CFAH

246 2nd Street #802
As we wrote in March of 2010:

Purchased new for $665,000 in the year 2000, 246 2nd Street #806 is back on the market in 2010 asking $658,000. See silly rabbits (or perhaps “bears”), prices really haven’t fallen that much at all. And bank-owned sales are obviously irrelevant when it comes to comps.

The sale of 246 2nd Street #806 closed escrow in May 2010 with a reported contract price of $650,000 (2 percent below its year 2000 sale). And as a plugged-in reader notes, the 1,101 square foot condo is now back on the market and listed for $738,000 in 2011.
∙ Listing: 246 2nd Street #806 (2/2) 1,101 sqft – $738,000 [MLS]
A Nine Year “Push” To Be For A Two-Bedroom At 246 2nd Street? [SocketSite]
Another Non-Comp Comp Closes At 246 2nd Street (#1003) [SocketSite]

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

    So let me get this straight. This is going on the market fifteen months after the last sale close and the seller believes that it’s appreciated about 13.5% since then?
    Is there something different going on in South of Market that I’m unaware of?

  2. Posted by Pfffft

    246 2nd calling all suckers willing to pay more than $650K.

  3. Posted by Longtime-Lurker

    I recall what was really depressing prices there was litigation on the building. Only First Republic would lend with a high down payment required – (35%)?
    Does anyone know if the litigation has now been settled?
    I think in that area at that price point, there could be some decent values.

  4. Posted by OneEyedMan

    Lurker –
    Litigation settled out of court and money is in the bank. Settled for enough to replentish reserves to 100% and make the desired repairs. After settlement many residents rushed to re-fi. From what I’ve heard appraisals on the 2 BR units, which are all very similar, have not been inconsistent with this $738K list. However, it will be quite telling to see if/where this sells.

  5. Posted by Longtime-Lurker

    I recall what was really depressing prices there was litigation on the building. Only First Republic would lend with a high down payment required – (35%)?
    Does anyone know if the litigation has now been settled?
    I think in that area at that price point, there could be some decent values.

  6. Posted by sfrenegade

    “Is there something different going on in South of Market that I’m unaware of?”
    There are occasional drug sales that cause hallucinations and delusions, but I assume you were aware of that.
    But seriously, if the litigation was depressing the price, that would make sense. However, does anyone have details on the scope of the litigation and why exactly it would depress prices? What is the open-ended liability to the homeowner of the litigation? Higher HOA forthcoming to replenish reserves and/or pay for maintenance/repair?
    It would be less than 1% appreciation per year since 2000 at asking.

  7. Posted by Spencer

    shouldn’t they be lowering the price below 2010 level since housing values have dropped in the past 12 months?
    am i missing something?

  8. Posted by Pfffft

    ^^^ That’s what I’m sayin’.

  9. Posted by [anon.ed]

    yeah, you’re missing the current market, and instead talking on Socketsite about the way you think things ought to be going.
    9-F, 9-G condo 1/1 – 8/8/11 121 sales $753psqft
    9-F, 9-G condo 1/1 – 8/8/10 87 sales $694psqft

  10. Posted by Brahma (incensed renter)

    Thanks all. I actually was unaware of the litigation surrounding this building. The price difference seems reasonable given the litigation uncertainty factor; I agree with OneEyedMan that it will be quite telling when this sells although I don’t see a sale at asking as being completely outside the realm of possibility.

  11. Posted by henry

    As noted by a previous post, litigation was settled. I know someone who bought in that building while litigation was pending and most banks wouldn’t lend. It wasn’t about the nature of litigation, just that there was any kind of litigation pending. So indeed prices were depressed because the buyer was having to pay extra in terms of down payment and higher interest rates.

  12. Posted by Willow

    This building is in a fantastic location with some really nice views. Unfortunately the exterior of the building is looking a little worn after 10 years.
    I’m not sure what an equivalent unit at SFBLU is selling for so I’m not sure if this price is attainable. Just guessing but it will probably sell closer to 699K.
    Purchased in May 2010 and selling just over a year later… Makes no sense.

  13. Posted by OneEyedMan

    Exterior maintenance has been deferred over the past several years due to the litigation. Once the water intrusion issues are addressed next spring the building exterior is scheduled to be completely cleaned and re-painted.

  14. Posted by lolcat_94123

    I checked out one of these out probably 5 years years ago – had the huge wraparound deck. Was comically over priced (imo) then but the realtor told me how it was instant equity. The building just seemed boring with meh views. Nice outdoor space though on the one unit.

  15. Posted by anonsf

    There are some nice units in this building and the construction is solid (I used to live there).
    The litigation WAS holding down prices, but the two main problems with the place (IMHO) is the large number of renters (the original developer kept a lot of units) and the high HOA fees for zero amenities (not even security).

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles