Freedom to customize in Belmont!
900 SOUTH Rd, Belmont, CA 94002 | MLS# 80902648
900 SOUTH Rd Belmont, CA 94002
Price: $1,300,000
Beds: 5
Baths: 3.5
Sq. Ft.: 3,500
$/Sq. Ft.: $371
Lot Size: 0.3 Acres
Property Type: Detached Single Family
Style: Contemporary
Year Built: 2009
Stories: 2
View: Canyon, City Lights
Neighborhood: Belmont Country Club
County: San Mateo
MLS#: 80902648
Source: MLSListings
Status: Active
On Redfin: 31 days
70% completed contractors delight. Your opportunity to finish your own gorgeous custom luxury home to your own taste! Come see this beautiful custom home with 180 degree panoramic views of the San Francisco Bay Area. Comes with completed plans for custom executive home with all the amenities. Fantastic!
Thanks to Burbed reader Herve for this find!
Wow… 70% completed huh? Any contractor types that could provide an estimate on how much more it would cost to finish this house out?
That said, this is totally worth it at $1.3M. Everyone in the Bay Area loves freedom and liberty, and that’s what this house offers you – the freedom to finish it however you wanted. It’s like buying one of those tables at Ikea that’s not stained yet – more freedom for you.
Come on executives – what are you waiting for?
March 4th, 2009 at 8:41 am
Be sure to note that this is a short sale. It was purchased in 2006 for $760k and somehow they got the bank to loan them a boatload of money (more than $540k) for construction they couldn’t even finish. Unbelievable.
Building on a hillside is very expensive in earthquake country, so if they did that right, I imagine the foundation could have cost over $100k.
March 4th, 2009 at 9:57 am
Sweet, just get yourself a 203(k) fixer loan.. oh wait, it’s over the FHA limit.
OK, get yourself a construction loan.. oh wait, if he could do that the owner would have already.
Well, if you have cash this is a… oh who am I kidding. Nobody has cash anymore.
March 4th, 2009 at 10:40 am
sonarrat, exactly
nomadic, I’d love to see the actual loan data for this. propertyshark doesn’t have it. maybe I should explore a sitexdata subscription (or, because I’m cheap) a free trial
March 4th, 2009 at 11:13 am
I’ve marveled at another not-quite-finished new construction in my neck of the woods:
http://www.redfin.com/CA/Los-Gatos/16041-Blossom-Hill-Rd-95032/home/890009
Banks used to have rules about drawing funds for construction but I guess those went out the window in the days of easy credit too. The place above was purchased for $750k, is on a flat lot and they’re STILL underwater with an original list price of $1.499M. The extra money sure as hell didn’t go only into construction. (BTW, the yard looks better in the pic. The grass is full of weeds now.)
March 4th, 2009 at 11:25 am
I’ve been reading up on the 203(k) program, incidentally. It might be great for getting a half-baked scraper in San Jose and fixing it up, but I’ve heard the interest rates are high and the closing costs can be outrageous.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Looks like buy programs are activated on the NYSE!
Yesterday, President Obama said that P/E ratios look favorable now, and it’s good time to buy stocks.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Well, for today’s snide comment all I can think of is the song “Castles Made Of Sand” by Jimi Hendrix.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Did anyone else see the articles this morning about the new Fed plan to help people keep their houses (via easier refinancing)? I just can’t let go of the irony of this quote:
“It is imperative that we continue to move with speed to help make housing more affordable and help arrest the damaging spiral in our housing markets,” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in a statement.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090304/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_housing
March 4th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
““It is imperative that we continue to move with speed to help make housing more affordable and help arrest the damaging spiral in our housing markets,” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in a statement.”
LOL nice nomadic.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but that says:
“Let’s make housing more affordable by keeping prices unaffordable.”
March 4th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Here’s the most laughable part:
“It’s really targeted at responsible homeowners.”
Would any responsible people get themselves into foreclosure?
March 4th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Yep, you’ve got it. Kind of like the bright idea to make homes more affordable by providing loans that are easier to get (and expand home ownership).
I was thinking along the lines of “let’s make the payments more affordable so people will stop letting their houses go into foreclosure, making even more houses go underwater.” I haven’t looked into the detail to see if they’re just lowering interest rates or extending loan terms to 40 or more years.
