August 27, 2009
What Are 412-416 Bosworth: Full Pricing And Two Open This Weekend
From what was and will be at 412-416 Bosworth last month, to what are today and a grand opening this weekend for two of the eight condos.
From the agent in charge:
One thing that people will ask about…is how much road noise there is from San Jose, which runs behind the property. I was initially concerned about that myself, but now that the window installation is in I feel comfortable challenging anyone to come and sit in the rear bedrooms so they can hear for themselves how quiet it is. The assembly consists of a dual paned window, then an air gap, followed by another single paned window that opens separately….Living in an urban area road noise is such a common issue, and I think a lot of other buildings in the city could have taken a cue from the way these windows were done.
And of course, the full pricing scoop to go with the plans:
A Upper (1/1.5) 1 parking - $650,000
A Lower (3/2.5) 1 parking - $855,000
B Upper (3/2.5) 1 parking - $960,000
B Lower (3/2.5) 2 parking - $1,099,000
C Upper (3/2.5) 2 parking - $1,099,000
C Lower (3/3.5) 2 parking - $1,149,000
D Upper (5/4.5) 2 parking - $1,275,000
D Lower (5/4.5) 2 parking - $1,299,000
∙ 412-416 Bosworth: What Recently Was And What Will Soon Be [SocketSite]
∙ 412-416 Bosworth [bosworthhomes.com]
First Published: August 27, 2009 9:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
What is happening with the empty space on Rousseau Street now that they are finished accessing the project site?
Posted by: Marten at August 27, 2009 9:19 AM
nice to see condos with more than two bedrooms come online.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at August 27, 2009 9:30 AM
Based on recent sales (mostly seen here)and a dip in pricing in SFH, I think these are overpriced. I do not find this area desirable compared to the other side of the street closer to Glen Park. Too much traffic whether you can shut out the noise or not. What if I want to open the window once in a while for air? Seems like you could get a nice place in Noe for this price soon enough.
Posted by: SJM at August 27, 2009 9:50 AM
These are massive looking in the picture compared to the tiny house on the left. There is no continuity of architecture. No space for greenery in front of the homes.
A very cold, sterile look. Why can't San Francisco, with the toughest building codes in the US, generate interesting buildings? Especially residential buildings?
This is almost as bad as most of the lego condos going up SOMA and, really, throughout the City.
Posted by: Gil at August 27, 2009 10:08 AM
A Upper (1/1.5) 1 parking - $ 650,000
Can someone explain to me, why a 1 BR is priced at 650K ????
Who is delusional. The listing Agent or Us, the prospective Buyers ?
Posted by: Chad at August 27, 2009 10:11 AM
Yo Gil -- toss out some examples of architecture that you find as an alternative this this size development?
Posted by: nottimhawko at August 27, 2009 10:41 AM
No space for greenery in front of the homes.
Easy now, take a look at the renderings. There will be trees. These condos really show the potential for RH-2 development; now lets jack up that sucker. Can someone review the height limits for RH-2? At least they had the courtesy to step-back the fourth and fifth floors...
Posted by: EBGuy at August 27, 2009 10:47 AM
"Easy now, take a look at the renderings. There will be trees."
Yeah, that is what passes for greenery in SF. A few spindly tress encased in cement going from condo to curb and one end of the block to another.
I think at times folks living in the City get used to the cemented-in sterile look and when a tree is stuck in the middle of the cement that is greenery!
It pretty much goes downtown too. The high-rises with a totally cemented plaza and a few tress and a planter. The Four Seasons plaza/block is a perfect example as is the plaza at the base of the BofA building.
I've been told that when Khruschev visited SF way back he said something to the effect that SF could never be a great city because of the lack of tress and greenery.
Posted by: Gil at August 27, 2009 11:03 AM
I think they missed a real opportunity to name this "The Boz".
Posted by: Stu at August 27, 2009 11:07 AM
I agree with SJM. These units (while I'm sure will be nice) are mispriced. Just looking at the floor plans and having walked by many I anticipate that they are going to very large which may appeal to families; (interestingly no square footage is included). Anyway I think they will sit for quite some time before the inevitable price reductions. They should of got ahead of the curve and been more aggressive in trying to attract potential buyers. Living in that hood here's what I would think would be a more appropriate starting point. (Note: I haven't gone inside so may adjust my predictions accordingly after this weekend.) One last point…the site is still a construction zone and has been for a long time so I'm sure that's not going to help pique buyers interest.
A Upper (1/1.5) 1 parking - $570,000
A Lower (3/2.5) 1 parking - $789,000
B Upper (3/2.5) 1 parking - $869,000
B Lower (3/2.5) 2 parking - $909,000
C Upper (3/2.5) 2 parking - $919,000
C Lower (3/3.5) 2 parking - $919,000
D Upper (5/4.5) 2 parking - $1,099,000
D Lower (5/4.5) 2 parking - $1,099,000
Posted by: Willow at August 27, 2009 11:35 AM
Downtowns should have greenery? What is one that does?
Posted by: anonn at August 27, 2009 11:58 AM
I live in glen park and have looked at houses on that street. Rousseau is basically an exit off of San Jose Ave so there is a constant stream of cars and it's a muni bus route so this stretch of Bosworth is particularly busy.
Also, there is a power transfer station (or whatever it's called) right next to this development.
On top of that, there was a house right across the street for sale for a while for $995k (having been reduced twice and de/relisted from over 1.2 a year or so earlier - owners are undewater having bought in 2005 for 1.005), before being withdrawn from the market - 425 Bosworth St, 3br 2.5ba, over 2000sf, 2-car side-by-side garage, fantastic modern remodel but you couldn't open a window. The backyard, which was lovely with trees and surround by other people's backyards, was filled with noise from 280 and the front of the house was filled with noise from Bosworth St. I am a city dweller and have no problems with generic street noise but this was LOUD.
