Author: Alison Ching
Recent posts
October 7, 2008
The Crocker Highlands area has a lot of homes on the market right now: I counted seventeen on Redfin. You can search for them either by typing in Crocker Highlands in the search box (although some are only listed as “Crocker”) or just by honing in on the area of the map of Oakland with the arrow compass. Here are a couple of factoids:
(Second) Best Bang for Your Buck: While not the absolute cheapest per square foot for the whole area (for that see 1272 Bates Rd. listed below at $218 per square foot) at $300 per square foot 684 Walavista Ave. is some pretty nice bang for your buck. I mean, it’s not often you find a 4bd/3ba home in Oakland that was built before the 1980′s. Due to the large number of beds and baths as well as the drawing pictured in the thumbnail, I thought at first that the home was new construction. However, the description states it was built in 1922.
Least Days On Market: 1615 Trestle Glen Rd. (pictured above) and 1272 Bates Rd. have both been on the market for six days and both appear to be English Tudor style (although the Bates home is listed as “Mediterranean”; but the photo looks more like a Tudor). However, the similarities end there: the Trestle Glen home has roughly 600 square feet less than Bates, is nearly twice the price and has almost three times more lot space.
Most Days On Market: At 132 DOM and 122 DOM respectively, 1131 Excelsior Ave. and 812 Creed Rd. take the cake for longevity on the market. While the Excelsior home may be having trouble due to proximity to the highway (see Oakland: Great Deals I Wish I Had Waited For) it’s unclear why the 3bd/2ba at 812 Creed is taking a while to move. This home was originally priced at $799,000 in March of 2008 and is now down 200k to $599,000. Any thoughts on what’s up (or rather, er, down) with this one?
October 5, 2008
In my quest to find great deals in great neighorhoods, 2343 Mastlands Dr. (photos here)has come up on my radar several times. It sold last summer for $680,000 and recently sold again last month for $550,000. Its highest sale was $950,000 in April of 2006. While its description stated “BANK-OWNED, SOLD AS-IS. Well maintained home in Oakland Hills with great views. Minor TLC required…” I’m still surprised that it sold for so low given that it’s in the Piedmont Pines neighborhood of Oakland. Often called “exclusive” and “desirable” by realtors, San Francisco Magazine has called Piedmont Pines “nature for folks with serious cash” and “one of the prime locations in the Bay Area” (October 2007 edition). While not necessarily a “gorgeous” house glancing at the photos, this seems to follow the mantra of “location, location,location”: being in one of Oakland’s best areas makes $550,000 sound like a steal, even in this market.
2343 Mastlands Dr.
4bd/3ba
Sold for $550,000 on September 3, 2008.
Square Footage: 2150
Built in: 1958
Lot size: 11,761 SF
Sales History
| May 23, 2001 |
$240,000 |
– |
| Sep 26, 2002 |
$10,000 |
-90.6%/yr |
| Apr 04, 2006 |
$950,000 |
264.5%/yr |
| Aug 27, 2007 |
$680,000 |
-21.3%/yr |
| Sep 03, 2008 |
$550,000 |
-18.8%/yr |
September 30, 2008
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about several Oakland properties north of me that have been inching closer in price to the amount I paid for my house two years ago. I lamented that I would have done well to wait out the housing bubble: had I done so, I likely could have scored a larger house in a more valuable neighborhood. One of the properties, 1267 Bates Rd., was puzzling since it’s price ($529,000) did not seem to match its location (the coveted Trestle Glen). Readers Rbehs and Optionarm pointed out respectively:
I believe Bates is under large powerlines
and
In the street view for Bates, if you angle the view upwards you can see the large powerstructure
Sure enough, checking out the Google street view for the Bates home, you can see a humongous transformer in the backyard. Ahhh…Nothing like Redfin readers to give you the lowdown on real estate. This prompted several other cool readers (hi Art, David, Jackie and Adam!) to discuss the perils of having a huge hunk of power structure hovering over you: loud humming, definitely not eye candy and possible adverse health effects from EMFs (electromagnetic fields). Thanks dear readers! Not only did you educate me on yet one more item to be aware of when purchasing a house, you got me investigating EMF’s (for this thirtysomething, I hitherto only knew EMF as the band that sang the catchy “Unbelievable”, you know, that song that was played at proms and clubs across the US in the ’90′s?) Interestingly, I couldn’t find much that has been written about EMFs after 2002 when the California Environmental Health Investigations Branch was commissioned to do a study on their alleged health hazards. (See California EMF Program and their Short Fact Sheet on EMF ).
