As we wrote three weeks ago:

Designed by architect Strachan Forgan and built for himself in 2007, the 1,850-square-foot Glen Park home at 1223 Bosworth Street was featured on the American Institute of Architects (AIA) tour of homes back in 2009.

While the modern home – which is outfitted with a double height living room, a high-end kitchen and adjacent deck, two master suites, a finished two-car garage with a temperature controlled wine cellar and modern features throughout – didn’t sell after being put on the market with a $1.479 million price tag following its tour in 2009, it did sell for $2.1 million, or roughly $1,135 per square foot, in April of 2014.

And having been listed for “$1,995,000” for two weeks ago, the “modern masterpiece” is now in contract. And yes, we’re expecting a solidly “over asking!” sale.

Yesterday, the sale of 1223 Bosworth closed escrow with a reported contract price of $2.3 million, or officially “over asking!” by 15.3 percent.

On an apples-to-apples basis, call it total appreciation of 9.5 percent for the modern Glen Park home since early 2014, or an average of 2.4 percent per year if said appreciation had occurred in a straight line.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by cleverpunhere

    Maybe I’m misreading the post, but I don’t understand the snark here. This seller didn’t make a killing but did sell for $200k over what they paid in 2014. And the selling price, about 1,400 PSF, is very good by any measure.

    • Posted by that_dude

      I mean…it’s 2.3 million in glen park. I see this as a ‘high’ sale IMO.

      SS likes to shock and awe IMO.

      • Posted by cleverpunhere

        I’m assuming that you were cryogenically frozen in 2009 and were thawed just in time to see this sale.

        According to redfin, Glen Park has had 51 sales over $2M in the last 3 years. One can debate whether this buyer paid a high price for this particular property, but sales over $2M are incredibly common in Glen Park. These days only sales above $5M start to really raise eyebrows–and there have been several of those!

      • Posted by anon2

        Dismiss this sale because it’s too ‘high’? And also dismiss bad condo apples because they are too low or generic?

        No single data point is definitive, but conversely it becomes absurd to dismiss every single data point with a patchwork quilt of rationalizations, many of which are inconsistent or contradictory. All segments don’t move in lockstep, but yet they all follow the pull of the general market trend.

        A trend that you could miss if you just think there’s just a problem with new condos, generic SOMA condos, condo’s on Valencia that are too noisy, homes further in the mission that are too far from the action, ‘high’ prices glen park homes, homes in Noe that are too far up a hill, people who overpaid in the Bayview,….

  2. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    Nice interior design though I could not cope with that “bottom of the well” back patio.

  3. Posted by phongpei

    This is at the base of the SF speedway “O’Shauhnessy Street”. Being at the base of the hill–you will not get any sun after 5p–even in the summer. Overpaid.

    • Posted by cleverpunhere

      The location has its shortcomings — that street is really busy! — but lots of upside as well. Access to BART, access to 280, and Glen Canyon Park across the street. And that particular stretch of road is quite pretty, even if heavily traveled.

  4. Posted by garrett

    freakin’ deal at 1.479 back in 2009. smdh

    • Posted by anon2

      And the general market was at a low in 2009. Last cycle, as now, some people speculated that SFR’s (or prime-SF properties or some other market segment that someone was pitching) would decouple and show sticky prices even if the rest of the market fell.

Add a Comment

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