485 Marina Boulevard (and yes, we added the ornaments)
Its 7,531 square foot oversized corner lot along Marina Boulevard makes it hard to miss. And we’ve always been rather keen on the 4,170 square foot four-bedroom home as well.
Purchased for $2,800,000 in 2001 and refinanced in 2002 with a $1,800,000 note, 485 Marina Boulevard was scheduled to hit the courthouse steps on 12/24 with $1,848,366.41 owed on said loan. At least it was the last time we checked.
And although we’d be surprised if it actually goes to auction tomorrow, consider it an early Christmas present if it does and you’re plugged-in and prepared.
We’ll see you next week to wrap up the year.
UPDATE: As expected, it appears as though any auction has indeed been postponed until 2010. And perhaps that first isn’t all that’s owed. Cheers.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by sparky-b

    Just the kind of stocking stuffer I’ve been looking for.

  2. Posted by EBGuy

    Has anyone checked their front door for the missing wreath? A couple of details from various sources. RealtyTrac is showing an auction date of Jan. 25 (and lists the price as $1.8million, which is the amount of the refi in 2002). Yahoo!RealEstate shows the amount owed as $2,689,353. The owners went back to the well (refi or home ATM machine) in 2003 and again in 2004. All of this, courtesy of WaMu…

  3. Posted by Newsboy

    I was inside this home about a year or so ago for some wine tasting. Nice place. Owned by the folks who own Canihan Winery up in Sonoma. Ya never know.

  4. Posted by Fishchum

    Newsboy – what was the noise level like due to the Marina Blvd. traffic? that’s one thing I’ve always wondered about the homes along that street.

  5. Posted by formerly%whatever

    While EBGuy usually posts reliable information, I think he’s wrong in this case. I don’t see the loan amounts being different in the refis. I don’t know the source for Yahoo, but that amount also seems wrong.
    This will not go on the steps.

  6. Posted by anon

    “This will not go on the steps.”
    At all? Care to elaborate?

  7. Posted by Newsboy

    Fishchum – I don’t really recall noticing a lot of traffic noise, just remember the view. However, I’m a city person so I’m not highly sensitive to noise.

  8. Posted by EBGuy

    AAAAANNNnnnddddd, in the other corner, a perennial Socketsite favorite, 311 Marina Blvd, appears to be destined for the auction block (again) after receiving a NOTS on October 19. A $2.583million dollar loan on a $3.69million dollar sale price in mid-2007. WaMu, wamu…

  9. Posted by marina girl

    they had a yappy white dog that drowned out the vehicle noise.
    love the big corner lot.

  10. Posted by SausalitoRes

    I *love* the homes along Marina Blvd. but can’t get past the bit about it being built on fill. I watched many of these homes being rebuilt/ seismically upgraded following the Loma Prieta quake through the mid-90s. If/when the “big one” occurs, the whole thing could happen again.

  11. Posted by EBGuy

    I don’t see the loan amounts being different in the refis.
    That doesn’t make any sense to me, but again, I only have access to the SF Recorders website (thanks for the update “the poster formerly know as whatever”). Can anyone suggest a reason why multiple Deeds of Trust would be filed in subsequent years? The names of all parties appear to be the same. Could these be HELOCs that don’t actually show an amount? Or, perhaps, the property is being used as security for a different loan?

  12. Posted by Honestly_Now

    re: Noise on Marina Blvd – Not bad especially if not near a stop sign or light. It is not like living on Lombard or Franklin.
    Re: Sale – Something seems out of sorts with this. The home does not show for sale AT ALL. I have a feeling there is something missing in this picture. If not, then this will be a giant step down in SF valuations imho.
    Waiting now for the haiku on this one 🙂

  13. Posted by Troy

    Google Streetview.
    Wow, that’s like the most optimum density and quite beautiful facades. If only the rest of the urbanization was like that.
    Corner would make a good walk-up retail space though.

  14. Posted by wow

    ^^^ like a coffee shop or a restaurant on Marina Bld. It’s a nice street, but it’s dead on that side. Chestnut or Starbucks next to Safeway don’t cut it for me. Too far away. The next best thing is Greens at Fort Mason.

  15. Posted by Honestly_Now

    Other thought is the possible sub-division of the lot at some point. I wonder if there are any deed restrictions on doing that.

  16. Posted by formerly%whatever

    My theory on the multiple trust deeds is that the initial teaser rate period on the loan ran out, so they got a new loan to start over.
    To reiterate, there’s plenty of equity here, so unless the tsunami literally hits, this won’t go on the steps. Move along, nothing to see here.

  17. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    The Christmas ornaments made me chuckle. Thanks editor.

  18. Posted by anonn

    Deeds of Trust would be filed in subsequent years?
    Deeding it between parties and then to a private trust?

  19. Posted by Kurt Brown

    Corner lot with view
    Perfect for walk-up retail
    Taco stand gold mine

  20. Posted by Paul Hwang

    Mery XMAS!

