May 19, 2009

The First Attempted Millennium Flip Resale: 301 Mission #40D

301 Mission Street #40D: Floor Plan

It’s the first attempted resale at the Millennium (as far as we know). Asking $2,750,000 ($1,409 per square foot) for the coveted southeast corner Grand Residences "D" plan on the fortieth floor with big Bay Bridge views.

301 Mission #40D

No word on the original contract price for the sake of comparison. Tipsters?

UPDATE: A plugged-in reader reports:

The D Stack was selling for 1550-1600 psf when they first came on, but the prices were dropped 15% a couple of months ago, so figure that this buyer paid $1300-1350 psf for this place. They may have added upgrades that would increase the price some, but it looks to me like they are try to "flip" and make a small profit.

∙ Listing: 301 Mission #40D (3/3) 1,952 sqft - $2,750,000 [MLS]
The Millennium: A Few Things You Might Know (And A Few You Don’t) [SocketSite]
The SocketSite Scoop: Millennium Cuts Prices 15% Across The Board [SocketSite]

First Published: May 19, 2009 1:00 PM

Comments from "Plugged In" Readers

those $1500 HOA dues should make this an easy sale compared to a nice SFH, no?

Posted by: polip at May 19, 2009 1:05 PM

"at least we have the floor plan. "

Oh great... we can all make asses of ourselves.

Is this really a 3/3?

Posted by: chuckie at May 19, 2009 1:11 PM

I'm sure someone paying cash for a $2.75M apartment is really gonna sweat the extra $20k a year for HOAs.

Posted by: Jimmy (No Longer Bitter) at May 19, 2009 1:12 PM

So this is a 2 bedroom, but 3 bathroom unit? Can someone please explain to me the logic behind this floorplan and the decision to put 3 bathrooms in this place?

Posted by: Fishchum at May 19, 2009 1:21 PM

Fischchum said" So this is a 2 bedroom, but 3 bathroom unit? Can someone please explain to me the logic behind this floorplan and the decision to put 3 bathrooms in this place?"

It's for the cat box.

Posted by: cooper at May 19, 2009 1:24 PM

Just a guess, but since these are the "Grand" residences, and both of the bedrooms have en suite baths, the planners decided to gild the lilly and add a shower to the powder room. I like it if I liked the idea of paying this much for a 2 bedroom apartment this large, just in case the library is used as a guest room.

Posted by: Tom at May 19, 2009 1:27 PM

When you get to a certain income bracket, you don't want your guests using your toilet, I guess.

Posted by: BobN at May 19, 2009 1:28 PM

Good one Cooper, how could I forget, the cat box! Haha.

Posted by: Tom at May 19, 2009 1:31 PM

"Can someone please explain to me the logic behind this floorplan and the decision to put 3 bathrooms in this place?"

so you can flush your money down easier?

so some listing agent can claim the "library" is a 3rd bedroom with it's own bath?

cuz rich people's sh*t really does stink?

Posted by: resp at May 19, 2009 1:47 PM

That looks like a very cramped "living area" for 2.7M - and you end up entertaining your guests while staring at your refrigerator, but perhaps the view captivates all. At least there's an entry instead of walking directly into the unit.

Posted by: Patrick at May 19, 2009 1:51 PM

This one should sell in no time. It's cheaper than Gavin's one bedroom.

Posted by: Fishtarian at May 19, 2009 1:54 PM

The D Stack was selling for 1550-1600 psf when they first came on, but the prices were dropped 15% a couple of months ago, so figure that this buyer paid $1300-1350 psf for this place. They may have added upgrades that would increase the price some, but it looks to me like they are try to "flip" and make a small profit.

Posted by: weatherman at May 19, 2009 2:10 PM

A third full bath might have been overkill but I hate places that have en suite baths and lack a "public" powder room.

Posted by: Michael at May 19, 2009 2:10 PM

"Tthis is a 2 bedroom, but 3 bathroom unit? Can someone please explain to me the logic behind this floorplan and the decision to put 3 bathrooms in this place?"