As for housing affordability, I don’t think he (or most politicians) give a sh*t right now. Not that I’d argue because until prices stop falling, the economy isn’t going to begin to recover.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
I think the new definition of “responsible” is someone who has a prayer of keeping the house if the payment was just a couple hundred bucks per month less. Or someone willing to pay off a $200,000 mortgage on a house worth $175,000.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
“Would any responsible people get themselves into foreclosure?”
Very few people who purchased within the past 7 or so years were responsible.
As I have said before, they fell into 2 categories: 1) People who were willing to use toxic financing, and 2) people who were forced to compete with group 1.
Group 1 was irresponsible. Group 2 was nearly as irresponsible. They should have realized that their $150k salary means nothing when they are competing with a strawberry picker willing to take out a loan they cannot pay back and do not understand.
We should start an anti-property movement to ensure that people who are left holding the bag cannot let go.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
“Or someone willing to pay off a $200,000 mortgage on a house worth $175,000.”
Can you give me a synonym for this, nomadic? I propose “suckers.”
March 4th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
We should start an anti-property movement to ensure that people who are left holding the bag cannot let go.
Are you turning into a Marxist?
Can you give me a synonym for this, nomadic? I propose “suckers.”
I won’t pass judgment this time – for purely selfish reasons.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
We should start an anti-property movement to ensure that people who are left holding the bag cannot let go.
I agree with that. This whole capability of being able to walk away from a loan and jingle-mail yourself into safety is beyond asinine.
Lack of accountability got us into this mess. Until we return to the days of being fiscally responsible AND accountable for your actions, we risk repeating the current scenario.
March 4th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
BAI – check this out:
Banks Refusing To Take Back Foreclosed Properties
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101386052
hehehe
March 4th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
This house is actually owned by a realtor and his wife. I posted it here in Jan:
http://sanmateore.dreamhosters.com/?s=realtor+in+trouble
March 4th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
“”It’s a really sad set of affairs when people don’t want to touch a piece of real estate with a 10-foot pole,” Nemeth says. ”
BUT THE VALUE IS IN THE LAND!!!!!!! Just kidding. Cleaveland is a dump. Must different than San Jose.
It’s pretty bad when nobody wants the properties. I guess that’s what happens when a deed is no longer a conduit to investor’s money.
“Are you turning into a Marxist?”
Maybe? heh
“I won’t pass judgment this time – for purely selfish reasons.”
No offense intended, of course.
“I agree with that. This whole capability of being able to walk away from a loan and jingle-mail yourself into safety is beyond asinine.”
Yep.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
My favorite El Cerrito Golf Mansion is still in trouble:
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/apa/1055753744.html
Now a bargain at $5500/month. Haven’t moved the list price yet from $2,388,000. Price/rent now at 434!
Did I mention it comes with an HOA fee? (A paltry $1,000 per year).
Did I mention it was first listed on 7/26/08? Only 90 days on Zillow…
Something fishy (or just stupid?): the buy listing says 5bd/5ba.
The rent listing says 4/3 (and 3 partial baths besides).
I think it includes an in-law unit – maybe they’re going to OCCUPY the in-law unit while they rent you the rest of the place (4/3)! Wild AND wacky!
I wish they’d have another open house…
I wish they’d offer that cool rent-to-own option they tried once (but that was at $18k/month or something)
March 4th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Something fishy (or just stupid?): the buy listing says 5bd/5ba.
The rent listing says 4/3 (and 3 partial baths besides).
A – do the realtard math: 3 partial (half) baths = 1.5 bathrooms…
1.5 + 3 = 4.5 then round up to 5! Voila, five baths!
March 4th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Hey, is this site turning into an angry renter blog? Wtf? I want to talk about today’s house. 70% completed? What did they forget? The roof? The floors? The foundation?
Nomadic, where did you get that loan info? Interesting. steve, sitexdata is one of the sources IHB uses.
March 4th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
test1
March 4th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
loan info, madhaus? You mean post #1? I just did the math. They bought it for $760k; it’s a short sale at $1.3M – QED, the extra amount they borrowed must have exceeded the difference of $540k.
March 6th, 2009 at 12:30 am
House featured on http://www.burbed.com on March 4, price reduced $200K on March 5. Talk about influence!
March 6th, 2009 at 8:22 am
Given that it’s a short sale, why not cut the price? Still only a very small chance the bank will approve it anyway.
March 6th, 2009 at 9:57 am
Go ahead and take the plunge, I’ll pay for it.