  21. Posted by inclinejj

    437020CA 311 MARINA BOULEVARD, San Francisco, CA 94123 $2,849,481.21 Cancelled 1/19/2010 2:00 PM 2:00 PM

  22. Posted by EBGuy

    The NOD on the winemaker’s house at 485 Marina Blvd. was canceled on Feb. 10.

  23. Posted by inclinejj

    8/10/2010 2:00:00 PM Address: 311 MARINA BOULEVARD
    State: CA
    Zip: 94123
    County: San Francisco
    APN: 0419A-002
    Sale Status: Sale Date 08/10/2010
    TS Number: 241901CA
    ASAP Number: 3653482
    Notice of Sale Amt: $2,874,389.19
    Opening Bid Amt: $1,806,075.00
    Sold Amt: 0
    Sale Location: At the Van Ness Avenue entrance to City Hall, 400 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94101
    Trustee: California Reconveyance Company
    Trustee Phone#: (800)892-6902

  24. Posted by sfrenegade

    Yet another auction scheduled. Will this one stick, or will this guy get away with not paying the mortgage for another 6+ months?
    Btw, did we ever sort out the mortgages? It almost seems like there’s a 1st and a 2nd based on the numbers.

  25. Posted by inclinejj

    9/10/2010 2:00:00 PM Address: 311 MARINA BOULEVARD
    State: CA
    Zip: 94123
    County: San Francisco
    APN: 0419A-002
    Sale Status: Postponed to 09/10/2010
    TS Number: 241901CA
    ASAP Number: 3653482
    Notice of Sale Amt: $2,874,389.19
    Opening Bid Amt: 0
    Sold Amt: 0
    Sale Location: At the Van Ness Avenue entrance to City Hall, 400 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94101
    Trustee: California Reconveyance Company
    Trustee Phone#: (800)892-6902

  26. Posted by sfrenegade

    Wow, finally pulled the trigger on bankruptcy. The good news is that it didn’t delay the sale by much. But now the trustee can get involved too.

  27. Posted by tipster

    311 Marina Short Sale for 40% off 2001.
    Beds: 4
    Baths: 4.5
    Sq. Ft.: 2,952
    $/Sq. Ft.: $559
    Lot Size: 2,783 Sq. Ft.
    Property Type: Detached Single Family
    Style: Colonial, French
    Stories: 3
    View: Bay, Mountains, Marina, Ocean, City Lights

  28. Posted by tipster

    Sold in 2001 for 2.8, now listed as a short sale for 1.65.
    I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that today is another GREAT DAY!! But you probably knew that already…

  29. Posted by [anon.ed]

    The 311 Marina Blvd property Tipster was crowing about is not on the market and the Redfin listing # makes no sense. Its last sale was not arm’s length, the owner filed a strategic bankruptcy to keep the property, and he’s fighting tooth and nail and is totally uncooperative, witness the lack of photos every time it’s “on the market.” It appears to be far from saleable or on the market at 1.6M and change or whatever. Thanks for wasting my time. I knew it looked too good to be true.

  30. Posted by EBGuy

    If you want to know more about 311 Marina Blvd., here’s a link to one of the first 311 Marina threads. From there you can trace the links to find out about the owner’s relationship to the founder of Hotmail and the blighted building next to the Odeon. “No more dot-coms — no more pipe dreams”.

  31. Posted by sfrenegade

    Sorry if I’m rehashing old threads, as I may have missed some of them, but here’s what I can figure out about 311 Marina and its owner beyond the thread EBGuy linked to and the Odeon thread he referred to:
    The current owner appears to be G’s friend, as mentioned in the Odeon thread.
    The 2007 sale at $3.69M was not arms-length and it looks like G’s friend bought it from either a brother or cousin (same last name), whom I’ll call H.
    H also got foreclosed upon for two other properties:
    1) 124 Knoll Circle, which he lost in 2009 to the now defunct Downey S&L, whose assets have largely been assumed by US Bank, for a note of $386.5K. US Bank flipped it 3 months later for $515K. Unclear what H bought it for, but the prior owner paid $544K.
    2) 647 San Jose Ave, which he lost in 2007 to US Bank. H had paid $1.12M. The new buyer bought it for $900K, and the chain of title is screwy, but it looks like that was 5 months later.
    The seller from the 2004 sale of 311 Marina at $2.35M were a husband and wife who also used to own Terrell Owens’ old house in Fremont, for you football fans.
    The current price of 311 is 30% off that 2004 sale. If you adjust the 1989 sale of $1.135M for inflation, you’d get $2.00M in 2010 dollars.

  32. Posted by [anon.ed]

    “The current price of 311 is 30% off that 2004 sale”
    You’re presuming it’s for sale. Why?

  33. Posted by sfrenegade

    Well, Redfin says:
    MLS#: 81046597
    Source: MLSListings
    Status: Active.
    On Redfin: 1 day
    It may have screwed up, but I’ll go with it in the absence of other info. Did anyone catch the listing price from January?
    Btw, is it G’s friend who filed bankruptcy? Or H?

  34. Posted by [anon.ed]

    What MLS? It’s not on the SFARMLS, the listing number is totally invalid, and that’s been reported.