You need the 3rd bathroom for your guest who sleep in the library.

Posted by: David at May 19, 2009 2:16 PM

Ugh! not that impressive of kitchen for an almost $3mm condo. Nice view, but low ceilings average finishes. Basically it looks like the top floor units at SF Blu. Everytime I see one of these, it makes my condo seem more valuable.

Posted by: Grubber at May 19, 2009 2:41 PM

I totally agree with the cat box comment.

A place for cat boxes and other less than glorious programming needs is what I look for in projects like this, and they are often lacking.

I figure 6 square feet for a basic box, or $8400 at the $SF cost of this unit.

Posted by: redseca2 at May 19, 2009 2:59 PM

bedroom 2's bathroom shouldn't be en suite, or else have a 2nd door so the bedroom can be closed off. This would eliminate the need for the 3rd bathroom, especially since the library isn't a bedroom - no closet.

Posted by: Michael at May 19, 2009 3:04 PM

ha! reseca2....when I worked with an architect to help design my home remodel, I specifically said we needed to design in a good place to put pet food dishes. The (nameless) architect looked down his nose at needing to do something so mundane. As you can imagine, there was a lot of push and pull in that relationship.

Totally agree that the third bath is completely wasted. 2nd br's bath could easily be the public one, and I could find much better use for the space devoted to the third. At the very least, the shower should go.

Posted by: curmudgeon at May 19, 2009 3:16 PM

All I want to know is, when is the open house? I would love to see the inside!

Posted by: Christina at May 19, 2009 3:17 PM

If this place had operable windows, you wouldn't really need that third bathroom...

Posted by: BobN at May 19, 2009 4:18 PM

The third bathroom really didn't need that shower. That was a waste. I agree with the poster above that if bathrooms are en suite, then a powder room needs to be available.

Otherwise I like the layout. The library feels integrated with the main living area but allows for watching the tv or working comfortably.

Posted by: midcentfan at May 19, 2009 4:21 PM

In a recession you need a separate bathroom so no one is stealing from your bedroom(s).

Also, my assumption is Gavin's also had a "powder" room, no?

Posted by: JB at May 19, 2009 4:25 PM

i'm not impressed.

the bridge views at the infinity are WAY nicer than that...

overall this is a close #2

1. Infinity bay bridge views
2. Milennium Tower views
3. ORH looking at down at the freeway views.

Posted by: jessep at May 19, 2009 4:43 PM

The kitchen is ugly...pretty embarrassing for a building that's so nice in almost every other way.

Posted by: magicshaq at May 19, 2009 5:29 PM

"Big Bay Bridge views"? ORH has big Bay Bridge views. The Brannan and Infinity have big Bay Bridge views. Even crapola like the Watermark has BBBVs.

But a 15° slice of the bridge glimpsed from 3/4 of a mile away between the mechanical equipment of 1980s office buildings is not a "big Bay Bridge view".

This was the problem with the Mil (and St. Regis) from the beginning; I don't get paying $1,500+ psf to look at the tops (or sides) of other buildings.

Posted by: Adam at May 19, 2009 5:51 PM

Regarding the third bathroom: His and hers bathroom.

Posted by: flaneur at May 19, 2009 5:52 PM

I don;t get this Jessep guy. The freeway views and traffic seen from any tall building at night are magical Ditto the electric billboards, the lights of the city skyline and more. Thats the beauty of a city. In fact, the bay is dark at night (at most people work during the day so only enjoy that on weekends). That said, at One Rincon you can see every major SF landmark, so why would one be obsessed with the freeway? If anything, one should be obsessed with views of a bus terminal (Infinity) or bus terminal (Millinneum).

Posted by: Armando at May 19, 2009 7:53 PM

To those who think the 3rd bath is extravagant, remind me never to be your houseguest. You're like my cheapass friends who see no problem with offering guests the use of their personal bathroom, covered with bits of hair, half-melted soap, dirty towels, grimy footprints in the tub, and an industrial-strength bathtub ring. The ones who see no reason to change the sheets on the guest bed--hey, they've only been slept in once or twice!

