May 7, 2012
No Hill Street Blues For This Maniscalco Designed Home
The sale of 350 Hill Street closed escrow on Friday with a reported contract price of $3,250,000 ($956 per square foot). While that’s 4 percent under its list price of $3,395,000, it’s 12 percent over its sale price of $2,900,000 in 2009.
To repeat a sentiment we've stated before: Design matters, damn it (as do views).
Once again, the Maniscalco designed Dolores Heights property was featured on the 2011 AIA Home Tour and offers four bedrooms across three levels with big windows, an open floor plan, and some rather nice and recognizable indoor-outdoor living off the kitchen.
∙ A Maniscalco Designed Modern Apple Atop Dolores Heights [SocketSite]
∙ Design Matters, Damn It (As Do Views): 3975 19th Street Sells [SocketSite]
∙ 2011 San Francisco Living: AIA Home Tours Lineup (And Challenge) [SocketSite]
First Published: May 7, 2012 10:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Pretty typical reault for this spring 2012 SF market, unfortunately. 2006 all over again.
Posted by: anon1 at May 7, 2012 12:02 PM
.0117*3.3e6 = $38610 in taxes/year
Who can afford that type of tax bill?
Posted by: James at May 7, 2012 12:05 PM
@James: I think most people above entry level part-time janitorial staff at FB would qualify (or so the press would have you believe)...
On the topic of affordability, say the buyer put 20% down and financed ~$2.6mm. A 5/1 ARM on this amount would run around $7k/mo before tax benefits, call it $5.5k/mo net financing cost. So even with a high tax bill, still compares favorably with trying to find a rental of similar quality in Noe (and flush monthly cash).
Posted by: no_ vally at May 7, 2012 12:19 PM
Nice, but why do these contemporary all look the same?
Posted by: Judith at May 7, 2012 4:02 PM
Who can afford that type of tax bill?
Um, the same folks who can afford to drop more than three mil on a house, I presume. Somehow, though three plus grand a month may seem like a good bit, I'd bet that's not really the limiting factor for people looking to buy in this range.
Posted by: justme at May 7, 2012 9:22 PM
7k on a 2.6M loan? You're smoking crack.
Posted by: sayno_tocrack at May 7, 2012 9:25 PM
@sayno: yes, those rates do exist. When markets are tanking around the U.S. and there are only a few bright pockets where trends are strong, foreclosures few and prices increasing, banks are going to compete hard to build books of mortgages around those places. In the Bay Area, First Republic is probably the most aggressive and will bid hard if it likes the buyer and property. I'm honestly no shill (just a customer)...with them (and good credit stats of course), you can get down to $7k/mo on $2.6mm.
Posted by: no_ vally at May 7, 2012 10:47 PM
^^^ Seems like the rest of the answer would be the loan terms. Is it $7k/mo for a 30yr fixed? Not likely or even possible. Or is that a teaser rate for the first 2 years? Or something in between?
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at May 8, 2012 8:36 AM
2.6M / 360 Months = 7222
Posted by: ReadingForRealtors at May 8, 2012 8:46 AM
^^^ call it the return of the dreaded IO/ARM or whatever, but yes, non-amortizing, interest only 5/1 ARM can get to $7k/mo on $2.6mm principal amount.
Main point is that some banks whose mortgage origination arms are moribund but for a few pockets throughout the nation are willing to be aggressive in order to build portfolios and buy market share. Not just a random event that FRB's newest office will be on 24th across from La Bou.
Posted by: no_ vally at May 8, 2012 9:36 AM
not dreaded by people who have them...2.6!
Posted by: sparky-b at May 8, 2012 6:59 PM
It seems like the IO/ARM is very useful for anyone expecting to flip but a futile way for a homeowner to finance. It basically amounts to paying to put a property on layaway.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at May 9, 2012 9:30 AM
Sorry, my ARM is not I/O. I should have clarified that.
Posted by: sparky-b at May 9, 2012 9:38 AM