271 Nevada

It sold for $720,000 in November of 2004.  And three years later, in July of 2007, it sold for $790,000.

Listed for $749,000 this past February, 271 Nevada was withdrawn from the MLS in June without a reported sale. And on Friday, the small single-family home “nestled in Bernal Heights with softwood floors, wainscoting, a formal entry foyer, living room w/ fireplace & built-ins, formal dining room w/ box-beam ceiling & leaded glass hutch” returned to the MLS as a short sale listed for “$549,000.”

∙ Listing: 271 Nevada (1/1) 875 sqft – $549,000 [MLS]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    This could be a nice starter house. Small but in an OK location. I think it will go over asking.
    Since when are softwood floors considered a marquee feature ? I thought that there were the cheapest option for flooring back in the day.

  2. Posted by sanfrantim

    Looks cute on the outside, but no interior shots? Red flag. Is it really only 875 sf? Sometimes the tax records on these old places understate the square footage for some reason. But if 825, that’s still $625 psf — no bargain. But I like the nabe and, if I were looking for a starter SFH home – I’d be intrigued enough by the price to want to take a closer look.

  3. Posted by diemos

    “Since when are softwood floors considered a marquee feature?”
    To a good realtor any feature is a marquee feature.

  4. Posted by sanfrantim

    I love the old pine floors. But, to the point, I don’t see the listing touting them as a “marquee” feature; only mentioning them. Wouldn’t it be inaccurate for the realtor not to? The red flag for me is why no pix of those floors, etc.

  5. Posted by ex SF-er

    Since when are softwood floors considered a marquee feature ?
    in an age where people highlight Pergo floors, softwood floors are definitely premium.
    it is hilarious beyond words that they chose to take the following pictures
    -one exterior shot
    -one deck shot
    -one basement/garage shot
    -one back yard shot
    -two “view” shots
    and zero interior shots.
    I know when I buy a place the most important feature is the cave like basement and garage.

  6. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    People really were paying $900 a square foot for a place south of Cortland? Un-freaking-believable.
    $550k seems steep to me for that location, if that square footage is correct. This is two blocks from the Projects. At least it is close the Alemany Farmers’ Market! I am surprised that they did not put that in the listing.

  7. Posted by left.my.heart.in.SF

    I think this is a cute little starter house. I must agree with the rest of you, why is there not a single photo of the interior and those wonderful floors?
    I do have one question, what is with the terms “apples to apples” and such? I have been watching this site for over three months now, and cant figure it out.

  8. Posted by Q

    Apples-to-apples means comparing actual sales prices for the same property, without a material change to the property in between sales (e.g., no renovations, additions). Some people feel it is a better barometer for the market than focusing on median prices, which are subject to varying mixes of property types.

  9. Posted by eddy

    Omitted is the fact that it also sold in 2000 for $437,000. A (short) sale at asking would be a 25% increase over the past decade.
    How or why this property ever commanded a 65% premium from 2000 to 2004 is just insane beyond words. The 2007 buyer and current short seller really got burned here. And it looks like they sold their condo in 2007 with a nice gain that was rolled into this place. Poof! No idea what the surrounding comps looked like in 2007 but $790k would have bought a lot more in a Noe condo/tic. Something is very odd about the 2004 sale.

  10. Posted by diemos

    “Something is very odd about the 2004 sale.”
    Yup. What’s odd is that in 2004 there wasn’t a single real estate professional who looked at that sale and thought that there was anything odd about it.

  11. Posted by eddy

    Thanks for both of those very insightful comments on this thread. I’m no defender of real estate professionals but you clearly have an ax to grind. As I’ve said in the past, having a good buyer agent is very important; and even more important is that as a buyer, you have to be very informed about what you are doing and recognize that you are the only person genuinely looking out for your own interests. I feel sorry for these short sellers and hope the bank takes the brunt of this loss. This is a case where the banks enabled this madness and, had proper regulations and oversight, been in place, would have prevented the 2004 sale from appraising at that level, as well as the 2007 sale. I would be very surprised if the comps supported those prices. Of course, this house was a comp as soon as it sold in 2004 for 700+. And that is exactly where the banks are responsible. That said, buyers need to be smart. Sadly, many are not. Crazy times we live in, but I disagree with Tipster that it is a bad time to buy *anything*. I’ve seen a few good trades out there and there are still people making $$$ on real estate. Mostly the agents though 🙂 these days. This is still an area that needs overhaul as I do think the commission system for real estate transactions is grossly flawed.

  12. Posted by jenofla

    Nice starter home? Is there such a thing? It seems like the starter home strategy (which implies a shortish-term hold) isn’t a good idea given the rent:buy cost ratio these days and the flat prices.

  13. Posted by john

    One of the posters mentioned proximity to housing projects. I don’t know Bernal well. Should that be a concern when looking in this area? Is this a particularly dangerous area with high crime? Or, is there another concern?
    I see a good number of similarly priced nearby houses.

  14. Posted by R

    @john: There’s a small group of projects down the hill on Alemany, next to the freeway.
    This is not a “particularly dangerous area with high crime”. But values definitely go down as you go down the hill.
    But this house is almost a mile from the projects, so not really an issue.

