93 Carmel Before
Purchased for $1,295,000 in June 2011, this past September permits were pulled to renovate, remodel and expand the upper Cole Valley home at 93 Carmel Street:
93 Carmel After
The property as pictured above now sports an expanded garage with parking for two cars (versus one), and a remodeled (verus renovated) kitchen on the main floor:


93 Carmel Kitchen
It’s still three bedrooms, but there’s now a new bathroom and remodeled master up top:
93 Carmel Master After
As the master bedroom appeared before, having since been reconfigured:
93 Carmel Master Before
It’s now back on the market and listed for $2,395,000.
∙ Listing: 93 Carmel Street (3/2.5) – $2,395,000 [93carmelst.com]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Robert R

    Did they photoshop out the tower?

  2. Posted by DataDude

    Can somebody explain the post between the living room and the stairs? It looks ugly, no matter how glossy the paint.
    Doesn’t this post scream “structural problems solved as cheaply as possible”?

  3. Posted by radar

    ‘DataDude’
    While I am not a structural engineer, by looking at the opening, it appears that there is a support header of at least 12″ that would allow for that wide of an opening ( did it myself in my home with permits and is 16′ wide ) I think the additional post you speak of is decorative and is more than likely repeated on the other side.
    Likely there is no structural issue at all…..

  4. Posted by kg

    Any guesses on what the margin winds up being between initial investment and post-renovation? Seems like it could be substantial if it goes for asking. Maybe flipping is back in style here in SF where inventory is low and demand is high.

  5. Posted by DataDude

    @ radar – your observation that the post is mere design because of the header makes sense, but still, one wonders why add the cost and eye sore of the post, not to mention possibility of trauma when a small child gets their fat head stuck between post and wall, and countless vacuuming mishaps of dusting the in-between dust bunnies without chipping paint?
    I know certain design elements like posts are a matter of taste, but I’m not a fan, especially the pseudo-greek doric, ionic and corinthian varieties (which luckily they didn’t opt for here).
    I’ve seen some “remodels” where a post has been added in the middle of the bedroom, which is probably a better example of “structural issues solved as cheaply as possible.”

  6. Posted by futurist

    I suspect there are a pair of wood columns, each equally spaced at that opening. This is a very classic approach, in the Craftsman style of design.
    Perfectly acceptable, gives the room added detail and stronger sense of entry. I like it.
    The entire house is much improved, with appropriate details and materials: especially like the front elevation with the new exterior stair configuration, classic railing, and the removal of that un-needed post at the front porch.
    As for a little kid getting his head stuck between the posts in the living room: Seriously?
    Looks like there’s at least 1 foot in clearance. Not a problem.

  7. Posted by Around1905

    Another middle-class house remade for the wealthy. At least these folks cleaned up the god-awful top floor and improved the streetscape. Classier than the place up on Clayton that got the same treatment. That said, the classical detailing inside is a bit cringy – that ‘post’ look like a half-assed attempt at a column. Like most architects these days the one who did this place was deprived of a class on ‘The Orders’. Nice job overall though.

  8. Posted by sigh

    I was just dreaming of a time about 20 years ago when homes like this were left in a more affordable state so that new buyers (families) could hire an architect & contractor to help create a dwelling that suited their needs. Now people who think they are “professionals” jump in, build and sell to buyers who buy at a higher price that allows less financial room for additional changes to create what used to be called a home instead of an investment vehicle.

  9. Posted by PPC

    The back splash tile in the kitchen is terrible. The top floor window is not balanced with the facade, the center of the inside (same) window from the master bedroom looks way off. They should have developed the new window off the original.

  10. Posted by soccermom

    Nice work. I like the classic shingled exterior.
    I think the developer prints money on this one.

  11. Posted by rk

    gonna have to agree with PPC on this, that top floor window is way off, the arch off-center with the gable just is not working. Waste of money … btw, someone care to tell me the difference between “remodeled” and “renovated”?
    and I could honestly care less about that entry post.
    and the top floor was WAY more interesting before they gyped and put a bunch of vanilla all over it.
    I’d have to say a definite downgrade on this one .. SIGH is right on

  12. Posted by sf

    The new version looks very nice, but with the addition at 3 stories, I feel we will turn into Manhattan :(

  13. Posted by futurist

    I think the interior column shown (actually part of a pair at that opening) are perfectly understated and scaled for that type of minimal classic interior.
    The off balance exterior windows at the front, are, in fact, subtle references to designs by Ernest Coxhead or Bernard Maybeck, who often used informal off center balancing to add uniqueness to a facade.

  14. Posted by Stucco_Sux

    That house deserves a better hat.

  15. Posted by mike

    good for them, hope they make a pile of cash on it. not my style but certainly lots of people will think it is beautiful. and are we really supposed to feel sorry for the poor family who could afford 1.3m plus a renovation but not 2.4? seems they are pretty far down the list of sympathetic figures.
    as far as the post, it doesn’t look all that bad. if it were there as the cheapest structural fix, good job.

  16. Posted by rk

    yeah, futurist, get that maybeck and coxhead did some wicked stuff, but this is certainly not it. A stock lowen window with vanilla trim is not an ode to maybeck nor coxhead, but rather a slap in the face. I think the 70′s mod clerestory windows and facade were a much better and interesting mix … not to mention what they did to that exterior eave/soffit at the front.

  17. Posted by Around1905

    The new arched window balances the bay so that the facade is nicely laid out. The stairs are well done too. The architect took the ugly top floor addition and made it graceful. All that said, I still think the he would do well to study a bit of classical architecture before attempting ‘modern’ simplifications. He clearly has the talent to get it right.

  18. Posted by futurist

    The earlier top floor addition can clearly be seen as just “stuck on”.
    The revised exterior renovation does integrate the top floor with the rest of the front.
    Yes. this isn’t a greatly detailed or historically accurate “interpretation” of Maybeck of Coxhead, but I was pointing out that they did some houses with odd window placements, that only made the elevations more interesting.

  19. Posted by DezinrSf

    I think the developer was right on point here. The off-center paladium counter balances the bay and overall facade. Nicley exectued nod to crafstman style inside and out very nicely updated and finished for today. The staging however is another story entirely….. Underwhelming, univiting, schizophrenic competing styles…. not at all geared to the typical Cole Valley family buyer.

  20. Posted by futurist

    Nice comments DezinrSf: I agree and was saying similar things about the informally balanced windows.
    Nice project, nice design.

  21. Posted by SocketSite

    The list price for 93 Carmel has just been reduced $100,000 (4 percent), now asking $2,295,000.

  22. Posted by SocketSite

    The list price for 93 Carmel has just been reduced another $100,000 (4 percent), now asking $2,195,000.

  23. Posted by Eddy

    In Escrow

  24. Posted by SocketSite

    The sale of 93 Carmel closed escrow yesterday with a reported contract price of $2,050,000, 14 percent under its original list price.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *