homesmillbrae.com

Real estate marketing company Point2.com used an algorithm that included MLS, local brokerage and listings websites to identify the lowest priced listing from each ZIP code identified as among the year’s top 100 highest priced markets, so we can imagine what it’s like to get a “bargain” in one of the top three most expensive Bay Area ZIP codes.

These listings are the least expensive properties currently on the market in Atherton (San Mateo County), the country’s No. 1 most expensive; in Ross (Marin County), the country’s No. 4 most expensive; and in Los Altos (Santa Clara County), the country’s No. 9 most expensive. 

The least expensive home you can buy in Atherton right now is this one asking $9.85 million at 10 Atherton Ave. This new construction home spanning nearly 5,000 square feet has five bedrooms and six bathrooms. It also features a pool. 

The cheapest home for sale in Ross right now is 3 Thomas Court, asking $3.45 million. It’s on a cul-de-sac in the flats of Ross and includes three bedrooms and three bathrooms.

In Los Altos, the cheapest home you can buy is this condo at 150 West Edith Ave., No. 3, listed for $950,000. It’s in the downtown section of the town and has two bedrooms and two bathrooms. 

Looking back, here are the three least expensive sales in the Bay Area’s three most expensive ZIP codes in 2021. 

The least expensive home sold in Atherton in 2021 was 1175 Osborn Ave., which sold for $2.18 million. Inside the 1,731 square feet there are three bedrooms and two bathrooms.

In Ross, 20 Redwood Dr. sold for $1.81 million and offered two beds, one bath and 1,246 square feet. 

Lastly, 38 3rd St. No. 200 was the least expensive home sold in Los Altos this year. It’s a one-bedroom, one-bathroom condo that sold for $385,000. Given that it was estimated to sell for closer to $800,000, this was likely a special case sale. 

Anna Marie Erwert writes from both the renter and new buyer perspective, having (finally) achieved both statuses. She focuses on national real estate trends, specializing in the San Francisco Bay Area and Pacific Northwest. Follow Anna on Twitter: @AnnaMarieErwert. 

Article source: https://www.sfgate.com/realestate/article/least-expensive-homes-Bay-Area-priciest-ZIP-codes-16683204.php

Today, the tall building feels almost hidden, tucked away on a quiet street next to the much more imposing Cathedral of St. Mary of the Assumption. It’s gray and stark, especially against the city’s frequently foggy sky, and most people wouldn’t guess it was commissioned by the famous developer. 

Entering No. 305, which just hit the market for $1 million, the small condo is flooded with light. Floor-to-ceiling windows and glass sliding doors line almost every room, and an entire living room wall looks out onto a long balcony. 

There’s another, smaller balcony off the dining room, which flows into the kitchen. Three bedrooms all include floor-to-ceiling windows, and the primary bedroom has its own bathroom and walk-in closet en suite. 

Even if the emphasis on natural light feels like the only part of Eichler that made it into the building plans, when the units hit the market today, they’re often advertised as “Eichlers.” “When it came to [Eichler] high-rises, they were much more generic,” said Matthew Gordon Lasner, an associate professor of urban studies and planning at Hunter College. “With structural considerations, there is much less room to be creative. … They are well built and well designed … but I don’t think [66 Cleary Court] is a particularly interesting building. You don’t have what makes Eichler houses special.”

Still, listing agent Rebecca White said turnover in the building is rare, and when people buy an apartment, they tend to spend much of their lives there. Unit 305 was occupied for more than 20 years by the father of Aaron and Lisa Schulman, who are just now selling the property after renting it for more than five years after their father died. The siblings said their dad loved the layout of the corner unit and particularly appreciated how convenient the location was to so much of San Francisco.

The neighborhood name Cathedral Hill is the one most thrown about by real estate agents these days, but Eichler’s mission at the time was to create a denser, new “neighborhood” dubbed Laguna Heights. While one high-rise was built at 66 Cleary Court, he had plans for three in the surrounding blocks, envisioning the next phase in American housing. “Builders that were very savvy could see the eternal expansion of the suburb was going to wind down,” Lasner said. “It was part of this regionwide effort to push the envelope and test the models of density. … As part of this experiment, this particular building was an opportunity for Eichler to test out whether high-rises could work for families.”

Instead of an apartment building full of studios, one and two bedrooms, a building full of exclusively three bedrooms that were spacious was somewhat revolutionary, Lasner said. 

There were also some unique amenities that are still present today. There’s radiant heating in the floors and the building has 24/7 security and a communal area with a playground, a basketball court, picnic tables and barbecue area.

