clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Under $700K Club: Five bedrooms or just a studio?

You decide

It’s a tough world, but unlikely miracles happen from time to time: fatal diseases go into remission, working-class people win the lottery, and, every now and then, a decent home goes on the market in San Francisco for less than $700,000 and joins our Under $700K Club.

Sometimes these are are ordinary homes that for one reason or another are a (relative) bargain this time around. Other times, you’re dealing with properties that, while attractive in their own way, bring certain eccentricities to the table.

Today’s showcase is a contest of extremes. First, the extremely large: This Crocker Amazon house at 21 Byron Court comes with a whopping five beds and three baths, packed into over 2,200 square feet, with 800 feet of yard left over.

At $659,000 to start, it’s the cheapest five-bedroom house in the city, priced at less than half of the median for a single family home of any size. Ande can’t help but notice the unique color palate on this circa 1978 home.

The salmon colored exterior and cranberry colored carpets are one thing. But almost every interior room is painted a different pastel color: sherbet orange, mint green, baby blue, even soft peach.

In truth, there’s something strangely appealing about a home layout that resembles the case of a Baskin-Robbins. But if 1978 pastiche is not your style, a week’s worth of repainting solves the problem.

This place has sold only once in its lifetime, for $110,000 in 1979. (That’s about $365,000 today.)

If you prefer living somewhere a bit further north on the city’s axes, you’re in luck with a condo at South Beach’s 177 Townsend, starting at a mere $625,000 in a 2007 building right across the street from AT&T Park.

Unlike the big, multicolored home down in Crocker, this little place is as well-mannered and contemporary looking as they come. The catch? The entire studio is only 484 square feet, from one end to the other. Yes, in our contest of extremes, this one is extremely small.

City records record a price of $1,250 for this place back in 2010. That would be 500 percent appreciation if true, but obviously that’s a mistake. The present owner took out a loan for $417,000, which we assume was closer to the actual price.