2799 Pacific (Image Source: noehill.com)
Commissioned by Dr. C. N. Ellinwood in 1893, 2799 Pacific was designed by Eugene Freeman and its 28 rooms, 14 fireplaces and glass domed center hallway were finished in 1894. And the Ellinwood residence is San Francisco Landmark #207.
As a number of plugged-in people noted last month, 2799 Pacific fell into foreclosure and had a date with the courthouse steps earlier this month. And as a couple of other plugged-in people piece together, with a mortgage balance due of $11,363,000 and an unmet minimum bid of $10,000,000, the landmark 2799 Pacific was taken back by the bank.
San Francisco Landmark 207: Ellinwood Residence (2799 Pacific/2498 Divisadero)
Another District Seven Mansion Heads For Foreclosure (2151 Green) [SocketSite]
Another Ex-Decorator Showcase Is Officially Listed: 2500 Divisadero [SocketSite]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Conifer

    2799 Pacific would have a southern view, very nice, but not the GG view that is so coveted. The interior of 2799 is magnificent, Victorian. But many people would prefer the Gothic Revival interior of 2500 Divisadero.
    In any case, if you are this high on the hill, it seems that the price is about $10m, although two on the houses on Pacific, south side between Divisadero and Broderick, sold last year for considerably less.
    One of them, with the brown brick facade, is under renovation by Joe Toboni, husband of the broker who is sister of Barbara Callan, mother of the man who is the husband of the sister of the Mayor. All in the family.

  2. Posted by K10

    SS- any idea which bank owns it?
    [Reader’s Note: “The proud new owner appears to be Chevy Chase Bank.”]

  3. Posted by diemos

    Perhaps our realtor™ friends would like to come on and remind us of how the high end is composed of all cash buyers who only took out loans as part of a cash management and investment strategy and therefore the high end will not see any foreclosures.

  4. Posted by resp

    interseting. another San Franciso hedge fund casualty. more comin’.

  5. Posted by Conifer

    Dr.Ellinwood’s daughter, then an old lady, restored the interior in the early 1990s, and over-extended herself too. But this truly a great house, and I need not remind the members of this list that there is a small number of houses of this caliber even in PacHts, so it will sell and some lucky couple or family will live there. Even if as our nay-sayers predict, prices fall, they will not fall far. There are no white elephants in SF nowadays.

  6. Posted by EBGuy

    I was scanning the home sales data at SFGate and couldn’t find anything in SF that had sold for 8 figures recently. The best I could do was a sale on 4/4/08 (34 Presidio Terrace for those who are curious) for $9.5 million. At any rate, many of the listings we’ve seen above $10 million have thought the better of it and are now in the 7 figure range. Will be interesting to see the pricing on this one.

  7. Posted by San FronziScheme

    There are no white elephants in SF nowadays.
    Well, we have a good candidate: 2845 Broadway.
    http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2006/03/the_65000000_ho.html
    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/2845-Broadway-St-94115/home/2025531
    Redfin shows 1211 DOM

  8. Posted by anonn

    Perhaps our realtor™ friends would like to come on and remind us of how the high end is composed of all cash buyers who only took out loans as part of a cash management and investment strategy and therefore the high end will not see any foreclosures.
    Perhaps our friends who very much enjoy saying the same baiting cynical paraphrases over and over again will take a moment to understand that times are difficult for a great many people these days, both rich and poor?

  9. Posted by sleepiguy

    This house MIGHT sell at 10, but everything in that Divis. section seems to linger on the market. The Metallica home never sold even when the market was “hot.” Also, I don’t think buyers today in any income bracket want 17k square foot homes. It’s just overkill after a certain point. Apparently, the other foreclosure on Jackson at Steiner is in contract, so its selling price should be a clear indicator what the bank might get for this monster..

  10. Posted by EBGuy

    take a moment to understand that times are difficult for a great many people these days
    Without a doubt; the two year tax-free flip ain’t what it used to be.

  11. Posted by Conifer

    Fonzi, 2845 Broadway is not a white elephant. It is just priced three times what it is worth. At $65 million, it could just as well be $650 million.

  12. Posted by Conifer

    >
    Very few want 17K, but there are lots of people who would be very happy in 7K or even 10K. A couple of kids, a few household helpers, two dogs, and a collection of 18th and 19th century English furniture — all filled up.

  13. Posted by San FronziScheme

    Conifer, that would be pretty close to a general definition of White Elephant.
    I am feeling a bit Wiki today:

    “A white elephant is a valuable possession of which its owner cannot dispose and whose cost (particularly cost of upkeep) is out of proportion to its usefulness.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_elephant
    Let’s see:
    – Valuable possession = CHECK
    >> One of a kind. Incredible quality. Best location.
    – its owner cannot dispose = CHECK
    >> 1211 days…
    – cost is out of proportion to its usefulness. = CHECK
    >> Bought for 20M+ but the buyer will needs a small fortune before moving in (8-16M?). Plus it would be worth way less than the 65M+++ total cost.

  14. Posted by eddy

    This home is spectacular and is probably on a triple lot. This will sell for north of $10m and if it ever comes to market there will be someone kicking themselves for not being at the auction.

  15. Posted by eddy

    Also, as I noted on the Baker Street Showcase Disaster Home thread, 200 Locust St is already In Escrow after only 6 DOM @ $7.2M. High End is alive and kicking folks.

