2123-2127 Castro

The sales of the two Noe Valley passive houses at 2123-2127 Castro Street have closed escrow.

Originally listed for $4.995 million in May, reduced to $4.695 million in June and re-listed anew for $4.499 million last month, the sale of 2127 Castro Street has fetched $4.250 million or roughly $918 per listed square foot (4,627).

And having been listed for $918 per square foot once 2127 Castro was in contract, the sale of the slightly larger uphill home at 2123 Castro Street, which measures 4,794 square feet, has closed escrow for $4.399 million (the price at which it was listed).

Despite their size and swagger, the two four-bedroom homes were designed as Net-Zero Energy (NZE) buildings, which are super-insulated and primarily derive their heat from the sun and people inside, the very plans for which we first revealed a few years ago.

2123 Castro Rear

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by observant neighbor

    Let’s hope this induces the developer to build pairs of 2000 sqft condos rather than single 4000 sqft mansions next time…

  2. Posted by Noodle

    These houses had some challenges with bedroom layouts. Not everyone wants/needs their master bedroom and two (kids) bedrooms on the same floor, but plenty of other homes in the price range have such a configuration.

    • Posted by Fishchum

      Really? I’ve found that a lot of buyers with children (or planning on starting a family) are looking for exactly such a floor plan.

      • Posted by Noodle

        Brain fail – I wasn’t very clear. What I was trying to say was that neither of these houses had two bedrooms that children could use on the same floor as the master bedroom… 2127 had this other odd issue with a full height window from the hall into part of one of the bedrooms.

  3. Posted by Just My Opinion

    I think the biggest issues with these houses was (1) they are on a extreme hill with head-in parking. Try getting out of the driver side on that steep a hill and (2) when you spend $4+ million on a house, do you really want what is essentially the exact same house next door?

  4. Posted by curmudgeon

    IMO it’s also an incredibly boring location. You’re in Noe Valley, but it’s not walkable to 24th Street, and the closest store is in Diamond Heights Village straight uphill. Not urban living at its finest.

    • Posted by Futurist

      Boring by what definition? so location makes it “boring”? oh, ok.

      Well, I live near by and walk to 24th st and Church st. ALL the time. Driving up the hill to Diamond Hts. Shopping center is doable with most cars these days. Just a thought.

      It’s a great location in that it’s quiet, great views, great location to walk and hike in Billy Goat Hill. I would say this is some of the best urban living in SF.

      • Posted by Orland

        Quiet and beautiful views… boring and not walkable.

      • Posted by Spencer

        Best suburban living in SF

    • Posted by SFrentier

      The truth is…somewhere in between.

    • Posted by Fishchum

      I’ll agree with you on the “not walkable” part, despite what Futurist says. It’s quiet, and I’ve always referred to this part of The City as “Outer” or “Upper” Noe Valley.

      • Posted by Futurist

        Seriously not walkable? Yea, there are hills, which are great for an aerobic workout.

        But then again, when I don’t walk I have to get in my Tesla and drive.

        • Posted by Fishchum

          If I want to walk somewhere to grab a six pack, get some coffee, or meet someone for a drink or dinner I’m usually in no mood to don a tracksuit and put “Sweating to the Oldies” on my Walkman. And even then, you’re talking about an 8 block walk to 24th Street.

          • Posted by Orland

            It’s not the walk TO 24th Street that’s the problem. It’s the Alpine climb back UP which would dissuade me from frequenting my neighborhood center which is the hallmark of “walkability.”

          • Posted by Freeloader

            Walk down, and Uber up. Or have the hike up as an opportunity to sober up.

        • Posted by Easwuud

          Not walkable in any normal sense unless one includes effort, perspiration, etc. along with time. As the crow flies sure, but [let’s] not pretend otherwise.

          Also these are just more examples of the generic built to the property line homes designed solely by Dwell magazine that dominate Noe/Bernal/Glen Park remodels

    • Posted by modernedwardian

      we walk this street and this hill a few days a week, up the stairs and then further up the hill or cutting up valley or up goat hill through the new trail to haas park, varying our daily urban hike. so i guess i’d say it is walkable – but i’m trying to exercise. it is NOT walkable in the “i need a quart of milk” sense. baby strollers here have the mother walking below and in reverse, not pushing it forward.

      and there are no restaurants that i’d want to walk home from – up that hill – after eating (though it is close to some really good eats); and i live on 29th only blocks away.

      the view is really nice…but it is not the “masters of the universe” downtown view that commands top dollar. and with two very similar homes between two cottages that will themselves be bought and developed skyward it should surprise no-one that these did not command $1200 /sq foot, net-zero or not.

      i still imagine the developers did fine at >$4MM per home and the purchasers are likely happy also.

      seems a good result to me.

  5. Posted by Amewsed

    Aren’t the marble floors in the bathroom slippery when wet? I know there will be bath mats used but it makes sense to have non-slippery flooring in wet areas.

    I recall one former handyman who installed granite tiles on a kitchen floor because the tiles were deeply discounted. The handyman’s wife never stopped yelling at him every time she slipped and nearly fell.

    • Posted by Ohlone Californio

      Please tell me you are not serious.

    • Posted by SFrentier

      Why wouldn’t he be?

      • Posted by Ohlone Californio

        I guess because a lot of stone is slippery when wet and marble bathroom floors are fairly common, and it is known that they are indeed slippery when wet. So yeah. That’s why.

    • Posted by AnonAnon

      Yes, polished marble floors are absolutely slippery when wet.

      • Posted by SFrentier

        I agree. When I choose bath floor tiles I always give some consideration to the texture and polish factor, or lack there of. No need to make it extra slippery. Coming from a landlord, this is obvs (and one more unnecessary lawsuit to mitigate.)

  6. Posted by Anoncurious

    Does anyone know who the architect was?

  7. Posted by Jim Collins

    Nice views but you can’t see downtown

  8. Posted by Noodle

    OK, I missed this earlier, and as someone who tried hard to be as transparent as possible with neighbors, it has me a little miffed.

    Somehow these houses gained AN ENTIRE FLOOR – that basement level, adding 1200+ sf – after the plans that were included in their DR hearing. Namelink for the DR packet.

    Could someone with more knowledge of development in SF explain how this was done?

  9. Posted by Sammymc

    Zero impact on any neighbor then, why would you care?

Add a Comment

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