May 27, 2010

One Hell Heck Of A Bedroom Overlooking Dolores Park...

601 Dolores Bedroom

It’s not only a new listing on the MLS (and now official inventory) but a new website and photos featuring one heck (for some reason "hell" doesn't seem appropriate) of a bedroom for 601 Dolores. No new surprises, however, on the price ($7,490,000).

Yes, we know that's actually the living room. And there are parts of this property we love.

601 Dolores Dining

∙ Listing: 601 Dolores (3/2) 17,000 sqft - $7,490,000 [601dolores.com] [MLS]
Unofficial Inventory (And A Righteous Reduction) At 601 Dolores [SocketSite]
Sweet Jesus (So To Speak): 601 Dolores On The Market And Inside [SocketSite]

First Published: May 27, 2010 4:00 PM

Comments from "Plugged In" Readers

Insane.

Posted by: Joshua at May 27, 2010 4:08 PM

does it come with a Segway? or a pair of roller skates?

Posted by: mao-mao-mao at May 27, 2010 4:17 PM

Lets Party!

Posted by: mikey woodz at May 27, 2010 4:33 PM

I've said this before, but this was so misconceived that I have to agree with Joshua.

Posted by: curmudgeon at May 27, 2010 4:33 PM

I had orginally thought they would remodel the interior for residential purposes. Didn't think they would just be removing the pews for the most part. Not sure how I feel about being intimate in that "bedroom", you know with baby jesus looking and all.

Posted by: lemonherb at May 27, 2010 4:52 PM

I think, but I am not sure, that the interior had a historic designation that prevented them from dividing it.

Posted by: curmudgeon at May 27, 2010 5:01 PM

Good Lord.

Posted by: Schlub at May 27, 2010 5:04 PM

silly? definitely! but it would actually be a great party space. just hard to imagine what you'd do the other days of the week.

Posted by: tharpo at May 27, 2010 5:21 PM

Insane in many ways. High square footage at 17,000 (only around $440/sqft!), plus a massive garage.

Is the one of the "bedrooms" the living room-looking thing in the top picture above? There's a 4-post bed there. Another "bedroom" appears to be in an open mezzanine/loft space. The third bed in the photos looks like it's in a true bedroom.

Still not sure what the market is for this property. Looking for somewhat eccentric ultra-rich person who doesn't care that this place has a completely impractical layout, I guess. Did the prior buyer buy this for around $2.2M? The listing price should be quite a bit closer to that price.

Also, anyone have reports on the seismic work done?

Posted by: sfrenegade at May 27, 2010 5:22 PM

Yeah, sqft be damned, seven-five is still an awful lot for this. Considering that not even another mil took 2830 Pacific, I'd say she's still got room to drop.

That said, there are things I love about this place too. The tin can fireplaces are not one of them. The parking is. I will say that the new pictures do the place a bit more justice. The old ones made the kitchen seem unbearable.

I know what I'd do with it, but I'd need to have boatloads to waste before I'd seriously think about it.

Posted by: justme at May 27, 2010 7:16 PM

One simple comment:

If no structural/seismic upgrade has been done to the entire building, all of that fabulous renovation and finishes is for nothing.

The entire brick building is simply a major collapse hazard in a serious earthquake.

They got their priorities all wrong.

Posted by: noearch at May 27, 2010 7:52 PM

wonder why they went residential with this place? It would have made an awesome HQ for some dotcom. As a home it's very eccentric. I think we may have to see a price in the 4's for this 3/2 to move

Posted by: sunnyvalesteve at May 27, 2010 7:57 PM

what a waste. this should not be a residence. it should be a public space.

as a house...can you say CREEPY? why would you want to live in a church? yuck.

where are any rooms? what a waste of square footage. there are maybe 3000 usable square feet, the rest is silly.

i say it sells for $5MM, and the owner might paralyze himself coming down the stairs from the tower.

Posted by: rex at May 27, 2010 8:28 PM

Why would you want to live in a church?

Because you think you're a god.

Posted by: flaneur at May 27, 2010 9:31 PM

...And living in the bell tower like that, they got a lot of room downstairs where the pews used to be, and having all that room, seeing as how they took out all the pews, they decided that they didn't need to take out the garbage for a long time.

Posted by: Arlo Guthrie at May 27, 2010 11:22 PM

Wht I lv Mst:

Th'm clngs, th'm chndlrs, wndws. Th chf KIT 'n Mn lvl's grt. wht abt th'lrg FDR & 2 FP? I cld C mslf slp 'n the Mstr lvl wth BR, Rmn BA, drssng rm, offce & 360 vus frm tower rms/dck. Lwr lvl as a rcrdng studio is a grt ID.

