January 25, 2012
A New New Kitchen, Fireplace, And Listing For 2400 Green Street
With a remodeled and reconfigured kitchen featuring Scavolini cabinetry, unfortunately the sale of 2400 Green Street won't be apples-to-apples as compared to January 2008 when the 4,500 square foot Pacific Heights home was purchased for $3,995,000.
As the then remodeled kitchen looked in early 2008:
A modern gas fireplace has also replaced the original wood burning one in the living room.
And having been on the market but off the MLS for a bit, 2400 Green Street is now official inventory having been listed for $3,900,000.
∙ Listing: 2400 Green (4/4.5) 4,500 sqft - $3,900,000 [2400green.com]
First Published: January 25, 2012 11:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
It is refreshing to see a windowless space in the basement marked as "storage" rather than "wine cellar"
Nice remodel on that kitchen. Assuming that no walls were moved the recent photo makes it look much larger than the 2008 photo.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at January 25, 2012 11:59 AM
"the recent photo makes it look much larger than the 2008 photo"
...and the bar height "chaise loungers" don't give away the fact that the photo has been stretched?
4 bedroom home with no yard at $1000 psft has to be a tough sell. Pretty place, though.
Posted by: tipster at January 25, 2012 12:23 PM
They took out a lovely wood-burning fireplace to put in a trendy, gas fireplace? At some point, someone is going to undo that.
And while the new kitchen is spiffy, I would have preferred something that coordinated better with the rest of the house.
Aside from that.....
Posted by: jlasf at January 25, 2012 12:38 PM
I strongly dislike the new kitchen finishes; maybe he bought them from the guy that gutted that condo. :) I do like the new kitchen layout.
Not a fan of the new fireplace either. And why do they have fireplace tools next to a glass enclosed gas fireplace? Are you even able to have an open flame gas fireplace in San Francisco? Even if you could, there would be no need for the tools. Could you even put back the wood burning fireplace? Ugh!
Those aspects aside, and the brick foundation that I would want to understand better, along with a comprehensive JCP review, I actually like this place a lot. Lot of variables to comment on price. I would say this home could fetch asking but it's been on/off the market at this price for a while I think. So hard to say on price. You would think this would trade at a post bubble discount. It just lacks any real high end appeal but has a ton of upside potential.
Doubt you could build new sqft on the roofdeck. But, I think a few hundred k could do wonders for this place and easily put it in the 1k psf territory.
If I had to guess, 3.65
Posted by: eddy at January 25, 2012 1:00 PM
"..and the bar height "chaise loungers" don't give away the fact that the photo has been stretched?"
At first I thought this was an artifact of ordinary wide angle lens correction. That often distorts stuff in the foreground while leaving the background mostly unchanged. But then look at the outlets above the counter in the back: they're nearly square. So the photographer didn't just adjust for wide angle lens distortion, they purposely stretched the photo horizontally. Shame!
"At some point, someone is going to undo that [conversion from wood to gas burning fireplace]."
Maybe. However considering the age of this place it is possible that the masonry firebox or flue might not be in good enough shape to safely allow a wood fire. I looked up a firebox and saw missing chunks of grout and wooden lath visible through the cracks once. That can't be safe! And pointing new mortar in to repair that problem doesn't sound like an easy job at all. Its much easier to drop in a stainless inner flue and attach that to a gas burning appliance.
However the most likely explanation is that more buyers prefer a gas burner over a real fireplace. So perhaps reconversion is possible.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at January 25, 2012 1:26 PM
Is this the THIRD kitchen for this place? I really don't think that was the kitchen when the place hit the market last year... It's also been restaged.
This place has some serious flaws... That first floor is a mess... The ceilings are a substandard height... which is only ok if you're moving from Hobbiton.
As for fireplaces... Yes, you can have an open flame gas fire as long as it's not in a bedroom. I have three! Second, it's entirely possible that during the remode,l code changed required modifying the existing firebox, and the owners found it easier to just put in a gas fireplace than bring it up to code. Or maybe the draw was poor and a gas fireplace solved that problem. I can't tell from the picture, but it may have been originally a coal burning fireplace that wasn't and adequate size for burning wood... I dunno... Just thinking (ok, typing) out loud here.
Posted by: Denis at January 25, 2012 1:41 PM
Oh, and will it sell at this price? I don't know. I say 3.75.. Inventory is low and a couple of places near me (and this house) have sold off MLS to literally the first people that saw them. Anything under 4 in move-in condition is a contender right now.
