There's action in a few parts of the Sand Section. Not sales – no new ones since April 15 – but action worth a look.
First, as we go to press (?), SFR inventory in the Sand Section is at 40, the highest we've seen in a year-plus of public market tracking. That's already +5 over the figure at mid-month. (See this story for a graph.)
There's one less listing in that mix, though. The toe-dipping, market-testing, ultra-modern walkstreet home at 528 6th (pictured) has now called it quits. The listing was withdrawn and the signs are down.
This home hit the market in mid-November 2007 at $3.449m, fully $450k higher (+15%) than its Feb. 2006 purchase price ($2.995m). That was ambitious.
Though we know some people liked it, the market snubbed 528 6th. Its stark, angular modern design just isn't what the typical family is looking for. (The apparently bogus square footage reported in the listing also drew MBC's ire in "Buyer, You'd Better Verify.")
More importantly, the sellers' attempt to play to scarcity in the market simply didn't work. True, when the listing emerged there were few South End walkstreet options, and there's always talk about how "pent-up" demand is for such homes. But 528 6th is just one door in off of Valley, not a classic walkstreet feel, and, well, maybe demand is not so pent-up after all. (See "Options Grow on South End Walkstreets.") The sellers never cut their price in an effort to move it, and appear to have decided to keep it.
Much further north – up at the Gateway to Manhattan Beach – there's a long-running case of involuntary keeping of a property: 4419 Highland (click for details via Redfin). You all know the story here, so we won't rehash it.
It was most recently offered for rent, but the news is that you can now buy 4419 Highland on a lease-option basis.
A lease-option. When another El Porto (El Norte!) listing sang this siren song last Summer, we presented the sellers' pitch and described the pitfalls. (See "The Lease-Option Gambit.") The home did sell pretty quickly, though, so we gave credit for creativity to the sellers then.
To compress the essence of our story from last year, the catch to a lease-option can be that you put up a high security deposit thinking it'll be part of your down payment. Then, 12-24 months after agreeing to purchase the home at today's price, you either do so, or you walk and the landlord/seller keeps your cash. The worst part, in a declining market, is being frozen into an agreement to pay today's price ($1.299m for 4419 Highland).
There are a hundred ways to offer a lease-option, however, and we won't assume this is a bad deal on the Gateway till we get more detail.
Finally, back down South, we have a case of a neighbor perhaps undercutting another. 401 3rd St. (click for pics & details via Redfin) just hit the market at $2.685m – a decent price for a sizable (4br/4ba, 3450 sq. ft.), newer home (an older home radically remodeled in 2006).
Across the street, 400 3rd (click for details) is a lovely corner-lot Nantucket (Cape Cod?) with 4br/4ba and 4050 sq. ft., priced at $3.499m. That's a difference of $814k for two comparable homes with almost the same location.
Because 401 has a narrow street frontage and 400 has that coveted corner, location advantage definitely goes to 400. And 400 offers 600 extra square feet. But is it an $800k advantage?
By PPSF, 401 is undercutting 400 by 10% ($778/PSF vs. $864/PSF). If it sold tomorrow morning at full price, 401 3rd might ultimately cost the sellers of 400 3rd $200k or more. Both sellers would walk away happy, but there could be grounds for a grudge.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Sand Happ'nin's
Posted by
MBWatcher
at
9:09 PM
Labels: lease-option, sand section, walkstreets
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
I'm sure we can expect to soon see sand section sales (especially W. of highland walk streets) stay relatively stable compared to the more volatile Tree Section of MB.
We all know that even in a poor market, these homes, plus the ones on the strand, are holding their value.
Unless I've got a personality that I'm not aware of, somebody is posting as mookie besides me.
4:51 wasn't me, and yesterday there was an am post that wasn't me. Both harmless posts, but not sure what the point is.
Mookie - get a google username...
Hmmmm mookie, maybe it's time to put in a call to the shrink.
Go to angryrenter.com! Sign the petition and tell Congress to stop with this bailout nonsense.
You know all these owners on here hope only the worst for us. Well, let's return the favor. Let's do everything we can to ensure that their overpriced bubble homes collapse!
401 3rd was remodeled in 2006, but built long before that. Note the rooftop deck, which isn't allowed anymore.
Including 505 3rd, that's three houses within a block on the market. Very unusual for this street.
Hm - 401 3rd lists "year built" as 2006, which is what I was going by, but you're right, that rooftop deck is a giveaway that the home is older. Tax records say 1990. Must have been a pretty complete remodel/rebuild. I'll change the story to reflect this. Thanks.
"Hm - 401 3rd lists "year built" as 2006, which is what I was going by, but you're right, that rooftop deck is a giveaway that the home is older. Tax records say 1990. Must have been a pretty complete remodel/rebuild. I'll change the story to reflect this. Thanks."
