Seeing Red on Front StreetMay 7, 2019
Having traded for $1.445 million in the first quarter of 2017, the “light infused One Bedroom + Den corner residence” #507 at 733 Front Street, a doorman building in the “highly sought after Jackson Square” neighborhood, returned to the market priced at $1.395 million last month.
The 1,122-square-foot unit features a signature red kitchen with top-of-the-line stainless steel appliances, a little outdoor space, an external storage space and a designated space in the garage, with HOA dues of $900 per month.
And after only four weeks on the market, the resale of 733 Front Street #507 has closed escrow with a contract price of $1.375 million, representing total depreciation of 4.8 percent over the past two years for the Jackson Square condo on an apples-to-apples basis.
Comments from Plugged-In Readers
This is a very good location and a nice, if not great, condo. Short of any unmentioned negatives this, IMO, reflects a topping out of the market at this time.
If you work in the Financial District, Jackson Square is a great area to live. It has an upscale, quiet understated feel to it. You can walk to work, meet with friends for drinks or dinner in the neighborhood or waterfront and you are well within easy walking distance to North Beach, Chinatown for weekend brunch without suffering the noise and crowds of either.
Comparable to Chelsea area of NYC perhaps. The good stuff in solid neighborhoods will do well.
Strange since everything else in the building has only shot up in value. Oh wait, perhaps when the last person bought it had amazing views. Now it looks at 288. Like New York, it is all about the location. In 10 years it will likely be $2000 a foot.
Perhaps. Of course 240 (aka 288) Pacific was already under construction when this unit last traded hands, having been purchased, and now sold, by the developer of that building next door.
And in terms of “everything else in the building [having] only shot up in value,” we couldn’t find a recent sale to support that claim, at least not on an “apples-to-apples” basis over the past couple of years.
Thank you SS. I was looking for a connection to their current portfolio — sometimes it’s as simple as the building next door. There’s old money, and then there’s real old money.
We me clarify a few things. Look at 605 and 211. Not on your radar? Both recently sold over prior sales numbers. Why focus on 507 knowing it was purchased by the developer of 288 Pacific to avoid delaying their project before the project ever broke ground ? Check out my website for 733 Front Sales. It sounds like socketsite likes to focus more on stories about depreciation though . I have a long list of buyers waiting for 733 Front and 288 Pacific resales.
Thanks for your skewed apples-to-apples approach though. Glad I can provide some accurate and useful information for those less informed. Clearly this article from socketsite failed to initially give the reason for depreciation on 507 and can cause those less informed to think the market is softening. Not true socketsite!
We looked at the sales history of both #605 and #211, as well as every other sale in the building over the past 6 months, prior to publishing.
Unfortunately, the apples-to-apples period for #605 was 2012 to 2018 (with a total gain over that period of 17.3 percent). It was early 2014 to 2019 for #211 (with a total gain of 9.8 percent). Any guesses as to how the market was appreciating from 2012 through 2015 and what that would imply, relative to these two sales, for the period since?
In addition, #507 traded hands after 288 Pacific broke ground.
So, Dean, with your intimate knowledge and a “long list of buyers waiting for 733 Front….resales”, I assume you brought in the buyer who purchased this condominium?
It didn’t close (not trade hands) until ground was broken, but the deal was in the works prior. Regardless, it not a real comp. It would be more interesting to see what it sold for in the hot 2007 market when it had unobstructed views and compare it to what it closed for last week with no views. This would be more interesting than “seeing red on front street” I believe you already used this title in 2009 during the market crash.
As such, we’re assuming the 2017 sale of #507 at $1,288 per square foot was never used as a market comp for any future sales, or included in any marketing materials, correct?
Regardless, the unit fetched $1.025 million back in July of 2007, with unobstructed views of the parking lots upon which 288 Pacific was built. That represents total appreciation of 34.1 percent over the past twelve years. And while that would represent average annual appreciation of only 2.5 percent, care to proffer how that appreciation was actually distributed?
This is a more accurate analysis and decent appreciation considering the view is no longer. Has the unit not lost their view, the value would be in the $1.6 range. Thank you for digging into this deeper.
