Purchased in 2005 for $1,111,500 but then extensively remodeled in 2006 (directed by architect Neal Schwartz), the nearly 3,000 square foot single-family home at 48 Linda sold in 2008 for $2,205,000 with all the bells and whistles (including an espresso machine).
Back on the market today and asking $2,249,000. And perhaps it’s simply a coincidence, but the seller in 2008 and the seller’s agent today do share the same name.
∙ Listing: 48 Linda (4/2.5) – $2,249,000 [MLS]
∙ SocketSite’s San Francisco Listed Housing Inventory: 4/12/10 [SocketSite]
Bottom fishing.
not a coincidence.
the previous owner is a real estate agent. They bought and flipped the home on its prior sale.
Grey has got to be going out of fashion by now. Have the color gurus picked the next color for facades of SF houses? How about a return to the old fashioned blue, maroon, cream, dark green?
Two point two five for the Mission? On a 2000 foot lot? We’ll see. The year 2000 this is not, tho.
agree with conifer. and a coat of paint wont be enough to change it. the more i look at these interior and exterior pictures the more it looks disjointed. i’m no designer but too many styles and far-from-neutral colors goin on.
I am thinking what anonn is thinking. $2MM for the Mission. No freaking way.
“I am thinking what anonn is thinking. $2MM for the Mission. No freaking way.”
Huh? Didn’t it sell for $2.2m in 2008?
Agree with SFSal. This just sounds like “the previous buyer overpaid” argument. A comp is a comp, even when a realtor is doing the selling.
What about the home on Cumberland St. that sold for $3.15 million last month?? That home was located in the Mission as well. The Inner Mission is a rapidly changing neighborhood and more and more families are moving in.
Wow…I was going to assume that Cumberland comp was Dolores Heights, but it was not..it’s between Dolores and Guerrero. Over $800 bucks a square foot for something that large, technically in the inner Mission? In this market? That seems crazy to me, and evidence to back up Anonn that the Mission is really hot. Was that house featured here?
No, it wasn’t……but I made multiple requests to our editor. I’m not sure why he/she decided not to profile this house since it was such a fascinating listing imo, with respect to pricing and neighborhood.
That wasn’t exactly what I was thinking. I was thinking, “Huh. Even more than last time around, now? On Linda? We shall see.” But I bet it will go for close to asking, regardless. Also I was thinking, “Game, set, and match at the guy who a few weeks ago said the Mission hasn’t changed in 10 years.” The Cumberland house was a realtor’s house too, a realtor whose husband happens to be a Mission business owner.
That Cumberland address is “inner mission” only on a technicality. I used to live on that block. Other than where it’s placed on realtors’ maps, everything about it is Dolores Heights — including the views. Linda Street is obviously going to be a more expensive location than some place on Shotwell or S. Van Ness, but I don’t think it’s comparable to Cumberland.
Hee hee, anonn, you agreed that the mission had not changed a whole lot since 2000 except for the gang-infested areas on the Southern edge. This place ain’t there. This part of the inner mission has had a lot of very nice places for a long time.
Shza, that block on Cumberland does not have views and that specific home that sold for more than $3.0 million definitely did not have any views. That block is Inner Mission, not Dolores Heights. It is a block east of Dolores Park. It was a stunning home, however….views or no views.
toadie, as I mentioned, I used to live *on that block.* We had great downtown views from both upstairs bedroom windows. (We were on the north side of the block and the bedrooms were in the back; if this house is on the south side of the block, maybe that explains it).
I already conceded that realtor maps call this block “inner mission” — which is all you’re saying by noting that it’s east of Dolores Park. The look and feel of the block is still way more Dolores Heights/Liberty Hill than it is Inner Mission, regardless. We called it “Country Club Mission” when we lived there.
Shza, Sorry you’re right. But that specific home was on the south side of the block, so that explains the lack of views. I would still consider it Inner Mission though 🙂
Hee hee, anonn, you agreed that the mission had not changed a whole lot since 2000 except for the gang-infested areas on the Southern edge. This place ain’t there. This part of the inner mission has had a lot of very nice places for a long time.
No, I disagreed about gangs, one, clearly saying the injunction has brought about positive change in the last few years. Secondly, I only agreed that 16th and Valencia hadn’t changed all that much. This area, particularly 18th street, has changed a lot in the last decade. Do you want to argue that? Judging by your “hee hee” and your “gang infested” goadings, you probably only want to argue with me, and it doesn’t matter about what. But 18th is lined with nice stores now. It wasn’t before, and no way does this house come close to 2M in 2000.
Like I said to another anonymous flametard, there are plenty of movie review and music sites where you can come off wittier by just saying whatever haterish thing pops into your mind + a Wiki search or three. When it comes to local real estate you crabs all get exposed as the petulant hacks you are very quickly.
^^pot, kettle, black.
As usual.
Yawn.
Cliche. No effort. No name. No opinion other than contrariness. The usual. Why?
Guess Anonn and I didn’t think the same, but I think $2MM is too much here even if someone did think it was worth it in the past. You can spend what you like. I don’t have $2MM, but if I did, I certainly wouldn’t buy here. There are better neighborhoods by far in this range. I am not into the whole trendy Mission thing or pardon me, Dolores Heights is it now? The city did not always have all these lame-o neighborhood names. Can’t we just be real? And, Guerrero as a reference street repels me right away. I lived on that street growing up and it was gritty. Maybe all that stuff just stays with you. What is the crime map like there?
I want to be a Missionite for all of the good food and tredy bars that I will never set foot in but am wary of crime and density issues. Agreed that $2m seems way too much here but what do I know?
