A Designer’s Digs On The Market In Potrero: 778 Kansas

Odd layout. I can never price property in SF
but this particular home would seem to be a niche-type product. it’s expensive, yet only has 2 bedrooms. and the 2 bedrooms it does have are in odd places.
One bedroom next to the family room. that’ll make sleeping slightly difficult if someone wants to watch TV. the other right next to the garage.
so you basically knock out most families. that said, SF has high percentage of singles and DINKs, so it might not be that big of an issue.
it seems a common theme these days is putting Living rooms and Great/Rec rooms by bedrooms. Makes no sense to me unless you have concrete walls or if everybody in the family adheres to the same schedule.
it seems that design/layouts try so hard to be cutting edge. but in general I feel there are reasons for “traditional” layouts. Bedrooms near each other so parents can watch over kids, and so that there is a “quiet” part of the house so people can sleep. kitchen/LR/DR near each other as they are where most of the “living” happens, and the noise. walls so one can do separate things in the same home if need be.

SS! yet again, very surprised you didn’t catch this price reduction. don’t get caught slippin’, we over at at SF Schtuff noticed that 778 Kansas Street used to cost $1.7 and is now $1.495. We found 6 places that cost less in the new year.
click here to see the reductions

Good eye, Garrett! $1.5 million for Potrero Hill? You’ve got to be kidding me. And 2 blocks from the freeway. This is just a party home (albeit a very nice one) but it is placed in a lower middle class part of the city. This one came to market about 18 months too late.

I didn’t realize that to I too could be a famous designer if I just bought everything from DWR!
Why is it that Sothbys listing are always seem over priced as if a property is somehow going to sell for more because its listed with a ‘high end’ agent. Ah well, it’s all in the packaging I guess.

I love the floors, but strange house.

I like the layout and would make sacrifices for the open top floor. But, I also feel the sq ft is inflated. It looks so much smaller than the 2443 listed in the MLS.

and then you go up on the roof deck and it starts to make more sense…

Jamie, no they don’t. You are looking at an “artist conception” (i.e rendering) of the living room.

Just calling a spade a spade (“lower middle class” refers to the hierarchy of SF neighborhoods, not any absolute sense — and I’m fully of lower middle class stock in that absolute sense so I don’t use this term derogatorily). You know the old real estate maxim: “Don’t but the most expensive house on the block.” This is a nice place but it’s not close to anything particularly noteworthy, right by the freeway, just a few blocks from an industrial area, and in a neighborhood that is unobjectionable but nothing special at all. That a handful of places sold at bubble prices around here at the peak of the bubble doesn’t change things — places sold in the Bayview for $1.2 million during the bubble but it is still quite a crummy neighborhood (albeit with some pleasant blocks).

Having lived in a Boston brownstone, I don’t find this place’s layout all that odd. Many Boston condos had an “upside down” layout. I believe the intent is to (a) take advantage of views when entertaining in the LR/kitchen, and (b) allow easier access to the roof deck while entertaining (it’s better than having guests walk thru bedroom levels on the way to the roof deck.
I do agree that a lack of a bathroom on the top floor is a negative, though.

I see. North Slope Potrero Hill is lower middle class and say, Laurel Heights would be upper class. I prefer grades myself. More variation for a rather stratified city. North Slope Potrero is a pretty solid “B” in my book. And Kansas isn’t right next to the freeway, but Vermont is. People are often surprised at North Slope prices going back at least six years. They’re pretty strong and would probably continue to be so now if there was any inventory.

Trip, actually Pot Hill is one of THE most desirable neighborhoods for a lot of people, including many of my friends, for the weather (warmer/sunnier), commute (think freeway access), the views (some of which are quite nice and unique as you feel like your “on top” of downtown) as well as the housing stock, neighborhood commercial areas, and “community spirit.” Socio-economically speaking, it’s increasingly feeling like Noe Valley East with lots of rich whitey’s and strollers that like to pretend that their really “progressive” whatever that means (although the projects give it some flava). Also the Potrero Boosters are THE oldest and among the most active (perhaps most active) neighborhood associations in the City with near religious turnouts at monthly/quarterly meetings. They have their own Julia Morgan designed community center (which looks like a log cabin if you ask me) that they all refer to as the “nabe” so much so that I’ve wondered if that’s where that annoying abbreviation comes from. I personally hate it because I too feel like it’s in the middle of nowhere and wouldn’t trade my chilly SF fog for that garrulous glowing yellow disc of despair in the sky any day, but to each his/her own.

I can never visit this block without hearing the command “Pull over on Vermont” sounded over a PA speaker in my head. You see there is something odd about the acoustics of that area that whenever the CHP pulls someone over on northbound 101 at the curve by the hospital, the sound comes over loud and clear into everyone’s backyards at 20th and Kansas.
I don’t know why though. Not an annoyance as it happens so infrequently. Possibly entertaining.

i think it is hideous. I would strip it and start over.

This is interesting (to me). The data is from 2000. In the previous census (1990), Potrero did not fall into the top category (it was second from top). Perhaps indicative of a shift?
Interesting that part of Bayview did hit the top in 1990, but not in 2000.

What about my call? Pretty much dead on.

They overpaid. It happens. I remember people paying $11 a share for Pets.com. Kudos to the seller!

Hmm, fluj I notice you never — I repeat never — come out with any predictions whatsoever on places. Makes it very convenient to be able to shout “WRONG, HA HA” the 10% of the time someone predicts a lower-than-selling price. And simultaneously scream about the lack of accountability among anonymously blog posters. Clever. So what do you think this place would have gone for two years ago? I’d say about $1.8M or a little higher.
And I remember when people were buying Cisco Systems — a fantastic company — for 5X today’s price.

Aw man, neither of you guys are worth much. You’re trying to gauge a market you aren’t in, and that’s why you’re so frequently wrong. I make guesses all the time on here. And guess what? I get held to higher levels of accountability too. Tipster, you say utter nonsense on a daily basis just about. Trip, you’re almost always wrong. Two years ago that Kansas property goes for about 1.6M or so.