The World Health Organization (WHO) website also has a pretty comprehensive and user friendly overview of EMF’s. What sturck me most was one of their tables comparing acceptable exposure limits. They note that 5,000 V/m (volts per meter) is the highest acceptable “public exposure” while 10,000 V/m is the highest “occupational exposure”. Ok. Fine. So just know what you’re getting into if you work in a field where you’ll have high occupational exposure, right? Not so fast. You should also be aware of possible high exposure if your home is close (under?!?) a power transformer, since “powerline exposure beneath large power lines” is estimated to be around 10,000 V/m (compare this to only 100 V/m exposure for homes not near power structures). Of course, this brings me to the Trestle Glen homes. How much will you be exposed to under those big suckers? While much of the research has not found conclusive evidence of the health risks they pose, WHO states:
There is no doubt that short-term exposure to very high levels of electromagnetic fields can be harmful to health. Current public concern focuses on possible long-term health effects caused by exposure to electromagnetic fields at levels below those required to trigger acute biological responses.
and
Despite extensive research, to date there is no evidence to conclude that exposure to low level electromagnetic fields is harmful to human health.
However, the 2002 California study found:
an association between leukemia and…high magnetic field exposure such as living very near a powerline…
All of this sheds some light on why some of these Trestle Glen homes might be having a hard time selling (on top of our already disastrous market). But what do you say? Would you think twice about living under a power transformer? Let me know your thoughts, and again, a big shout out to everyone who brought my attention to transformers and EMFs in the first place!
More links discussing EMFs:
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health
US Department of Labor OSHA ELF Radiation Hazard Locations and Solutions
Wi-Fi As A Health Hazard
Electric Power Research Institute
September 28, 2008
Reading Tracy Taylor’s A Building So Beautiful It Has to Bode Well for Oakland prompted me to write about several properties I see on my way home from work. If you take Oakland’s 14th Avenue exit off of 580 W and drive south (down 14th), you’ll pass Highland Hopsital on your right and then a curious scene will emerge on the hill to your left: a bunch of falling real estate. Literally. Three homes on Wallace St. in Oakland’s San Antonio District are cracked and sliding off the hill. Uninhabited for a number of years now, the three homes had to be abandoned by their owners due to foundations damaged by moving down the slope. However, according to an inside source, though several investigations were done to determine the cause of the houses’ movement, engineers have not been able to figure out just what has caused this unfortuante (and heartbreaking for the owners and neighbors) situation. From what I hear, the city is finally agreeing to pick up the tab to demolish the homes (since the homeowners’ insurance has not covered it). Yet with Dellums’ recent call to trim the city’s budget due to the deficit, could this promise be in jeopardy?
Pictured below is a side view of one of the properties that shows the tilt downward:
September 23, 2008
I was intrigued by my fellow blogger Jenny Pisillo’s entry First Hand Account: My Visit to a Home Auction where she details her experience of bidding on a condo she’d been eyeing. Curious about upcoming auctions in Alameda County, I checked out the website that both Jenny and Susan Brady have cited: Real Estate Disposition Corporation. When you get to the site, you’re greeted by a banner proclaiming “Public Lender Foreclosure Auctions” and “All Homes Must Be Sold” and “EZ Financing”. While four auctions have already passed (or are in progress as of this writing, e.g. the Merced and Surrounding Areas auction was scheduled for today) there are two more to come: San Jose and Surrounding Property Areas is this Saturday, September 27th and Stockton and SPA’s is on Sunday, September 28th. I went through the San Jose auction list to see if there were any Alameda County properties and found a sprinkling in San Leandro, San Lorenzo, Livermore and Pleasanton (see below). If you’re interested in either of the auctions, you’ll need to inspect the properties and then reigster on the REDC website. Since REDC holds these auctions nationwide, this is one method of researching and buying a second home or rental property in another state. Plus, there’s a Southern California auction coming up this November, so if you miss the North Cali auctions you might want to check that one out.
San Leandro
356 Caliente Dr. 2bd/2ba Condo 1060 SF Starting Bid: $69,000 Previously Valued To: $333,900
16850-16852 Ehle St. 4bd/2ba Duplex Starting Bid: $149,000 Previously Valued To: $485,000
San Lorenzo
457 Crespi Place 3bd/2.5ba Duplex 1370 SF Starting Bid: $139,000 Previously Valued To: $496,970
17609 Wickman Place 2bd/1ba Duplex 1168 SF Starting Bid: $69,000 Previously Valued To: $377,400
Pleasanton
6859 Vale Court 3bd/1.5ba 1372 SF Starting Bid: $259,000 Previously Valued To: $606,420
3022 Yuma Way 3bd/1.5ba Townhome 1130 SF Starting Bid: $99,000 Previously Valued To: $406,000
Livermore
846 Via Granada 3bd/2ba 1174 SF Starting Bid: $99,000 Previously Valued To: $656,000
4143 Camrose Ave. 3bd/3ba 2872 SF Starting Bid: $319,000
September 18, 2008
I bought my Oakland house near the height of the housing bubble, circa 2006. Since then, I’ve watched with chagrin as housing prices drop like bombs all around. Still, many of the homes I’ve seen take the steepest dives have been in dire need of repair, homes that should never have gone for above $400k max, even during an overpriced housing market. So it’s given me some comfort to know that while my home price has dropped (got the assessor’s statement over the summer, wow) homes that I viewed as a “step-above” mine still had not dropped to the price I paid for my tidy craftsman bungalow (the sweet 1913 home my inspector said was solid and incredibly well-maintained). Well, today I start crying into my beer, ‘cuz I’ve found some homes that are in more desirable neighborhoods than mine and are approaching (or are at) the price I paid two years ago. Wail. Here they are:
1267 Bates Rd. is described as a “bright, sunny and cheerful” 1920′s Mediterranean in the Trestle Glen neighborhood. Priced at $529,000 it’s the lowest listing I’ve seen for Trestle Glen. Nearby properties have sold in at least the $600-$700k range; once you cross over Holman Rd. on the map you’re getting into million dollar listings.
1131 Excelsior Ave. pictured above is a 3bd/1ba 1667 SF home in lower Crocker Highlands close to the 580 freeway. It’s been reduced from $550,000 to an even $500,000 and has been on Redfin for 119 days. The property style is listed as “traditional” and I’m not sure what that means: from the picture it looks like a house you’d find in the French countryside, replete with a sloping roof that you could easily imagined thatched. Just for added flair, it has a row of impeccably trimmed lollipop tree-bushes in front. The fact that it’s been on the market for almost 4 months is odd; anyone know the story?
Finally we have 8888 Skyline Boulevard , a 2bd/2ba A-frame that will be auctioned off “to the highest bidder” on October 9th at 12pm. It’s minimum price is $449,000. While there are no photos (and I could not find any while googling either, so please let me know if you find some) it is described as having an in-law unit that rents for $850/month. So will it come with the renter? That’ll do nicely for the mortgage payment if so.
September 16, 2008
With summer officially coming to a close in the next week, I thought I would look back over my postings from the period from May-August and see what’s sold, what’s still on the market and what’s still fuzzy. The good news is there are still sales happening, by golly. The bad news is that there appears to be more homes still sitting on the market as well as homes that have been pulled from the market (and not necessarily because they’re pending, although some might be). While some (hopefully, many?) of the “Off Market” listings may be in escrow, I’m guessing that a number of them have been pulled by their owners/realtors in order to re-price, re-market and re-introduce them later. Still others (not necessarily those below) may be going into foreclosure.
Sold
4661 Park Blvd. List: $769,900 Sold: $760,000 (June) see “Oakland Price Reductions”
638 Brooklyn List: $539,000 Sold: $515,000 (August) see “Oakland Price Reductions”
4132 Balfour Ave. List: $900,000 Sold: $890,000 (June) see “Oakland and Piedmont New Listings…”
1837 E 15th St. List: $529,000 Sold: $500,000 see “Oakland New on the Market”
313 Warwick Ave. List: $799,000 Sold: $775,000 see “Oakland New on the Market”
1088 Clarendon Crescent List $995,000 Sold: $950,000 see “Oakland New on the Market”
2459 E 21st St. Sold: $207,500 see “Oakland and Emeryville Foreclosures for Sale”
2266 E 20th St. 2/1 Sold: $330,000 (June) see “Oakland and Emeryville Foreclosures for Sale”
2343 Mastlands 4/3 List: $699,000 Sold: $680,000 see “Oakland and Emeryville Foreclosures for Sale”
Off Market, Status: Pending? Waiting? Going into Foreclosure?
9043 Broadway Terrace 4bd/3.5ba List: $1,895,000 see “Oakland and Piedmont New Listings…”
3700 Lundholm Ave. 3/2 $429,900 see “Oakland: Bank-Owned Listings”
2754 Kingsland 4/2 List: $354,900 see “Oakland: Bank-Owned Listings”
3287 Arizona St. List: $548,000 see “Let’s Compare in the Laurel”
3251 Wisconsin St. List: $569,000 see “Let’s Compare in the Laurel”
3812 Harbor View Ave. List: $590,000 see “Let’s Compare in the Laurel”
1115 Dartmouth St. 5/1 List: $899,000 see “Albany on the Market”
904 Jackson St. 2/1.5 $595,000 see “Albany on the Market”
918 Taylor St. 2/1 List: $875,000 see “Albany on the Market”
1108 Kains Ave. 4/3 List: $825,000 see “Albany on the Market”
Still On the Market
954 Kains Ave. 3/1 List: $600,000 Reduced twice from $700,000 and $650,000 see “Albany on the Market”
891 61st St. 3/1 (Foreclosure) $279,900 see “Oakland and Emeryville Foreclosures for Sale”
825 30th St. 2/1 (Foreclosure) $249,990 see “Oakland and Emeryville Foreclosures for Sale”
Lower Laurel see “Let’s Compare in the Laurel”
3046 Georgia St. 2/1 List: $250,000 see “Let’s Compare in the Laurel”
3531 Laurel Ave. 2/1 List: $289,900see “Let’s Compare in the Laurel”
3425 Suter St. 2/1 List: $329,000see “Let’s Compare in the Laurel”
3801 Brown Ave. 2/1 List: $399,900 see “Let’s Compare in the Laurel”
10782 Hellman St. 4/2 $433,900 Chabot Park see “Oakland: Bank-Owned Listings”
1401 Excelsior 3/1 $519,900 Lower Glenview/Bella Vista see “Oakland: Bank-Owned Listings”
1065 55th St. 2/1 $319,900 see “Oakland Price Reductions”
September 13, 2008
A couple of weeks ago I wrote about the fact that Alameda (the town) home sales seem to be made up of a lot of 3bd/2ba. While I don’t think Oakland has anywhere quite the number and quality of 3bd/2ba for sale, I wanted to see what’s out there. Searching through a number of neighborhoods throughout the city, here are some of my picks. In this set, prices range from $325,000 to $899,000. I’m guessing that the homes below in West Oakland, Highland Terrace and possibly Joaquin Miller Park will sell for less than asking while the other neighborhoods most of which seem to be withstanding the housing downturn will go for close to asking, or even higher. For example, the home at 4334 La Cresta Ave pictured right sold for $750,000 in 2006 and is currently on the market for $650,000. Not only is the price well below its previous sale price, it is also on the the lower end of Glenview prices. Perhaps it is priced to sell quickly? Or to generate more interest? We’ll see.
