$3 Million Ripley Home Sale Sets New Bernal Price Record


It’s official: The rather dashing home at 171 Ripley just sold for $3 million, instantly setting a new Bernal Heights sale price record — just a week after 152 Elsie had set a new record at $2.3 million .

SocketSite brings the gobsmacking news:

As we wrote when we first reported the record breaking sale of 152 Elsie last week, “the quiet sale of another Bernal Heights home which was never officially on the market is poised to blow away the $2.3 million record.”

And this afternoon, the sale of 171 Ripley was officially added to the MLS, “for comp purposes only,” with a record setting sale price of $3 million.  Measuring 2,313 square feet, that’s roughly $1,350 per square foot for the architect’s home which is faced in recycled copper and known to some as “the copper house.”

For whatever it’s worth, SocketSite adds “The seller was an architect at Gensler for over 30 years, and the firm’s President and CEO for over a decade.  And no, the buyers aren’t ‘techies’ nor are they from overseas.”

PHOTO: 171 Ripley

15 thoughts on “$3 Million Ripley Home Sale Sets New Bernal Price Record

  1. We bought our hill people of powhatten house from the owners of this house 13yrs ago! Got to check out the beautiful copper house just after they finished it- a lovely couple – good for them- All the best wishes to them!

  2. Inequality is the enemy. Everyone should be given the same dwelling. Architecture should be limited to public spaces only. There is no other equitable distribution of resources.

    (Sorry I had to add this to the thread as it was far too positive for San Francisco still)

  3. Well, let’s see. Presuming that’s 20% down and a $2.400,000 loan, that comes about to be about $11,300 a month in mortgage payments. SF’s property tax at its highest rate would be about $4,700 a month, so total monthly without maintenance or utilities would be $16,000 per month. If one is in the rental business it’s typical to charge 1% of the total home price per month, or $30,000 rent per month.

    Now, who would pay $30,000 rent per month? Break that down to nightly and you’ve got $1,000 a night plus AirBNB’s 3% listing fee and SF’s hotel tax of 14%, or $1,170 per night.

    Of course that doesn’t include the costs of cleaning up after each guest daily and putting a Ghiradelli chocolate kiss on the pillow…

    $1,170 per night anyone?

    • Except that the buyer probably owned an existing house already, and was able to sell it for a pretty penny. If the new buyers had a place in SF that was paid off, and say it was a nice loft in SoMa that they paid $600k for 20 years ago, and is now worth 1.5m. Suddenly their Mortgage drops to about half of your example ($10k a month with mortgage and property tax) and is not that exorbitant of an amount to pay for housing for a successful business person.

      It is a trophy house. It has an amazing view (as anyone who walks up/down the stairs on Harrison adjacent to it can tell you). If you are a retired businessman who was able to sell your business, you could afford this. And given SF property values, it’s probably a great investment.

    • I’m not sure that I see the point of this comment and the hilarious unrealistic assumptions. Who puts only 20% down on a house like this? (Actually there are several scenarios where doing that would make sense, but nevermind). Secondly, insinuating that places like this sell to airbnb-rentiers is hilarious, the ROI would be terrible compared to equally marketable lower-end properties, and only a nutcase would waste a showpiece like this on holiday makers.

      • I was just running the numbers to see what kind of feasibility there might be in buying a home at this price. I don’t care one way or the other whether a home in Bernal sells for $3 million because it’s not my $3 million nor is it my home.

Comments are closed.