Real Estate

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Nov 9, 2005 | 07:00 AM

#31

GlennFordx4

Fleet Mechanic

Joined: Jan 2005

Posts: 1,413

Likes: 14

From: cape may county NJ

I bought my first and only house in 89 when I was 19 $61,000 600sq ft 75x100 lot,I had a plan keep it 5yrs sell and move on to something bigger well then the market dropped and I would have to put $10,000 in to it just to recoup,so I refinanced and stayed here ,now their paying $200,000 to $250,000 and ripping the old house down and building big custom 2 story houses on the lot.I love the area now that I've lived here 17yrs and don't know where I would go unless I moved out of state and that ain,t gona happen any time soon! I do feel sorry for the kids today they can't afford the housing cost in todays market and with little to no rentals around I guess thier staying home with mom and dad a little longer.At least now they have 40yr motgages to to help keep the cost down but it can't be by much.

Nov 9, 2005 | 01:37 PM

#32

1956MarkII

Lead Driver

Joined: Apr 2002

Posts: 7,746

Likes: 7

From: Tampa Bay, FL USA

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmyers

...Add the 3 acres and being that close to town would add anoth 1-3 million...

Obviously, that was my own house I described. I had to quote tmyers (and I added the bold type) because the "that-close-to-town" part really made me chuckle. You see, here in Rochester, anything that's more than 15 minutes from downtown is just too far to drive to. I have friends that think I live in the middle of nowhere, and will NOT come out here to visit, because it's "just too far to drive."

As for the current value, its hard to give an exact figure for I've owned it so long, and homes don't change hands too often here. I can tell you that my town uses full-value assessment, which is currently $128,000, but I'm thinking current market value is somewhere in the $150-$170,000 range. Taxes are just under $3000.

Nov 9, 2005 | 01:58 PM

#33

sierraben

Post Fiend

Joined: Mar 2004

Posts: 24,418

Likes: 3

From: San Francisco, Ca.

1956MarkII, sounds like your tax rate is a bit higher than over here, but our ridiculous property values, as you can well see, are "slightly"

higher over here.

Because of Prop. 13, my mother's taxes on her house are $900.00.

No way in hell she could afford the taxes on the current value of the house.

Her taxes would be slightly over $10,000.00 a year.

The house in purchased 1966-7 for $22,500.00 and change.

Amazing!

Nov 9, 2005 | 02:04 PM

#34

76supercab2

Postmaster

Joined: Feb 2003

Posts: 4,043

Likes: 4

Sierraben,

Your mom pays $900 on property that would otherwise bring the city $10,000. Does the recent supreme court decision regarding immenient domain laws have her worried?

Nov 9, 2005 | 02:36 PM

#35

tmyers

Posting Guru

Joined: Jun 1999

Posts: 2,404

Likes: 1

From: Everett, Wa

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1956MarkII

I gave you a price that would be reasonable in my area if any such houses existed. A developer just came through recently and bought up all the large tract housing. Most of those sold from 1-3 mill depending on acrage.

The rule of thumb around here is that for every mile closer to Seattle you add 10K the house. If you are inside the city limits you can almost double the price of any house outside it.

FYI, if I need to go downtown during rush hour I can expect a 1-2 hour drive. Thats covers about 25 miles. Even just going to my plant is a 30 minute drive and that is only 9 miles. When people ask me why I want to leave the state its easy. Seattle is no longer the town I grew up in.

Nov 9, 2005 | 02:36 PM

#36

sierraben

Post Fiend

Joined: Mar 2004

Posts: 24,418

Likes: 3

From: San Francisco, Ca.

76Supercab2, Not a bit.

Her location is in the outer edges of the city.

She's between Golden Gate Park and the Presidio/Golden Gate Bridge.

It's pretty much zoned for homes and small businesses.

Plus we have district stupidvisors, some who own property, that would see this doesn't happen.

It may have happened in other districts, such as the industrial districts, but I've never heard of it.

Of course, nothing is written in stone.

Nov 9, 2005 | 02:45 PM

#37

76supercab2

Postmaster

Joined: Feb 2003

Posts: 4,043

Likes: 4

Actually I did hear of a business owner in SF that had his store for the past 50 years. The city decided to 'redevelop' his block, declared immenint domain, took the property and gave it to a developer. Not sure if it's going to condos or a shopping center but it's not for public use like a park or road would be. The city did offer the owner some money and it is set aside in an account for him while his dispute is resolved, but the catch is if he touches it then the deal is done.

Zoned for homes hmmm. Homes == Condos, Condos == more people in smaller area == more money for the city.
Good luck to your mom and you. Stay tight with that supervisor.

Nov 9, 2005 | 03:23 PM

#38

sierraben

Post Fiend

Joined: Mar 2004

Posts: 24,418

Likes: 3

From: San Francisco, Ca.

76supercab2, a lot of apartment owners are trying to turn their units into condos, but it's difficult.

To evict a current tennant takes a good lawyer ($$$$$) and maybe some more $$$$$ to buy out the tennant.

There's always an ongoing battle between property owners and the renters board.

Majority of the stupidvisors are pro-renter.

Can't really fit anymore people here.

Alot of people don't realize that we're only about 680,000+ on 45 square miles; and we're a major city.

It's a complex subject.

As for the store owner, I don't know. He may have been in an industrial district.