February 10, 2009
The Rather “Studly” Julian Waybur House (3232 Pacific) For Sale
The Julian Waybur House at 3232 Pacific Avenue is a “Historic [Ernest] Coxhead Shingle-Style Home with Presidio and Golden Gate Views.” And while it wasn't in bad shape “before,” it’s now down to the studs and awaiting a “green” renovation.
Coxhead's signature redwood paneling remains in the living room and the celebrated staircase has been restored off-site and is now ready for re-installation and finishing in place.
Included in the offering are preliminary plans by Page and Turnbull to create a luxury "green home" consisting of: 3 bedrooms, 3 full and two-half baths, living room, formal dining room, gourmet kitchen with breakfast area and recycling center, media room and study.
Full details, history and plans for 3232 Pacific are on a "special website," the address for which we somehow managed to surmise.
UPDATE: As a plugged-in “sleepiguy” notes, after the "before" but before any "after" there was an "in-between" (a.k.a. a fire).
First Published: February 10, 2009 12:00 PM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Here's a big home that actually has a shot at being truly green. Rather than some sprawling new construction that radiates heat and generates a lot of landfill from the demo of the old house, this one re-uses most of the original structure and is a compact heat conserving form factor.
Seems like a good price.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at February 10, 2009 12:23 PM
Does anyone know the story behind the brick road that is only on that section of Pacific?
Posted by: bossmillion at February 10, 2009 12:35 PM
Love that spot, great looking home.
Posted by: gh at February 10, 2009 12:46 PM
Wow, $2.5M for a Pac Heights victorian is a heck of a deal compared to a lot of the multi-million $ stuff on this site! So what if its a failed renovation in progress? That's where the best deals can be had (or so I'm told).
Posted by: Jimmy (No Longer Bitter) at February 10, 2009 12:49 PM
Is this the same one that burned down last year?
Posted by: Sleepiguy at February 10, 2009 1:05 PM
Ah.. I didn't need to ask that. It is. Down the the studs is the translation for gutted by horrific fire.
Posted by: Sleepiguy at February 10, 2009 1:09 PM
Odd to put the living room on the 2nd floor...
Posted by: Geo at February 10, 2009 1:23 PM
"Odd to put the living room on the 2nd floor... "
Do you really think so? With that view?
Posted by: anonn at February 10, 2009 1:26 PM
Thanks sleepiguy. How nice of them to put on a new roof and pull off all of the drywall after the fire, and the water that was poured on it.
Amazing the problems you'll find when you open up a 100+ year old house, and how expensive they can be to fix.
Here's a photo of what I think it probably looked like a few months ago, before the "renovation":
Posted by: tipster at February 10, 2009 2:08 PM
About the right price it should be if it WASN'T a fixer. But at least we're off to a good start.
Posted by: Smiling Millionaire at February 10, 2009 2:43 PM
P.S. Good luck getting a construction loan right now.
Posted by: Smiling Millionaire at February 10, 2009 2:45 PM
The lot value here has to be close to $2M. Seems like a great opportunity to swoop in and ditch any plans for a "green" rebuild -- and just pimp the place out. Would be a historical shame; but seems like an opportunity. We now have 2 stud renovations at about $725/psf in D7 (see also: 2219 Pacific).
Considering some of the Noe Fixers / Contractors specials flipped over the last few years, both of these Studs seem like good deals. Of course, one look at the S&P might scare you away.
Some good historical information on 3232 Pacific here:
Too bad no parking.
Posted by: eddy at February 10, 2009 3:06 PM
And just in case anyone was wondering.. high end properties still move in this market. 3388 Clay just went into contract.
Posted by: eddy at February 10, 2009 3:07 PM
"And just in case anyone was wondering.. high end properties still move in this market. 3388 Clay just went into contract."
Yes it did. And in a hurry, after four days I think?
Posted by: anonn at February 10, 2009 3:10 PM
Re: 3388 - great views and move-in condition will do that for you.
Posted by: kthnxybe at February 10, 2009 3:19 PM
Of course they do. Nobody ever said that not a single high-end property would sell.
But it really cannot be denied that the high-end is all but frozen. Per Redfin, Pac Heights has 20 SFRs and 53 condos listed at a median DOM of 90 and 67 respectively. 94123 has 22 SFRs and 45 condos listed at a median DOM of 83 and 72 respectively. Just about half are now with price reductions. How many places have sold in these areas in the last month? Maybe 5 or 6 units total? We must be close to 20 months of inventory in these prime areas.