Do you have any friends at all or do you just think it's ok to treat them like you treat your dog?? I, for one, think the third bath with shower is a very civilized touch and it substantially raises the appeal of the unit to me (although not to the level of $2.75 million).

Posted by: steve2 at May 19, 2009 9:21 PM

I think the layout is great. You can turn the closet between the library and the front door around by knocking out the wall and putting in a closet door on the wall of the library nearest the front door, and then you have three bedrooms and three baths. Or you can leave it as is and use the library as a media room

Views are very good, and yet the location isn't out of the way. Millennium Partners is a first class operation, and they know how to cater to a top tier clientele better than anyone in the city. I've been inside this building and it's fantastic and the amenities are all first class.

That said, I think anyone who pays these prices shouldn't expect to see any upside in their lifetimes. SFRs in Pac Heights are struggling to get 2003 prices and these prices don't seem very 2003 to me.

Posted by: tipster at May 19, 2009 9:35 PM

Now i know its a classier bldg than ORH, but can someone justify to me that this is worth 1450/sq ft where the 31st floor of ORH (other thread) just sold for 805/sq ft? (or even 850).

I havent been to either bldg but I think that the views are what people are paying for in both. Yes, the facilities are better at Millenium but the HOAs pay for that it seems. It cant be worth 80% more, can it?

Posted by: mac at May 19, 2009 11:07 PM

Why can't you get a balcony for 2.7MM but you can at ORH for less than half the price? Albeit a sub par development? Just curious. Same speaks true for the Four Seasons, and 95% of the St. Regis units as well. It annoys me to say the least.

Posted by: Ryan at May 20, 2009 1:12 AM

Now i know its a classier bldg than ORH, but can someone justify to me that this is worth 1450/sq ft where the 31st floor of ORH (other thread) just sold for 805/sq ft? (or even 850).

I also constantly struggle with this question (although maybe not phrased this way).
I often see places for sale and must ask myself "where did the money go?"

Clearly a lot must go to land costs, and also a lot goes to pad various govt agencies pockets (development fees, etc) and star architect fees.

there is no question that Millennium has an amazing very expensive lobby, nor that they used absolutely beautiful floors, and probably top rate kitchen appliances/cabinets (although I don't like the cabinets myself). also the bathrooms probably also used top rate materials, although in the end they're pretty basic bathrooms and don't seem all that luxurious to me.

but $1400/sq ft???? is most of this just going for profit to the developer? is it just a high price to keep the riff raff out? (kinda like a country club fee or a $200 cover charge for a club) or just because it's exclusive (like French Laundry)?

I would love to see the balance sheet of a place like this. is this place just a cash cow for the developer, or is it really this expensive to build (inclusive of ALL costs)?

Per Wikipedia, Millenium cost $350M to build. it is 1.15M square feet.

thus building costs are approx $304/sq ft.

I would REALLY love to see the balance sheet on this place! Nice work if you can get it!

as for ORH, it cost $300M to build. I don't know how many square feet it is. I believe it's around 5900 sq ft per floor NOT INCLUDING the elevator space which is significant, and not including the townhomes.

Posted by: ex SF-er at May 20, 2009 7:12 AM

"but $1400/sq ft???? is most of this just going for profit to the developer?"

But you get to tell people you live in Millennium. That must be worth some money to some people:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/science/19tier.html

Posted by: Fishtarian at May 20, 2009 7:35 AM

steve2 - my original point was that with each bedroom having it's own bathroom, a 3rd bathroom is kind of overkill unless you're going to use the library as a 3rd bedroom.

My solution would be to get rid of the 3rd bathroom, move the door to the second bedroom back and use the 2nd bathroom for guests in the 2nd bedroom and also as a "powder room" as well. If someone has to bunk in the library, then screw it - they can share the 2nd bathroom with the guests in the 2nd bedroom.

How does the old expression go? Something akin to "houseguests are like fish - after three days they begin to stink".

Or something to that effect.

