April 29, 2008
Alameda 3bd/2ba Homes: For Sale and Sold
My previous post on Alameda, Albany and Emeryville sales sparked some conversation about sales stats. One of our readers, Parag, is interested in Alameda 3bd/2ba homes but states: “As a potential buyer, its pretty frustrating to see pices HIGHER now (at least for 3/2s) even though the ease of financing has gone away.” Intrigued I did a search for 3bd/2ba homes to see where current list prices are at, as well as looked up sales recorded in the past 3 months. Current list prices for 3bd/2ba homes range from $499,000 to $1,395,000; however most appear to be in the 600k to 700k range. Recent sales paint a similar picture with the below properties sales prices ranging from $643,000 to $888,888. Has anyone else found a trend in higher pricing around Alameda? Alameda folks, please do let me know!
Thanks to Philip Kaake’s site for April sold stats.
Alameda: Current Properties For Sale
402 Haight Ave. $669,000 3bd/2ba stucco built 1927 Previously sold in September 2005 for $670,000 so short-sale
1546 Broadway $550,000 3bd/2ba 1256 SF 1930s stucco interesting style, unusual craftsman: art deco-ish? Previously sold in 1996 for $203,000
1417 Page St. $700,000 3bd/2ba 1954 SF stucco craftsman; 116 DOM and being sold “as-is”; Reduced from $835,000; Last sale: $610,000 in August 2003
2830 Fernside Blvd. $658,000 3bd/2ba 1572 SF stucco with tiled roofing No price reductions recorded; Previous sale:
931 Magnolia Dr. $789,000 3bd/3ba 2396 SF 1960s contemporary; no price reductions listed; previously sold for $850,000 September 2005
390 Hollister Ave. $799,000 3bd/2.5ba 2219 SF 2005 new construction; no price reductions; previous sale: $729,500 April 2005
613 Haight Ave. $720,000 3bd/2.5ba 1809 SF A “duet” built in 1905; no price reductions or past sales history listed
1423 Willow St. $619,000 3bd/2ba 1142 SF Victorian built in 1897; Reduced from $679,000; previously sold in May 2005 for $620,000
Alameda Sold: Selected 3bd/2ba Sales Recorded Feb-April 2008
110 Sherwood Lane $795,000 3bd/2ba 1817 SF Sold Feb 2008
344 Beach Rd. $643,000 3bd/2ba 1536 SF Sold Feb 2008 Previous Sale: $596,000 May 2007
58 Shannon Circle $888,888 3bd/2.5ba 2205 SF Sold Feb 2008 Previous Sale: $277,000 Nov 1988
629 Sandalwood Isle $780,000 3bd/2.5ba 1998 SF Sold Feb 2008 Previous Sale: $100,000 Aug 2004
425 Coral Reef Rd. $702,800 3bd/2ba 1438 SF List Price: $738,000 Sold April 2008 Previous Sale: $625,500 in Nov 2005
428 Tucker Ave. $679,625 3bd/2.5ba 2035 SF List Price:$729,900 Sold April 2008 Previous Sale: $652,315 in Oct 2007
2904 San Jose Ave. $700,000 3bd/2ba 1968 SF List Price:$719,000 Sold April 2008 Previous Sale: $715,000 Oct 2006
1050 Otis Dr. $672,000 3bd/2ba 1837 SF List Price:$749,900 Sold April 2008
David said:
I drove by the house on Broadway. Seemed awful small for a 3/2. Didn’t bother to go in.
April 29, 2008 9:18 PM
Alison Ching said:
Hi David: thanks for the heads-up. 1256 SF sounds like a moderate size for Oakland/Berkeley properties in that price range but for Alameda looks to be on the small side judging from the other 3/2 properties on the market.
April 30, 2008 10:04 AM
David said:
I think it has 1256 sq ft in a fourth dimension. I wonder how a house that appears to be, say, 45X20 and single story can physically be 1256 sq ft.
But maybe I’m eyeballing it wrong.
April 30, 2008 11:06 AM
Parag said:
Alison
WOW!!! Mwah mwah..thank you so much. This is a wealth of Info. I’m glad I have redfin on My Yahoo as I had not actually visited the site in a couple of days
April 30, 2008 3:03 PM
Alison Ching said:
Hi David: “fourth dimension”, lol =); well, these things can be strange…our house is 950 SF but looks much larger from the front because it is a row house victorian but a bit wider set than others built in that period; and I’ve been into homes that are the oppposite: tiny from outside but once you go in it somehow expands…
Hi Parag: glad you like the info; hope it helps! Thank YOU for your previous comments; they spawned posting material for me. Something I wanted to clarify from your previous comment: when you said that 3/2 prices are higher in Alameda “now”, were you comparing to 1 year ago, 2 years ago, etc.? I wasn’t sure what your time reference was…Thanks!
May 1, 2008 8:55 AM
Parag said:
Hi Allison
By “higher now” I meant that homes had a price as high or higher relative to similar transactions in 2006 which I consider the peak of the bubble. Its interesting that in 94501 and 94502, the price / foot for non fixer uppers is still in the 400s, a level that was hot only during the bubble time. Pre-bubble pricing (2004 and prior) per square foot was below the 400 level. Any other insight would be helpful. Maybe I am being unrealistic??
May 1, 2008 6:06 PM
Alison said:
Hi Parag: thanks for the clarification. Perhaps it will just take some more time for those zips in Alameda to come down; Alameda and SF seem to be slower in price dropping than say Oakland and areas in Contra Costa such as Richmond…but according to many even “Prime” areas such as SF (and I think Alameda can be considered Prime as well) will come down eventually. See a comment by one of our regular readers SurveyKid who commented on my posting $100k or More Off Please: Oakland Price Reductions here:
http://sfbay.redfin.com/blog/2008/04/100k_or_more_off_please_oakland_price_reductions_.html#comments
May 4, 2008 6:27 PM