147 South Park Exterior

As we suspected when the sale of the two modern condos at 147 South Park closed escrow with a combined contract price of exactly $8 million ($3,005,000 for the second floor unit #1 and $4,995,000 for the penthouse unit #2), it was one buyer, or more accurately a couple, that purchased both units.

And while neither works at Google, Apple, Facebook or Twitter, one half of the couple did co-found a software company which was recently acquired by another which has been around since the 80’s.

The combined $8 million sale effectively blows away the previous record-setting price paid for a South Park condo, a record which belonged to the three-bedroom penthouse unit #407 atop One South Park (a 2,659-square-foot unit which quietly sold for $3.5 million in 2011 and is rumored to be in the process of being combined with $1.4 million unit next door).

And with 5,300 square feet of combined space, call it roughly $1,500 per square foot.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Amewsed

    Congratulations to the new homeowners. I am curious what the other half of the couple did for a living?

    • Posted by Bertie Anglis

      Put up with the first half’s insufferability?

  2. Posted by Roberto

    I bet they have big plans with the rope swing dining room chairs!

    [Editor’s Note: Wrong property (see: The Ultimate Swinger’s Pad On South Park Sells For $5.7M).]

  3. Posted by Strike

    Congrats on a no views, 2 parking spots, 0 parking for visitors, and a horrible area. I’m sorry but for $8,000,000 you should be on a full floor atop of ORH, not having to step outside your front door onto a needle.

    • Posted by johntrev

      Agreed. Everyone makes their choices, and these may be very nice units, but there are plenty of other properties one could have for $8M.

    • Posted by Stop Driving

      WTF is ORH?

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      yep crazy to pay this for a homeless filled neighborhood

    • Posted by needle park sleeper sell

      why would anyone in the software industry want to live on a park where Wired, Twitter, and Instagram started; within walking distance of ATT Park, many restaurants, and Caltrain and Central Subway stations; when they could live in an aery surrounded by some of the worst traffic in the Bay Area and attend HOA meetings?

      • Posted by modernedwardian

        +++1

        seriously am amazed that people continue to argue ‘which neighborhood is better” or to question others’ choices at this price point. if you pay these prices, your home is likely not the retirement vehicle/investment it is to the middle class.

        forty years from now this will likely still be an block of SFHs and 3 story condos surrounding a cute park in a neighborhood of taller highrises – in a very desirable part of the city.

        the more human scale housing in manhattan may be out performed by 30,000 sf full floor oligarch highrises but it outperform most equivalent sq floor units. I have no interest in highrise living or the commute from pac heights or sea cliff, but i love south park and the dogpatch…and i own in baja noe.

        perhaps when i am really old…

    • Posted by Serge

      Besides the homeless and needles, what’s wrong with South Park? You can find ways to mitigate those issues (perhaps the neighborhood can pay for private patrol?… nah). South Park is a unique neighborhood with quite a bit of history. Not to mention the proximity to nearly everything.

      • Posted by Jake

        There aren’t any needles in South Park. I’ve lived around there for over twenty years and that has never been a problem. It isn’t even very dirty for an urban park. Victoria Manalo is much worse, though it has some excellent features. The trees are so tall that the grass on the upper section never grows in very well. And the toddler play area isn’t well equipped, but otherwise the mixed residents sorted out and made peace way back in the last century.

      • Posted by Keepitup

        For those who are not aware…….the folks living around South Park have raise nearly $4,000,000.00 dollars in public and private funds to redo South Park.

        *See name link for the proposed plan.

        Ground braking fall of 2015 and work estimated to last 16 months.

    • Posted by Lloyd

      Congrats to the sellers of this property.

  4. Posted by Brian M

    I can see that ORH would be the better option, but to claim this is a “horrible” area is pushing it. The feral population IS present, but not really anymore so than many other areas of SOMA (although they do tend to gather in (infest?) the park). But South Park does have some charm, also.

  5. Posted by BrisketLover

    Are there other condos in that building still to be sold then or just those two? as I understand it the Butler & The Chef is expanding into the ground floor space in that building. Seems like quite a bit to pay and not own the entire building.

    [Editor’s Note: As linked above, it’s just the two residential units atop a commercial condo which the developers retained.]

  6. Posted by Stop Driving

    South Park is where all the poseur newbs flock when they’re not hanging out in the Mission. Let them overpay to be surrounded by bums. Keeps them out of Pac Heights and away from me.

  7. Posted by Brian M

    Why would anyone want to be anywhere near a Pacific Heights snob?

    • Posted by moto mayhem

      im pretty sure 99% of the populace would like to own in pacific heights

    • Posted by anon

      bet you don’t know any.

      • Posted by Brian M

        well you are right.

        If this person is typical, not sure I want to.

        • Posted by anon

          do you find that the species homo sapiens, when living in areas in cities can be called typical? how so?

          • Posted by Brian M

            I don;t understand your question. Stop driving made a sneering remark about “poseur newbs”. I merely pointed out that such snobbery is not becoming, and that I would probably prefer to hang around with poseur noobs than some Pacific Heights socialite who sneers at the little people. which is exactly how his original comment came across.

            Are you denying the tone of the orignal comment? Whatever.

  8. Posted by jenofla

    Brilliant strategy for the couple that likes a bit of space in their relationship. Also, it makes splitting assets in case of divorce so much easier.

    • Posted by JR "Bob" Dobbs

      +1 When we were looking a few years back, we looked at a number of 2-flats and my wife joked that she could take the smaller unit and I could take the larger one with our two kids. We’d all have keys to both units – but plenty of personal space that way. Perhaps her idea was taken literally by these buyers.

  9. Posted by Amewsed

    Where would the mistress go? I need my mistress.

    I have relatives who bought side by side townhomes because one needed space for work, separate from three small children (at the time.) Later, they knocked down the wall and merged the units. All kinds of acceptable marital arrangements I guess.

    • Posted by BobN

      See previous comment about the nearby property with the swings.

  10. Posted by Conifer

    Do not forget that these are two separate units, and that if they are found to have “knocked down the wall and merged the units” they will have committed the only-in-SF crime of Dwelling Unit Merger. This is not allowed for an affordable unit, and at only $4 million each, they would definitely be deemed affordable in this city. There neighbors could turn them in.

  11. Posted by Conifer

    Their
    (sorry for the mistake.)

  12. Posted by Amewsed

    Since these are upstairs/downstairs units, not adjacent, there is no need to knock down anything. Keep front unit doors unlocked, or create a floor opening for connecting stairs if so desired. There is no SF law governing how unit space is utilized by the homeowner. If no one complained about the building being clad entirely in mirrored surfaces, doubtful anyone will complain about anything else.

    Isn’t the left neighbor (from the photo) a parking lot?

  13. Posted by Belen

    I lived around south park and didn’t like it but not for any of the reasons mentioned.

    It feels like you’re living in an office park, people are only there to work and on the weekend it’s completely deserted. A lot of businesses were actually closed on the weekend. There is no neighborhood feel, people keep to themselves. Sometimes it’s not deserted but becomes absolutely impossible during a game when the place gets overrun by people from outside of SF trying to find parking or a place to eat, yelling, and treating the city like an amusement park.

    That said it’s a great for all the reasons mentioned above and the restaurant next door shown in the photo is probably the best place in SF to get brunch.

Add a Comment

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