Last December the two-bedroom condo known as 140 South Van Ness #919 sold for $595,000 according to public records ($610,000 according to the self-reported MLS), it had been purchased for $630,000 in March 2004.
Six months later 140 South Van Ness #719, the same floor plan but two floors below, was taken back by the bank having been purchased for $553,000 in November 2003. Perhaps taking a cue from “the market has risen since 2009” crowd, the condo was listed for $589,900.
Reduced four times and then delisted yesterday, the 1,075 square foot unit was relisted the same day at $499,900 but now with an official “one day” on the market according to MLS based stats, reports, and newsletters.
∙ Listing: 140 South Van Ness #719 (2/2) 1,075 sqft – $499,900 [MLS]
not a single photo of the unit itself…
HOA + parking + property taxes = $1100
Then you have to pay your mortgage and pay for the building’s special assessments + your own maintenance costs.
This adds up to 4000-4500 / month
Pretty pricey to live in this area.
cookie cutter condo by the freeway that is expensive to own…this is the stuff i would have expected to see getting cut in half.
I’ve never understood who would live in this building, or along any of the condos on Van Ness (aka, 101 North). I’m dumbfounded that anyone would have paid north of 500k for these places. Even 499k seems a stretch @ 500psf.
wow!
what a great and open Living room, an awesome home office that they’re using as a conference center, not to mention the amazing home exercise room and awesome personal patio out back!
oh, you mean that none of this is part of the unit?
then what is the prospective buyer buying?
irritating listing.
—-
I agree with the above posters that this was wildly overpriced and wildly over-bought back in the mid-2000’s… however, the decision “made sense” when questionable properties were selling for $800/sq ft, “nice” properties for $1000/sq ft, and “very nice” for $1200/sq ft.
all of the “micro” nabes are linked to the other “micro” nabes… correlation is clearly not 100%, however there is strong correlation.
higher entry level prices support/justify higher luxury level prices… higher luxury level prices support/justify higher entry level prices…
and vice versa.
ex SF-er,
Yes, and dominos are falling as they may, except it’s in a disordinate fashion. It can be frustrating to people who are still looking what is still in demand. But if you shift your goals a tad bit, priced-to-market is more and more satisfying.
2/2 1000-1250sf ~$500psf:
1099 Mississippi
300 3rd
250 King
199 Tiffany
940 Duncan
522 Wisconsin
Aside from the ghetto-adjacent Mississippi place, 500 seems to be the prevailing MSRP for high-density factory housing.
I looked very closely at buying a unit in this building back in 2004. They are suprising nice inside with some reasonable views. The big drawback for me was the gas station right next door and the Marriott Inn exterior design / common areas.
Marriott Inn exterior design perfectly fits the description of this building as that was the first thought that crossed my mind when I saw this post. In Miami, this type of 80-90ish looking condos in this type of neighborhood are selling for $100 per sqft. with better view.
I agree that the place is bland and boring looking on the outside. I do know several people who live there, and like it (although I’m sure they regret what happened to their “investment”). The reason folks buy this is that it is relatively affordable, and has great access (Hayes Valley, SOMA, Mission, Castro, Highways to jobsites south..). Folks have told me that the demographic is gays and asians (and I’m sure, often, gaysians).
Where do people park if they don’t want to lease a parking space? The building really isn’t that bad.
As far as I know, every inch of curb in that neighborhood is either restricted or metered.
I’m simply not sure if “not that bad” is worth $500psf.
“however, the decision “made sense” when questionable properties were selling for $800/sq ft, “nice” properties for $1000/sq ft, and “very nice” for $1200/sq ft.”
The “vice-versa” at the end of ex SF-er’s post is important. Now that “questionable” but perfectly okay places like this are down to $465/sf, potential buyers will choose that over the $800/sf “nice” place because the savings are worth it (or that is all the buyer can get financing for). This forces the prices down on the “nice” place to $600/sf if the sellers want to make a sale. Which in turn forces the price down on the “very nice” place to $850/sf. As I have often stated, there is no “market of one” in real estate. The market is a continuum with any buyer willing to take any one of many substitutes (or to buy nothing and rent).
This is a very convenient location if you want to get your car washed.
I think if people don’t lease a parking space, they don’t have a car. If you work downtown, you don’t need one in this location (you can walk to transit, supermarkets, etc). It’s also a great location to bike from.
And if you do have a car, Paul’s right…it’s very convenient to get it washed.
Thank you for your groundbreaking comment, Paul Hwang. It is exactly the type of comment that I would expect from you–one which is CRASS AND UNSOPHISTICATED.
Paul’s joke was kind of sophisticated, humor wise, actually. A bit of wink wink self deprecating humor goes a long way sometimes. Tough room I guess.
@anon.ed
Sophistication must be in the eye of the realtor.
Off topic, anyone know of a
—a lot in Bernal less than 2000 sqft available for slightly less than 400K?
These look like Soviet Era housing from the 70’s………think Perm…or Chernobyl.
Another reason to stop approving
all these high density housing proposals.
It all turns into “Ross for Less”
Some really keen insights there. They should have totally built a Victorian SFR here instead, right?