If anyone has better info, feel free to provide it as the MLS does not give up recent sales data. But even if these figures are off, I don't think the overall picture would be changed.
Posted by: Trip at February 10, 2009 3:23 PM
"P.S. Good luck getting a construction loan right now."
What is your frame of reference for making such a statement?
I got a construction loan offer, this morning.
Posted by: anonn at February 10, 2009 3:29 PM
I'd just be concerned about how much real damage occurred during the fire. Who knows what could come up during the inspection? Plus, you might not find out things until you're in the midst of construction: i.e. water from the firetrucks seeped into the foundation thus rotting parts of the support structure. Then you're talking about a $700-800 psf remodel of the whole building. I'd price it under 2 million - like 1.9 ish. Then if and when it's finished, you've got less than 4 million in the place, which seems ok for that block with no yard and no parking.
Posted by: sleepiguy at February 10, 2009 3:29 PM
I know some people who can't get construction loans right now, because they are rightly considered by banks still in the lending business to be the most risky types of loans. As you know, flipping as a business is over for the time being. To be fair, it is more difficult to get a construction loan if you don't have a job. Then again, have a look at the employment figures.
Posted by: Smiling Millionaire at February 10, 2009 3:37 PM
"As you know, flipping as a business is over for the time being ... it's more difficult to get a construction loan if you don't have a job ... have a look at the employment figures ... "
So your perspective is individual consumers with no track records? OK then. Flipping as a national pastime is over for the time being, agreed. And such folks will have a tough time getting loans right now. Especially without jobs. But development of distressed properties as a business in San Francisco will never be over. If the exit strategy is conservative enough, there are loans to be found.
Posted by: anonn at February 10, 2009 3:51 PM
...Just waiting for those "conservative" opportunities to be "found." Not seen any in Pac/Pres Heights yet, anyway.
Posted by: Smiling Millionaire at February 10, 2009 4:13 PM
I'm with fluj on this one. This town has so many great properties that are run-down, vacant, tenant-occupied and neglected, etc. that it is ridiculous. Developing these and turning them around is not only a great service but should be profitable for those who know what they are doing and don't overpay for the property (I fear a lot of flippers in recent years made the latter mistake).
Posted by: Trip at February 10, 2009 4:30 PM
I said. "conservative" exit strategies
loans to be "found"
You said .."Just waiting for those 'conservative' opportunites to be 'found.'"
Thanks for the wonderfully sincere use of quotations there.
Since you set that up, here you go.
First off, sure you are just waiting on those "conservative" opportunities. Secondly, if you ever saw a San Francisco property that sank low enough to fit the ludicrous metrics you routinely flame with on here, you'd have no chance at ever obtaining it. Because someone would have already sold it to their daughter in law.
I quoted you directly. I used ellipses only because I thought those were your salient points. I left out the part that somewhat incongruosly seemed to tie your unemployed friend's difficulty getting a construction loan with what banks are thinking, I guess.
As usual, you were talking out your posterior. It must be difficult. Seeing as how the sun's rays emanate from the same locus. But you couldn't be cool enough to quote me directly even when I engaged you in a sincere manner. Typical.
Posted by: anonn at February 10, 2009 4:50 PM
not my taste, but I'm sure it'll go quick. =)
Posted by: jessep at February 10, 2009 4:54 PM
For this price, I would expect a garage. I guess it's hard to add given that the property is historical...
Posted by: flaneur at February 10, 2009 4:58 PM
I see someone's been peforming pillow karate again.
Posted by: HappyRenter at February 10, 2009 6:40 PM
I guess sock puppetry skills are not taught in realtor(tm) school.
Posted by: anon at February 10, 2009 8:34 PM
Hey Trip - pretty good estimate of the months of supply for Pac Heights. Here are tables of the current months of supply by MLS district for single-family homes and condos. The inventory figure is based on the current active count (1,448 total) divided by the Jan 09 sales count (142 total).
