Purchased in March 2008 for $566,500 with $509,537 in debt and just $56,963 down, four weeks ago a notice of default was filed on the $417,000 first mortgage behind the purchase of 425 1st Street #2004, a 605 square foot one-bedroom at One Rincon Hill.
Yesterday, in a Hail Mary move that shouldn’t catch any plugged-in readers by surprise, 425 1st Street #2004 hit the MLS listed as a short sale for “$399,000.”
Keep in mind that 425 1st Street #1204 is also in pre-foreclosure having been purchased for $575,000 with $517,500 in debt while 425 1st Street #1104 (purchased for $567,244 with $509,950 in debt) and 425 1st Street #2104 (purchased for $587,000 with $557,650 in debt) are both scheduled to hit the courthouse steps this month.
∙ Listing: 425 1st Street #2004 (1/1) 605 sqft – “$399,000” (short sale) [MLS]
∙ 2008 Versus 2011 At ORH With Some Courthouse Steps In Between [SocketSite]
not surprised. very poor construction in the unit I stayed in at One Rincon. i was very excited to move in because i liked the building and thought the finishes looked great. but OMG was it loud – i could hear traffic all day long, and always knew when any of my neighbors were home because i could hear them walking on their hard wood floors, listening to music, watching tv, etc. in the 21st century, i’m pretty sure that level of noise is completely avoidable through better construction.
What a stupid place to build an apartment building. The compromise to having a 10×10 foot bedroom are all the amenities you can walk to easily. Where are the amenities near this building? Where is the coffee shop that is your defacto office? Where is the cheap local place where you take guests for dinner since your apartment is so small?
It’s laughable that fools paid those absurd prices for 1/1 condoboxes just a few short years ago.
Can someone explain to me how this unit is 605 sq ft??
I see a 10×11 BR and 13×18 Living/Dining … so that’s 344 … let’s be generous and throw in 100 for the closets and bathroom … still only 444. I don’t get it.
I had a feeling this was coming. Only a matter of time before we see this sort of thing at the Infinity.
@Greg, when “officially” calculating square footage for real estate (the number that will show up on county records) you measure to the outside of the walls, or if a wall is shared half the thickness of the wall. Since those measurements unofficial and are of individual rooms I believe they would only measure to the inside of the wall. Also, as the rooms are not rectangular there’s probably some space not accounted for even in the room measurements.
This could account for the discrepancy.
Sure it’s tall and there’s probably a nice view, but that’s a pretty “plain Jane” layout. And while I love the building on the skyline (and get a chill when I drive past on the freeway as it towers over me), those who point out how isolated it remains, thanks to the recessionary cancellation of everything else nearby, are right.
For me the high HOA’s with any building really put me of.
over $700! that’s huge money
Building is nice with all the amenities but you really pay for it with the HOA dues. The unit itself is a boring, no personality tiny box…….views are great.
RE: Sq. footage : This is why most real estate companies no longer allow agents to post the ‘reported ‘ sq. ft. as every person measuring will give a different estimate and when it doesn’t add up to stated square feet on marketing materisals, liability runs rampant and agents and companies are sued.
These are the smallest units in the the building; however, this has everything to do with the owners’ financial situation and nothing more. These are homes bought by investors and people that simply should not have been able to buy a home. NO different than those bought by investors in other condos in the city from 2006-2008, and where the buyers’ financial woes pushed them into default.
These units will be snapped up rather quickly and rented out at very high rates.
“These units will be snapped up rather quickly and rented out at very high rates.”
Good one grrr. LMAO
You’d rent it for $3000. easy. SoMa rental rates are through the roof and will only get higher until the new apartments being built come online in 1-3 years. And even then. Keep watching SFwatcher, cause that’s clearly all you’ll ever be able to do
However you measure it, that’s a tiny 1 BR
Actually, grrr is probably right. Rents are up like 10-15% YOY in Soma – as I’ve said before, lots of dumb tech money sloshing around down here right now. Not saying it’s a great investment, but it breaks even or slightly cash flows if you put 20% down. Be tough to get $3K/month for something this small, but probably at least $2,600.
$3000 rent for #2004? LOL, I’ve been out of SF for a little over a year, but the rent couldn’t possibly have shot up that much. Too bad sfrentstat price trend no longer works. I used rent high floor 06 with spectacular views for $4100 back in 2008.