Posted by: Denis at January 25, 2012 1:50 PM
Wood burning fireplaces pollute. That's a fact. They are forbidden on Spare the Air days. (although a lot of people ignore that.You can smell the word burning in lots of NV fireplaces on those days.)
I believe they are also no longer allowed in new construction and remodeling as well, per the SF building code.
Besides; a gas fireplace is much cleaner, safer and still warms the room. What's not to love?
Posted by: futurist at January 25, 2012 1:55 PM
I agree that the kitchen looks out of place with the rest of the style of the home. I realize it's upscale Scavolini, but in all honesty it screams Ikea to me. And the dark wood cabinets with light wood floors doesn't work for me either.
Posted by: Lori at January 25, 2012 2:07 PM
neo-noe futurist - we've been over this before. I doubt I'll change your mind on this so am only countering your opinion. Yes wood fireplaces produce particulate pollution. But on the flipside they are carbon neutral. Gas fire appliances are net creators of atmospheric carbon (as are anything that burns fossil fuels).
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at January 25, 2012 2:23 PM
There is nothing quite like the faint smell from a (well drafting) wood fire. It is deeply authentic.
As far as those gas fireplaces are concerned -- might as well go all the way and stick an ipad on the wall, run a video of flames, and heat the joint using a high-efficiency furnace.
Funny how its perfectly OK to gut-reno these piles every three years (some folks even make a living doing it), but wrong-wrong-wrong to have a real wood fireplace.
Posted by: around1905 at January 25, 2012 3:17 PM
I detest the late-80s, early-90s glass bar in the kitchen. That said, I love the layout as shown in the blueprints.
Posted by: Q at January 25, 2012 3:21 PM
The whole wood burning fireplace as a save the air things is absolutely insane when compared to the other forms of outright pollution and just simple wild fires.
Posted by: eddy at January 25, 2012 3:36 PM
Since this is now the official fireplace thread...
I like the idea of wood burning fireplaces, but they are messy. I like to have a fire going most "winter" days and cleaning out the ashes is kind of a pain especially if you're lugging ashes (and a shop vac) up and down a few flights of stairs a couple of times a week... So I got rid of the log lighter and put in an an open flame gas fireplace. It's a little more practical and eliminates the problem of spilled ash on the carpet (which never comes out, btw). So the real compromise here is the open gas flame. If someone wants a wood burning fireplace, it's an easy conversion back... just reinstall the log lighter. Turning this back into a real wood burning fire place may not be possible.
Finally, what's up with the Putti? I see these damn things every day and wonder, WTF? Their only use seems to be allowing me the opportunity to bust out the word Putti every now and then. "Go down Green until you get to the house with the Putti and make a left."
Posted by: Denis at January 25, 2012 3:49 PM
Eddy - you can't compare wood burning fireplace pollution to wildfires. The concern for particulates is almost always LOCAL - that is, how many people are exposed to particulate levels that are above federal standards. Most of the time the Bay Area is well-served by the prevailing winds which blow our smog-forming gases and particulates into the Central Valley, which is why they are facing even stricter burning regulations. But on those rare days of inversion, the Bay Area can reach unhealthful levels of particulates, which have real health impacts. Wood fires can be a big part of this (in part because these days usually come in the winter when it's cold), and it's easier to put restrictions on wood burning than it is to reduce driving or other diffuse sources of particulates. Wildfires in the Sierras or Chico make don't make a difference for Bay Area air quality, even if they produce 100x the particulates.
As to the house, I don't like the new kitchen. Don't like the old kitchen either, but I'd prefer something a bit more "classical' that fits with the rest of the house. Also, I like my gas fireplace (with ceramic fire logs) - it looks nice, gives off heat, and I can turn it off when I'm going to bed. All the upsides and none of the down.
Posted by: katdip at January 25, 2012 3:53 PM
Oh.. and if you want to see how this house looked in 1929 sans Putti, go here:
The pic is reversed in the archives, unfortunately...
Posted by: Denis at January 25, 2012 3:53 PM
My problem with wood burning fireplaces comes from looking at the entire "life cycle" of the wood burning fireplace in that, like a perfect green lawn in Phoenix, I find the idea of trucks shlepping cord after cord of wood down 101 to burn in dense urban fireplaces absurd.
OTOH: A wood burning fire is agreat thing on your land where you have selected the trees to be culled - paricularly when the PG&E gas line is a mile and a $100K away from you.