Dist Active Sales Supply
1 36 1 36.0
2 71 17 4.2
3 53 12 4.4
4 58 7 8.3
5 77 7 11.0
6 9 - -
7 41 2 20.5
8 11 - -
9 42 6 7.0
10 152 29 5.2
Tot 550 81 6.8
Dist Active Sales Supply
1 52 5 10.4
2 17 3 5.7
3 12 2 6.0
4 6 1 6.0
5 146 17 8.6
6 72 6 12.0
7 74 5 14.8
8 161 9 17.9
9 317 11 28.8
10 41 2 20.5
Tot 898 61 14.7
So the D7 (Pac Heights) inventory for single-family is 20.5 months - right at your estimate. How about the Miami-like inventory of condos in D9 at 28.8 months of supply. Yes, January was a record low month for total sales - but February is no better with just 32 sales reported through today.
Posted by: FSBO at February 10, 2009 9:09 PM
"but should be profitable for those who know what they are doing and don't overpay for the property"
The problem right now is that properties are dropping so fast that by the tim eyou get the permits and compete the work, you could have just bought something done for the same price and not taken the risk and gone through all the trouble.
Look at this property vs the Clay Street property. Buy a burned out hulk of a yardless, garageless potentially water-damaged property for $735 psf and put $300 psf minimum into it (and risk spending a lot more) to end up with a yardless, garageless property, or just go up the street and buy something done, ready to move in, with a yard and garage and killer views for around $1000 psf. Why would anyone go through the trouble or take a risk for which you could not be compensated?
And last year, Clay Street would have asked $1300 psf. This place would have been at $950psf. If you had bought a place like this last year, by the time you were done, you could have just bought something done.
I agree that at some times, going through the trouble can be worth it, but I don't see now as being one of those times, in general. And that's probably why very little is selling right now, and for what little that does sell, the ppsft remains high. It's not as though comparable prices are just as high as last year, but anything that sells needs to be near perfect. You'd be hard pressed to beat the Clay Street property.
Posted by: tipster at February 10, 2009 9:14 PM
FSBO, February is gonna be better most likely. I don't know why that is. It shouldn't. But it will it seems.
Tipster, the idea of you speaking about development deals + costs is probably beyond ludicrous for most longtime readers. I can only suppose you're angling for newbies. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's what your up to.
But does the lack of feedback bother you? One would think that the propaganda you throw would find the unaware, and take them. And then off they go ...
How many, "Thank you Tipster" notes have you ever gotten? Becaus the majority of what you say is a guess?
Posted by: anonn at February 10, 2009 9:43 PM
FSBO, your first post was very readable, and thanks for sharing valuable info.
Do district 9 numbers already include Infinity 2 and other developments? If not, that would push the city-wide months of supply well beyond 24. Doesn't look good...
Posted by: asiagoSF at February 10, 2009 10:29 PM
Clearly, this is a touchy subject for you, Anonn. Sorry to hit a sore spot. Also sorry the quotations were not in the right place..I was simply quoting your choice of words in stating my observation. The deals just aren't out there yet, and neither are the buyers, so I can't see how flipping can be profitable now.
Posted by: Smiling Millionaire at February 10, 2009 10:44 PM
asiagoSF - the numbers I posted above are what has been reported through the MLS. There has been 11 condo sales reported for D9 in January. None of those were at Infinity I or II - many (but not all) of the new developments never appear in the MLS. Of the 317 active condos for sale in D9 per the MLS, 3 were actually at the Infinity. There is 318 Spear #6H ($649K) which looks like a resale of a Tower I unit - and there are 338 Spear #5G ($530K) and 338 Spear #5A ($780K) which are new Tower II units. These listings provide general info about Tower II.
So the 317/11 = 28.8 months excludes much of the new unlisted inventory - but it also likely excludes many of the sales of (or contracts on) these new developments. Either way, there must be multiple years of supply in D9 at the current sales pace.
Posted by: FSBO at February 10, 2009 11:22 PM
The one thing that 3388 Clay does not have is a street facade worth looking at. What happened to the original?
On the other hand, it does have north, south and east views, and many other good things, although the lot is relatively narrow.
3232 Pacific does have a slightly better location, but as my fellow posters have noted, muchas problemas, including the apparently unfixable lack of garage on this lot.
Posted by: Conifer at February 11, 2009 6:47 AM
FSBO, thanks for the numbers. Yeah, the months-of-inventory do not look good at all for sellers. But it looks great for buyers! I expect that sales will pick up from January's numbers (which were obscenely low), but so will listings.
Tipster, you and I do not disagree. All I'm saying is that there are a lot of crap places that could be profitably rehabilitated. You rightly point out that it is difficult to pick these places up at prices that reflect the (lower) value two years down the road when the development is completed. The rapid decrease in prices certainly needs to be factored in for anyone looking to do this.
