Burbed’s first Woodside house! Just $299,000!
512 MAPLE Way, Woodside, CA 94062 | MLS# 80909209
512 MAPLE Way Woodside, CA 94062
Price: $299,000
Beds: 2
Baths: 1
Sq. Ft.: 900
$/Sq. Ft.: $332
Lot Size: 5,000 Sq. Ft.
Property Type: Detached Single Family
Style: Cabin
Year Built: 1945
Stories: 1
Neighborhood: Emerald Hills Area
County: San Mateo
MLS#: 80909209
Source: MLSListings
Status: Pending Without Release
On Redfin: 6 days
Fixer-upper
DRIVE BY ONLY! PLEASE DO NOT DISTURB OWNER! Offers if any to be presented Friday February 27. House in need of many repairs. Cannot add on to existing house. Rebuild only in same footprint. Septic located in neighbor property with easement. No septic inspection or any inspections.
Thanks to Burbed reader Herve for Burbed’s first Woodside house! And what a house it is! Just $299,000!
Here’s what Herve had to say:
Build a 4-story high house and you get 3,600 sq ft of pure joy.
And the Zestimates is $910K. What do I hear? Oh, it’s the sweet melody of instant equity…
No kidding! The Zestimate really is $909k! Is it any surprise? After all, this is Woodside. Notice that this was on Redfin for 6 days only and already it was Pending Without Release.
You gotta be quick on the trigger here in the Real Bay Area!
March 9th, 2009 at 7:25 am
I suspect there are quite a few little dumps over there. I knew a guy who rented a similar place for $3,000/mo about 4-5 years ago. It was right by Edgewood Park. I thought he was nuts; still do.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:16 am
Is this place actually in Woodside or is it in (gasp!) Redwood City? They do share a zip code. When I lived in Emerald Lake Hills I gave my address as Woodside rather than RC and the mail found me just fine.
You don’t even need to build a four story house here. Just stick a doublewide in the ground on its end and add some climbing rungs.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:34 am
madhaus, I know that there is a slice long Jefferson that is really Woodside, so I suspect this is to. The tipoff:
Cannot add on to existing house. Rebuild only in same footprint.
since the last time I checked RWC will let you build anything and Woodside only approves permits submitted before 1980 (ask Steve Jobs).
Alternately, the issue may be the easement.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:36 am
This is too mind-boggling to not share: FHA hasn’t learned ANY of the lessons from the bubble.
In the past year alone, the number of borrowers who failed to make more than a single payment before defaulting on FHA-backed mortgages has nearly tripled, far outpacing the agency’s overall growth in new loans, according to a Washington Post analysis of federal data.
Many industry experts attribute the jump in these instant defaults to factors that include the weak economy, lax scrutiny of prospective borrowers and most notably, foul play among unscrupulous lenders looking to make a quick buck.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/07/AR2009030702257.html
March 9th, 2009 at 8:49 am
From the same article – why refinancing won’t work in many, many cases:
Among FHA loans with instant defaults, the upward trend is especially pronounced in refinanced deals. The number of refinancings that defaulted after zero payments or one have more than quadrupled since then end of 2007 and now represent two-fifths of all instant defaults.
The FHA is attractive to borrowers looking to refinance, in part because the agency allows for cash-out refinances, a practice Apgar called “particularly problematic.” It has become rare among conventional lenders, who fear that borrowers will take the cash and walk away from the loan.
ad_icon
The FHA also permits “streamlined” refinancing, in which established FHA borrowers get lower rates without verifying their income. The thinking is that borrowers who are on time should stay that way if their rate drops.
March 9th, 2009 at 9:14 am
This house is cheap even for Redwood City.
March 9th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Do I see bars on windows? In Woodside??
March 9th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Wait a minute. I thought the rule was that if a house came on the market with reduced pricing, it meant that the area in question could no longer be considered part of the Real Bay Area?
Has that concept changed?
March 9th, 2009 at 10:01 am
There are grace periods, second chances, etc.
March 9th, 2009 at 10:07 am
Cramer – I think those are decorative muntin bars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muntin
BAI – Reduced price? That’s the original price from when it was listed 14 days ago. Maybe it’s a realistic agent who realizes this is place is a pit that would probably be more valuable if it was vacant land.