1 question / comment – if you look at google aerial map you can see that the building immediately behind has a parking lot for a backyard. This $2m house??? with no backyard abuts a parking lot? For that reason alone I would never consider it. Is this a deal killer for others?
I seriously looked at this house in 2005. The house sits precisely where Mission Creek used to be. This is full-on liquifaction zone. During the big one, this house is a goner. Furthermore there is practically no yard. If I remember correctly, it’s about 100 square feet on the south side of the house. It’s going to be hard to get past the negatives on this one.
I’m the listing agent for 48 Linda Street, and as already pointed out, and in the spirit of full disclosure, also represented the house when it sold in 2008. And yes again, it was my personal residence from 2005-08 (yes Socket site, even Realtors need a place to house their family).
For the record, we did not buy to flip, we competed for the purchase in 2005, spent many hundreds of thousands of dollars with a down-to-the-studs remodel while spending a year living in temporary housing…for personal reasons decided to sell…and yes it sold quickly for over the asking price to the dismay of a higher back-up offer that followed, leaving all of us reason to believe that the market determined the value.
Here’s my question for Socket Site…while some may find it entertaining to poke fun at our color choices or trash the Mission (my guess it that these same folk are hanging in our parks and enjoying our food, from sushi to tacos)…what do these folk think this house is worth? Because it’s one thing to reduce this forum to childish banter about paint and liquefaction (let’s keep some perspective here since we’re all sleeping near a fault line). When instead, let’s be deliberate and constructive…48 Linda is 3,000 square feet, totally remodeled, high-end finishes and fixtures, 4BRs on one floor with a deck and outdoor space, parking, boasts a 95 walkscore, and thanks to a unique facade and color…does not try to look like every other post-modern beige house around. What is this house worth? If anyone would like to provide a thoughtful and constructive response to this question, I as the listing agent would welcome your input. My only request is that you see the house and study the comparables before weighing in. And if it’s helpful, it is open Sunday 2-4 and easy to see by appointment.
@Stephen, for someone who believes “the market sets the price” and therefore pricing beliefs should be ignored, and that people trash the mission and then come for the food anyways and therefore what they say should be ignored, it sounds like you really don’t care what anyone thinks it’s worth.
This frankly sounds like a desperate plea to get people to your open house so that any potential buyer will think there is more interest than there really is. That and the fake postings by the owner after you told him his house was on socketsite are kind of a huge turn off, so no thanks, we really aren’t going to pack your open house just to boost your commission.
The market will determine the price in the end. List high and drop it every couple of weeks like you are planning to do anyway. When someone thinks it’s worth it, they’ll make an offer. Of course, by then it could be a stale listing and the buyer will offer less than they might have, but thems the risks.
^^^
tipster, I think you are confusing threads. “The fake postings by the owner”, where is that?
“we competed for the purchase in 2005, spent many hundreds of thousands of dollars with a down-to-the-studs remodel”
Interesting information. It is not consistent with the city’s permit database, showing much less extensive work at about $100,000 total cost.
“…and liquefaction (let’s keep some perspective here since we’re all sleeping near a fault line).”
As someone who works daily with bay area real estate surely you realize that earthquake risks vary dramatically depending on the geology directly below a building. A house that floats on liquefaction prone soil will meet a dramatically different fate compared to one anchored to bedrock. And those two house may be a mere couple of blocks apart.
So it isn’t sound reasoning to allay EQ fears of a specific site by glossing over the differences with the statement “we’re all sleeping near a fault line”. That is true. But it is also true that the rural residents of Mt. Loma Prieta suffered little damage from the ’89 quake even though they were just a few miles from the epicenter while nearly 70 miles away the residents of the Marina had quite a different experience.
“Interesting information. It is not consistent with the city’s permit database, showing much less extensive work at about $100,000 total cost.”
Again, the city has their costs and they aren’t based on the bid you get to do the work. This is because at the time you are getting permits you don’t have bids, you are estimating the cost.
Here is an example. If you are doing a kitchen the city uses $159/ft for R-3 (any area of work), plus $9239 for a residential kitchen remodel. So for a 200 sq.ft. kitchen the value is $41039. You can then put in $100K of cabinets alone if you like.
Oh cr*p sparky, you’re right!
I walk around this area frequently and have looked at two much lower-priced places on Linda. Can’t beat the convenience, but I do share the concern about the liquefaction zone. I think I’d want to get earthquake insurance ($$) if I bought in this area, whereas I probably wouldn’t if I bought on bedrock.
Another concern–– there’s a big hill between my current apartment and Bi-Rite Creamery/Tartine. So at least I burn off 1% of the calories of my treats. But living SO close… I hate to think of the consequences 🙂
I like this location for the food, weather, and culture. But it’s quite busy on evenings and weekends, with cars circling around looking for parking in every nook and cranny, including narrow alley-like streets like Linda. For those who don’t mind this type of busy environment (I don’t), this is a great location.
In the Mission, crime is concentrated around Mission and So Van Ness, and it tapers off noticeably as you go further out, according to crime maps.
The list price for 48 Linda has just been reduced $100,000 (4%), now asking $2,149,000. Once again, purchased for $2,205,000 in July 2008.
I really like this neighborhood, and there are a lot of great homes nearby. But $2+ million dollars there and no yard at all? Just a tiny deck? My favorite part of the listing is the misspelled “Electra” espresso maker — even if that is one nice machine, on a $2M house that’s like adding “full tanc of gas” in a used car classified ad.
In contract two days after its price reduction.
Sold for 2.149 about 2.5% under its last sale