Posted by: Trip at February 11, 2009 7:31 AM
Clearly, this is a touchy subject for you, Anonn. "Sorry to hit a sore spot. Also sorry the quotations were not in the right place..I was simply quoting your choice of words in stating my observation. The deals just aren't out there yet, and neither are the buyers, so I can't see how flipping can be profitable now"
It's not troubling or touchy. You don't know what you're talking about, as always when it comes to SF r.e. not located within a half mile of St. Francis Wood, and you're insincere and arch as always. Should I let those facts bother me? No. I should not.
Posted by: anonn at February 11, 2009 7:40 AM
No fluj, the lack of feedback doesn't bother me.
Any chance you could propose your own different numbers? Something like this: "No tipster, a house in pac heights that is down to the studs and has potential water damage can be completed to pac heights standards for no more than $50 psf. Just put wallpaper over the studs - no one will notice. I'm a realtor, so in my world, buyers have a cheap and easy time rehabbing 100+ year old fire-damaged mansions. Just pay whatever price the seller wants, buyers, so I can get my commission. I'll be happy to estimate everything low for you so that the numbers work out."
Posted by: tipster at February 11, 2009 8:05 AM
You haven't viewed the property in person, you haven't viewed the property in person, and furthermore, I haven't viewed the property in person.
Nearly everything you say is a shot in the dark. Is 300 psf a current metric? Yeah, it is. Do you, Tipster, have the personal experience to display a proxy flip on the Internet for all and sundry? No, you don't.
Sight unseen? I like this property for about 750K less than asking provided there exists an ability to put a garage in.
Do I find it very lame that nowhere in the marketing information does the listing agent mention the fire? Hell yes. I find it shameful. But she might be under strict orders not to do so. Who knows?
Posted by: anonn at February 11, 2009 8:33 AM
"she might be under strict orders not to do so"
I agree this is a possibility and even a probability. But does that mean she should just blindly follow orders? Isn't there some realtor ethical/professional obligation not to mislead, even if by omission? I ask this sincerely. I have to tell my clients "No, I won't do or say that" all the time and I've told clients they can go ahead and get a different lawyer if they're going to insist on some tactic that is dishonest. What is the realtor's obligation here?
Posted by: Trip at February 11, 2009 8:53 AM
In my personal dealings with this particular realtor I have found her to be quite strident. My guess is that she is following orders. The guidelines with regard to advertising speak to misinformation more than they do lack of disclosure. The gist of what's going on with the property is going to be in the disclosure packet. This is merely an advertisement on the internet we're discussing.
Would I do it this way? Not a chance.
Posted by: anonn at February 11, 2009 9:04 AM
Obviously, fluj, there is a price for every property. My whole point is that an acceptable price to the seller for a fixer is rarely that price.
And real estate goes to the dumbest, most careless buyer. Someone who thinks they can do it. For $50psf and throws caution to the wind will outbid the careful, prudent buyer. In a rising market, such problems are solved by time. We no longer have a rising market.
As for adding a garage, I was under the impression that it would be nearly impossible on a house like this. So without a garage, you would need at least $1M off. Not gonna happen.
Posted by: tipster at February 11, 2009 9:17 AM
"And real estate goes to the dumbest, most careless buyer. Someone who thinks they can do it. For $50psf and throws caution to the wind will outbid the careful, prudent buyer. In a rising market, such problems are solved by time. We no longer have a rising market."
These characterizations come from a point of knowledge learned where, precisely? Your understanding of DBI code vis a vis a garage comes from knowledge gleaned where, precisely?
Tipster, you do not speak from experience. Yet you talk a whole hell of a lot.
Don't forget where this home is located. Is there a market for a car-less, wealthy, Presidio-loving and GG Bridge view loving buyer, who has an interest in interior design, and wants to put down roots for 20 years?
If there is a market, it's a small one. But is there not such a market? Would you have any gauge of that, Tipster? I think you would not.
Would this property be a dumb buy for such a person? Your metric is skewed toward flip. I don't think this would be a particularly dumb buy for such a person.
I don't think most of you guys on here would know a good deal if you saw one. None but the most obvious anyway. Yet on you talk, often dropping disinformation along the way.
Posted by: anonn at February 11, 2009 9:36 AM
Since when did the garage premium go up to $1M ? The most elaborate garage retrofit quote I've seen was $300K and that involved lifting the house and creating a whole new floor with new rooms.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at February 11, 2009 9:42 AM
I just wanted to post a note saying thank you to tipster. I enjoy his comments.