March 9th, 2009 at 10:15 am
burbed, I hear los altos may be running out of second chances? any truth to that rumor?
March 9th, 2009 at 10:25 am
Good news!
Genentech, Roche Near a Deal at $95 per share.
That’s surely going to create many more Bay Area millionaires.
March 9th, 2009 at 10:40 am
That’s surely going to create many more Bay Area millionaires.
——
Millionaires from stock-options or share – never heard about it. I thought only way people can get rich (and millionaires) by investing in real estate, especially who knows secret code that starts with 9 and ends with 1. If you look at the richest people in the world, the majority of them made their money in real estate.
March 9th, 2009 at 10:57 am
Are you kidding, steve? Palo Alto ran out off second chances and now Woodside is on probation.
Pralay, there are no millionaires from stock options. People who cash in their stock options only become wealthy once they invest their “gains” in an actual asset, namely RBA Real Estate. The problem is that most of the homes in the Bay Area have already had their second chance, so good luck identifying one.
March 9th, 2009 at 11:00 am
Re #5 — FHA default article. Oh my gawd, nomadic! This quote is just priceless:
OMFG. Ya think?
March 9th, 2009 at 11:13 am
DO NOT DISTURB SQUATTERS.
BUY THIS NOW AND PAINT A BIG ANARCHY “A” ON THE WALL IN RED SPRAY PAINT!
March 9th, 2009 at 11:31 am
#11 – I’d say an even 50% of the “new listings” I get in Los Altos from our agent’s automatic update email system are “updated list price” – a euphemism almost as awesome as “pre owned” for used cars. Too many seller’s remain in denial. Another fine example – 990 Aura Way. On a super busy corner with Miramonte, tired old rancher with no updates just a few hundred feet from the “liquor/deli” and the post office listing for $1.675M. That would have been a stretch in 2005!
March 9th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
#15 – genius, eh madhaus? LOL
Hey, I just figured out under what circumstances I’d buy this place – at full list price. The owner would have to adopt me first, so I could keep his Prop 13 basis and I could keep paying just $930 or so in annual tax.
March 9th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
losaltosrenter, the 1.5 – 1.8M los altos market is delcining at a quick rate (and much faster than MP or PA). I’m not sure why (maybe motivated sellers?) but there have been some eyebrow raising price reductions.
one exception, and a hot property to watch: 303 QUINNHILL Rd. .62 (relatively flat) hilltop acres with great views east and west and lots of privacy. unfortunately, the house is a teardown, but I expect they will receive several offers on tuesday.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Steve says,
>>losaltosrenter, the 1.5 – 1.8M los altos market is delcining at a quick rate (and much faster than MP or PA). I’m not sure why (maybe motivated sellers?)
Perhaps that’s not too surprising. Here’s my take:
1) Los Altos has too many high priced homes without sufficient variation within the price range. In Palo Alto, you can find homes for under $1M, all the way up to $5M or so. In Los Altos, majority of the homes are between $1.5-2.5M, with a bunch between $1.5-1.8M. When buyers in the narrow range are exhausted, the market starts to lose support.
2) Los Altos loses some customers to Palo Alto in that range.
3) Buyers in the $1.5-1.8M range are typically upper middle class working professionals, as opposed to buyers in the over $2M range who are rich people. Thus, this range is more suspectable to economic conditions.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Here’s a good deal in North Los Altos:
http://www.movoto.com/real-estate/homes-for-sale/CA/Los-Altos/391-Mariposa-Ave-100_80911037.htm
March 9th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
RE-
The Roche/Genentech deal is a huge question mark for most DNAers. Though many will exercise options and realize substantial gains (especially those who have been on since pre-2005), many other will lose their high-paying jobs as the corporate integration eliminates redundancies. Research will probably be fine, but it only makes up 10-15% of the company. Bus. Dev., and other strategic arms look a little vulnerable.