So if a single family house, not facing San Jose Ave and not next door to a power station, can't sell, I don't think these are going to move anytime soon at those prices.
Of course, I could be totally wrong.
Posted by: geekgrrl at August 27, 2009 12:28 PM
From what I can recollect, downtown Eugene was pretty green... :-)
Posted by: priced_out_with_envy at August 27, 2009 12:31 PM
Green downtonws - try Portland and Seattle and San Antonio. To name a few.
While its bad enough SF does not have a green downtown, its worse still it doesn't even have green neighborhoods. Except for the a few of the wealthy areas like Pacific Heights and St. Francis Woods.
But the folk don't live there - they live in the avenues or around Mission St. IMO among the ugliest neigborhoods of any American city.
Posted by: Gil at August 27, 2009 1:05 PM
Sorry but Seattle's downtown is not particularly green by any stretch of the imagination. Have you spent much time there?
Posted by: anonn at August 27, 2009 1:08 PM
Having lived in San Antonio, I will note that there is certainly plenty of greenery along the Riverwalk, but the bulk of downtown is big streets and few or no trees. The city as a whole has lots of trees, but it's a huge, spread-out, car-centric mess, with no zoning, and I would guess that SF is at least 20x more dense. There are lots of trees because it's a hugely spread-out, car-centric city of suburban-style houses with big yards, front and back, not a high-density European-model city like SF, NYC or Chicago.
Posted by: Dave at August 27, 2009 1:22 PM
Downtowns should have greenery? What is one that does?
Believe it or not Mexico City - have you ever driven down la reforma? Miles long with highrises set back from the street and a very wide median all planted with huge beautiful old trees. Actually, many of the downtown districts have lush greenery and trees.
Posted by: brad at August 27, 2009 1:59 PM
^ I concur. Mexico city had mucho greenery in the areas I visited (I guess the surrounding areas of poverty would have much less...at least from what I saw on the bus ride out to the nearby pyramids).
But, a downtown is about urban density. A few trees here and there, but otherwise I like, the concrete, high towers and bustling energy. When I want an oases I go to
my back yard.
And FYI- there is a sidewalk greening project, supported by DPW that focuses on removing large portions of sidewalk and planting drought tolerant plants. It beautifies the sidewalks and helps reduce waterflow into the city drain system. And BTW, the mission leads in implementing this idea. Take a look at shotwell between 17-18 street and Harrison between 22-23 street.
The web site for this project is: http://www.plantsf.org/
Posted by: 45yo hipster at August 28, 2009 8:33 AM
"there is a sidewalk greening project, supported by DPW that focuses on removing large portions of sidewalk and planting drought tolerant plants"
Yeah, the same project that cemented in the previously green median strip on Portola from Mollie Stone's down to past the fire station. Planting a few spindly trees that are dying already and will split the narrrow median strip should they grow to full size.
Posted by: Gil at August 28, 2009 8:53 AM
Tokyo, despite its poor planning, is also a very green city.
Posted by: Tokyo Green Space at August 29, 2009 10:51 PM
I went to the open house today. The three layers of windows in the bedrooms facing San Jose Ave totally kill the noise from the street. I actually asked the realtor for information on who put them in so that I could put them in my own house.
Oh, and the stairs didn't squeak either. :-)
Posted by: Dave at August 31, 2009 12:40 AM
I went to the open house too. The two corner 5 bedroom units were both open and they are enormous but the floor plan is an irregular shape. The finishes are mid grade. Not uber high end but not low cost either. The kitchen is probably the best room. There are two flights of stairs that you have to initially climb if you buy the top unit. Not ideal. The decks are huge too but it is noisy above street level with the traffic from San Jose and the 280 carrying up. I'm going to stick with my pricing predictions from a few days ago...
Posted by: WIllow at August 31, 2009 8:41 AM
It's not just the road noise....you can't EVER open your windows due to noise and air pollution.
Any units on a road like this should be at about 50% of this asking price.
Posted by: David Mercanus at August 31, 2009 12:45 PM
I've been to the units as well. I can honestly say that there is NO noise at all in the master bedroom overlooking San Jose. Matter of fact, it was a little weird watching the bus drive by and hear only the whisper of a breeze. No creaking stairs either.
Sounds to me like most of the posters on here must live is some utopian paradise comprised of tons of greenery and no road noise. I'm born and raised in the City and I have yet to live in a place that is surrounded by lush trees and is quiet when I open the windows. If that's what you want, move to Millbrae or be prepared to pay a LOT more than what these are selling for.
Prices are right for the size...maybe even a pretty good deal.If you can't afford it, it's not for you. I know that I can't but if I could, I would buy one of these, ditch the car and take public transit to work.
Posted by: SF_Born & Raised at September 4, 2009 1:55 PM
Anyone have an update on these? I ride my bike past them several times a week and it doesn't look like any are occupied, and constructions seems to have ground to a halt. They are an eyesore - did the developer go belly-up, or financing dry up?
Posted by: katdip at August 16, 2010 1:42 PM
Do you know what the status is on the Bosworth Homes project? It seems to have stopped in mid-construction and has become an eye-sore for our neighborhood. Unfinished units have been standing for well over a year and is now becoming a hazard to the community. I think this property would probably not meet health department regulations since the load bearing walls have been exposed for two winters now.
I have already contacted the Board of Supervisors and would like to know what the current status is.
Posted by: Jay Sath at September 15, 2010 12:37 PM