You don’t want 04. It’s a cauldron in the afternoon and the view sucks. And ORH is all about the view. Also at this price, you probably end up paying more for the HOA than mortgage.
Just a note that 2307 was sold at $560k back in 08. On price/sf, it probably was about the same as this one.
Not a bad layout for such a small unit. 1 bedrooms generally take a big hit so I can relate to some of grrr’s comments however I’d guess at least 80% of the owners in this building are underwater. (Two bedrooms generally fare better.) I think $3000 would be a stretch for this unit but even if you could get that rental price, with mortgage, HOA’s, taxes, vacancy & maintenance you’re not exactly going to be making a profit. (You’re also going to have to depart with more than 20% to get funding.) In short, this is really not cash flow positive at $399,000.
“It’s laughable that fools paid those absurd prices for 1/1 condoboxes just a few short years ago.”
Can we start calling them econdoboxes to play off econoboxes? Of course, modern econoboxes are better than the econoboxes of yore, but modern econodboxes probably suck worse then econdoboxes of yore.
This building as faulty kitchens designed by men(?) for men who do not cook. Its seems to me a high rise bachelor pad for men who understand comic con more than they understand the social graces.
Lesson one: A view of a freewway is not inviting no matter how high.
Bad building bad location .. should never have been approved by planning commission..will plague SF forever..
“These units will be snapped up rather quickly and rented out at very high rates.”
hot air balloon warning.
people that say such things, never have the balls do what they say. they’ll never buy these properties to rent out because even they know it’s a bad idea.
Couldn’t disagree with Kathleen more. I once had a view of a freeway and found it hypnotic on rainy afternoons or at night watching the headlights. The Loma Prieta quake took it from me and I miss it.
As for the building, I love the location as I said above. It extends the skyline from being a table-top clump at the foot of Market St., emphasizes that Rincon Hill is a hill and gives me at least a thrill looming over the freeway. I just wish it would get some mates (esp. the other ORH tower) there on its hill.
All that said, the unit itself doesn’t do much for me–it’s hardly even a real one BR. And I can see how, as someone above said, it would be a sweatbox on sunny afternoons.
re: grrr and Keep watching SFwatcher, cause that’s clearly all you’ll ever be able to do
One of my pet peeves, there: the insinuation that choosing not to buy (and thinking it is a bad idea to do so) is an indication that you are unable, not unwilling, to do so. I thought this sort of taunt got discredited after 2008…
kathleen has never been in a One Rincon Hill home. Ever. Clearly. Sounds more like the inane rants of another of the give-me-a-free-home crowd, or the entitled Bernal Heights homeowner who feels that any building over 5 stories in the heart of SF blocks “her” view.
Designing a good or bad kitchen has absolutely NOTHING to do with the gender of the designer. To say this is simply old fashioned, stereotyping and immature.
The layout of this (very small) kitchen was based on so many other factors, such as overall building footprint, mechanical and structural issues, number of units per floor, and other important criteria.
I’ve been in kitchens designed by women that were horrible, poor layout, lack of counters, terrible work triangles. And I’ve been in kitchens designed by men that were well thought out, functional, solid, and workable.
@grrr You know that Kathleen is a respected agent in the City and I’m sure she has been into One Rincon Hill. Look her up, I’m sure it’s not too hard.
Respected doesn’t mean an agent knows anything about good design. Usually the word “respected” is a self-adhered adjective.
They all think they are “respected”. food for thought.
The already foreclosed 3604 now dropped to $499K
Comment to lyqwyd’s comment. Actually the “official” way to measure living space is: For condos and other multifamily properties, the Gross Living Area (GLA) is measured from the inside of the interior wall surface. For single family homes (also for single user warehouses, retail, etc., if that matters – not called GLA for them though) the GLA is measured from the outside surface of the exterior walls. In other words, a 1,000 SF condo and a 1,000 SF single family home are not a straight across comparison in terms of size. Yes, I’m an appraiser.
Thanks Schaetzer. That seems like an objective and reproducible way to measure horizontal space. Can you comment on whether and how some interior spaces are excluded from the SFH living space calculations? I’m thinking the sorts of spaces that might be excluded are rooms that are unheated, have low ceilings, or perhaps were built to substandard specs.