$850 per square foot - “Perfect starter or retirement home”
1758 Crane Ave, Mountain View, CA 94040 Miramonte MLS# 80826261 - Property Details
$848,000
* Status: Active
* Bedroom: 3
* Bathroom: 1
* Year Built: 1952
* Lot Size: 5616
* Square Footage: 998
* List Date: 8/5/2008
* Garage Spaces: 1Charming 3BD/1BA house in a fantastic cul-de-sac neighborhood. Refinished hardwood floors, fresh paint, new light fixtures, and fireplace. Spacious front and rear yards with distinctive gardens and beautiful rose beds. Walk to Cuesta Park and Blossom Valley shopping center with Starbucks and Safeway. Perfect starter or retirement home for anyone wanting a desired Mountain View location.
I’m always amazed at the ingenuity of the Bay Area. 3 bedrooms in 998 square feet? Wowsers. They must have had some top notch engineers working here on compression! Real Bay Area, my friends.
That said, it fascinates me that this $850 per square foot home is perfect for both couples that want to start a family, as well as people who want to retire and die in their homes. This is how amazingly versatile houses in Mountain View are.
You know what? This house is also perfect for starting a day care, or housing a data center. It can also be a floor wax, or a dessert topping!
What other purposes can this house serve for you?
September 17th, 2008 at 7:32 am
Yup, every retired person I know on a fixed income wants to part with $850,000 of their cash, or cash out some assets to fund a tract home in Mountain View so they can walk to Safeway and Starbucks. They also don’t flinch at $12,000 annual property tax payments.
September 17th, 2008 at 8:01 am
Dumbest listing ever!
September 17th, 2008 at 8:29 am
To every noun its adjective, MLS rule #1. There are so many that you’d barely notice if they were swapped around..
Distinctive 3BD/1BA house in a refinished cul-de-sac neighborhood. Fresh hardwood floors, charming paint, beautiful light fixtures, and fantastic fireplace. Spacious front and rear yards with new gardens and perfect rose beds.
September 17th, 2008 at 11:42 am
I like where this is going.
Perhaps a rule book could be compiled. May I suggest the following for rules 2 and 3:
2) Creativity breeds creativity. When soliciting a creative buyer - one who is willing to embark on ‘creative’ financing, one must have a creative listing. Try posting in a listing in all capitals. Or, try spicing it up with a lot of ——————————————’s. Just make sure that your posting is unique, just like you, your buyer, the bay area, and every single place in the world.
3) Disregard conventional rules of grammar. Many listings fail to sell because they do not get the requisite level of attention. While perusing the listings, many people will simply skim the listing. However, if you can make your post difficult - but not impossible - to comprehend, you can drastically increase the amount of time people spend viewing your listing. This increased viewing time will translate to more sales, thus increasing your worth as a human being!
September 17th, 2008 at 11:49 am
I always wonder what kind of people buy this kind of place at this price. Only possibility is a flipper who plans to add 1000 sqf at least.
I do have friend bought into Palo Alto earlier, they don’t make a hell lot of money, and they bought the ugliest house in probably the entire neighborhood, spent 150k updating and it is still the ugliest house - view from outside. But the house is at least of pretty decent size so that they can raise a family.
I’ve never lived in such a small house, what does a couple want to buy this house for? In other states this would be for people living in the gettho, because they can’t afford any bigger. You can do incredible amount of fixture and renovation, but no matter how much lipstick you put on a pig, it is still a pig.
September 17th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
People who are blinded by “guaranteed 15% appreciation.”
Buy this home, sell it a year later for 15% profit.
If you buy it for $500,000, 15% = $75,000 profit.
If you buy it for $750,000, 15% = $112,500 profit.
Therefore, the larger the price tag on the home, the better.
September 17th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Less IS more, baby; it’s the new paradigm for real estate. Buy now while it’s still a really, really bad, bad idea! The higher the price, the lower the VALUE (what you get, NOT WHAT YOU THINK IT’S WORTH, BIG DIFFERENCE)! Less is MORE! Less IS more!!!! You don’t actually want VALUE, now, do you? You DO want debt, baby, DEBT IS GOOD FOR YOU! DEBT KEEPS THIS PHONY ECONOMY GOING! Look at all the companies collapsing because debt is collapsing! How dare you NOT support bailouts!
