It has been about 6 weeks since there was a sale in the Hill Section, but this week we saw 2.
First was a new listing, priced at land value, at 943 9th (just west of Dianthus). A flat and dated yet "very livable" home (listing) was offered on a 7500 sq. ft. lot for $1.6m. With some lot sales in the area going for much more (872 8th, somewhat larger, sold off the MLS for $3m), that must have looked like a bargain. It lasted 3 days.
Second was a home just down the street at 916 9th (pictured), which we've featured at MBC several times because we unabashedly liked it. (See our first story, "A Modest +50% in the Hills.") This one began last year at $3.275m and worked its way down to $2.895m this year, after some holiday time off the MLS.
The sellers paid a hair less than $2m in Nov. 2003, so they'll walk with a nice profit. Equally important, someone's getting a great home out of the deal. Our best to both sides.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Action on 9th
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Looks like one of Mrs MBC's favorites located at the corner of Agnes and 26th St just went pending too!
Many kudos to MBW for showing the upside of things on a day when even General Electric posted unexpected losses. Not a member of the accused "cult." Thank you very much for your objectivity.
can anyone help me understand - what are the really nice spec homes selling for per square foot
what i mean is, if a vacant lot would sell for 1.5 million today, and matt morris has a house just completed - a 4000 square foot house -and he sells for 3.5 million that means that the buyer is paying 1.5 for the land and 2.0 for the house
the buyer is paying 500 bucks a square foot for the house
using this logic, i am trying to figure out what buyers are paying right now for new construction
i assume matt gets a premium and the lower end builders sell for less but can anyone do the math
how does it compare to buy a spec home vs buying the land and hiring an architect and getting exactly what i want
let me lay out a scenario
ok a teardown on a walk street south of the pier and west of highland will cost me three million bucks -
then if i hire a great architect and builder to build me a 3000 square foot house they will charge me all in , 450 a square foot
if instead of having them build me what i want i buy a spec house of similar quality that is just sitting there for sale, will i pay more all in for the spec home or more all in to have what i really want built
by the way, i don't want to take sides in teh battle between bulls and bears - i don't want to express an opinion as to whether houses will go up or down - i am simply asking today right now - build vs buy
help me out
"i am simply asking today right now - build vs buy help me out"
I don't know about MB, but I was considering building in the Valley and the information I got was you could build a nice house for $225-250 per sq ft. That's construction costs only. Obviously you can spend less or A LOT more depending on the style, materials and acutriments.
The big problem right now is finding financing. From what I understand Indy MAc was the biggest provider of "construction to permanent" loans and they have gotten totally out of that business. I think lenders are rightly concerned that they could finance the construction of a house that could be worth less when it's completed than when it started. I assume that there are still lenders out there who would fund a new construction project, but I'd guess you'd be looking at something around 40% down.
We're buying a spec house. :-)
Building is really the best option to make sure you get everything you want in a home. Down to the placement of the appliances, you have a complete choice.
You just can't get that with a spec home.
i understand what you are saying
but let's say that matt morris buys a piece of land and then puts up a house - how much per square foot do i pay (excluding land)
then let's say i find the land and hire matt to build what i want
apples to apples do i pay more or less
"then let's say i find the land and hire matt to build what i want
apples to apples do i pay more or less"
Presumably it should be less if you buy the property and then hire the contractor. Why? Because they don't have the carrying costs to offset and they're not assuming any of the risk. In the first instance (spec build) the builder is taking a gamble and, if things go according to plan, will gain more from the outcome. The second instance you are assuming all of the risk and the contractor is just a hired gun.
I don't know about Matt Morris, but that's certainly how most contractors would look at it.
this sounds very reasonable - can others give their opinion
apples to apples do i pay more for spec home or more for a custom home that is exactly the same >>>
what is the point of going through the agony of building a custom home if it's going to be the same as a spec? Between temporary housing and financing costs, you're going to be way better off buying spec and you'll probably get a better location too!
I do agree that building a custom is expensive and time-consuming. But in the end, you have a truly one of a kind home that has everything where YOU want it. All of the specs I have been in are just plain vanilla. This is because they [the builders] can't do anything "out of the box" because they must target the lowest common denominator. Really, if you want your own fixtures in the bathrooms, your own appliances, your own deck, etc, having a house built custom is the only way.
Plus, interior design for spec homes is usually pitiful and bare bones at best. Furniture usually always sucks as well.
"usually always" Now, that's an intelligent use of words.
MBWatcher - do you know the sale price of 916? Was it sold at list or do we need to wait for it to close?
Thank you.
Post a Comment