December 30, 2013

A Big End Of Year Sale In Premiere Pacific Heights

2666 Broadway

Listed for $11,250,000 this past March and reduced to $10,250,000 in September, the sale of the Pacific Heights home at 2666 Broadway "with Distinctive Artisan Finishes" closed escrow today with a reported contract price of $8,650,000 or roughly $1,750 a square foot.

2666%20Broadway%20Kitchen.jpg

Originally designed by William Wurster and purchased in great condition by a New York based Internet entrepreneur for $4,700,000 in November 2011, the Pacific Heights home was rebuilt over the course of a year at an undisclosed cost of "about four times what [the buyer] was quoted."

First Published: December 30, 2013 2:30 PM

Comments from "Plugged In" Readers

This black-on-black look is just fugly.

Posted by: Sunsetter at December 30, 2013 2:59 PM

So, this place needs a gut job on top of the gut job. And a new facade. And all the other work happening on the block.

I hope the buyer got a Rolls Royce Silver Cloud II in the deal.

Posted by: Joshua at December 30, 2013 3:11 PM

Ugly street view, but pretty nice when you are inside. Has nice views, too. And it does not need gutting (unless you dislike the finishes and layout). It was rebuilt by a very good contractor.

Posted by: Philip at December 30, 2013 3:55 PM

I love the numerical street address /2666/.

Posted by: SF Citizen at December 30, 2013 4:05 PM

Damn. I was waiting for it to come down to 500 a foot.

Posted by: formidable doer of the nasty at December 30, 2013 4:28 PM

Further proof that the people moving to SF are devoid of taste and have too much unearned money. This is one of the ugliest houses I've seen in a looooong time.

Posted by: Sad at December 30, 2013 4:58 PM

@ Sad...how appropriate a name for you. It's common knowledge that people who can't afford to live in SF have nothing left to do than bash the folks who can. Clearly you're no exception, and it's S...A...D...

Posted by: Diggler at December 30, 2013 5:22 PM

Diggler, but you never responded to the comment which is that the HOUSE is Ugly! Attacking the person and not the position they are writing about does not work.

Posted by: Anonandon at December 30, 2013 5:43 PM

It is, or at least it was, a William Wurster designed home. There is a reason why despite making major changes inside, the previous owners kept the exterior intact. I'm not defending it or criticizing the design, but pray tell-- what style is not "ugly" in your opinions?

Posted by: Adam at December 30, 2013 7:44 PM

"Unearned money", eh? So you know for a fact that the buyer of this home won the lottery? Or stole the money? Or inherited it from someone who either won or stole it? Interesting.

Posted by: formidable doer of the nasty at December 30, 2013 10:24 PM

Another example of the terrible taste floating around San Francisco these days. A William Wurster residence with a Thomas Church courtyard garden has been transformed into THIS?

You would never see a home of similar distinction ruined this way in Los Angeles. At least in L.A. they get architecture and the value it creates for owners by being preserved, restored and maintained. Don't believe me? Even Diane Keaton and Brad Pitt realize buying and restoring historic architectural residences is a great investment of their money. They have restored Lautners, Neutras, Greene & Greenes, etc but maybe it works in L.A. because L.A. buyers are more sophisticated?

Currently down in Palm Springs, a town that saved itself by recognizing and preserving its mid-century modern architectural heritage.

Posted by: InPalmSprings at December 31, 2013 6:33 AM

"... Even Diane Keaton and Brad Pitt..." ? As if you're conversant with what those two people know or don't know about architecture? Or as if celebrities are by and large stupid and incapable of understanding architecture? And then you go on to make a few other broader points about San Francisco based upon this lone property? Weak thinking and writing. No point was made there whatsoever.

Posted by: Truth at December 31, 2013 7:09 AM

The point IS, that even silly celebrities in Los Angeles understand the value of not destroying homes of architectural distinction! Our so-called genius community of "creative thinkers" here in the Bay Area fall for "faux sophistication" ( not my phrase , but I love it), every time. Check out what they did to the fireplace in this residence!

