From (more than) one plugged-in tipster: Arterra is now offering two years of pre-paid HOA dues with purchase (perhaps they ran out of plasmas). And from yet another: Park Terrace is now offering brokers a 4% sales commission for selling a “townhome” (which always makes us wonder).
UPDATE (9/14): As a tipster notes, The Hayes is now offering a new incentive as well in the form of a “permanent interest rate buy-down of 5.500% on a 5/1ARM interest-only loan.”
∙ Arterra (300 Berry) Tops Off At 16 And Aims For A Spring ’08 Opening [SocketSite]
∙ Out With The HOAs (For Now) In With The Sub-Zero (And Plasmas) [SocketSite]
∙ Park Terrace (325 Berry): The Grand Opening Weekend [SocketSite]
So at what point do they give up on all these incentives (that don’t seem to be working) and start lowering prices… anyone?
Arterra seems to be in better shape than Park Terrace. Their units are more reasonably priced (1 bed in low 500s) vs Park Terrace, which doesn’t have any 1 beds under 600k that I know of. I believe Arterra is close to 50% sold vs 35-40% at Terrace.
Alterra is a green building with some nice views on the upper floors and accessable rooftop. Park Terrace faces some old, ugly houseboats and is located in the stinky part of the creek….
Toured Park Terrace on Friday with my wife. We’re in the industry and had a very positive reaction to this project. Very nice finishes, well built, with some fantasic view units on the creek. The townhome units are cute and would be prefect for someone with a dog. $$ psf it’s not the cheapest, but it felt like a building that would be worth spending a bit more. It clearly was not a cheap building to build.
I was wondering why my so called agent suddenly discovered the “value” at Park Terrace. Shouldn’t a “buyer’s” agent bring clients because it’s a good deal for the buyer rather than the agent?
Arterra may have some nice views on high floors, but it will be loud on the King Street side as you would have the freeway and Caltrain contributing to the noise level, without any building to block sound (like the other Berry buildings).
missionbay res 10:51 AM said “… reasonably priced (1 bed in low 500s)…” I agree, But: half a million dollars for a one bedroom condo! If I told anyone here in “Leningrad” I’d be committed.
Leningrad, there is nothing reasonable about 1 bed for 500K. This is insane and I have difficult time understand why would someone buy a box with no land for 500K.
On another hand, I am trying to do some construction on my house by adding a room and changing the kitchen. Can someone point out a website which lists how to approach this issue so i wont get ripped off. Can someone help me with working out the contract details so both parties are covered in case something goes wrong?
“Toured Park Terrace on Friday with my wife. We’re in the industry and had a very positive reaction to this project. Very nice finishes, well built, with some fantasic view units on the creek.”
Compared to what’s out there at this price point I can’t help but disagree. The quality in the units at Park Terrace is below par. Not terrible but I wouldn’t even classify the finishes as mid range. If you’re interested in that area look no further than 325 Berry. Definitely better quality and more value (in my opinion).
On my last comment I meant 235 Berry. All those Mission Bay Development tend to blur into one big condo mall after a while. Sorry!
Misha,
Dwell.com has some great tips for adding-on/remodeling, especially if you’re into going green, or adding a modern touch. They also nowhave a forum for folks who are in any part of the building process to ask questions.
“If you’re interested in that area look no further than [235 Berry].”
I wasn’t very impressed by 235 Berry. It seemed a bit subpar given its price range. The really small bathtubs, “Hobbit” tubs if you will, seemed absurd to me. This same space saving smallness seemed to be reflected in some of the floor plans as well with dysfunctional nooks, cramped spaces, awkward rooms, and dining table challenged kitchen/living areas. I did like some of the other features and finishes of the building, but was put off by the downsides I mentioned above. I also expected something a bit more as I liked 255 Berry (Signature also) quite a bit.
Does anyone know if 325 Berry offers 4% coop on their non-townhouse units? Some of their 2b/2b plans are not bad. Definetly bigger and better planned than Arterra’s.
JS, I agree that 235 Berry is not perfect (particularly some of the very small 2/2 units) but compared to Park Terrace I think it’s better value. If you’re open to living elsewhere in the city (or in the Bay Area for that matter) there are better options.
As a tipster notes, The Hayes is now offering a new incentive as well in the form of a “permanent interest rate buy-down of 5.500% on a 5/1ARM interest-only loan.”
“First loan amount assumed to be 80% of purchase price, or less, with a minimum down payment of 10% of purchase price…and assumes a minimum credit score of 720 or better.”
Stopped by 325 Berry sales office on Sat. They seem to be extremely busy with people constantly coming in. Actually there was NO agent available to show us the units. Had to make an appointment for next weekend.
I guess 4% comm is working… Or the gloom-n-doom predictions are yet to materialize.
Also got to see Arterra dismantling their giant crane. Quite a spectacle.
“gloom-n-doom predictions are yet to materialize.”
Oh, if only these people could go back in time.
325 Berry #719 sold today for $535K, down from $820K in 2007. 35% off.
SO sad. $300,000 could have been put to so much better use.
Gloom and doom indeed.
“”gloom-n-doom predictions are yet to materialize.”
Oh, if only these people could go back in time.”
Out of nostalgia, I just revisited that guy’s real estate blog for the first time in years. I think he has yet to catch up to 2009, much less 2011. Either that or he’s doing a brilliant impression of Baghdad Bob.
the $300k simply changed hands, where, who knows, maybe it was put to better use.
“where, who knows”
developer takes out loan from bank a, builds building
buyer 1 takes out loan from bank b or pays cash, net flow of money to bank a and developer. Bank a is repaid with interest, developer makes a profit.
buyer 2 takes out loan from bank c or pays cash. Buyer 1’s losses are $300K (cash case) or Bank b’s losses are $300k (loan case).
Bank b passes any losses to government. Government passes any losses onto taxpayers.
So netting out all the flows there is a transfer of money to the developer with some combination of buyer 1 and the taxpayers loosing $300K. The bigger the downpayment the less the taxpayers lose. Which is why government policy should be to require large cash downpayments for all real estate transactions. 20% minimum I would say.
And I guarantee you that the fraction of the loss that came out of my taxes was not put to better use.