Tht's all the vwls 7.5M*2.5% cn buy.

Disenvowelment shld B a Cptl Offns.

Posted by: lol at May 28, 2010 8:40 AM

hate all the abbreviations as well, but in the listing agent's defense...I realize it looks like the MLS gives you more space to write than that, but it doesnt.

$7.5M for a house on Dolore Street, any house...not a chance in hell.

Posted by: anon$random at May 28, 2010 8:59 AM

If I had $7.5 million and a trust fund to cover heating for a massive space like this, I'd buy this in a second over other offerings in this price range. I love this neighborhood, and these spaces are awesome. But I recognize that those who actually have this kind of cash would likely not be interested in a place/location like this. Tough sell.

Posted by: A.T. at May 28, 2010 9:11 AM

I'll be dammed if this place sells for $7.9. But seriously, have you ever seen so many options on where to install your bowling ally?

Posted by: eddy at May 28, 2010 9:14 AM

Perfect place for a cult to buy!

Posted by: jenofla at May 28, 2010 9:25 AM

There is not enough closet space.

Posted by: hummm at May 28, 2010 10:22 AM

My mom would be so happy if I could honestly tell her I go to church every day.

The parties here would be outstanding. Think of the theme possibilities: Tasty canapes served on imitation communion wafers. A hot tub full of "holy water".

And I like the idea of having my bedroom in a church. Most of the women who share my bed scream the lord's name over and over again at various times, so he'd be right there to hear them. Of course, most of them would probably stay away due to fears of that immaculate conception thing happening a second time.

OK, the reality is this whole concept is stupid and costing someone a fortune in holding costs. It was concocted at a time when there weren't enough houses and people could convert anything into one and it would get bought right away because anything you could call a residence could be loaned on and huge profits made. However, the world is currently awash in houses, and so there is no real purpose for this. You just want to shake the owner and say "stop throwing your money away. The world has changed!" But I suppose dreams never die.

Posted by: tipster at May 28, 2010 10:41 AM

This place would be good for the following uses: nightclub, restaurant, design studio, dance/theater school, artist's colony, church.

House, not so much. But it is beautiful.

Posted by: kthnxybe at May 28, 2010 10:55 AM

actually, the present owner is a seismic engineer. he did enough seismic work on the place to bring it up to residential code. anything more would have required installing big steel beams. this is why it's permitted residential and not commercial.

Posted by: lefty at May 28, 2010 12:28 PM

If that's the case, he should probably try harder to unload this place before The Next Big One by lowering the price significantly.

Posted by: sfrenegade at May 28, 2010 12:32 PM

Who ever buys it better like to sweep.

...or if they can afford to but it, more likely they will have a cadre of sweepers with the biggest push brooms known to man.

Can you imagine trying to sleep in that bed on the main level? serious creepy factor as the church mice scurry about in the night...

Posted by: CSK33 at May 28, 2010 12:59 PM

A.T. said:

"If I had $7.5 million and a trust fund to cover heating for a massive space like this, I'd buy this in a second over other offerings in this price range. I love this neighborhood, and these spaces are awesome. But I recognize that those who actually have this kind of cash would likely not be interested in a place/location like this. Tough sell."

You hit the nail on the head. You DON'T have that much money, and someone WITH that much money will not want to live amongst your hipster, cheap beer drinking Dolores Park dweller friends.

Posted by: Rex at May 29, 2010 3:03 AM

I say bad staging... Why put the bed on that floor in front of the alter and make it a joke? There are a lot of smaller more private rooms in the building.

Posted by: *** at May 29, 2010 10:12 AM

HI I AM GOD

THIS IS MY OLD Pied-à-terre IN THE MISSION, FROM BACK WHEN THAT PLACE WAS COOL

I AM GOD

AND I THINK THIS PLACE (MY OLD PLACE) SHOULD BE GOING FOR $3.1M MAXIMUM

JESUS, WHAT DO YOU THINK???