Posted by: Fishchum at May 20, 2009 8:59 AM

To those who think the 3rd bath is extravagant, remind me never to be your houseguest.

This assumes that the houseguest is not staying in bedroom 2 and is instead crashing in the living room or in the home office/"library." What makes that situation unclassy/undesirable is not the lack of a third bathroom.

If the 2nd bedroom is full, other guests should pay for a hotel (there are plenty within blocks) or at least not complain if they're insisting on using living space to sleep/strew about their luggage, etc.

Posted by: shza at May 20, 2009 10:12 AM

Anyone seen any Millennium condos up for rental? Wondering what the going is for them?

[Editor's Note: The Straight Scoop: Millennium To Offer Select Rentals]

Posted by: Danny Boy at May 20, 2009 10:12 AM

Regarding the 3rd bathroom, this is a "luxury" building, so I'm not surprised, in fact expect it.

Posted by: viewlover at May 20, 2009 11:31 AM

"You're like my cheapass friends who see no problem with offering guests the use of their personal bathroom"

what other bathroom can i offer my friends other than my "personal bathroom" if i don't have an extra brand new sparkling clean bathroom sitting idle 350 days/year?

Posted by: condoshopper at May 20, 2009 12:09 PM

This floor plan is a wreck... just like most of the others in the Millenium. There is only one television jack in the entire Living/Dining room which is on the cement block on the bottom of the floorplan by the couch. This leaves the TV in the center of the room where your couch and chairs would be right against the kitchen island. It's extremely compact. The library is a wasted space. It thought it could be used as a living room but it cannot. It's tiny when you see it in person. It would have been so much better if they had an option to knock the wall down between the library and the living/dining space so you could have true separation between your living room, dining room and kitchen. This building is a train-wreck. The floor plans are awful.

Posted by: sfyoda at May 20, 2009 1:43 PM

"This leaves the TV in the center of the room where your couch and chairs would be right against the kitchen island. It's extremely compact ... This building is a train-wreck. The floor plans are awful."

Clearly you haven't been to the Infinity and checked out the configurations of their 'curved' window 2/2 units. You may find yourself asking "No, seriously, where is the living and dining space?". In addition, they want $1400 psf for some of the higher Tower II units.

I'm not sure that $1400 psf is sustainable, but this building may come closest to warranting such a premium.

Posted by: huh? at May 20, 2009 2:13 PM

the floorplan has 10.5 by 19 ft for the library, sometimes rooms seem smaller when they are empty because those dimensions are larger than most bedrooms in SOMA buildings. I've not seen any units here, way to rich for me, but if it really is that small, maybe the dimensions are not correctly stated.

Posted by: viewlover at May 20, 2009 4:52 PM

Maybe Marie Antionette's great granddaughter can throw out some bread to the homeless crowd surrounding the building.

I didn't see this in the marketing pieces.

Grand Residence: Ultra Rich
Street Level: Drug addicted, starving, dying and confused homeless

let them eat cake

Posted by: Jessep at May 21, 2009 12:38 PM

If you updated that it is a small flip, shouldn't the title of the post change as well? I feel like this website perpetuates the real estate problem with this psychology of 'impending doom' and negativity.

Posted by: sfer at May 21, 2009 5:24 PM

The listing for 301 Mission Street #40D has been withdrawn from the MLS after 452 days on the market without a reported sale.

Posted by: SocketSite at August 13, 2010 3:53 PM

Here's one that did resell, a 1.4 year apple (as far as I can tell) that has dropped about 6-7% per year.

The losses are about equal to mortgage and property tax and HOA, so you can pretty much double those to do a rent vs buy analysis.

Unit 22G sold for 1,381,250 in July of 2009 and 17 months later sold for 1,264,200.

http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/301-Mission-St-94105/unit-22G/home/22044809

Posted by: tipster at December 11, 2010 12:35 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:

« Call It Yet Another "Anecdote" (Or Data Point), It’s Down From 2004 | HOME | Bay Area Home Sales Slow, Except In San Francisco »