Posted by: Dude at February 11, 2009 10:05 AM
fluj said it needed to drop by 750K. Add $250K for the garage premium. $1M.
Thanks dude, but the realtors are desperate, and long for the days when they controlled 100% the flow of information. If this meltdown started 20 years ago, they would have had it contained. He's just trying to get back to those days.
That too, is not gonna happen.
And nice of you to point out all my "disinformation" flujanonn, but I'm still waiting for any coherent statement of any factually incorrect statement I've made about this property.
What I can tell you is I've seen a number of properties in poor shape get bought by a retail buyer when the contractors needed more off the asking before they would bother to go in, and seen the buyers get COMPLETELY SCREWED when the rehab turns out to be FAR more expensive than they anticipated.
I'm assuming the banks won't let that happen here, but I've seen it on other properties that are not so obviously in poor shape.
Any retail buyer would also take STRONG NOTE of the fact that the seller is obviously and plainly attempting to mislead the buyers about the fire and actual condition of the property (look at the listing photo vs the actual photo), and might want to wonder what else the seller might be withholding. This is a huge red flag in my book.
Posted by: tipster at February 11, 2009 10:20 AM
Thanks dude, but the realtors are desperate, and long for the days when they controlled 100% the flow of information. If this meltdown started 20 years ago, they would have had it contained. He's just trying to get back to those days
No I'm not. You can call what you do "information" if you like. But it is not that. It's really only noise. What I'm doing is calling you out on your particular brand of bullshit. Like what you posit above. I highly doubt you've been privy to dialogues between contractors and clients, whether before, during or after, with regard to fixer purchases and sales.
You speak about the bank here. You have no idea what the insurance payment for the fire was. Or even if there was one. There likely was one. You don't even take that into account. You're full of shit.
Everything you say is a guess, dude. "The flow of information"? please. Get off it. You create disinformation. Plainly.
Posted by: anonn at February 11, 2009 10:31 AM
"You create disinformation. Plainly."
Posted by: tipster at February 11, 2009 10:46 AM
Nearly every single thing you say is a guess, Tipster.
How many people casually skim this website and walk away subconsciously internalizing your guesses as some sort of reality?
How many thousands of times has that happened, I wonder?
Posted by: anonn at February 11, 2009 10:53 AM
If it hasn't been said yet, thank you for posting, tipster! I truly enjoy your comments the most.
Posted by: anon1 at February 11, 2009 10:57 AM
Wow, what a location. Your backyard is the Presidio. In a normal functioning market someone would pick this up right away and make it its life trophy for these points alone. Of course there's the price tag attached. Even at 3400sf contractor planned footage this could be a bit pricey.
About the claimed GG Bridge views, I wonder if they are "GG through the trees" views. They are not on the web site.
A footnote: SS should implement a "Profanity filter" for people who do not want to be polluted by someone's improprieties. Not judging, just saying.
Posted by: San FronziScheme at February 11, 2009 10:58 AM
tipster's posts are consistently some of the best-written commentary on SS.
The realtors are always trying to pull the "I'm an expert" charade. LOL. If they were experts in anything but BS, they wouldn't be slinging used houses. They'd be doing something more productive, or at least be retired and poking fun at the whole sham :)
Posted by: LMRiM at February 11, 2009 11:07 AM
Personally I try to look at any statement by tipster (or anyone for that matter) with a critical eye and don't just subconsciously absorb the message without thinking. I've even called tipster out when I thought he was out of line (even a little here on this thread).
Still, tipster brings an interesting perspective to SS. I think he was formally a PR spin guy, no ? His ability to read between the lines often illuminates what is really occurring.
As for profanity, it doesn't bother me though here are some handy replacements :
bull**** --> lies
full of **** ---> lying
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at February 11, 2009 12:15 PM
I don't get the hate for realtors on this site. People make them sound like they really have control over the buyers or sellers. If you don't like the tactics of a particular realtor you can always get another one.
I'm curious why all the anger towards them, were some of you guys done wrong? The anger goes beyond a point of view, just look at the posts, while they are entertaining, they really don't have anything to do with this property. It does not matter what the subject is, these exchanges always turn pretty ugly. What gives?
Posted by: viewlover at February 11, 2009 12:22 PM
The most elaborate garage retrofit quote I've seen was $300K and that involved lifting the house and creating a whole new floor with new rooms.
