If done right, colors can delight…457-459 Broderick, a designer two unit NOPA Victorian hits the MLS and can be yours (designer paint and all) for $1,549,000.
-457-459 Broderick [Property Website]
Dear 134 16th Ave,
We have had our eyes on you for quite some time and are heart broken to see you must go. We must tell you, it’s not your frontside that originally grabbed our attention.
Yes, your frontside is nice and you’re very attractive upon first glance. We’re also aware that you have a great inside (although we’ve heard you underwent serious counseling to get where you are), but it’s really your backside we admire….ooh, la, la!
Or maybe it’s the fact that you have recently found a suitor that makes us that much more attracted to you. You know, the whole want what you can’t have thing. Regardless, you’re one hot property and we wish you well.
Your secret admirers
-134 16th Ave, asking $2,695,000 and recently in contract. [MLS]
Well, all, few and far between are homes we can look at and positively say: That’d be a good investment. Yet here is one, that frankly, given the size and location, has to be just that. The downside– yes, sorry, these days there simply has to be one- is that this could be a lonnnnng term investment indeed. It could also bring out the evil in a person that he or she didn’t even know existed; but the latter, I suspect, is often the result of becoming a landlord in this city.
Welcome to 1847 Stockton, 2/1 TIC on Telegraph Hill, listed at just $250K. At issue is the tenant currently occupying the property. This tenant is “protected,” and “is not moving.” Now, if we know our tenant/landlord laws in SF as well as we should, we know protected tenants are either:
Andy Sirkin, oft credited as the pre-eminent font of knowledge on all things eviction and TIC related (which incidentally, this property is both) puts it this way:
Protected Tenants: Certain tenants are “protected” and cannot be evicted for owner-occupancy except in very limited circumstances. Protected tenants are those 60 or over or disabled who have occupied for 10 years, and those catastrophically ill who have occupied for 5 years. Also remember that no tenant with an unexpired lease can be evicted, and that tenants who occupy a unit during conversion to a condominium are entitled to remain for one year after conversion, or for life if they are over 62 or disabled.
We have no way of telling from this listing alone what group this tenant belongs too, but it could easily be any of the above, including the long term residency, since the current rent being collected on a 2 unit in North Beach several years beyond what this tenant pays: $795 a month. (Um, no wonder the tenant is “not moving!”)
So how then is this a good investment? Well, I already said: It’s a 2 bedroom TIC in a highly desirable area, also in a building that looks well cared for. We don’t know how the unit itself looks (no pics: bad sign), but we can find out by attending the open house on 11/22 or 12/6 from 9am to 10am. In fact, if anyone goes, email some details to The Frontsteps as I’d love to do a follow-up. And hey: if we find the tenant to be ill or elderly, maybe we can project that lifespan he or she has left and plan our investment accordingly. Or, perhaps if you know a good hit man? Ha, ha. Calm down, people! Of course, I’m kidding; but you can see how the tenancy laws might bring out the worst in landlords, or landlords to be.
In any case, this property does offer some potential if you can wait it out. The rent collected now won’t cover the mortgage, so it’s a good bet for someone who can pay cash for the whole shebang. And, kismet: The listing says “all cash sale.” That means then in 333 months (27 years) or so, you’d have your principal investment back and could commence profiting. Or, you get lucky, and the tenant would …disappear first.
We noticed it [3373 22nd Street] hadn’t had a Sunday open in a while, but rather than a pending or sold sign outside – we noticed the sign was just gone yesterday. It isn’t on the public mls as in contract – it just isn’t there. You know the scoop?
We are dying to know the final sales price. It was our perfect house in our perfect location – but a very unperfect price. So it wasn’t just the price – it was the price plus the people who were squatting in the house before the developer bought it, who still like to hang out around the house. For 2 + million – I don’t want to regularly have to ask the neighborhood characters to loiter elsewhere.
Now, we don’t know for certain which property you’re talking about, but imagine you’re talking 3373 22nd St, so we’ll go ahead and assume.
According to MLS it closed on 7/10/08 for a sales price of $1,950,000 (original asking was $2,095,000, originally listed 5/1…love that day!), and we heard the buyer represented himself (mls states the same). Last sale was 11/05 for a sales price of $920,000 and has definitely been fixed up since then.
