Comments on: West Linn Real Estate Market Activity — December 14 – 20, 2009

By: Ron Ares

Ron Ares — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 03:19:38 +0000

A quick note about the 2687 Beacon Hill listing. A reader graciously pointed out to me that the original list price for that home was actually one that had been set in 2008 which expired shortly afterward. The property was sold recently without any market time, certainly for a good price, but not at the kind of discount our table shows.

By: Ron Ares

Ron Ares — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 02:48:57 +0000

Hi ARWood,

Welcome (eventually) to Oregon!

The Gregory Court house could have been a good opportunity, but is not currently available for sale — the listing was withdrawn in late November.

The owners paid nearly $950,000 in 2005, and at the short sale pricing of $640,000 for 4,000 sq. ft., it would appear to have been a good deal. No telling if the lender would have approved it, though. Perhaps we’ll see it back on the market in the new year.

By: ARWood

ARWood — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 23:50:48 +0000

Hey…I have been lurking on your website for a few months now. Thanks for all the info. it has been really great. We are in the process of relocating from Austin. And might I say “Holy sticker shock!” and high property taxes to boot! Oh well, Oregon is where the job is. Anyway I wanted some opinion on the short sale property in Gregory Court. Good deal or not? There is not a lot to choose from in our price range. And this seemed to be a great deal back in October. But now we are starting to wonder. Any thoughts would be appreciated!

It’s a 4008 sf, 4 bed 3.5 bath. Built 2005 (?) at $639,900

Thanks!!

By: David

David — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:21:29 +0000

I think the 1.3 million dollar johnson property was sold at a loss. If they bought the land for 500K that leaves 800K to build a 6400 sq ft home. That’s about $125 a sq ft. Builder’s cost is probably $100 or less a sq ft. But then once you add commission paid by the seller and whatever incentives they threw in to make the deal, we’re looking at loss.

David

By: Stuart

Stuart — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 17:12:14 +0000

Additionally. The recent news that home sales were up 7%, but new build sales were down 11% is telling us quite a bit. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/November-new-home-sales-sink-apf-1326075865.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

1) New build is still somewhat of a poker game with builders hoping they can bluff you into signing at silly prices before they go BK or into protection. My care-o-meter isn’t registering even a quiver though.

2) The glut of short sales, and foreclosures is starting to move pre-owned houses to opportunistic buyers looking for a deal and who have their finances in order (many likely needing to carry two properties for a while), but there will be many properties left on the sidelines unless they start listing at realistic prices.

By: Stuart

Stuart — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 17:00:14 +0000

Well, there are some stunners in this week’s numbers. While a $1.3M haircut on the newbuild on Johnson seems amazing, I think we all know the builder/owner must have been on controlled substances to ask $2.6M in the first place. The land sold for $500K.

What’s more interesting is the sudden flurry of “aspirational” ($500K to $800K) properties moving down into (or very close to) the “Actually you can sensibly afford this without needing a NINJA loan” zone of conforming+20% pricing.

$140 per sqft. It’s where it’s at. Properties with large lot sizes over and above the nominal 30% use ratio (3000 sqft property on 10,000 sqft lot, which in West Linn turns into a 3200 sqft home on an 8000 sqft lot after the council have been “persuaded” to grant the variance) are somewhat skewing the average, but I kind of think we are pretty much there. Basically back to 2003/2004 pricing.

Buyers and sellers should plan accordingly for 2010