November 22, 2011
An Inner Mission Apple To Be Atop 3236 17th Street
Living like a two-bedroom but technically a one, the top floor condo atop 3236 17th Street was purchased for $830,000 in June 2008 according to the MLS, or $820,000 according to public records. Back on the market today and touting "high-end…in the heart of the Inner Mission" and "meticulously designed," it’s apples-to-apples to be and asking $799,000.
∙ Listing: 3236 17th Street #3 (1/2) 1,273 sqft - $799,000 [Climb]
First Published: November 22, 2011 11:15 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
No property "in the heart of the Mission" should be over $300K.
Posted by: HellNo at November 22, 2011 11:25 AM
Whaddyaknow, the street view shows a "neighbor"'s mobile office parked right on the curb. $600/sf for the flatlands is pretty steep. But these flatlands? Hipster sucker wanted.
Posted by: lol at November 22, 2011 11:37 AM
I love the Mission but $800K at 17th and Capp? You're kidding.
Posted by: James at November 22, 2011 12:24 PM
Agree that it seems quite overpriced. So tell me, the "study" has a window and door and appears to be set up as a bedroom. Why in this case is it not legally a 2BR, which would definitely help their marketing. This is a different situation from the windowless nooks that are usually passed off as "bedroomlike"
Posted by: SunnyvaleSteve at November 22, 2011 12:39 PM
I'm sick of taupe
Posted by: curmudgeon at November 22, 2011 1:13 PM
A bedroom has to have a door, a window, and a closet.
Posted by: Marten at November 22, 2011 1:19 PM
The usual cries of crime are almost uniformly overstated, but this is a place I would want a gun rack next to the bedroom door.
Posted by: EH at November 22, 2011 1:21 PM
Excepting the location, this place would work great for many people. The interior finishings are nice, it is bright and open, it has exterior space. overall, not bad IMO.
The photography shows the unit well... well done by the agent. interesting that there is no exterior photo, espeically since the exterior appears well maintained.
I agree with the editor that this may be technically a 1BR, but it really functions well enough as a 2 BR despite lack of closet. nothing Ikea can't solve.
overall, I like it.
Posted by: ex SF-er at November 22, 2011 1:28 PM
Not true. In SF, you do not need a closet to have it called a bedroom.
I suspect it's because you have to go thru the master bedroom to get to the study room.
Posted by: Samuel at November 22, 2011 1:37 PM
A bedroom has to have a door, a window, and a closet.
Posted by: Marten at November 22, 2011 1:56 PM
That poor, lonely toilet is just crying out for a bidet companion.
Posted by: BobN at November 22, 2011 2:04 PM
The definition of a bedroom varies both legally and practically depending on where you are. In the minimum legal definition it requires a door and a closet, but some places redefine it, and a closet can be optional, but add the requirement for a window. Some places have size and heating requirements, there is a fairly large variability in this. Another common criteria is that a bedroom cannot be a room that provides the only means of access to another room.
It was probably the realtor or seller (or perhaps the developer) who decided to be conservative since the room doesn't have a closet. I can't tell from the pics if this room is the only access to another room, but it could also be why it's not listed as a bedroom.
Posted by: lyqwyd at November 22, 2011 2:40 PM
I was told by two appraisers that a bedroom in SF does not require a closet. Examples they gave are the many old Victorians that don't have closets... anywhere.
Posted by: Samuel at November 22, 2011 2:45 PM
"Another common criteria is that a bedroom cannot be a room that provides the only means of access to another room."
I hope that excludes bathrooms, otherwise anytime you create a master bedroom with its own bathroom it would no longer count as a bedroom by that standard.
Posted by: Rillion at November 22, 2011 2:53 PM
I've been inside and Ex-sf'er nailed it. This is a nice unit. The second room has its own door and works just fine as a BR. Outside of the funkiness of being on Capp/17, this place is sweet. Couple blocks in. Any direction and this would probably be solid at $800k.
Posted by: 47yo hipster at November 22, 2011 3:18 PM
At least it comes with a security system! Personally, I'd rather buy one of the many perfectly nice places on the market for $800k that is in a location where you don't need a security system or a gun rack, but to each his own. Maybe one could turn that extra room into a "panic room."
Posted by: A.T. at November 22, 2011 3:37 PM
"I hope that excludes bathrooms"
It does exclude as long as there is at least 1 publicly accessible bathroom. I probably should have said:
"Another common criteria is that a bedroom cannot be a room that provides the only means of access to another public access room, where public access means a room intended for use by people other than the occupant of the bedroom."
Posted by: lyqwyd at November 22, 2011 3:50 PM
A bedroom must also have a secondary mens of egress... Otherwise it's a big closet, not living space. The secondary exit is generally a window, but a window as such is not required.
Posted by: James at November 22, 2011 5:52 PM
James nailed it, it's in the building code.
?The secondary exit must also be accessible from outside for emergency rescue crew. That is, a room that has a window that opens up to the living room cannot be classified as a bedroom. That would simply be a closet with a peep hole.
Posted by: HC at November 23, 2011 3:20 PM
^ all thst shiza is for new construction. Loads of older props in SF where the window opens up to a light well, etc. all legally considered bedrooms.
Only for new constr., DBI will make you call the room something else. And only an idiot would label it a giant closet. Try library, media room, study, etc.
Posted by: 47yo hipster at November 23, 2011 3:40 PM
There are many 1BR lofts in the city with a doorless bedroom and no secondary means of egress. Just a staircase. Can these still be called bedrooms?
Many of these lofts also have 1.5 bathrooms, with the only access to the full bathroom through the bedroom. Since no one can publicly access the bathtub without going through the bedroom, can it still be called a bedroom?
Posted by: joh at November 23, 2011 4:32 PM
Among other requirements, the CBC requires a bedroom egress window to be accessible from PUBLIC WAY. Technically, this means that if a room contains a window within a light well or a window into the rear yard that's not accessible via an open side yard, that room would not be determined a bedroom. However, the San Francisco Building Code Amendment allows an egress window that isn't accessible from pubic way and that's why you see bedrooms with light wells and facing the rear yard.
A one bedroom live/work that has been permitted might not show the MEZZANINE as being the bedroom. Of course, it's assumed that it's the/a bedroom but that doesn't mean that's how it was permitted.
A bedroom doesn't require a closet but it needs either an exterior door or a window. It certainly doesn't require an interior door.
Posted by: Architect at November 23, 2011 5:05 PM
Wow....crappy location. The neighboring buildings abandoned, and there is a crack hotel a block away. Who would buy this?
Posted by: Sam at November 23, 2011 5:30 PM