But the average annual appreciation for the aforementioned unit #211, from 2014 to 2019, which captured at least two years of the 2011-2015 boom, was even less (a meager 1.9 percent per year). And for unit #605, from 2012 to 2018, it was less as well (2.4 percent). And neither of which “lost their views.”
Are you suggesting that the condo market in San Francisco has been appreciating at an average rate of under 3 percent a year since 2012? Or that 733 Front Street has been underperforming the market as a whole?
Not weird at all. I suggest you get your facts straight socketsite. Both 211 and 605 lost their views. Does Fox News own Socketsite? More fake news!!!
Unit #211 lost its obstructed view of the parking lot. And while certainly narrowed since 2012, unit #605 still features “panoramic” views (not to mention “beautiful upgrades throughout”).
And now Socketsite is an expert on 733 Front street? Hardly!! Thank you for making it very easy to to dismiss once and for all your cookie cutter approach to real estate reporting and stats. Best of luck to your website that seems to continue to spiral downhill. And again, for the record: 605 looks directly into 288 from all but 1 room. 211 never looked at the parking lot, but rather the battery and sky. You better get back to your next big story.
Our apologies, someone had specifically suggested we “look at 605 and 211” to counter the recent depreciation of unit #507 (which, over a longer period of time, actually outperformed the other two in terms of average annual appreciation, inclusive of the recent drop).
To be clear, this is the view which #211 lost (versus today). And in addition to the surviving living room view for #605, there are still some rather big views from a bedroom.
Does Fox News own the National Association of Realtors? Talk about fake news…
I think it’s hilarious how bent out of shape people get on these apples-to-apples comparisons. I find them valuable vs the “information” from my realtor.
If you don’t believe what your realtor tells you why do you have a realtor?
I don’t believe what my car salesman tells me, but I have one every time I buy a car.
a different one at everyplace you look and you go find the car by yourself you don’t take them around with you to the other dealerships.
really dude? Um, to help you buy a house, doesn’t mean you believe their bs
Might not need to have a Realtor on the buy side much longer. Giant class action suit going forward. Been tried before, but serious law firms this time:
“A new class-action lawsuit takes aim at real estate agents and the tools they use to do business, and housing industry watchers say it could revolutionize the way Americans buy and sell the biggest asset they’ll ever own.”
“Still, as Hahn put it, past lawsuits have mostly been filed by what he calls “ambulance-chasers,” not the firms behind some of the biggest civil settlements in American history.
That view is shared by Cohen Milstein partner Daniel Small, who called the way Realtors do business “a longstanding problem.” What’s different now, Small told MarketWatch, is that deep-pocketed law firms had done a “substantial investigation” that convinced them that there was merit to the case.”
I worked a block from here for 6 years and never could figure out why this neighborhood wasn’t more popular. On paper it should be great. But, it just isn’t. Outside of a few restaurants, it’s empty at night and desolate on the weekends. Mostly homeless sleeping in the parks you’d like to enjoy.
One thing holding the area back is Broadway. Nothing extends north past it; it’s a wasteland of parking lots and meh food chains. Nothing desirable for a hip neighborhood. Might as well bring back the freeway?
I’m a little late to apples and oranges party, but I’ve noticed many individual sales and data trends that contradict socketsite’s narrative on this topic (I’m a socketsite fan). After running average price/sf numbers for closed condo sales in the inner mission during the spring selling season, I see a 5.6% increase in $/sf from 2016-2019. I’m seeing similar gains in other neighborhoods. Perhaps the argument is that only SOMA/South Beach is softening. But, when I run the same search for South Beach, I see an 11% increase in $/sf from 2016-2018. Perhaps I’m missing something, but this is basically what I’m seeing (anecdotally) with my own listings as a redfin sell-side agent.
TL;DR Mix & Renovations. Many (Most?) properties are renovated for sale. This increases $sf and sales price but isn’t market appreciation. $psf changes across price. Plus even 5.6% over three years is 1.8%/year straight line. Big slow-down from years past.
Comments are closed.