September 17th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
This weekend I looked at two of the condo hi-rises in downtown SJ. For $850K, you can get a 1200 sq ft 2BR/2BA with den (i.e. cubicle size cubby hole off the living room) on the 15th floor, with the living/dining area having floor-to-ceiling glass walls on three sides. Pretty spectacular views. Only downside is that it is located in downtown SJ
Oh, and the $500/mo. HOA dues.
I wonder what kind of down payment lenders would require on an $850K property in this environment. I’m guessing 30%. That would be over a quarter mil just for the down payment.
September 17th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
In downtown SF it maybe worth it, in downtown SJ? Santana Row? I think the fire on Santana Row a few years ago makes a pretty good memory for it. Another attempt to revitalize downtown ghetto. There are high paying jobs and high demand for premium office in SF, NYC, Chicago, etc. Where are they for SJ?
September 17th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
You know, this would actually be an okay house for a small family if the lot didn’t limit adding on. It’s in the best Mountain View zip code too; ‘40 is the southwest, in particular southwest of El Camino and snugging up against Los Altos, ‘41 is central, and ‘43 is the ghetto near 101 (northeast).
Anyone check out the pictures? That dining room is giving me claustrophobia, and why do I suspect they are using 7/8-scale furniture in there on top of it? Oh, because it’s only 998 square feet. Christ on a kilobyte, what algorithm did they use to pack this house, or did they just cram it into the knapsack and the hell with the bins?
(the last comment is for nomadic, who claims to appreciate inner geekitude)
September 17th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Ghetto? That’s a bit exaggerated esp. compared to Latham/California. Certainly there are car thefts and drug dealing in better neighborhoods as well, and the odd rape or murder are just that - odd!
Some call ‘43 ‘funky’ while others merely note how the zoning makes no sense at all. But for having living there, well it’s no ghetto for sure.
September 17th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
“for having lived there”… burbed, when is that [edit] functionality coming up?
September 17th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Yeah there are nice parts of ‘43, I’m talking about trends. 94043 is the 94085 of Mountain View.
September 17th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Trust me, I rent a house exactly that size (and nearly the same layout) right around the corner. It’s as small as the pictures make it out to be.
September 17th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
madhaus - That bad?!
September 17th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
This is a good quote!! Bob, take note. Chuckie too!
In light of this new turbulence, even German Finance Minister Peter Steinbrück has been forced to evoke unusually clear images when he speaks. As he sees it, the very people who had prematurely spoken about there being a light at the end of the tunnel will now be forced to realize “that, in reality, it was the light of an oncoming train.”
September 17th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
IIRC, the Santana Row fire happened during construction, and was started accidentally by a worker. More recently, another major fire hit during construction of the last phase of Rivermark, and also at that apartment complex along Zanker. Construction sites are hazardous places.
I wouldn’t call downtown SJ a ghetto, but it does lack certain elements of livability. There is virtually no retail. The nearest supermarket is the Safeway out on San Carlos. It is mostly surrounded by older blue collar neighborhoods. And the night life is of a younger, edgier variety, definitely in opposition to the DINKs and empty nesters the condo developments are targeting.
September 17th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
“To every noun its adjective, MLS rule #1. There are so many that you’d barely notice if they were swapped around..”
Hehe, this is fun!
Fresh 3BD/1BA house in a spacious cul-de-sac neighborhood. Charming hardwood floors, fantastic paint, distinctive light fixtures, beautiful fireplace. New front and rear yards with perfect gardens and refinished rose beds.
September 17th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
oh my god RealEstater killed God!
September 17th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
> 3 bedrooms in 998 square feet?
Bunk beds!
September 17th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
> “for having lived there”… burbed, when is that [edit] functionality coming up?
Au contraire, you have to follow rule #3 and disregard conventional rules of grammar. Is I clear enough?
Speaking of grammar and considering the current events, check that out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksGzn5bRFzQ
September 17th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
I was exaggerating, but yeah, I don’t think in other metro suburbs well-to-do people raise family in such a small home. What’s holding the original owner from applying for a bigger floor plan? That is the whole point about suburb living.
SJ downtown is not ghetto, but it is definitely “the happening” place, nobody gets excited going there, and what it offerings (hotels, restaurants, clubs, etc) hardly makes it a valuable metro real estate.
November 5th, 2008 at 5:04 am
[...] Price Cut on House in Mountain View - now affordable $850 per square foot - “Perfect starter or retirement home” [Burbed.com] September 17, 2008 $850 per square foot - “Perfect starter or retirement [...]