Just went to a party in the former home of Bob Hope designed by John Lautner. Don't know how Hope and Lautner got together but the result was genius! ( now for sale for 50 million) http://www.highsnobiety.com/files/2013/03/bob-hopes-space-age-palm-springs-home-on-the-market-07.jpg

Posted by: InPalmSprings at December 31, 2013 7:33 AM

Now that is the poster house for zero curb appeal!

Posted by: inclinejj at December 31, 2013 9:00 AM

@inpalmsprings

You're so right! I just love what Micheal Bay did with the Jorgensen house in Bel Air.

Posted by: thatwasprettydumb at December 31, 2013 9:15 AM

Again with the denigration of celebrities whilst dropping names. Again with an expansive point based upon an opinion derived from one property. Ridiculous stuff + I bet Diane Keaton knows more about architecture than you.

Posted by: Truth at December 31, 2013 10:06 AM

The "LA buyers are more sophisticated" comment is fun... That would explain why so many comparatively modest homes in Beverly Hills have been demoed to make way for all those lot-busting limestone McMansions. Anyway, my guess is the interior of this place will be totally demoed within 6 months. Pacific Heights in particular has a paucity of mid-century homes, but those that were built don't really have the classic interior features you might find in LA or Palm Springs, so I don't think there was a huge loss here. However, if the sellers had remodeled/restored this home more along the lines of say Brad Pitt's Malibu home (shoot me for saying that), they would've seen a better outcome here. This was entirely too taste specific for most buyers.

That said, the fatigue of seeing so many D7 late 19th century homes gutted and quasi-contemporary interiors installed is setting in. Eventually the pendulum will swing back and this early 21st century trend will end and classicism will make a come back... in 50 or 60 years.

Posted by: Denis at December 31, 2013 10:20 AM

The interior of this place is sterile. A bowling alley has more appeal. It is located in a desirable neighborhood with a nice view. That and that alone explains its price tag.

Posted by: james jr at December 31, 2013 10:43 AM

I agree with James Jr. This house has a lovely view out the back and the inside is bleak and bare and not in a good way.

Posted by: M.R. at December 31, 2013 11:06 AM

Historic home buyers in LA may be eligible for a big break in property taxes through the Mills Act if they restore the home consistent with its history.

Posted by: Dan at December 31, 2013 2:32 PM

San Franciscans can take advantage of the Mills Act also, although it has seldom been used.

I think there is a fundamental difference in San Francisco and Los Angeles when it comes to what the community appears to value in architecture. In Los Angeles, the AIA Guide is mostly single family houses, very many of which are mid-century modern.

The AIA guide to SF is primarily public buildings, very many of which are 1910s-1920s.

While architects revere William Wurster, and his 50's cleints were the roster of SF bluebloods, his understated work does not appeal to those seeking flashy. It was his own wife, Catherine Bauer, said something like, "Bill is the only architect I know who can make a $10,000 house look like a $5,000 house." It is the volume of the rooms, the proportions, the flow of space, the light quality which give them their magic, not expensive materials or image from the street.

Unfortunately, in my view, what was a very nice Wurster is now a disaster.

Posted by: Jim at December 31, 2013 2:46 PM

This is an appropriate price for this home. The seller knew he would never recoup his investment and kudos to the buyer for coming in with a fair but low offer to steal a modernized and fully upgraded home on the Gold Coast. I'm curious if the new owner will do much work to it. Despite the negativity that has surrounded this home I happen to think its fairly nice and well done with a few obvious elements taken too far. Easy enough to fix if one is so inclined.

Congrats to all. Happy New Year.

Posted by: Eddy at December 31, 2013 5:33 PM

Two questions, was the original Thomas Church garden saved, and was the house always painted black? San Francisco has never been as comfortable as Los Angeles with modernism, especially mid century modernism. What was done to fireplace in the living room of this residence speaks volumes about the taste problem with so many remodels and flips.

Posted by: Anon at January 1, 2014 8:21 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:

« While Still Cheap, Higher Mortgage Rates Are Slowing Home Sales | HOME | Plans To Raze Market Street "Home" And Build 64 Apartments »