What? You didn't do your homework?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but "roof decks" in MB are ok but they must be off of a legal room. You just can't put a deck on top of the house like you can in Hermosa. It looks to me like this deck is off of a room. Builders?
- I recall roof decks are ok within guidlines and height restrictions
- MBW your link to 401 3rd is not working
Farmhouse went pending. Blakes can shut up now.
401 3rd was huge remodel. Seller is (was) a commercial real estate agent. Very gothic in feel, not too beachy...
401 3rd link is fixed, thanks.
To add to 8:07am's post about the 'housing bailout,' I don't think people realize just how dire the economic consequences could be if some of the measures currently under consideration get passed. One of the most far reaching is that homebuilders could write off their losses up to four years in arrears. This means that if they take a loss today, they could theoretically get a huge refund check for the taxes they paid on the profits made in the go-go 2004-2006 period. As a result, they have and incentive to immediately liquidate as much non-performing inventory as possible, causing further downward pressure on prices. While the impact will be felt mainly with housing land and tract homes from major builders, local custom homebuilders who have made profits in the last four year could use this tool to exit a house that is currently losing money more gracefully (Matt Morris, Villa d'Arte, etc.). They could theoretically price their houses at an amount equal to their development cost LESS their tax refund, and still remain in a net-neutral financial situation (i.e. get their initial investment back). The current net effect of this legislation is bad for values in any market that has mature homebuilding companies in it.
12:50 PM here again.
I'm not hinting that Matt Morris or Villa d'Arte are currently losing money, just that they are local companies who have operated consistently in the last four year in MB. As a result, they are example of local builders that stand to benefit from new write-down rules.
re: the various "bailout" plans – I keep starting, but not finishing, a story on the subject. The legislation is a real moving target.
Concretely, I would be skeptical that the homebuilder credit would apply to any old homebuilding company or consortium – it's certainly been drafted at the behest of the major building companies (of which I believe all, maybe save one, are publicly traded). Do you have reason to believe it would be a benefit to smaller-time local builders?
The other issue, 12:50 – your insight is quite valuable, that the promise of a tax writeoff, noxious as that may be on its own merits, would inspire liquidation at a loss, with a huge hit to home prices.
Now, you do know that half the readers here don't think that's such a bad thing – if the market (nationally) needs to correct, quicker is better, even if we hit a deep trough. In fact the promise of a nearer-term endgame might get people to support this corporate bailout by another name who might not do so otherwise.
Dear MBW,
Forgive me if you've already reported on the massive house being built on what I believe is the 1200 block of the Strand. I'm just curious about it. We've been out of town for a while and jogged past it this morning and my jaw hit the ground. It looks like it's going to be a very nice home, but it looks to be about 10,000 sq.ft!
Thanks.
1200 block - you mean the one with the stucco and details to make it look like it's right out of old Venice? I think it's a giant remodel. Anyway, haven't covered it, do love it, will look into it.
Sorry MBW, I got my blocks confused, I meant the one south of the peer, maybe it's more 300 or 400 block. It's hard to miss as it appears to be a half block long.
The old Venice one is interesting as well.
Thanks again.
The house at Strand & Third is 3 lots, approx 14,000 sq ft, single family residence. Owner is one of original principals of Ariba Software. House has lawn and pool on second floor. Interesting fact, geothermal heating system is drilled approximately 400 feet into ground. KAA designed. Completion set for summer 2009. The construction team is a class act lead by the construction manager. A picture is posted on the construction office. Very much looking forward to see the finished project.
Heard today that southend, non-strand/non-100 block teardown is in escrow for $4.3, if so it probably sets a record.
1:49 p.m.
It looks like it belongs somewhere else already and its gott a long way to go until its complete. I can't believe the city approved such a project. I guess money talks....and this one is speaking loudly. It will be an eyesore in my opinion regardless od how much they spend.
mbwatcher, 12:50pm here again.
My understanding that it is simply a carry-back rule change that ups the existing two years to four, and that it applies to everyone. Thus it doesn't matter if you treat it at the corporate or individual level, as the test is whether the income/loss was received from a sale of real estate within four years. So even if you formed a separate pass-through entity (LLC.,LP., etc.) for each project you undertook, you should still be able to claim the losses on your personal return, but only against prior income from real estate (i.e. no passive loss against other sources of income). Of course, C-corporations (like the homebuilders) would only be able to take these losses at the corporate level. I am not a CPA or tax attorney, so my understanding may be incomplete. I hope that addresses your first question adequately.
Here's a question, money-makers: Why would you go through all of the necessary due diligence to buy a $2m or $3m MB house and then not even bother to make sure that the nanny you hired for your kids is doing a decent job?
Today at AdventurePlex during the lunch hour, there was an adorable, blond/light-haired boy named Jake, probably 2 or 3, who was very sweet, incredibly verbal, and unbelievably ignored by his nanny (30s or 40s, big build, Hispanic/Filipino, black hooded sweatshirt).