While 66 Cleary was constructed in 1963, Eichler also took on other projects in the city, including townhouses in Diamond Heights, the Geneva Terraces and the Geneva Towers (which were imploded in May 1998) in Visitacion Valley and the Summit on Russian Hill. While none of these buildings were considered his most successful projects — some would even say they led Eichler Homes into bankruptcy — they were a re-examination of urban density and affordable housing that continues to be a point of discussion today.

“It’s a hugely important project, but it’s not on the radar on the story of American housing,” Lasner said. “It’s really a project that uniquely proves the viability of density decades before we were pouring back into cities. It’s a really interesting project historically. It was decades ahead of its time in some ways.”

Article source: https://www.sfgate.com/realestate/article/Eichler-condo-sf-66-cleary-for-sale-16680061.php

Velivela may have felt connected to the home, given the location of the company’s headquarters. “With his professional offices in the former Hills Brothers coffee plant on the Embarcadero, he now can come home to one of San Francisco’s most beautiful and historical residences formerly owned by the Hills family,” said Compass agent Karen Mendelsohn Gould. “A rare and whimsical opportunity!”

A serendipitous transaction, sure, but this home sale also had a unique objective for the anonymous sellers. A large portion of the proceeds are slated to be distributed among different animal and nature nonprofit groups in the Bay Area. 

This was the first time the home had hit the market in 55 years. 

Among San Francisco’s most iconic food brands, Hills Bros. pioneered the ability to vacuum-seal cans of coffee in the 1900s. The brand’s sign still stands today above 2 Harrison St. in the Embarcadero, though the offices are now occupied by Google.

Herbert Gray Hills lived in the seven-bedroom, seven-and-a-half-bathroom home with his wife Winifred and their family from the 1940s to the mid-1960s. Among many amenities, it features a gym, a separate caretaker’s apartment, a walk-in safe, an elevator to all levels and a four-car garage, according to the listing. 

Article source: https://www.sfgate.com/realestate/article/Hills-Bros-Coffee-mansion-sold-16673214.php

I’m in support of building more housing in San Francisco. And especially housing that service people who work here can afford.

How can we do that? The time is now to answer that question. I hope to see new apartment buildings in the Portola before the end of the decade.

Keith Ferris, San Francisco

Neighbors matter most

I consider myself strongly pro-housing. I don’t see a way to increase housing affordability in the Bay Area without increasing the supply (in San Francisco and in surrounding communities). This may include both luxury and below-market housing; I don’t think we will build enough just by relying on the city/state.

As far as neighborhood character is concerned, the most important thing to me is walkability and general liveliness of the streets. I don’t consider building architecture to be nearly as important — a neighborhood is its people, and that should include diversity of income, race, family structure, etc.

I would rather live next to an ugly new building that families can afford than all expensive Victorians that house only the wealthy or retired people who bought their places 40 years ago.

Gretchen Ehrenkaufer, San Francisco

We need a healthy mix

I am a 21-year San Francisco resident, having migrated here from the East Coast. My husband and I own a flat in a two-unit condo building in the Inner Richmond, on a block that includes single-family, two-unit and multiunit buildings. Our block is a prime example of how housing of all different types can work well together to form a vibrant and cohesive neighborhood.

Without more luxury housing, people in the market for high-end housing will just buy more lower-end housing — displacing people who otherwise could afford it — and spend hundreds of thousands fixing it up. We see that every day in our neighborhood. And the people selling their property take the considerable profits and move out of San Francisco permanently. This is sad and unfortunate.

“Neighborhood character” is people. I believe we are at our best in neighborhoods where people of different backgrounds — financial, ethnic, cultural, racial — can live and learn from each other.

I consider myself “progressive” on housing. The most important housing issue to me is additional housing of all types, from luxury to below market. But San Francisco also needs to build much better public transportation, particularly on the west side, to accommodate additional people and cut down on car traffic.

Can San Francisco remain the city so many love if it changes its cityscape to make room for newcomers? Of course. Cities must always evolve or they die. San Francisco has plenty of room for greater density all over. But in what other city can just about every resident find a beautiful park within a 10-minute walk? Or world-class sporting events, museums, restaurants, farmers’ markets, performing arts and outdoor spaces?

I would not want to live anywhere else in the world.

Carol Brewer, San Francisco

Affordable housing key

I have worked in real estate development in San Francisco and the other core Bay Area counties for over 20 years. And I am progressive with respect to the need to build more housing.

The most important need is affordable housing. “Affordability” and market-rate housing don’t fit together in San Francisco, as construction costs are so high that a market-rate developer can only develop for the highest rents or sales prices on the market. Thus, in San Francisco, it will only be possible to provide affordable housing built by true affordable housing developers who have access to capital sources specific to these types of buildings.

I also believe that affordable housing should be spread throughout different neighborhoods, subject to having good availability to transit. Those living in affordable housing developments are typically those that work in-person jobs. Also, housing can be built much more affordably when in-building parking is minimized, making transit near housing imperative.

How can a city love itself if only people who make $200,000 or more can live here? The city does not just belong to the wealthy.

Vickie Nyland, San Francisco

City can get even better

Neighborhood character is a more politically acceptable way of saying keep it the way it is, and keep those “other people” out, maintaining a lack of diversity.

There is a great need for housing at all income levels. New market-rate housing, with all of the demands made for approvals, is necessarily expensive. More new housing being built will mitigate the demand for existing units being converted to luxury housing. San Francisco today (or at least in 2019 pre-pandemic) is the best it has ever been. And I expect it to get even better.

As I grow older over the next 20 years, I expect that living in a three-story house will become more of a challenge. When I reach that point, I hope to move to an elevator building located within or near my neighborhood.

A final thought: I live in ZIP code 94114, recently reported as one of the most affluent in the country. I would like to see more diversity.

Alan Marling, San Francisco

Stop calling it ‘luxury’

As the former executive director of the San Francisco Housing Action Coalition, I’d like to throw in my two cents’ worth. I object to using the term “luxury housing” as a catchall when describing new housing production. It’s inflammatory and does little to illuminate the debate around our housing affordability crisis.

I suspect little of San Francisco’s paltry current production is actually luxury housing, which generally includes amenities like sweeping views, concierges, fancy fitness rooms, etc. It is also limited to certain neighborhoods. There is no luxury housing being built in the Tenderloin, Sunset, Western Addition, Bayview and many other city neighborhoods.

Unfortunately, for a variety of complex reasons, ALL new multifamily housing in San Francisco is really expensive to build. The culprits are stratospheric costs for scarce skilled labor and building materials, high land costs, expensive and lengthy process and permitting costs, and the very high taxes and fees we put on new market-rate housing to subsidize “affordable housing.” A modest 30-unit building in the Richmond District with smallish unit sizes, no views or amenities, and limited parking generally faces the same obstacles as a 30-story glass and steel tower on the waterfront.

The problem with calling all new housing “luxury” is that most of it simply is not. In public debates, what we call things matters. No matter how it’s approached, solving our housing crisis demands that we dramatically increase housing production in all of our neighborhoods. Using false arguments to oppose this should not be accepted. Besides, it’s perverse that folks who live in neighborhoods where homes run for $1.5 million (San Francisco’s median sale price) or more should be taken seriously when they oppose new housing on the grounds that it is too expensive.

Tim Colen, San Francisco

Some context needed

I grew up and lived most of my life in the Minneapolis metropolitan area. For the past 12 years or so, since my retirement, I have lived in San Francisco. As a rule of thumb, housing in the Minneapolis metropolitan area costs about 20% what it costs in San Francisco.

San Francisco is a major international city. However, many residents still want it to be the funky small town of the 1950s. To solve the housing problem, people here must first accept the fact that change is inevitable.

San Francisco just needs to build more housing! All types of housing!

There is plenty of land available to build. Affordable housing, middle-class housing and, yes, housing for the wealthy. There is nothing wrong with building high-end condos for the wealthy billionaires from around the world who would like to live in San Francisco. Their condos pay real estate taxes and are only occupied a fraction of the time.

San Francisco needs to embrace the fact that it is a dynamic, diverse, exciting international city.

Bill Drake, San Francisco

A gathering of ideas

When we speak about urban design in the profession, and as students, there are many movements. From prefabrication to cohab housing, the village and assembly line manufacturing, urban renewal/slum clearing, placemaking, urban transportation, visual aesthetics of large and small, parks and streets, neighborhoods, living communities, market spaces, and squares.

It’s historic. Yet it evolves with history, culture and community.

We have to constantly be asking those questions of our community. What could we be? Where do we want to be?

We have the creativity and knowledge right here San Francisco. Let’s do something right and have a charette in front of City Hall to do some serious planning ideas and invite the community!

April Rosenlund Ford, San Francisco

What can I do to prevent this in the future?

If you are on a personal connection, like at home, you can run an anti-virus scan on your device to make sure it is not infected with malware.

If you are at an office or shared network, you can ask the network administrator to run a scan across the network looking for misconfigured or infected devices.

Article source: https://therealdeal.com/sanfrancisco/2021/12/01/facebook-parent-grabs-another-1m-sf-in-bay-area/