  15. Posted by curmudgeon

    John , there are also other parts of Bernal that are near public housing. One is Holly Park (not a bad project at all. Also, “Bernal Dwellings” (if it’s still called that) on Cesar Chavez across from Bernal near Precita Park used to be awful, but was torn down and rebuilt as a Hope VI project, and is much better these days.
    I don’t either of these, or Alemany, would be considered anything like the larger projects like Sunnydale or Hunters View. But if I were investing in real estate I would keep it in mind.

  16. Posted by yunion

    Starter home? Its a 1BR with 875 sq feet. What are you starting? A hamster colony?!?! This is more like a finishing home….where an old person goes to die.

  17. Posted by A.T.

    This could be a decent starter home for a couple who have no kids — perfectly good sized for that (I’m assuming it is not a total dump). However, given the relatively short 5-odd year anticipated hold for a starter home, that only makes sense if the holding + opportunity (tied-up downpayment) + transaction costs are less than renting. This place is still way overpriced to make sense. It would need to fall below $400,000 for it to add up, which is why it will eventually fall that low. You’d be crazy to buy it even at the current 30% discount off the 2007 price and with today’s low rates. Again, illustrates how truly insane the 2003-2010 era was on prices — just gambling the ponzi scheme would continue.

  18. Posted by El Bombero

    Down 30% from peak would be pretty typical for this part of Bernal – really, pretty typical for SF as a whole. Potential buyers shouldn’t get misdirected by the thinly-veiled attempts by realtors and shills to imply that every large loss is the result of someone “overpaying” a few years ago. Prices are down 20-35% (from peak) for the vast majority of SF properties. Everyone, it seems, “overpaid”…..
    – el bombero

  19. Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

    Yeah, I think it is overpriced too. But I still think it will go for over asking.

  20. Posted by R

    “Down 30% from peak would be pretty typical for this part of Bernal”
    Really? Here’s what I found for anything south of Cortland and east of Ellsworth that sold this year, and had previously sold 2004-2007 (peak):
    456 Prentiss (permit for $3k for a fence)
    11/09/07: 475,000
    02/10/10: 555,000 (up 17%)
    3905 Folsom (no permits)
    03/28/07: 800,000
    06/11/10: 645,000 (down 19%)
    330 Gates (no permits)
    07/20/07: 1,250,000
    05/21/10: 1,092,500 (down 13%)
    331 Ellsworth (no permits, but seems very strange)
    05/28/04: 865,000
    11/17/10: 559,000 (up 55%)
    Where did you get your 30%?

  21. Posted by eddy

    @R, you’re dates are wrong on 331 Ellsworth. Redfin shows it sold in 04 for 559k. The 2010 sale is 865k I presume.

  22. Posted by [anon.ed]

    Bernal 1/1/04 to 11/24/04: 188 sales 747K avg 737K median
    Bernal 1.1.10 – 11/24/10: 123 sales 770K avg, 767K median

  23. Posted by EBGuy

    It appears that 330 Banks helped drive the pricing on this house. The home at 330 Banks (760 sq.ft.) sold for $700k in 2005 and was taken back by the bank in June 2010 for $558k. Currently listed for $534.9k.

  24. Posted by R

    @eddy: woops, yeah, I swapped them numbers. Anyway, still showing up 55% since 2004.

  25. Posted by A.T.

    Comparisons with 2004 do not add much when the point was Bernal’s drop from peak about three years later.
    The place that is the subject of this thread may be where the -30% figure came from — of course, it may sell for more, or less, than asking.

  26. Posted by R

    Yeah, I see the asking price of the subject house is -30%. But lyqwyd stated that was the norm for this area. I’m questioning that, as the data I was able to find doesn’t show that.

  27. Posted by eddy

    @EBG, good point.

  28. Posted by John

    What do people think of this fixer north of cortland?

  29. Posted by lyqwyd

    @R, when did I say that?

  30. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    But this house is almost a mile from the projects, so not really an issue.
    Um, no:
    Two block from Market Heights, which are pretty nice as Projects go, but still low income housing.
    0.3 Miles from the Alemany Projects, not 1 mile. I have no idea if crime is an issue or not, walking through here in the daytime is fine, I have done it many times coming back from the Farmers’ Market. But don’t just make stuff up.

  31. Posted by R

    @lyqwyd: yeah, my bad. It was El Bombero. Sorry for the mixup.

  32. Posted by R

    @NVJ: I guess it depends on your definition of ‘projects’, but I don’t consider housing created by a private developer to be ‘projects’.
    Ands as for your .3 miles, not sure how you got it.. It’s .8 miles (or nearly a mile) by street, and over .5 miles as the crow flies:

  33. Posted by NoeValleyJim

    My bad, R, I misread what Google Maps was telling me. It is .8 miles and up a hill at that, from Alemany Projects.

  34. Posted by sfrenegade

    “and zero interior shots.”
    I assume the interior sucks so they are trying to show some minimal amount of bones and show the advantages of the lot in order to make the sale. The starter house concept is mostly broken in the Bay Area, but this house could be expanded. As Milkshake mentioned, I think this place is overpriced but still might go for above asking.

Add a Comment

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