And while I’m asking – I’ll give you a bit of insight from the east bay. We were supposed to close yesterday on our house in Oakland – only the bank hasn’t delivered loan docs yet. We have a jumbo loan and found the very last bank willing to do a 20% loan. Everyone else wanted 25% down or ridiculous rates. There is no problem with the loan – the bank is just backed up. We likely won’t close until sometime next week and the sellers are rolling with it. I was fully prepared to have to beg and plead for them not to walk – but we are hearing from our agent that a lot of deals are closing late. Is it the same over there?
Deals closing late, or the begging and pleading? We’re seeing a bit more of both. ;-)
Thanks for the insight on the East Bay, thanks for your email, and thanks for reading!
To the untrained eye, 1671 Bush St. is nothing more than a “spacious, elegant Victorian flat priced well below market comparables”, but to the wizards behind theFrontSteps
…it is an approved short sale, so time is of the essence, and we would like to sell as soon as possible. We are offering 4% commission to the buyer’s agent.
Okay, so we got spammed and the email gave us the short sale clues, but now you have them too. And since you’re reading, we’ll give you back 1.5% of that commission should you need assistance with that purchase.
As for help with the wallpaper. Sorry, our hands are tied.
Update: And a reader comes in with more details:
It opened at 1.13 then dropped to 995k.
It’s also been on craigslist some times for 899k and must sell.
All told, it’s been on the market for well over 12 months at roughly the same price.
For most of the time it has been in foreclosure, which makes me think that the owners haven’t paid their mortgage for about the 12 months that it’s been on the market.
Last sold was approx 400k in 1997. I’m guessing the owners did a massive refinance to the highest price they could appraise it at. (1.13) then stopped paying the mortgage. I hope the owners are taking a nice holiday with the money the borrowed from the bank before they stopped paying the mortgage.
Especially since it is “AS IS” and it has had no takers at roughly the same price for the last 12 months, look out below!
-1671 Bush St. [MLS]
Before you haul off and shoot the messenger, this is one of many emails we receive on a daily basis. We’ve tried to tone the cheerleading down a bit, but when it keeps on coming from other sources (not Realtors) it’s kind of hard to pass up. So…
Awesome places that are priced right continue to sell at competitive prices all over the city.
19 Delmar St. [3 bed, 3 bath, $1,795,000] just went into Escrow as did two condos on Sacramento in the $2.1 range.
Lots of buyers out there! Wow.
No, this is not from MarinaPrime, ResortAtSquawCreek, Later, BoomTime, or any of the other people that sound oddly like the same person. It’s from someone entirely too well connected to not know the difference.
-19 Delmar [sfnewsletter listing detail page]
Since we’re on the subject of beautifully restored 3 bed, 3.5 bath Victorians in Lower Pacific Heights selling in a heart beat for over $1000/square foot, why not take a look at another beautifully restored Victorian 3 bed, 3.5 bath in Lower Pacific Heights, selling almost as quickly, just around the corner, and on one of the busiest streets in San Francisco?
Asking $2,995,000, 2872 Pine came on the market in late October of this year, and is already “pending”, which, for the new readers, means it is pretty much a done deal.
[Update: Check the comments. Kenny has added a couple links to some more Victorians.]
-2872 Pine St. [sfnewsletter.com listing detail]
-Tanking Market? Come Again? “That’s what She said” [theFrontSteps]
She being 1705 Broderick, a 3 bed, 3.5 bath, single family home in Lower Pacific Heights, and the pun being that she just came on the market 10/03/07 for $2,450,000 and just sold for $2,800,000. For the mathematically challenged (that includes us) that is $350,000 above asking (14.29%), a staggering month on the market (MLS shows 15 days, but we’ll add a few for sh*ts and giggles), and a price per square foot of $1,057 for Lower Pacific Heights between Pine and Bush streets.
Argue all you want about pricing, anecdotal information only, it’s the exception not the norm, blah, blah. The fact is, there was more than one person interested in this type of property that had the means to make this type of purchase. Should another home like this come around, what’s going to happen? Keep in mind, this whole sale took place in one of the worst markets our city has seen in years.
If you watch “The Office” you’ll get the “that’s what she said joke”. Regardless, a pretty good sale in a pretty “gloomy” market. We think you’d have to agree.