Having traded from a former Google engineer to a former Facebook engineer for $6.1 million in 2011, the Ogrydziak/Prillinger Architects (OPA) designed “T House” at 526 Duncan Street, which was built in 2005 and first sold for a record $5.3 million, is now back on the market with a $12.5 million price tag.

According to tax records, the four-bedroom home measures 5,371 finished square feet but its first listing had claimed closer to 5,700 square feet of “living space.”

As such, a sale at asking would equal between $2,193 and $2,327 per square foot and easily make 526 Duncan the most expensive home in Noe Valley (the title for which is currently held by 553 Elizabeth Street which sold for $7 million and roughly $1,570 per finished square foot back in June of 2015).

And yes, there are multiple decks and some rather spectacular views (which are being encroached upon by the local flora).

As the home and surrounding vegetation appeared in 2005:

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Conifer

    Soon enough it will cost more to buy in Noe Valley than on the Place des Vosges.

    • Posted by Mark

      And the fact that it’s Noe Valley makes me laugh. Sure, 24th St. has a few blocks of restaurants and retail, but come on…the establishments aren’t anything extraordinary.

      • Posted by lemon obrien

        rich people with children like to be away from the rest; the wealthy in general… you don’t want a lot of stores around to attract others, and in many places, they won’t have sidewalks on the streets to prevent others from walking in their neighborhood.

      • Posted by Futurist

        Why would you laugh. That really comes off as an insult to those who live there.

        • Posted by Mark

          It’s not an insult. I couldn’t care less where people choose to live or how much money they are willing to spend to live there. However, I laugh when people are so entrenched in their belief that where they live is so grand and fabulous just because of its zip code and corresponding price tag when in reality they live in an okay area.

          I like to stroll along 24th St. from time to time. There are some cute shops and restaurants/bars. I’ll give it that. But, it’s nothing spectacular. With $6M, $7M…and climbing…home prices I expect something more.

          • Posted by Futurist

            Yes, it is. so obvious with your latest comment: you seem to care a great deal where people choose to live. You seem to sniff with your nose held proudly in the air at the “cute” shops and restaurants.

            Must a neighborhood be “spectacular” for you to care about it? Noe is home to many people who love it there, just as others love their neighborhoods.

          • Posted by Panhandle Amigo

            I am a proud Panhandle / Divis advocate, but cmon. Noe is safe and quiet, has outstanding weather for SF, respectable housing stock, and easy access to downtown or South Bay. It’s basically perfect for a family who wants to be in SF.

          • Posted by Mark

            Stings a little when someone points out a different view of your hood, doesn’t it? $12M apparently gets you a mediocre commercial strip. All yours.

          • Posted by spencer

            Noe is perfect suburban living within a city. what more could you want?

          • Posted by ess

            Love the house, but $12M is extremely high. That said, NV is SF’s Alamo. Maybe Danville if you discount for all the stucco multiunits. I wouldn’t be surprised if NV has the highest parental school involvement in the city.

      • Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

        Though proximity to shopping and services is important to some (it is to me), not everyone cares. Just look at the majority of suburban America where there’s nothing within walking distance.

      • Posted by Sabbie

        This place is so far up the hill that nobody is going to walk down to 24th Street anyways, or walk anywhere for that matter, so you’ve also got to factor in driving and parking. At that point you might as well be in Clarendon Heights.

  2. Posted by Anon94123

    Like Confier, when I see current San Francisco housing prices, I cannot help but sometimes start to imagine cashing out of my two San Francisco properties and look to see how one could live (for LESS) in other iconic cities or resort areas. Right now, one San Francisco property alone could buy a mountain resort home in Colorado and a desert home in the Palm Springs area with money left over.

    • Posted by Dave

      Indeed. I doubt this gets the asking price, but even if it gets “just” 10 million it’s like “really”. Look at the photo, the jumble of residences, this place has no privacy, not much yard space. The streets? Cluttered with cars, congested and not always easy to navigate.