Posted by: redseca2 at January 25, 2012 4:11 PM
This house has had more face lifts than Joan Rivers. If I remember correctly the original owner died and it was rehabbed and flipped. Then it was rehabbed even more and flipped again. Then it was purchased twice by people temporarily relocating from foreign countries and the last owner redid the perfectly lovely kitchen and ruined the charming fireplace. This house deserves to finally find someone who wants to make it into a home instead of an ATM.
Posted by: Jane at January 25, 2012 4:40 PM
redseca2 - As an alternative to using "imported" wood there's usually a significant amount of wood downed in the urban forest that would otherwise end up in the landfill. I get everything I need from about a three mile radius around home. Make friends with a local arborist or just listen for the chainsaw. :-) It takes a little planning and patience since the wood needs to cure for about year before it is dry enough to burn though. (Wet wood is also very smokey)
... and yeah, such a dual standard from the BAAQMD regarding spare the air days. Automobile drivers who account for the vast majority of pollution are asked "please consider not driving" on spare the air days. I'd guess about 99.999% of drivers don't change their habits. But wood burning banned with a $400 fine for violators.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at January 25, 2012 4:54 PM
Spare the HotAir. :)
It seems you can have an open flame gas fireplace if you are retrofitting into an existing fireplace. I'm not sure you can instal one in SF in new construction, or if you putting in a new one where there wasn't a fireplace previously.
Anyone know for sure? Denis, where all of yours retrofitted; or were any of them new?
Posted by: eddy at January 25, 2012 5:08 PM
Yes, mine were existing wood/coal burning fireplaces that I retrofitted and added gas lines. You are right, you can't install an open flame gas fireplace where no fireplace previously existed; if you do, it has to be an enclosed glass box. That's why, in this case, I would've retrofitted the exiting fireplace, brought it to code, added a gas line, and left it open... I'm not sure how much of the flue was sealed during the construction, so I don't know how reversible this is.
Posted by: Denis at January 25, 2012 5:22 PM
No photos provided for any bathroom? What's up with that?
Posted by: SoBayRealtor at January 25, 2012 6:52 PM
Thanks for the clarification Denis.
@SBR, my guess is the bathrooms are unchanged and the pics from the last listing aren't all that hot. They actually used the exact same picture for the workout room from the prior listing. Sort of odd.
I'll grant that this isn't an apple but the "improvements" are universally viewed as questionable. And honestly, I would think that any buyer here is going to fix that fireplace and fix that kitchen. So this is much more apple-like in terms of the house has the same issues it had in 2008 in my opinion despite the owner throwing a $$$ into the pit.
FYI, the kitchen permits are listed at 70k and there are some plumbing permits and a fireplace permit. I'd put total investment here at well under 150k. The kit cabs probably have some decent salvage value for someone in SoMa.
Posted by: eddy at January 25, 2012 7:18 PM
I'd go the other way. The kitchen is fine, a big improvement. It just looks like they never finished updating the rest of the place. The kitchen is the toughest, because you only have one. So that's a big help.
I think the buyer gives them full credit for the work and then finishes the job. Not an apple at all.
Posted by: tipster at January 26, 2012 8:39 AM
Can't tell when you are serious or jesting anymore. I'd be willing to bet a bag of donuts that the buyer guts that kitchen. It's horrible and grossly out of touch with the homes other characteristics. I can't even imagine who would fabricate that atrocious blue/green opaque bar counter unless it was sourced from the archives of Miami Vice set props.
This one has a lot of challenges and its not priced attractive to anyone that would step in and flip it; and buyers at this price have no interest in the "project" when they can go and buy a place like 2531 Washington for $5.5 and move in tomorrow. All I'm saying is that despite the capital "improvements" in this house the same problems that existed in 2008 are present here.
Apple? No. Decent Comp, Yes.
Posted by: eddy at January 26, 2012 8:54 AM
This went into Escrow.
Posted by: eddy at February 21, 2012 4:55 PM
Posted by: eddy at February 22, 2012 1:36 PM
Sold. $3.8M. Under asking and below the 08 sale. Personally, I'm fine to call this an apple. I predict the kitchen and fireplace will be gutted before the end of the month. I would. And I wouldn't have paid $3.8 for this place either. But things in D7 and elsewhere are flying off the market. Condos too. 2253 broderick.
[Editor's Note Vanity, Pure And Simple.]
Posted by: eddy at April 2, 2012 7:39 PM