Milkshake must not have much experience in putting in garages in PacHts. $300K is common, even cheap, and that assumes there are not too many other problems "discovered" by the attentive contractor after the bid is accepted.
Posted by: Conifer at February 11, 2009 1:01 PM
Conifer - I'm going by just contractor estimates as I never got to the point of starting the project. Maybe I was getting lowball bids ? Is your $300k "common" project cost for just excavation and 1 car garage construction, or is this a lift-and-add-floor project for a larger garage + new living space ?
Some listing agents had mentioned that a simple excavation into an existing 4' high cripple wall (so probably excavation 5-6' down) for a 1 car garage would run $40-75K but those numbers seem low. This was for houses in Bernal and Glen Park.
And for those who don't think that a garage is valuable because SF dwellers drive less, I'm the kind of beverage who drives about once a month. Yet I still want a garage (and get good use out of it because my car is almost always in there :-)
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at February 11, 2009 1:41 PM
there is a house on Ord, around 90 Ord, that has been lifted and moved back and a garage has been built but not yet finished. After seeing this for what seems to be forever, I'm sure the cost was easily $300K. Anyone know?
Posted by: viewlover at February 11, 2009 3:05 PM
> tipster's posts are consistently some of the best-written
> commentary on SS.
> The realtors are always trying to pull the "I'm an expert"
> charade. LOL. If they were experts in anything but BS,
> they wouldn't be slinging used houses. They'd be doing
> something more productive, or at least be retired and poking
> fun at the whole sham :)
As long as you don’t have any problem telling lies all day long you can make good money selling real estate. I didn’t know this when I started selling apartments. The guys that make the most money selling real estate spend every day lying and beating up on sellers (“the market is in the tank, you need to lower the listing price, your property is a piece of crap, etc.) while at the same time lying and pushing buyers to move forward (“the market is about to rebound, you need to increase your offer price, the property is so great that ten others are about to write offers, etc.)…
Posted by: FormerAptBroker at February 11, 2009 3:42 PM
I doubt you would need to excavate or lift the house. Just make the dining room smaller to accomodate a garage ramp and turn the media room in the basement into a garage. However, permits may be tricky to obtain given it is considered a historical building. I would hire a good lawyer.
Posted by: flaneur at February 11, 2009 3:49 PM
I had my house retrofit for earthquake few years ago in Presidio Heights. I was charged 100k for the work. I doubt I'll be charged that much had the house being in Bernal Heights or Noe Valley. The bottom line is when the house is in a good area: Pac Heights, Presidio Heights, Cow Hallow, Marina, Sea Cliff, you pay a premium for the same work that is done else where in the city. And the reason for that is contractor knows you have money. Plain and simple. A garage addition may not cost 300k else where in the city, but at this location, it will and probably more. That is if the city's planning department will allow you to alter the exterior (good luck with that unless you are well connected). Just look at the hoops that Dede had to jump through for De Young.
Posted by: Juju at February 11, 2009 8:48 PM
"Just make the dining room smaller to accomodate a garage ramp and turn the media room in the basement into a garage."
That's a good idea, flaneur. An equally good idea would be to use the neighbor's garage entrance two houses down. Then just cut through their living room, turning left and through the next door neighbor's kitchen (making both of them smaller) before you drop down into the media room of this property, which, as you note, could be converted into a garage.
I don't think either concept would ever get approved by the planning department, but with your idea flaneur, the planning department planners would all have a hearty laugh before physically throwing you out into the street if you proposed altering one thing about the facade of this place. With my plan, they'd just think I was nuts. :-)
Posted by: tipster at February 11, 2009 10:15 PM
Not sure... you could conceal the garage door by making it frameless, covering it in wood shingles matching those on the facade, and tucking it below the old dining room window on the street side. You sure would need a permit expeditor, and an architect who can make great renderings and can convince officials. This is a building by a noted architect but it is not a landmark. And come to think, they were allowed to add a parking garage underneath Grace Cathedral...
Posted by: flaneur at February 11, 2009 11:27 PM
I agree with Tipster that a $2.5M house needs a garage. It may be historic, but right now it's like a medieval castle without bathrooms.