He was all alone in the little kids area, begging to play with us, then he wandered off into the big kids area with kids knocking over him, while his nanny sat sullenly in the far corner of the lunch area, never once saying a word to him. (I only know it was his nanny because I asked who was with him because he seemed so small and alone.) She was either on the phone, talking with another nanny friend, or glaring at me for asking who was watching him. I never once saw her attempt to play with or talk to this bright, sweet, sad little kid.
I know there's a better place for this and my comment will probably be deleted, but moms and dads, PLEASE - take the time to find out who is really looking after your kids during the day.
1:49
That's a very subjective response, but you are entitled to your opinion. I think it is going to look great, once the facade comes up, the concrete is hidden, and the landscaping put in. What makes me mad is that people in this city think they have a right to tell a property owner what he should do with his land. If you wanted an art jury, move to PVE. If you want an HOA and serious CCR's move to a new gated community in the OC. At least in that case you are CHOOSING those restrictions.
What really gets my goat, is all the ex-post facto jealousy legislation that gets passed in this city. A hundred 6,000 SF houses get built in the 90's, so the long-time residents in 1,500sf homes get jealous, and BOOM! Here comes ZORP. This guy from Ariba has the wherewithal and EXTREME patience to assemble and entitle three lots on the strand, and BOOM! We now have the two lot-tie limit, which should have been called the 'Jealous Houswife Act of 2008.' These laws do NOTHING to improve the quality of life of homeowners in this town, and can adversely effect existing owners with redevelopment plans. And please don't give me the MB Historical Society line of: 'The character of historic neighborhoods can actually increase home values.' Newsflash: 1950's ranch houses will NEVER be historic and in a place like MB, where you can spit to the beach, square footage will almost always trump nostalgia. I guess this is what happens when the city council has no real issues to legislate. Ok. I'm done.
3:05 here.
Sorry 1:49, I had my anonymous posters confused. This rant was actually directed at 2:40pm.
interesting post about the homebuilder NOL credit. next time i run into Jerry Howard in DC, i'll be sure to thank him for helping to tank the high end housing markets. what a fiasco.
this actually explains something that had been puzzling me today. this morning, my realtor told me that the builders with inventory in the tree section have put the word out to the agents that they are ready to accept low ball bids for the stuff that's not selling.
i had originally thought that this might be a signal that vineyard is pulling back. but, if the NAHB is putting the word out that the tax credit's going to be in whatever the Frank/Dodd bill becomes, then it makes sense to go ahead and blow out the inventory now.
the other great thing (from a builder perspective) about the inventory liquidation is that as the comps come down, it will put pressure on land values. that, in turn, will allow the builders to pick up new land at prices that are economical in a world where new construction in the trees is < $2m.
i always knew that once the downturn picked up steam, the REIC would pile on in an attempt to get prices to the level that stimulated transaction activity.
remember, the industry only gets paid when transactions take place. at some point the local developers will be short land and eager to see prices to drop to the point where buyers emerge.
when that happens, i suspect people who bought new homes in the 2004-2007 time frame are going to be sorely disappointed at what's happened to their resale value. it will take a good 5-10 years for them to get their principal back.
Hey MB "mom",
I think we've all seen MB "moms" do the same thing. Nice of you to come to the conclusion that it must be a "money maker" that would have a nanny like that.
Who was watching your kids while you were shaking down all the nannies?
I won't delete the 2 comments so far on nannies, but I'm shutting down that discussion now.
The first comment was too passionate to ignore and the rebuttal was on point.
That's it, though.
3:05 p.m.
Hey dude, its not just this town. Every city has some restrictions. You don't know what youare talking about. Things like this home don't fit the beach community.
Wow. I had not thought about it that way before.
Builders will slash their prices because they effectively get a "get out of jail free" card.
No reason to even stop building in the suburbs, they can keep building houses as long as they have lots (which have been written down in value, of course).
Tract homes can get built for 50$/square foot. That means the "bottom" for a 3000-sq ft house in the burbs (with lot and improvements being written off against previouis profits) can go down to 150-K.
Isn't it a crazy world we live in?
By the way, new home sales are ~500-k units per year and building rate is still considerably above that. If they knock the prices low enough, they can keep stealing sales from the existing homes.
If this passes, prices will OVERCORRECT significantly.
3:29
Once again. You are entitled to your opinion. I own a house here too, and I think that it will be a beautiful addition to the Strand. So who's right?
Before you respond, make sure it isn't your envy talking. How would you feel of you were this guy's shoes and after you bought the land and meticulously designed your dream home according to the existing rules, then someone said 'sorry the rules have changed and you can't build that anymore.' You'd probably be pissed.
IN this guys shoes.
3:43 p.m.
no envy dude. I envy nobody. That is reserved for the snobs in this town. If the shoe fits wear it.
Post a Comment