      Many people are shocked when they venture to other metros and see what one can get for, forget a million, 500K or 600K. If one doesn’t want a resort, the prices are even less- for better quality housing.

      Here in pneumonia gulch there are still a fair number of “old timers”. People who bought their homes in the 80s and are now retiring. Most are moving away – though it’s usually to free up cash to supplement their retirement rather than to move to a resort area. Though a few have done that.

      • Posted by Mark

        As I said above, it comes down to zip code/location. People with the means are willing to spend whatever it takes to live there, regardless of how fantastic it really is.

        • Posted by Futurist

          So do tell us what credentials you have to determine which neighborhoods are “fantastic” or not. I find your entire commentary arrogant and completely ignorant.

          You must be fuming about the price. It’s an ASKING PRICE.

        • Posted by Dave

          If I had that kind of money it’d take more than a zip code to interest me. I’d be far more interested in a home in the hills above Sausalito. I’m native-born and have never felt that SF neighborhoods are very attractive. With very few exceptions and Noe is not one of them.

          The top tier of SF homes seems to have hit a silicon ceiling. Many people with millions to spend on a home have traveled and are aware of how over-priced SF is and especially given the quality of what one gets here. There is a reason Redfin found more SF residents looking to leave the city than is the case for any other US city.

          • Posted by spencer

            you can get homes in hills above sausalito for $2M.

            this is more like tiburon pricing

      • Posted by Futurist

        We did exactly that. Just stating some facts. Bought in 82. Went thru major foundation to roof remodel with high end finishes and construction.

        Sold in Feb ’17, multiple offers way over bid, all cash. Moved to Palm Springs and completely enjoying it.

        But, to be clear, we still enjoyed living in SF for many years. It’s a great city, and so is Noe V.

        • Posted by Dave

          This is fairly common now. Palm Springs may be a bit hot for most SFers, but many people like that area.

          Most folks near me who’ve moved did so for economic reasons – either going to states with no income taxes and/or places which were much cheaper and allowed them to have buckets of cash to support their retirement.

          Its rarer today for retired residents to remain in SF than it was decades ago. Retiring in place is no longer the only option.

          • Posted by modernedwardian

            we fully intend to retire in place. that’s why we bought a duplex.

            as much as you read here about how bad it is to be a small time landlord, my tenants pay my mortgage (from their rent controlled apartment; though its hard to call what they pay ‘rent control’ and most of our renters outearn us by quite a bit).

            bought 2009. remodeled 2010. refinanced 2011 and again at the low for 3.25% on a 20 year. ~11 years left in payments. rents would have to fall 20% before we’d just be making standard payments and we’d add a year or 2 to the term.

            whether the future rents will be “buckets of cash” to support retirement has yet to be seen – but we have a pension and 401Ks for that (we hope).

          • Posted by Dave

            My neighborhood is all SFHs so the retirees here don’t have a rental unit to supplement their income. The other thing is more and more do not have defined pension plans so they must rely on their 401ks and SS. The buckets of cash comes in when they sell a home here for 1.5 million and buy in say Flagstaff for 300K – as one neighbor recently did. That frees up a ton o cash and indeed this neighbor retiree ended up buying 2 rentals as well in Flagstaff. All cash so they are getting the full rental income as income and right now it’s tax free mostly due to the depreciation tax break.

            One thing I notice is of several friends at work who recently retired the ones planning on staying are almost all in rent controlled apartments with extremely low rent as they’ve been in those apartments for 30 years.

          • Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

            You don’t need to live in a duplex to be a small time landlord. As an extreme case one of my friends started buying up rental homes in his late 20s. Last time we talked he was up to 14 units. He works like a dog, managing and maintaining the properties in the evenings and weekends.

            Of my peers, very few intend to move away on retirement. Too many local family and social connections. Their kids on the other hand are facing strong headwinds to build a life in the Bay Area.

          • Posted by anon

            Yeah my circle, even broadly defined, isn’t going anywhere. Most have owned here long enough that their cost of living is not that high (thanks Prop 13). Or they simply are sufficiently well off to stay in SF, which is the city they would most like to live in. And I’m surrounded by retirees (Castro) who love it here because it is easy to get around, pretty much everything is available within a couple of blocks, weather is moderate, and their friends/family are here. This is a pretty great place to live for an older person. I’ve never seen anything indicating an increase in retiree departures.

          • Posted by Futurist

            Well, from my experience a number of our friends who owned properties in SF, Noe, Castro, Glen Park, have, in fact, sold and retired/moved to various smaller scale communities, such as Palm Springs, Sedona, Santa Fe, Sonoma, etc.

            Everyone chooses differently.

          • Posted by anon

            Yeah, oldsters have been moving to the sun belt for about 75 years. Question is whether that has accelerated for SF retirees in recent times as Dave posits. I doubt it. At least, I’ve never seen anything indicating that. One has been able to sell a home here and buy cheaper elsewhere for at least 30 years now, so that is nothing new.

          • Posted by Futurist

            Brand new construction, modern house, one level, fully sprinklered, 3br, 2b, pool, spa, sprinkler system, low voltage outdoor lighting, 9kw solar on roof which we own; $800k. (all cash).

            One hour to Joshua Tree National Park, mountain trails all around, the CV link bike path, 2 hours to LA (we go a lot). We grille almost every night out (usually only 1-2 times a year in Noe.

            The White Party, Coachella, Stagecoach, etc. There is a little “Castro”.

            Oh yea, it gets “warm” down here. What’s not to love about Palm Springs.

          • Posted by Dave

            3 bedrooms. 2 baths on 2 acres with 200 yards of river frontage. 20 minutes from the Portland tech hub, 30 minutes from the Tualatin Valley hubs. Half hour to skiing and great windsurfing. Wrap around deck which affords great views of the aurora during summer/fall when it is wont to make an appearance. 425K. All that and no state income tax.

            Retirement is a ways off for me, but the home I just described is one I own and rent out and may retire to when the time comes. And its an example of the options out there for house rich but cash poor SF retirees.

            You seem to have moved to PS for non-economic reason. My point is more to those who “have” to move for economic reasons. Someone said homes have always been cheaper in other areas which is true, but the disparity is greater than it has ever been. That bucket of cash that gets freed up when one sells their 1.5 million dollar Sunset special and buys a 300K home in another area is a deciding factor for many who leave.

            The asking price for this NV home is over the top IMO and is one of the more blatant examples of the housing crisis – and especially for retirees not fortunate enough to have purchased a home in the day.

          • Posted by Futurist

            @Dave: nice description of the place you mentioned. Portland area is beautiful and very livable, but too wet for us.

            Yea, we move for “non-economic” reason, except that selling in Noe meant a huge set of options. Plus, tons of friends down south, family too. My desire to enjoy the best of SoCal, the coast as well, LA, SD and the mountains.

            But, leaving SF was hard in that many friends were made here (and lost due to AIDS), careers were made here, connections, the history, the urban culture all were hard (at first) to move away from.

            The new owners of our house in Noe are starting their young life, their journey, their hopes, dreams and goals with exactly the kind of home they wanted, just as we did some 35 years ago.

            It’s all good, and the cycle continues.

  3. Posted by soccermom

    Meh, 8-9mm.

  4. Posted by Mark F.

    Pretty nice place, but that price tag!

  5. Posted by Brisket

    Let’s cozy up by the fire dear – on a hardwood bench.
    Nice decks and views but it gets pretty blustery up there. Nice pad overall. But the price seems crazy.

  6. Posted by MKP

    epic house

  7. Posted by BobN

    So which room is on the other side of the entry fireplace?

Add a Comment

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