I AGREE, MAXIMUM #3MM, BUT I THINK $2.75M REALLY IS THE RIGHT PRICE, MAYBE $2.5M

Posted by: GOD at May 29, 2010 11:53 PM

Hi Folks, one of the listing agents here. Thanks for all your interest. We thought we would just ping in here and give you some info to clarify some of the speculation. So in answer to some of the above:

1) Why? - A few years ago this building had been condemned by the City as an unreinforced masonry building that the diminished parish could not afford to fix. So they put it up on the market and our client bought it. As it happens he owns a seismic retrofit company. He, and we, had also always hoped to find a church, firehouse or other cool space to renovate. This was a perfect match. A bit of a renaissance guy, he chose to restore and repurpose the property as a single family rather than chop it up into a shopping mall, condos or other purposes that would have destroyed the interior. He did remove most of the horrid additions done during th 50's and 60's and yes, he did a seismic retrofit.

2) Live in a church? - There are churches all across the country and at least half a dozen other churches here in the SF that have been converted into homes (not to mention firehouses).
In this country we don't have any old castles to restore so churches and firehouses and warehouses provide the same kind of space. Thus our choice of the name Castle on the Park. Not for everyone, but it does seem to attract very creative people. Slash used to own another church just a few blocks away.

3) Abbreviations? - Yes, you must have been looking on the comments section of the MLS which is really for realtors to look at and which has a very limited amount of space. So yes, we abbreviated. Srry if it cnfsd u.

4)This is clearly not for everyone. Neither is a modern one bedroom in South Beach or a tunnel entrance out by the beach. But someone will love this home, probably someone who entertains a lot or needs major work space at home for art, start up, or whatever. I could live there in a heart beat.

Hope this helps. Enjoy the pictures. Its an amazing place and our pleasure to help the owner sell it to just the right person.

Posted by: John Woodruff at May 30, 2010 12:07 AM

What I see is an amazing home and a beautiful restoration of a historic icon that we can all watch and appreciate while sunbathing in Dolores Park. No ugly condos or other garish conversions. I can't understand some of the negative comments. Probably jealousy!

Posted by: doloresres at May 30, 2010 6:17 PM

What I see is a white elephant sitting empty. Yeah I am jealous. I wish I could afford bleeding millions.

Posted by: lol at May 30, 2010 11:19 PM

A Buddha on the Altar? That's some serious bad karma.

Posted by: Gate at May 31, 2010 9:43 AM

A neighbor, I know the owner, cool guy...has been living in there since he finished the project. I am jealous too!

Posted by: jouster at May 31, 2010 10:13 PM

I don't begrudge the guy for doing a project he thought was fun and creative. But I do question the wisdom of the project as a real estate deal. I, and many of the folks on here, clearly, think that the demographics are very thin for the kind of buyer who would be a match for "the Castle".

But thanks to the listing agent for providing a little more detail. Just to clarify...so, the owner wasn't FORCED to keep the sanctuary whole? That was his choice?

Posted by: curmudgeon at May 31, 2010 10:29 PM

The designer/developer/homeowner/resident here...
Some answers:
-Neighborhood is zoned residential only, not commercial or any other public use.
-The creation of a single home -with a lower floor office/studio/etc.- was not the product of an inflated ego, but the best way to maintain the structure's unique integrity. The proportions of the upper living level work well with this plan. Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
-Building has been seismic'd.
-Only the exterior was 'architecturally significant'. Any and all work in the interior (and sanctuary) was my choice, design, and doing (except most of the furniture staging...and that bed!)
-The dilapidated front stained glass (a few small ones were vandalized before I got here) was restored -at great expense- and is on display in the sanctuary. Resurrecting all such architectural elements was a non-negotiable aspect of the design and development.
-Yes, I happily live in this lovely building and neighborhood, and will only sell to a qualified custodian for this unique architectural gem and rare piece of SF history.
-I have spent significant resources, and worked tirelessly for over a year and half on this project, as reflected by the asking price.
I gladly will answer any other questions...
Best wishes and harmony to all.

Posted by: Siamak Akhavan at June 1, 2010 10:39 AM

Kudos to the developer for choosing to preserve the integrity of the interior. That decision conflicts with the financial goals of this project. It may be a struggle to profit well from all of this work though hopefully the good karma created by preserving this space will help.

I'd gladly live here as well though have no illusions that I could ever afford to.

Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at June 1, 2010 11:04 AM

i've always wanted to sleep in church.

Posted by: Christine at June 21, 2010 9:34 PM

OK - this developer only made this a home and not a commercial building because it would have been much much more expensive to do so. Not because of any desire to "preserve the initegrity of the interior". Please.

Posted by: sleepegal at June 24, 2010 4:33 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:

« From "Needs TLC" To "Contractors' Special" (And Now Bank Owned) | HOME | A Blast From The Past And Back To The Future On Portola Drive »