  16. Posted by diemos

    “will take a moment to understand that times are difficult for a great many people these days, both rich and poor?”
    Not only do I understand it, you might want to take a walk down memory lane with me. Just like the hour hand on a clock, it doesn’t look like it’s moving but if you check every now and then you see clear motion.

  17. Posted by Geo

    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/601-Dolores-St-94110/home/18835089
    oops, here’s the correct link to the white elephant…

  18. Posted by anonn

    Diemos,
    How does this property fit into your theory? ARM’s, resets, leveraging, coming apocalypse, etc?
    No. Stuff happens homey. Rich folks lose money too.

  19. Posted by SurveyKid

    The carnage in the high and mid range has begun. This nightmare doesn’t end until the trophy Victorian in Noe Valley falls 50% from the highs. The disease is finally reaching prime all over California.
    People realize that there will be no net economic growth in California for at least a decade, yes? You’ve got the highest unemployment since 1941 and yet oil prices are at 70.00. California is trapped. I’m looking for the entire state to eventually wind up at real estate prices common to 25 years ago.
    –The Kid

  20. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    What about the trophy Victorian in Pac Heights?

  21. Posted by auden

    the most amusing part of the transaction thus far was the auction…It was *almost* the deal of the decade.

  22. Posted by diemos

    “Stuff happens homey.”
    Ah, the battle cry of people who don’t want to put in the time and effort to understand how things work.

  23. Posted by San FronziScheme

    We all know people are hurting. But this is mostly self-inflicted.
    A friend of mine overbid on a place 2 years ago around 10% over asking. It was a cockfight at this point but he felt pretty victorious to have “won” the place. He figured the 10% overpaid would be like 8-12 months extra to wait before cashing out. The plan was a typical 2/3-Y flip followed by a move up. everyone did it, even in SF in 2007. A bunch of owners are still in shock, and the worst is for the ones who HAVE TO sell.
    I have always said: make it quick and we’ll recover faster:
    http://dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/50000/8000/800/58816/58816.strip.gif
    OK, maybe not THAT quick…

  24. Posted by anonn

    Yeah. Your theory. This property. How? Sorry buddy. Own some credibility. OK?

  25. Posted by San FronziScheme

    Not my theory. Many people’s theory. Of course the NAR is trying to debunk it daily because high prices are the industry bread and butter. Nice fighting though.

  26. Posted by anonn

    And this particular property somehow fits that m.o. according to you guys. It’s priceless irresponsible internet nonsense, and yes it is awesome.

  27. Posted by San FronziScheme

    times are difficult for a great many people these days, both rich and poor?
    That wasn’t the NAR official response last year. It was all D10 and losers and flawed property, remember? Now a few bears point out things have gone as they predicted and all we get is this:
    Stuff happens homey.
    priceless irresponsible internet nonsense
    Own some credibility. OK?
    LOL! Bring it on!

  28. Posted by anonn

    You can’t be serious. I have as much to do with the “NAR” as you do. Talk about this property, and why it somehow dovetails into your little thing. Or don’t. Ridiculousness has already been obtained, regardless.

  29. Posted by james

    to the lesburu’s parked out front come with?
    i’m in if so!

  30. Posted by San FronziScheme

    I have as much to do with the “NAR” as you do.
    I should frame this one, bookmark it, get it engraved on a pet rock, etc…
    Let me check. Did I pay any dues last year? Nope. Am I a Realtor(TM)? Nope. What about you? In the 6-degrees of Kevin Bacon/NAR game, you win, no question.
    Trying to sell the wares by saying you have no relation with the mothership, you’d need 3 pages of fine prints to make this fly, sorry.
    Talk about this property, and why it somehow dovetails into your little thing.
    You did the dovetail when using a very generic “times are difficult for a great many people these days, both rich and poor?” There’s not more generic than that.
    You went macro first. A few cried foul, you’re going back micro. Just saying.
    Or don’t.
    That’s a flujism (TM). Give orders and try to diminish the opponent, hoping the guy will give up after repeated assaults. And when things get too dicey, then there’s the lawsuit innuendo. Though we haven’t seen that one in a while. Disclaimer: I have never disclosed your name and all I am posting is in all pure fun;) You are a trustworthy and honest professional as far as I can tell as I do not know you personally. End of disclaimer. I’ve already exposed the technique on SS a few months ago. Too bad that was deleted by the editor.
    Ridiculousness has already been obtained, regardless.
    Really? Based on your twisted little logic feeding on a contradiction you initiated? Yawn. Not convinced.

  31. Posted by Rillion

    Come on SFS, if you are going to mock at least mock correctly. It is REALTOR(R) not Realtor(TM). Seriously check out the website, they can’t use REALTOR(R) enough times.

  32. Posted by anonn

    Yes well perfectly emblematic it is, then. Sheer obstinance won the argument. Happy?

  33. Posted by sfrenegade

    Interesting fact about this house is that it apparently got foreclosed on twice in succession:
    http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/2799-Pacific-Ave-94115/home/1020959
    Jun 10, 2009 Sold (Public Records)
    This home was foreclosed. $10,000,000
    May 02, 1995 Sold (Public Records)
    This home was foreclosed. $3,111,857

  34. Posted by Lindsay

    I work for the law firm that just completed the lockout on this property. It is owned by Chevy Chase bank.

  35. Posted by diemos

    Excellent! I’m sure the ability to have “pride of ownership” is worth every penny Chevy Chase paid.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *