Pricing Poll: 2913 Pacific

Posted by Dave Fratello on Tuesday, December 7th, 2010 at 4:59am.

You'll forgive us, we hope, for focusing once again on a listing on a midblock location on Pacific Ave. in the Tree Section north of Valley.

Last week it was 2912 Pacific (see "Double the Fun?"), while this week it's 2913 Pacific, just across the street.

The reasons are different, though.

2913 Pacific offers a regular-size lot (4700 sq. ft.) and a home of profound blandness. The one-story 60s structure (3br/2ba, 1900 sq. ft.) is no teardown, it's just a bore.

The home's outfitted now as if it's been a rental, with no noteworthy improvements, but no grievous signs of age or obsolescence. To put it more simply: It's livable, but it really could use everything.

The listing description touches this base gently: "If you have been waiting for a home to add your personal touches to, then look no further!"

The price now, 3 weeks out from Christmas, starts at $1.1m, and that's what caught our attention.

A blank slate on a busy street for $1.1m? Can they get that?

What's the land value here? At MBC we're generally looking at standard Tree Section lots as being worth $800k, plus or minus for location, etc. – and even that may be high. But on Pacific there's a markdown, so you probably put the land value on 2913 Pacific in the 7s somewhere.

From that point, what's the home worth?

If the grass is green, the heater works, the toilets flush and the stove cooks, great. But if there's really nothing else to the house, what's a buyer going to pay?

Please vote in our new poll and let us know. The question is: What do you think the closed price will be when someone grabs 2913 Pacific for themselves? Please take a moment to explain your reasoning in the comments on this post.

We'll run this poll through Sunday night at 8pm, in case they open it up for public inspection this weekend. Take note: We've created some narrow ranges of $50k each for this poll.

We'll recap the results when complete and refer back if and when a sale closes.
comments powered by Disqus