  35. Posted by sfrenegade

    Come on, you have more MLS resources than I do:
    The agent’s phone number is the area code for suburban Phoenix: Scottsdale and Tempe plus some others.

  36. Posted by [anon.ed]

    Oh, OK. Well I’m sure all the prospective Marina Blvd shoppers in the greater Phoenix area are aware of the property, then. Nope, nothing askew here.

  37. Posted by sfrenegade

    It’s on a Norcal MLS, but the agent is in Arizona. I think it’s sketchy that the agent is in Arizona, but the MLS listing is bona fide Norcal. Are you unfamiliar with local MLS sites?

  38. Posted by [anon.ed]

    I’ve got that website bookmarked but I don’t often have reason to use it. This one is not in the SFARMLS or affilliated, and it’s an SF listing. Do we really need to discuss that any further other than to note it’s odd? I asked you why you presumed it listed. You pointed out that it is, technically, listed. What’s the endgame there? Surely it’s not for the owner to sell the property.

  39. Posted by sfrenegade

    No idea what the endgame is, but I’m not sure why you are making such a big stink about my pointing out something factual. The current listed price is 30% off the 2004 sale. Full stop.

  40. Posted by tipster

    “Thanks for wasting my time. I knew it looked too good to be true.”
    Oh that’s really, really rich coming from a Realtor. Imagine that: something on the MLS that isn’t true and when you go to investigate, you find that the reality is a big disappointment and a complete waste of time.
    I’m sure that none of us have ever had the same experience. /sarcasm

  41. Posted by [anon.ed]

    “something on the MLS that isn’t true ”
    Once again, it’s not on “the MLS.” Regardless, your reaction to the prospect of a 1.65M Marina Blvd property was remarkable and rather telling. You played it for laughs only. And that made me laugh in a way you did not intend.

  42. Posted by anonee

    proves what i said earlier about tippy and cohorts;even if something is priced too low they are not interested in buying. strange hobby to haunt an sf re blog but have no intention of ever
    profiting from it.

  43. Posted by tipster

    So if something in 2009 was priced $5 under its 2009 price, I should buy it in 2009 even if it will be $1,000,000 lower in 2010?
    Only a commissioned salesperson would think such a thing.

  44. Posted by lol

    I think we’re all interested in buying. Just not at any wish price.
    I have said it again: I am shopping very seriously. It’s just that this market is split between 5% decent deals and 95% great delusions. You have to be either very fast or very patient. If you can afford to be both, you’re golden.

  45. Posted by anonee

    sure lol, that could be true. ol tippy sees $559/sq.ft on marina blvd and is still not
    a buyer…
    “It’s just that this market is split between 5% decent deals and 95% great delusions”
    plugged in sources are touting 40-50% off peak pricing, inventory spiking, foreclosures rising , arm reset tsunami etc.. and you are still not seeing deals? something is not matching up here-which is it?

  46. Posted by sfrenegade

    anonee made the same point to me the other day, but if he was really the “investor” he claims to be, he would put his money where his mouth is and buy one of these amazing deals he seems to be seeing everywhere.
    As I mentioned, I go to plenty of opens, and the good stuff, which is a very small percentage, goes fast for a higher price, whereas the vast majority of the market is junk.

  47. Posted by diemos

    Uh-huh. Me thinks the anonee doth protest too much.
    One would expect an investor to be delighted that his competition was staying away, not be urging them to take his deals away from him.

  48. Posted by lol

    anonee forgot to click the Nitrox option off:
    plugged in sources are touting 40-50% off peak pricing
    Not. Probably 10,15 to 20% depending on various factors. And certainly a bit more to go…
    inventory spiking
    That’s a fact.
    foreclosures rising
    Also true.
    arm reset tsunami
    That’s an obsolete 2008 prevision. You still have time to catch up and level with the bears. Trillions of your tax dollars have brought rates down since. The Tsunami will not happen if that’s still happening. Just a slow moving return to some median. Tipster has his slow/paint/grass quote. We’ll probably settle to 2001-2002 prices. How fast depends on what policy makers decide to do: let is run its course (fast-ish) or proceed with subsidies (very slow).
    and you are still not seeing deals
    Yes I do. But not that many, and not for long. People are not crazy. A good deal today is a safer bet.
    something is not matching up here-which is it?
    You tell me.

  49. Posted by lol

    Oops, I meant Nitrous

  50. Posted by [anon.ed]

    “Just not at any wish price.”
    559 per foot on Marina Blvd is a developer’s wish price.

  51. Posted by lol

    The wish price comment was a general comment to a general statement (you people are not gonna buy anything anyways), not specific to this property.
    I think 559 is a good price on Marina today, if it’s not an extensive rebuild, that is.
    Heck, a first line water view for the price of a decent NV 2008 buy.

  52. Posted by anonee

    sure diemos,
    “One would expect an investor to be delighted that his competition was staying away, not be urging them to take his deals away from him.”
    i have made two purchases in the last 3 years. i am not worried about competition from the fellows who post on ss as they are not interested in buying at any price. the ‘dread’ of your avatar is widespread amongst the perma-bear set…

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *