$1,355 per square foot house in Palo Alto – normal!
2375 SIERRA Ct Palo Alto, CA 94303
Price: $1,199,000
Beds: 3
Baths: 3
Sq. Ft.: 885
$/Sq. Ft.: $1,355
Lot Size: 7,620 Sq. Ft.
Age (Years): 58
Year Built: 1950
Type: Detached Single Family
Stories: 1 Story
View(s): Neighborhood
Neighborhood: Green Gables
County: Santa ClaraMust see. Move in condition. Live in exisitng or build your dream home. Cul-du-sac. Nice neighbourhood. Easy access to freeway. Close to midtown. No sign, no lockbox. Sellers are moving out of town & want quick close. “AS IS” Sale. Open house Aug 9 from 1.30pm to 3pm. Still accepting offers.
Burbed reader Michelle originally sent this to me at the end of July, but I missed it (junk mail folder woes.) Here’s what she had to say then:
Take a look at this gem, new to the market. Priced for 34% appreciation in 36 months!
Crappy part of Palo Alto and “just” $1242/sf on a small-ish lot. The buyers will have to act fast – offers are due this Tuesday. Time for all of those bids to rush in. (And I have to wonder, if the realtor says this place is “move in condition” then maybe he/she is color blind.)
Guess what Michelle! It looks like you should’ve bought it back then because the price has already appreciated an additional 9% since it was listed. Damn! Ouch!
Besides, is this really so bad?
The TV mounted over the stove gives it a certain retro-bling feel. Plus, these are Palo Alto schools!
Honestly, if you’re interested in this house you’d better buy it ASAP. Otherwise, I can easily see the sqft appreciate another 9% by the end of the month. This is Real Bay Area Prime Platinum. Better quick on the draw!
August 20th, 2008 at 7:32 am
The orginal lower price was because they set a 7-day deadline for all offers. They expected this to receive multiple bids when it was $100k less!
Funny.
No, sad.
Guess they figured they better raise the price so they wouldn’t have to sell so low! What would the neighbors think?
August 20th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Perfect burbed ad. Another one of these houses where you see the house, then the price, then ask yourself:
” You’ve got to be kidding… right?
August 20th, 2008 at 8:41 am
3/3 in 885 sq ft? No wonder the TV is over the stove, only place to fit it. All that for a cool 1.2 mil. What would that rent for 8K a month? If so you could be at rent parity.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Ah, its relisted as 1100 sq/ft. Now its a bargain.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:52 am
I bet that TV is all greasy from all the food being cooked below it. If we were to compare rent to own, you could probably rent three and a half houses for the cost of buying this one. But its sooooo worth it… right?
August 20th, 2008 at 10:36 am
I drove by that house on the way to Fry’s the other day. By which I mean I saw it from the offramp from 101SB to Oregon Expressway.
August 20th, 2008 at 10:37 am
…which means the house is Instantly accessible via freeway. Talk about convenience!
August 20th, 2008 at 10:51 am
Take a right on St. Francis, right on Embarcadero Rd, and you’re on the freeway.. I mean, I suppose it is on a cul de sac, so that’s worth something. It’s not worth $1050 a square foot though. I’m sure it will sell briskly -if- they’re willing to take a lowball.
August 20th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
So you can listen to the freeway noise and convince yourself you’re really hearing the roar of the ocean surf, huh? You can get the same effect for much less at Gable’s End.
If you really want Palo Alto schools that badly, rent some studio on El Camino instead of buying this crackerbox.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
It has indeed expanded to 1,100 square feet, so it’s really only $1,090 per sq ft now….. If it keeps expanding like this, it’ll be a bargain within a week…..
August 20th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Just head over to OSH and buy their biggest tool shed, bolt it onto the side of the house, cut a hole through both walls, presto! 1250 square feet!
August 20th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
You forgot the last step, madhaus. Paint the walls magenta.
August 20th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Looks like I can easily make a driveway from the backyard and merge into 101-S ramp. I am sure CalTrans won’t mind.
August 20th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
This house says ‘Just testing waters’ written all over it.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
> Sellers are moving out of town & want quick close
Huh? Are they serious?
August 20th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
They’re ready to sell their property for far more than its worth NOW.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Herve – that’s kind of like how bank robbers want a quick getaway.
They’re trying to make a 46% profit during the largest decline in the market in decades, for pete’s sake.
RE – are you out there? Care to tell me why I’m wrong to find this incredible? Maybe if you talked them down to “just” a million it could be your “investment?”
August 20th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
Motivated seller, with balls.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
The walls look edible to me
August 21st, 2008 at 5:41 am
[...] yesterday we saw what $1.2 million buys you in the Bay Area’s best school [...]
August 21st, 2008 at 8:39 pm
2327 Sierra Ct is also for sale, but for $928K.
3/1
1,105 sq ft house
10,009 sq ft lot
Buying that one is like admitting you are poor and cannot buy 2375 Sierra Ct for $271K more. Do you want your friends and co-workers to know you are poor? What kind of respect would you get? 94303 is not the Real Palo Alto anyway so why bother? And crime is rampant.
August 21st, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Hey, my alter ego posted a comment there! On second thought, maybe it was my taunting self.
April 7th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
Reduced to $998K.
April 7th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
> 2327 Sierra Ct is also for sale, but for $928K.
It was sold for $950K by the way.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
It’s back on the market for $875K (already reduced $50K).
June 29th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Even better, Herve, the bank foreclosed on it just 3 weeks ago! Now they can be serious about selling it. At least between the original posting above and the foreclosure they repainted the interior. It shows much better in the pictures. (I remember looking at the pics and noting the paint job when you put the April update above.)
June 29th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
Wow – 2363 Sierra Ct. sold in March 2009 for $1.1M – it’s right next door. 2B/2BA but almost 2000sf.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
There are no foreclosures in the RBA. None. Zero. Zilch. Therefore this house is really in East Palo Alto despite the Mountain View address. The dropping price is the other hint that this is an inferior property that would not impress my co-workers, no matter how many exotic plants are in the yard.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
Mountain View address?
June 29th, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Re: 2623 Sierra Ct @ $1.1 million.
Useless anecdotal data.
Re; Mountain View address?
Look, I’m very busy and cannot be bothered with your Nit Picking about where this house used to be. The point is, it’s no longer in the RRBA now, so I don’t care about where it was then.
Why don’t you tell me about your neighborhood so I can tell you how little you amateurs know about actual pulse of the market? And then I’ll insult Pralay just because.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
lol – that explains it. I think it’s in EPA now though. It jumped 101.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
I think Palo Alto should give 94303 to Mountain View. 94303 is giving Palo Alto a bad name.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
A lot of things are giving Palo Alto a bad name. Let’s review:
10. Facebook moved out
9. Soccer fields in poor repair
8. Anyone can enter Foothills Park
7. 3 Indian restaurants downtown and they all suck. Not one serves dosas.
6. Spend a fortune to live there and your kids can’t attend the neighborhood school — it’s full.
5. Spend a fortune to live there and get ordinary tech guy as neighbor
4. Residents claim it’s like Manhattan but no subway system
3. Stanford fails to admit over 800 Paly and Gunn HS grads year after year
2. Parking zone colors impossible for guys to recognize
1. He’s here to help!
June 29th, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Post #33 screams out 2 words: sour grapes.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
4. Residents claim it’s like Manhattan but no subway system
—-
Manhatten, Manhatten! Please don’t misspell.
And Sub Way (similar to Star Bucks).
June 29th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
>>RE – are you out there? Care to tell me why I’m wrong to find this incredible?
What is incredible is how desparate people are to get into Palo Alto. This kind of crap house next to the freeway would be totally worthless if it didn’t have the Palo Alto brand on it. As I drive around, I still see sold signs everywhere. This is just surreal in this economy.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
Pra Lay, how are you?
June 29th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
10. Facebook moved out
—–
But at least Face Book, which totally a different company, still there. And don’t forget that Face Book (I am not talking about Facebook) was pre-IPO in Feb 2008. It must have gone IPO already and their employees have bought their dream homes.
July 19th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Bank owned price: $875,000
Craigslist:
$875000 / 3br – Don’t Miss this RARE BANK OWNED HOME in Palo Alto! (palo alto)
Date: 2009-07-16, 7:20PM PDT
Reply to: [email protected] [Errors when replying to ads?]
$875,000
Sierra Court in Palo Alto – $875,000
Don’t Miss this RARE BANK OWNED HOME in Palo Alto!
Move In Ready. Gorgeous Custom Kitchen with Granite & Designer touches. Marble/Granite Bath upgrades, Staged like a model! Located on a Cul-de-Sac in Desired Neighborhood of Green Gables in Palo Alto, Minutes to Midtown for shops & restaurants, Close to the freeway for easy commute. Large yard with storage shed. On Demand Water Heater.
July 19th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
Who says renting is cheaper than buying? These guys bought the house for $820k and were foreclosed on four years later for $809k. So 11 grand and your credit rating… cheaper than rent? (If you have no shame anyway.)
July 19th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
plus probably 3 years of mortgage servicing
July 19th, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Phoney baloney. Pretenders everywhere!
Does anyone here ever read 10ks for valley companies? Some of these companies will have done 600 million in revenue Q1 2008, and in Q1 2009, they reported 5 million.
I would imagine that the state’s budget is looking similar…
July 19th, 2009 at 9:34 pm
one word for you, anon: deadwood
July 19th, 2009 at 11:22 pm
Don’t Miss this RARE BANK OWNED HOME in Palo Alto!
—–
My best guess is that this house moved from East Palo Alto. Remember EPA people occupying BBQ table in Palo Alto parks? But this time, they moved their houses to Palo Alto so that they can claim BBQ table legitimately. There is no such thing as foreclosure in Palo Alto.
September 19th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Final update on this house that washed out of the RBA:
Purchased 7/7/05 for $820k
Bank repo 6/9/09 for $809k
Sold 8/5/09 for $845k
Opinions on whether the current owners got a “deal?”
(BTW, prior sale was 12/1/99 for $310k)
September 19th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
> Opinions on whether the current owners got a “deal?”
Yes. But only if they’re deaf.
September 19th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
And they were originally asking for $1.2M… This is laughable.
September 19th, 2009 at 11:25 pm
Even more laughable: the original listing said the owners wanted a “quick close” and were “still accepting offers.” Unreal.
September 19th, 2009 at 11:31 pm
I thought REO market willing to pay more than what the bank is asking. Don’t tell me that REO market is different (and worse) in RBA.
I have only one explanation: bank didn’t ask for $875K.
September 19th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
There’s only one explanation, Pralay. Palo Alto is no longer desirable, as you’ve shown over and over again.
September 19th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
Palo Alto is no longer desirable, as you’ve shown over and over again.
—-
I bet I have shown YOU, not on burbed but in your nightmare.
September 19th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Pralay,
Yes, I worry about it all the time. The thought of Santa Clara move-up buyers not shopping my neighborhood just kills me.
September 20th, 2009 at 12:08 am
That explains why you are having nighmares and then after getting up trying to put your own words (from nightmate) in my mouth.
November 26th, 2009 at 12:16 am
First pics look like it’s right next to the Stanford Dishes on that nice open country, then it’s revealed to be in that ol’ crummy neighborhood right near some wanna-bee freeway interchanges and the low-income housing on Alma. At least Wal-Mart’s not too far away.
June 4th, 2010 at 9:43 pm
Back on the market for $1,099,000 (after apparently being foreclosed).
July 3rd, 2010 at 8:03 am
Reduced to $1,069,000.
July 19th, 2010 at 8:33 pm
Reduced to $1,049,999.
July 19th, 2010 at 8:51 pm
Petsmart groomer- That’s CRAZY! What will it be next month, $1,039,999?
July 19th, 2010 at 10:16 pm
This place was sold to an individual (for $845k) after the foreclosure in 2009. When do you suppose he’ll start to panic? Almost 90 days on the market, and I’d guess he put about $10k into fixing the place up after he bought it.
The nearest comp (http://www.redfin.com/CA/Palo-Alto/1119-Oregon-Ave-94303/home/1195768) was 50% larger and sold for $950k.
August 2nd, 2010 at 8:29 pm
The sellers heard SEA and are getting a bit more aggressive with the price cut this time. Reduced to $999,900.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:01 pm
It went from “selling soon” to “pending without release”!
August 14th, 2010 at 8:58 am
And now it’s back on the market. I guess someone could not get a loan.
August 14th, 2010 at 12:21 pm
Probably wouldn’t appraise.
August 23rd, 2010 at 10:45 am
namadic- Are you out of your Real RBA mind?
“Probably wouldn’t appraise.”
No. No. No.
Those who understand the RBA know that it will, would, did appraise for more than the asking price, as we have to include the over-bidding in the appraisal.
The more likely scenario is that the prospective buyer(s), if I may use the term prospective, would have been transient guest(s), and as such, the loan was not approved.
I am having a hard time understanding why you thought this place wouldn’t appraise. My guess is that any appraisal would come in at a minimum of $1.5M–it’s not about the property; it’s about finding the right RBA buyer. Transient guests are not Real RBA buyers.
All that said, I really think you’ve missed a few too many “Hail RBA” and “Thank you RBA.”
Hail Real Bay Area
Thank you Real Bay Area
No Transient Guests
August 23rd, 2010 at 11:20 am
Take a pill, SEA. Just calling a POS for what it is.
Signed,
RDL
(RBA Defamation League)
August 23rd, 2010 at 11:55 am
Maybe the street is too busy! That will take it right out of the RBA, and then we can call it a POS! It used to be that Power Lines took properties out of the RBA, but now we have to have “Real Power Lines (RPL)” for a home to be in the RBA.
August 23rd, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Have you looked at the aerial view?
August 23rd, 2010 at 12:53 pm
Guilty as charged.
August 23rd, 2010 at 12:56 pm
“Aug 23, 2010 Delisted — — Inactive MLSListings #6″
Yes, that’s right, delisted today.
This property is movin’
August 23rd, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Don’t be silly. That’s “Soon Pending.”
August 23rd, 2010 at 10:53 pm
it’ll be interesting to see the final sale price.
August 24th, 2010 at 12:16 am
it’ll be interesting to see the final sale price.
—-
Just the “overbid amount” will be be enough to fund seller’s kid’s college education.
September 18th, 2010 at 10:41 am
Sold for $970K.
September 18th, 2010 at 10:56 am
Let’s hope it stays off the market for several years now. The poor house has had an overload of mockery.
September 18th, 2010 at 11:26 am
But… but… but… that means it sold for less than a million. This should not be possible in
Palo AltoSpecialest Part of RBA.September 18th, 2010 at 12:20 pm
Clearly this is not part of Real Palo Alto (RPA). This place must be one that the thieves target.