Purchased for $1,272,000 in 2007, and having sold three years before for $1,088,000, the rather well kept and updated Forest Hill Extension home at 44 Rockaway Avenue returned to the market this past February listed as a short sale for $989,000.
As a plugged-in tipster notes, the three-bedroom Spanish Mediterranean home has been in and out of contract twice since, and the listing now notes a previously approved short sale price of $995,000, twenty-two (22) percent ($277,000) below its 2007 sale price.
And yes, there’s a bidet (along with Cararra marble) in the lower (unwarranted) bath.
∙ Listing: 44 Rockaway Avenue (3/2) – $965,000 (short sale) [MLS]
It’s not surprising that this house has been in and out of contract twice. I’ve been through this house before and loved the exterior and interior of the place…loved the Spanish/Mediterranean characteristics of the house. If you look at the fine print closely, the master bedroom and bath is actually unwarranted. So on paper, the house is really a 2bd/1ba place and doesn’t warrant the close to $1M price tag that it’s asking for. I’d say this house would be snatched up for around $850K.
“Gr8 flr plan for entertain.” Ugh!
Doesn’t “unwarranted” mean it shouldn’t even be listed as a 3/2?
Pardon the ignorance…what is the process for making it “warranted”- inspection? construction?…and why wouldn’t the sellers do that?
What are the ramifications for the buyers if they do nothing to make it warranted?
“unwarranted” means that it was built without the proper construction permits. There may be ways to make it fully legal though usually inspectors want to see what is behind the walls before they are sealed up. So that might require a partial demolition in order to properly inspect and when you’ve gone that far a complete remodel isn’t that much more work.
Among the ramifications is that when it comes time to sell you can’t market the unwarranted rooms for the purpose they were converted for. Though that doesn’t prevent sellers like this from doing so.
Not even down 30%? More resilience for the SF market! Average house, plan c nabe, pretty close to a “busy street” (Laguna Honda), and they overpaid. (So did the buyers who paid 1,088,000 back in summer 2004, obviously.)
El Bombero – Plan “c” for you is Plan “a” for others – especially if your kids go to St Brendans. Also, this is on a dead end street – no traffic, absolutely quiet. That said, Even in the mid 9’s this is stretching it for a 2:1 with the unwarranted space.
Also, agree with MOD on maing the downstairs legal. We had to essentially do this with an unwarranted space in our 2 flat building when we did the condo conversion. Walls were opened and wiring, framing and plumbing were inspected. That was easy because it was wallboard. Would be a shame if some of that marble had to be removed
Listing says this is “Near St. Brennan” not St, Brendan. You must be thinking of a different neighborhood (it couldn’t be that the realtor is stupid and/or lazy).
This place is also right by Juvie Hall, where most of my catholic school friends ended up 😉
Does anyone realize that the VAST majority of “3/2” houses sold in this part of town are actually 2/1 with an additional “unwarranted” bedroom/bath? These 2/1 + unwarranted bedroom/bath places consistently sell in the 1MIL+ range. I have been house hunting for the last year and have not come across one “true” 3/2 in this area for less than a million that wasn’t a piece of junk. This seems to be priced well for what it is
I have been house hunting for the last year and have not come across one “true” 3/2 in this area for less than a million that wasn’t a piece of junk. This seems to be priced well for what it is
What’s interesting is that SocketSite has previously featured lots in Forest Hill Extension for about $1M.
112 Kensington: https://socketsite.com/archives/2009/10/feel_like_a_feudal_lord_in_forrest_hills_extension_112.html
63 Garcia: https://socketsite.com/archives/2009/05/under_two_hundred_per_square_foot_just_not_including_th.html
Was 85 Vasquez a piece of junk?
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Francisco/85-Vasquez-Ave-94127/home/1437883
renegade,
The first 2 are lots not houses. Smart Guy is looking for a house for under $1M
Vasquez looks to be a 2/1 with a bed/bath down. Which is the other thing he’s talking about not wanting.
The first 2 are lots not houses. Smart Guy is looking for a house for under $1M.
Yeah, that wasn’t meant to be a direct response to Smart Guy. It was to add commentary to the thread in general — that what people considered lot value in 2009 is above short sale value of this place in 2011.
Vasquez looks to be a 2/1 with a bed/bath down. Which is the other thing he’s talking about not wanting.
First of all, it appears to be a true 3/2 — not unwarranted, at least per tax records, and I see a permit to add a bed/bath. There was also a canceled permit to add another bedroom by enclosing a deck. Second, I was asking if it was a piece of junk. The question appeared to be whether one could find a 3/2 that wasn’t 2/1 + unwarranted space for under a mil, no?
Sorry for the sidetrack, but what does Redfin mean by “In Fault Zone (See Report)”.
See “Location Information” for 85 Vasquez.
^^^ it usually means that the property is on or near one of the fault lines marked on the Thomas Bro’s real estate maps. I think it might be required disclosure. Some of the faults on the Thomas Bros. maps are small and not expected to generate much activity.
Proximity to a fault is not nearly as important as the other geological characteristics of the site such as in whether it is on bedrock versus liquefaction prone soils.
thanks MOD.
i have heard of homes (and Memorial Stadium) being atop the Hayward fault, but the San Andreas is in the ocean. this must be a small fault.
btw, i would stay away from homes on the Hayward Fault even if it is on bedrock.
Yes the Hayward is probably the most dangerous fault in the bay area. The USGS predicts that it is about 50% more likely to crack than the San Andrea in the next few decades plus as you mention a lot of people live right on top of it.
There are lots of little faults scattered about the bay area. You can see some of them marked in black dashed lines on this map: http://seismo.berkeley.edu/hayward/hay_faults.gif though that map isn’t very detailed. It doesn’t even show the fault that this house sits atop.
Now reduced to $925K.
At 925k this is down about 27% from what looks to be a near peak price. Typical result around these parts of SF or did these sellers just foolishly overpay back in 2007?
renegade,
I read Vasquez as legal but with a 2/1 up and a permitted 1/1 down. So although legal not what Smartguy is looking for.
As far as a remodeled 3/2 for under $1M, I would sell mine for that price. I’m not gonna, but I would, so I am sure somebody else will.
Well clearly “the Smart Guy” was smarter than us if the price just got knocked down $40K.
This house has now been taken off the market.
Back on – listing changed from 3/2 to 2/1.
Heard that there is $100k+ in water damage to lower structure / foundation from faulty plumbing. Don’t know if it’s related to the work without permit (or inspection)
Sold for $860K.
[Editor’s Note: Look Out Below.]