On the other hand, when Roche Palo Alto shuts down, a lot of jobs are going to move up to South San Francisco. That PA/SSF commute is a long one, I suspect more than a few Rochers will decide to go shopping in Burlingame and Hillsborough an out their PA places up for sale
In the end the Roche/DNA deal will probably sting PA worse than anywhere else…
March 9th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
SanMatean: You are right about Roche PA. They stopped doing much new research a while ago, and now are worried about being closed down.
March 9th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
>>On the other hand, when Roche Palo Alto shuts down, a lot of jobs are going to move up to South San Francisco. That PA/SSF commute is a long one, I suspect more than a few Rochers will decide to go shopping in Burlingame and Hillsborough an out their PA places up for sale
PA to SSF is a reasonable commute. I seriously doubt anyone living in PA will go through the trouble to change their house due to this reason.
March 9th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
zanon-
The word on the street is that Roche research (virology, etc.) is planning to move into some of the new research facilities in South City. Genentech doesn’t have much in the way of a virus group, so Roche’s HIV and HCV teams will probably complement rather than compete with the DNA teams.
RE- 45 minute commutes are wearing for workers and their families. Very few people who work in the biotech research parks in SSF live as far south as PA, great schools notwithstanding. Lots and lots live in Burlingame, San Carlos, San Francisco, and a few even live in San Mateo…
March 9th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
“3) Buyers in the $1.5-1.8M range are typically upper middle class working professionals, as opposed to buyers in the over $2M range who are rich people. Thus, this range is more suspectable to economic conditions.”
LOL – suspectable. Way to sound it out. Does your son do your proofreading?
real estater, you don’t actually know any rich people, do you? If you did, you would know that the natural implication of your statement – that rich people are not susceptible to economic conditions is flat out wrong.
March 9th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
hmm, it’s only 25 miles to commute up the 2nd busiest freeway (i’m putting it behind 880) in the bay area. I wouldn’t do it unless I was stuck with a house in PA.
March 9th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
hey anon, you know the rich always stay rich! Just ask Bernie Madoff…
March 9th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
LOL nomadic – What’s the quickest way to make a small fortune? Answer: Start with a large one.
March 9th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Another sign of the direction of the market in Los Altos. Check out 65 Alvarado Street. A new listing in September 08 at $1,995,000. Dropped the price a month later to $1,895,000. Took it off the market to clear the DOM and I just got it today as a “new listing” with a list price of $1,695,000.
Original listing was September 10 so technically it should have about 180 days on the market instead of the “0″ that it will currently show on the MLS.
Per other comments I’ve made, I still think we’re only at the tip of the iceberg in Los Altos but it’s definitely starting to unravel.
March 9th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Good news!
Genentech, Roche Near a Deal at $95 per share.
That’s surely going to create many more Bay Area millionaires.
…which I assume you think means with all these supposed newly minted rich people ( which is actually quiet unlikely given how stocks work in non-tech companies) they will ALL go out and buy up all those houses sitting on the market.
Couple of flaws with that logic. For one, there would need to be hundreds of thousands of them all at once whom would all buy houses at full asking prices, assuming they all would want to buy. Remember, these are smart people and smart people don’t often make stupid decisions like buy ovepriced houses in falling markets.
Secondly, even if they did, there are actually more people losing their high-tech jobs to offset the advance. The latest is that Apple laid people off last week:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10191877-37.html
Add Apple to the latest casualty of the housing crash in regards to laying off staff whom live in the BA who will either need to sell their houses or keep right on renting.
Thus I have to ask… is it good news if the Roche deal doesn’t mean diddly squat for the housing market? Oh- I agree, business like this is good. But it won’t do a thing for BA real estate.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
“Style: Cabin”
I guess “shithole” isn’t in the dropdown menu.
March 10th, 2009 at 3:16 am
It appears to be in Emerald Hills just north of Jefferson squeezed between the rights of way so there is road noise coming and going.
June 15th, 2009 at 9:48 pm
Sold 3/31/09 for $368,500 – 23% over asking price! Booyah!
June 15th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
To celebrate I’m opening a bottle of port.
June 15th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
Let’s open the whole case
June 15th, 2009 at 11:12 pm
23% over asking price!
—–
No downturn here!