Posted by: flaneur at February 12, 2009 8:31 AM
The MLS listing for this place is incredibly misleading. Putting up pictures of the home from the old listing before the fire is a cheap trick in my opinion...I don't like that this agent hasn't disclosed that there is fire damage anywhere on the MLS listing or the special website. Sure, if you read the docs, its clear this is a historic restoration project going on, but no mention of fire damage anywhere.
Posted by: auden at February 12, 2009 9:22 AM
RE: The garage...
Don't forget that even if putting in a garage were possible, you'd have to cut down a tree. That, of course, would never be approved by the Bureau of Urban Forestry. So not only would you have to fight planning, but also get on the docket for the BUF just to find out if you can remove a street tree.
Posted by: sleepiguy at February 12, 2009 9:33 AM
Another house by Coxhead that is in need of restoration TLC, but hasn't been through a fire is 400 Clayton, on the panhandle at Oak and Claytong in the Haight Ashbury:
Link to this location: http://www.mapjack.com/?sS5mWUcubFXC5CbA
Posted by: redseca2 at February 12, 2009 9:38 AM
I'd say you could replace the two trees with four trees, which would work better for the garage entry. But this is definitely a project that will require experienced design professionals and permit expeditors.
Posted by: flaneur at February 12, 2009 10:14 AM
While the four new trees would be smaller, the two trees currently there were also smaller when they were planted, and I am sure Coxhead's design intent was not for them to mask the facade the way the current trees do.
Posted by: flaneur at February 12, 2009 10:17 AM
Add a garage? Not completely impossible but not at all likely. This facade and the row of houses it is a part of is one of the most iconic facades in San Francisco. Look at the list of books it has been published in. World War III anyone?
Posted by: Jim at February 12, 2009 3:39 PM
RE: 2219 PACIFIC --
Any idea how this one compares and how much $$ left to put into it??
Posted by: Geo at February 13, 2009 11:03 AM
^The fire makes this one impossible to tell what it would cost because you don't know if there was any structural damage. If there was, and the house is a total loss, you're looking at least $500 a foot for quality work. Again, if I were interested, I'd make an offer well below 2 million and have a long escrow, hire your own inspectors, and hook up quickly with a reputable contractor. Personally, I'd hope for a total loss and demo everything but the historical facade. That would be MUCH cheaper than trying to work within the damaged envelope of the existing house.
I think 2219 Pacific might be doable at $300 a foot - again only if there are no structural issues. I haven't seen either property, but off the top of my head, I'd say minimum 1.5 for 2219 and 2+ for 3232. Of course, it could cost a lot more!
Posted by: sleepiguy at February 13, 2009 11:29 AM
I LOVE THIS HOUSE. I would leave the warm side of the city to have the Presidio as a backyard!! I would ditch my car and walk everywhere. I'll be a nicer person, I swear. No glaring at slow people in cross walks. I'll say good morning to people on the streets, just please, let me have this house!!
Posted by: MichelleL at February 13, 2009 12:21 PM
It would seem to me at least 123 Laurel, listed now for $2.9 would be the better but relatively -- it does have a garage...
Posted by: Geo at February 13, 2009 12:54 PM
^No... 123 Laurel, I don't believe, has been updated at all. It's likely in terrible condition and needs at least 500k in upgrades - probably more, much more. And, I said this before, but the garage is insane. It's only acceptable if you have a vespa or a smart car and it probably can't be fixed. I also don't like that block of Laurel. I'd rather have an east/west street.
Posted by: sleepiguy at February 13, 2009 1:08 PM
I admit, I have not been in 123 Laurel, but unless it needs a new roof, from the pics there is no way it needs $500k in upgrades...
Posted by: Geo at February 13, 2009 1:44 PM
Posted by: anonn at April 7, 2009 10:22 AM
The Coxhead at 400 Clayton did suffer a fire in the living room circa 1968. The LR redwood paneling was removed and is now sheetrock. The DR redwood paneling and fireplace is intact as is the staircase. The 1st floor hallway redwood has been restored after being painted hospital green.
Posted by: ratso at May 15, 2009 3:52 PM
Anyone know, withdrawn or sold?
Posted by: Seb at May 30, 2009 4:23 PM
The sale of 3232 Pacific closed escrow on 6/17/09 but was just updated on the MLS with what appears to be a "confidential" sale price.
Posted by: SocketSite at July 15, 2009 2:32 PM
Please, did anyone download the floor plan for this best of Coxhead houses, while it was up? Amazingly it is not published anywhere. Thanks.
Posted by: Jeff Freeland at December 12, 2012 12:56 AM