West Oakland
1421 Peralta St. $325,000 3bd/2ba
Highland Terrace (Fruitvale Border)
2501 Wakefiled Ave. $399,000 3bd/2ba
Piedmont Avenue
43 Montell St. $799,000 3bd/2.5ba
Grand Lake/Lakeshore
563 Walavista $899,000 3bd/2ba
Crocker Highlands
728 Mandana $859,000 3bd/2ba
Trestle Glen
1292 Trestle Glen Rd. $649,500 3bd/2.5ba “Contractor’s Special”
Glenview
4334 La Cresta Ave. $650,000 3bd/2ba
Joaquin Miller Park
3432 Brunell Dr. $695,000 3bd/3ba
September 7, 2008
Residential sales prices are hovering around 2003 levels for Dublin and Livermore while the median Pleasanton sales price for June-August 2008 is more than $150,000 above sales prices for the same period five years ago. Dublin currently has 210 homes on the market with the median sales price from June-August 2008 at $475,000; the median price per square foot was $304; and sales for the past three months have totaled 190. Compare this to a median sales price of $490,000 during June-August 2003 and 286 sales. Meanwhile, Livermore currently has 423 homes for sale on the market. The median sales price from June-August was $438,000 (compared to $439,500, same period in 2003); the median price per square foot was $276 and the total number of sales was 353 (a decrease of 41% from 2003 sales). While Pleasanton’s median sales price ($708,000) is significantly above 2003 levels at $556,500 (at least, compared to the town’s tri-valley counterparts) sales volume is down substantially: only 175 sales were recorded this past summer compared to 483 during the summer of 2003.
September 4, 2008
It all started kind of gradually. First I noticed one house on a corner half a block from my house (pictured below) that had been vacant for months. Then contractors and builders started coming over a period of time: they redid a staircase here and converted a basement there. When they were finished, I realized what had once stood as a single family home had become a multifamily unit. The I saw another house on the opposite end of the street undergo this transformation (pictured right). Then another. And now one more. There are at least four homes in a 2-block radius from my bungalow that have been converted from single family residences into duplexes or from duplexes into multiplexes. When the first one went up I didn’t think much of it. Even after the renovation it remained vacant for months and I assumed they were having a hard time renting it. Then several months ago a bevy of tenants moved in (it is a 3-unit building now). As I watched the three other buildings steadily being converted while the housing market took the mother-of-all-belly-flops, I began to grow more and more anxious: would these new aparment buildings cause my first house to drop its value even further? Would my home become difficult to sell someday due to all the rentals surrounding it? Will the owners manage the properties well? It also made me a little angry: what right does whoever is developing these units have to do so in a neighborhood that’s struggling to keep its value above water anyway? After all, chances are they’re not living here. I imagined that they were somewhere far away, like Dublin. Or San Jose. Then again, I could be wrong. Maybe property values won’t drop (at least, not due to these new units). On the bright side, the units are brand new and look relatively tasteful (though gargantuan) from the outside. As long as their landlords keep them up, I suppose they could add to our neighborhood and not take away from it the way a vacant, blighted house can. But ideally I’d like to see the blighted SFR’s become renovated and then sold (affordably) as SFR’s. (And likewise, if it’s a blighted duplex, renovate and remain a duplex, not become a megaplex). Should I dream on? Let me know your thoughts.
