54 Harriet #1
As we wrote about 54 Harriett #1 this past October:

Purchased for $750,000 ($543 per square) in January 2005 by way of two variable rate loans totaling $750,000 (yes, 100% financing in San Francisco), the 1,382 square foot two-bedroom was taken back by the bank this past June with $607,500 owed on its first.

With respect to the other two units at 54 Harriet, the 767 square foot #3 sold for $611,000 in August 2005 ($797 per square), while the 1,044 square foot #2 has a tax assessed value of $712,708 ($683 per square).

Missing a few kitchen appliances (but not the counters), the condo was listed by the bank for $599,900 and closed escrow two days ago with a reported contract price of $485,000. Call it $350 per square foot and 35 percent ($265,000) under its January 2005 price.
A Different Kind Of Historic Context On Harriet: 54 Harriet #1 [SocketSite]

11 thoughts on “54 Harriett #1 Closes For $351 Per Square Foot (35% Under 2005)”
  1. 100% financing on 750K. No wonder you’d get outbid 90% of the times on bland condos. A 22-Y old drop out pumping gas in Vallejo could price you out thanks to creative Ninja financing.
    Now it’s the other around. Cheaper places and the drop outs are back in their mom’s basements.

  2. The problem I have here is the value trade off. I’m more bullish on San Francisco real estate than some other here, and mostly track the upper tier out of my own personal curiosity. But places like this are small (I rarely include loft space as legit sqft) and its location is pretty rough. This is like the lower east side in 1985. It’s going to take a lot of changes to clean the area up. Point is, in 1985, buying a condo in LES was not a great idea no matter how bad you wanted to live in NYC (*). I’m not sure I see the logic in buying this place, or any of those nasty condo rise on VanNess by the highway. But I don’t think these prices have as much impact on the upper and middle tiers personally. There is an impact for sure, but no matter how cheap rents get in Jersey City, Hoboken or Brooklyn, you’re not going to impact Upper West Side, Tribecca and Central Park View homes.
    (*) Note: if you held that place in LES for 25 years it was a brilliant move.

  3. I’m not sure I see the logic in buying this place, or any of those nasty condo rise on VanNess by the highway.
    I’m not interested in buying here either. But in fairness, if you want a chance at making big capital gains, this is the type of area you need to buy in. If it gentrifies, then you’ll make a lot of money. If it doesn’t, you won’t. But buying in Pac Heights has no upside (as in investment…of course it’s a nicer place to live) because the area is totally gentrified, so in the long run prices aren’t going to grow any faster than incomes do.

  4. Mid-SoMa is still getting a bad rap from you guys. “If it gentrifies”? Tell that to restaurants and foodie shops like Radius, Citizen’s Band, Pinkie’s Bakery, the Terroir organic wine bar, and the converted taco truck from Chez Spencer selling French frog legs at 7th and Folsom every weekend.

  5. Olive bar and others moved in to the tenderloin 8 years ago. Its boosters started calling it the “trendyloin”. But the tenderloin never “gentrified” just because of a few foodie shops.
    Just because a few restaurants and others move in looking for cheap rent and who can draw in spite of the neighborhood, doesn’t make the place less of a dump.
    And real estate prices in the fillmore area have dropped more than 35% since their upscale restaurants moved in and were supposed to “turn it around”.
    Not falling for that BS again.

  6. “In spite of the neighborhood”? No, because of the neighborhood. You haven’t been to visit lately.
    Or, OK, don’t visit. That leaves more foie gras, organic vintages, local honey, Kobe burgers and fresh-made bread for the rest of us.
    Oh — earlier I forgot to mention the multibrew beer store, also betwen 7th and 8th on Folsom. Posters here would like it, I think — at least, the after-work twentysomethings cramming the place all seem to have money.

  7. And real estate prices in the fillmore area have dropped more than 35% since their upscale restaurants moved in and were supposed to “turn it around”.
    Not falling for that BS again

    “The Fillmore” ? What upscale restaurants? Who said that the Fillmore was going to gentrify thoroughly? You don’t even have the decency to hate on reality any more.

  8. Yay! Someone was able to buy something they like and (hopefully) in their price range. Not bad for a city that has out priced many.
    Oh, Even without the loft, this place is pretty spacious.

Leave a Reply

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