big Japanese bath, which keeps the water fresh and at the right temperature.


Sure, it wastes water, but even if it's $100 a day to keep the tub running, who gives a crap compared to the rest of the expenses?

Posted by: Whorfin at November 13, 2008 10:05 PM

I'm not familiar with Japanese baths... Is this how the bath would work? Can you explain further?

Posted by: Auden at November 13, 2008 10:35 PM

Think micro-onsen. I'm not sure what technology is used to keep onsen water clean without resorting to chemicals, but somehow they do it. Part of the solution is scrubbing down and showering thoroughly before a soak like the Japanese do. American style communal hot tubs are gross compared to their Japanese counterpart (so be careful inviting Japanese visitors to take a soak - they will be disgusted)

Another much simpler solution is simply to expend 500 gallons of water for each soak. In this category of wealth that expense is not noticeable.

Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at November 14, 2008 10:39 AM

Can I use My American Express points?

Posted by: C-Dogg at November 14, 2008 3:16 PM

Sf-er,

Check out 15 Central Park West for numerous sales over $30MM in Manhattan. They sold for well over $3000/sf.

Posted by: RE Dev at November 14, 2008 4:32 PM

Right, but my question is whether they would ever use it if they had to fill it up ech time. It would take hours. And then they would need heaters to keep the water warm while they were filling it up. Seems like too much effort just to take a bath.

Posted by: Auden at November 14, 2008 4:55 PM

it could be on recirc in-line heater pumps.
it could also have a booster pump to increase the flow-rate. maybe two fillers?
It could also have a filtration system.
it could also be tied into a home-network touch-screen option that you press just before you eat dinner for that relaxing post-meal soak.

would you take a bath now?

Posted by: tub guy at November 16, 2008 5:23 PM

No, its way too big. If I bought the place I would expand it into a mini exercise pool with swim jet.

Posted by: Auden at November 17, 2008 6:08 AM

Auden,
There's one of those already in St. Regis.
"Pristine Indoor Infinity Lap Pool"

Posted by: tub guy at November 18, 2008 9:52 AM

Gregg is a great listing agent??? What kind of bone head takes a $70MM listing with no chance of selling it at that. Not even $50 million would it sell for. The correct price for this property is below $16MM regardless of how much they are spending on it.

A great listing agent helps his clients properly price a home so that it can get sold....period. Not grab a vanity listing, spend 10s or 100s of thousands of dollars on a property that the owner doesn't really want to sell.

Gregg is Not a great listing agent.

Posted by: Carmen Fischer at February 28, 2009 8:56 AM

Now this is what a penthouse should look like. High ceilings, amazing view and living at the top of the world. Miami has some pretty amazing condos too, but this one at St Regis is incredible.

Posted by: MIami Immobilien at September 29, 2010 8:04 PM

As of November 2010 the price was down to 49 Million ,no buyers, no firm offers.

Take it down to $30 Mil, and I think you will attract an overseas investor. (The only ones buying over the top real estate these days.)

[Editor's Note: As of February 2009 actually, although that was unfinished, and as plugged-in people know it has been finished since (but still asking $49M).]

Posted by: Sir Knight Jack at November 5, 2010 4:09 PM

Post a comment


(required - will be published)


(required - will not be published, sold, or shared)


(optional - your "Posted by" name will link to this URL)

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)


Continue Perusing SocketSite:

« The Market Might Not Like It, But We Do: Paulson Changes Rescue Plan | HOME | Bay Area Home Sales Slow, Except In San Francisco »