July 22, 2011
1803 Castro Returns Four Times Its 2005 Size (And Price)
Purchased for $600,000 in 2005 as a 825 square foot one-bathroom home on a 1,950 square foot lot with plans for a horizontal expansion, 1803 Castro Street has just returned to the market as a fully renovated 3,400 square foot home with four bedrooms, three and one-half baths, and a $2,600,000 price tag.
Needless to say, no "apples" here but a nice boost to the neighborhood averages to come.
∙ Listing: 1803 Castro (4/3.5) 3,400 sqft - $2,600,000 [MLS]
First Published: July 22, 2011 12:30 PM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Love it! Very purdy. Well done! It's about time the MLS updated its pictures browser.
Posted by: Skye at July 22, 2011 12:43 PM
What is that thing to the right of the sink?
Love the place. Should sell quick me thinks.
Posted by: eddy at July 22, 2011 12:55 PM
Actually, checking the map location I'm starting to think they over spent on the remodel. Or are asking to much for this location. I still like ti.
Posted by: eddy at July 22, 2011 1:02 PM
Skye, to the right of the sink, a trash compactor. didn;t really think any one still used those any more...especially in SF with the composting / recycling etc
Posted by: Ta hoe at July 22, 2011 1:10 PM
Posted by: Mark F. at July 22, 2011 2:19 PM
Nicely done -- but I agree with eddy. It is too much for this location. The price seems high. I don't see this place selling for $2.6. The curb appeal seems lacking for that price range.
And, trash compactor? Really? Why not avocado colored appliances and a shag rug in the family room? ;-)
Posted by: sf owner at July 22, 2011 3:07 PM
Overdone with cheesy downlights. Over priced.
Posted by: Modernqueen at July 22, 2011 3:08 PM
Gorgeous remodel using high quality products and craftsmanship. Curb Appeal is a perfect mix of modern and Edwardian.. I wouldn't normally think that could work, but in this case it does.
Posted by: sfnative at July 22, 2011 6:38 PM
Really? Have you read the other comments? This place is overdone for the location, and as a result overpriced. (And some people obviously don't care for this style.)
Are you the listing agent, contractor or seller? Please come clean with your SS readers!!
Prediction: Sells for about $2.1.
Posted by: realist at July 22, 2011 7:52 PM
2.1? Too low.
Posted by: Eddy at July 22, 2011 7:59 PM
@realist. take a sec to re-read what @sfnative wrote. All he/she said was how much they liked the look/design. They didn't comment on the price/value.
Also, did YOU read the other comments? While many of them said they thought it was overpriced, about 5 (to about 1) said they liked the design/look.
Jeez, way to jump all over someone.
Posted by: DanRH at July 22, 2011 8:54 PM
@DanRH -- Thanks for your comment -- a lot of this is subjective, so we'll see when it sells. Obviously it appeals to some people, so maybe someone will pay $2.6. I don't know. I just don't think it will happen, so that is my opinion. It certainly isn't what I would buy for that price, but again, that is my opinion.
Didn't mean to jump on anyone, although I see why you say that. Sorry readers!!
Posted by: realist at July 22, 2011 9:20 PM
When did a four bedroom home with separate bathrooms become a necessity for any but adult roommates? Somehow being "green" now means that you cut down a lot of trees in what used to be a backyard.
I watched this place as it went through permitting because the owner said he wanted a home for his family. I guess he was lying. (A developer lying to planning! What a surprise!)
But wait - there's a second kitchen, so either this is going to be an in-law unit or the place is designed to be converted into several units. And all those recessed overhead lights mean it could become a UCSF remote lab location.
Posted by: MM2 at July 22, 2011 11:56 PM
@MM2 - Read the MLS listing. It states that the property includes a legal apartment. Don't jump to conclusions without knowing the facts!
Posted by: gotoutintime at July 23, 2011 6:54 AM
It was bought six years ago. Things change. For every developer buying a fixer in Noe, there is also a family buying what they hope will be their dream house.
Posted by: [anon.ed] at July 23, 2011 7:56 AM
And yes, i kinda agree w/ya - 2.6 is steep!
Posted by: DanRH at July 23, 2011 4:48 PM
i think a wine refrigerator would have been a better choice than trash compactor
Posted by: meep at July 24, 2011 12:58 PM
Live round the corner. I think the pricing here is a bit aggressive. Its neighbor, 2 or 3 doors up, with more curb appeal sold in late 2010 for $2.2. That seems about right for this place, with maybe an extra $100 k for the in-law.
Posted by: sanfrantim at July 24, 2011 2:18 PM
I would have gone with dual dishwashers over a trash compactor. A friend of mine has a dual DW setup and swears by it. As a single mother of 3, it saves her valuable time. Most of the daily-use dishes don't even make it to the cabinets -- they go from the "clean" one to the "dirty" one.
Posted by: joh at July 25, 2011 8:43 AM
"i think a wine refrigerator would have been a better choice than trash compactor"
Except that wine refrigerators are not really that great. The typical wine refrigerator uses a lot of energy (not usually Energy Star, etc.) and many of them don't fit Pinot bottles very well, so they never hold as many bottles as claimed. In addition, built-in devices like wine refrigerators can often be sub-optimal to fit the space, and require you to buy another sub-optimal replacement when they die if you aren't simultaneously renovating. Better to get a good standalone wine fridge, if you really want one, than to shoe-horn a crappy one into that spot.
Glad to see they didn't do the "clean lines" junk on this house, but the price seems aggressive. I'm actually not seeing the "curb appeal" that someone mentioned. It's too bad the setbacks are so large here, as it'd be nice to have a bit more backyard space on this tiny lot.
Previous owners of this place first tried to make it a 2-unit with a horizontal addition almost 20 years ago. I'm glad someone was finally able to do it. We could use more improvements to housing stock this old.
Posted by: sfrenegade at July 25, 2011 11:03 AM
Does anybody know of any photos of what was there before?
Posted by: lyqwyd at July 25, 2011 2:37 PM
The list price for 1803 Castro has just been reduced $205,000 (8%), now asking $2,395,000.
Posted by: SocketSite at September 22, 2011 3:12 PM
The list price for 1803 Castro has been reduced another 8 percent ($200,000), now asking $2,195,000.
Posted by: SocketSite at November 22, 2011 8:35 AM
The sale of 1803 Castro closed escrow last week with a reported contract price of $2,110,000 ($621 per renovated square foot, 19 percent under original asking).
Posted by: SocketSite at January 18, 2012 12:47 PM
@realist pretty much nailed it. Nicely done.
Posted by: eddy at January 18, 2012 1:35 PM