As we wrote this past February:
Listed for $3,350,000 last June but then withdrawn from the market last October, the AIA award winning 147 Laidley designed by and for Zack | de Vito Architecture is back on the market and asking $2,950,000.
A brief flirtation with the rental market last month was quickly rethought.
While just reported on the MLS, the sale of 147 Laidley closed escrow a few weeks ago with a reported contract price of $2,820,000 ($866 per square foot). Cheers. And as always, don’t forget those invitations to the housewarming.
Nice place. Looks like they did OK with the deal considering the market — maybe about even or a small loss depending on the financing terms. $706,000 to buy the old place and $1.5M to build. So $2.2M “buy-in” costs and probably $600k in financing for 5 years. Assume about $140,000 in selling costs. I’m not counting property taxes, etc. They did live there for the last couple of years.
High end is obviously taking a hit. Not as easy to make money on projects like this as it used to be. They would have done fine with the original asking, but can’t get 2007 prices any longer.
Seriously creepy looking. Why does it exist?
Explain creepy.
Well, it exists as a nice piece of modern architecture on a street full of interesting, somewhat quirky houses.
Nonetheless, a very nice place.
Creepy lookin ^ what are you smokin
I’m going to try to check it out in person this weekend to see it. It looks ominous like a little modern prison or a wannabe Palm Springs piece gone wrong. I’m not smoking anything (it’s only 11AM).
In the meanwhile, I’ll be keeping eye out for a Friday-make-my-weekend-amazing-SF-future piece here in SS. (no pressure).
The time to check it out was on the AIA tour or for the last few months while it was on the market, its in contract now!
I can appreciate a lot of contemporary architecture (Inc. many local SFH designed by the much maligned saitowitz.) but this one I never cared for. And I think creepy is the perfect adjective for this Bauhaus-gone-wrong-prison-glass-f*uk-fest.
Thanks hipster and invented. Any and all opinions are valid here, I just wish using the word “creepy” to describe any architecture could be elaborated on.
It means nothing to us here, except maybe describing a clown.
We went to an open house at this place last year.
It is beautiful but very over-the-top modern. I love modern but this was way too much for my tastes. I wouldn’t call it creepy but it was definitely a bit cold.
Being very vertical and open combined with lots of wood and steel, it seemed super noisy between the living space levels and even up into the bedrooms.
All the custom built-in cabinets are amazing, though. Really well crafted and thought out.
If you love 200% modern and have the money to spend, then this is the place for you so congrats to the new owners, I’m sure they’ll enjoy living there.
When the Tea Party nutcases come to “liberate” San Francisco, this is where the last stand should happen.
Neither $866/ft nor $2.82M in Glen Park says “high end is obviously taking a hit” to me.
Yea, you’re right sparky-. This is a unique, modern house. not for everyone, but it just takes one buyer..
I think the price was in line for the house, location, views and street.
That is the nice thing about selling SFH’s you only need one buyer to want it.
In this case, creepy=oppressive. Referring to the facade only (interior may be great.)
High end is obviously taking a hit. Not as easy to make money on projects like this as it used to be. They would have done fine with the original asking, but can’t get 2007 prices any longer
Why do you say that about this particular property? I asked around, and it turns out this is the single most expensive piece of property ever sold in Glen Park. Also, apparently the owners were builders/architects who worked on their own residence, so they probably paid abut $250 per square foot to build. I figure they grossed about 1mm or so.
$500 a square foot, fluj, not $250. And it was not intended to be their own residence. That was an accident because they thought the market would come back. And they decided to sell now to stop the bleeding.
This is Glen Park only on a realtor’s map. It is a knockout, huge, award-winning place. And it sold only after a year of trying and a half million dollar discount.
$866/sf used to get you the Beacon. Now it gets you an architectural gem in a top-notch neighborhood.
I’m not flujanonn, it’s not that big, I saw it, it’s really vertical, and it’s the most expensive place ever in the area, and if you think builders and architects spend 500 bucks a square foot on their own projects, you’re nuts.
Also, how do you know all this stuff about these people? As far as living there and all? Are you friends with them? If so I defer to your answer(s).
What would you call this neighborhood if not Glen Park? Fairmount Heights?
Fairmount Heights or Noe Valley, right on the edge of the latter.
Other anon who sure sounds just like fluj, it’s public info about the 500/sf construction costs. Just look at prior socketsite links.
Obviously only the Fairmount Heights section of Glen Park supports 2mm+ in the first place. The Laidley sale is the most in that area, and other stunning homes in Fairmount Heights were sold throughout the last market. So a display of decline this is not.
“Fairmount Heights or Noe Valley, right on the edge of the latter.”
Hardy Har Har.
I can just imagine what the outcome would be if a selling agent said that here.
147 Laidley Street
• 2009 AIA National Housing Award, selected as one of the 10 best houses in the US for 2009
• 2009 AIA San Francisco Design Award of Merit
• 2009 Builder Magazine Builders Choice Grand Award
• 2009 Custom Home Magazine Award- Best house under 3,000 sq ft
• 2009 Design/Build Magazine Honor Award
• 2009 Residential Architect- Best design detail
• Published in 21st Century 150 of the Worlds Best
• Published in over half a dozen international design magazines
Those that know about design know this is one of the best.
I have it on authority the costs were over $500.sq ft, if you saw the house and undrstood and appreciated design you would know why.
Saw the house. Liked it. Have seen 500 a foot numerous times, am currently working with an architect who is about to charge 500 a foot to someone. Under 3000 square feet? That’s what I thought. So it actually sold for over 900 a square foot? Wow. Between this and what’s happened in Clarendon Heights recently, maybe those two areas have seen the most appreciation of anywhere.
anon,
I was thinking the same thing. It won an award for being under 3000 yet at the sale it’s 3256. 256 is a pretty good sized room and would have cost $128,000 to build at $500/ft.
At 2995 feet this place sold for 941!