Julie Emery has another good one at her Piedmont Real Estate Blog about a house that finally sold in Amissville (Rappahannock County) after 574 days on the market.
"The home was listed for sale on May 4, 2006 for $2,275,000. The price was dropped three times. The final price drop was in November of 2007 when the price went to $995,000.
The final sales price was $850,000".
16 comments:
Wow.
Here's a home that's been for sale for 672 days...but I think it's actually been longer...
9203 PARK AVE
MANASSAS, VA 20110
$649,900
I think when we first moved here in 2006 they were asking almost a million for it...now it's for rent for $3,000 a month, as an alternative. Vacant for more than two years...
I make a fearless prediction that it will never sell, due to its neighbors, who have little ramblers with carports full of kids' toys and stuff...that, and the house itself feels like a museum, a showcase that no one is supposed to breathe too deeply in...but that's just my guess, and what do I know?
I went to the link and saw that the blogger/Realtor said it was a great deal because it was a low % of final list price and a very low % of the original list.
Since anyone can set any asking price he/she wants, the list price has nothing to do with whether you've gotten a good deal. I can ask $90000 for my used Toyota, but if you pay a third of that, I guarantee you are not getting a good deal. A good deal depends on what other similar properties are going for. If you can't get anything better for the same price, then you got a good deal.
That's an amazing deal. Forget the house; the parcel was 51 acres. That works out to around $1,600 an acre.
Tabitha: do you have an MLS# for the Park Ave. place?
I'm amazed. Less than $20k an acre. Not quite farmland prices, but still amazingly low. Cash is king.
Got Popcorn?
Neil
That owner was stupid for selling it.
Live in it another 20 years and that land would itself be worth the original asking price.
He should have done whatever it took to stay in there, get family help, whatever.
The thing about this market I dont understand is why there are so many idiots that buy high and sell low.
MLS#: MN6055218
9203 PARK AVE
MANASSAS, VA 20110
The thing about this market I dont understand is why there are so many idiots that buy high and sell low.
Said idiots overbought. Its rather prices to hold onto an unoccupied property for 10 years. Many are not selling; they've found out the bank will sell an unwanted home for them!
Got Popcorn?
Neil
Doug asked:
"The thing about this market I dont understand is why there are so many idiots that buy high and sell low."
Ever see that commercial where everybody is following everyone else into a hole in the ground? It's the herd mentality. Now that the main stream media have picked up on "the bubble", the masses are reacting.
The irony is that by putting a house on a parcel that large, they may have lowered its value. Many prices for parcels that size are priced upon a highest and best use concept. Specifically, raw land is priced on the assumption some jackass developer will come in subdivide it into 51, 102 or more lots and put up more cookie cutter McMansions.
However, by putting a single house up there, the seller was making a statement - this house (and parcel)is meant for living in. As a result, the property was marketed for resale not to developers (i.e. highest and best use prices), but homeowners unlikely to make (or pay for) 51 McMansion parcels.
Sure, a potential homeowner may elect to divide the 51 acres into 2,3 4 or maybe 5 parcels. However, it is unlikely the owner would go smaller the way a developer would. Thus, by setting this parcel up as a SFH with maybe only a few subdivisions, the owner actually could have made this parcel less valuable than raw land capable of being subdivided into dozens of parcels.
Another thing, though, is that Rappahannock County is draconianingly (if that's a word) anti-development. I think the population is less than it was during the Civil War. Subdivision is not an option in most cases.
And yes, I've seen residents complaining of late in the papers that their kids have to move away because they can't subdivide the farms for their kids to build a new house.
I think a lot of nice living arrangements could be made out of the small villages that already exist, but I'm sure they'd scream about that if anybody breathed the word "townhouse".
"Another thing, though, is that Rappahannock County is draconianingly (if that's a word) anti-development."
Good point. I was thinking the house was in Culpepper Co which makes all the difference in the world. Rappahannock is extremely anti development. They make western Loudon Co. look pretty tame in comparison - not that this is a bad thing mind you.
crt,
Fauquier County decided to set up about seven "business districts" to allow for growth in concentrated areas, which I think made sense.
I very much dislike the settlement patterns that are created when anti-growthers allow one house per 5 or 7 acres. That seems more of a waste of farmland to me than putting 50 houses there.
"I very much dislike the settlement patterns that are created when anti-growthers allow one house per 5 or 7 acres"
Agreed - look at little towns out that way such as Paris (loudon) and Little Washington - charming little towns that could be the model for future growth. Too bad there isnt a developer out there who knows how to do anything other than soulless McMansions and Stripmalls for retail.
The development patterns can be whatever you want them to be - all it takes is the political will - which frequently doesn't exist.
Those 5-7 acre McFarms you hate are not the result of anti-development types; more often they are the result of "property rights" types insisting that the by-right development they've been banking/counting on for years while keeping their larger parcel in 'agricultural use' for the tax savings can still go forward.
Often the best most counties can do is set a minimum lot size for future divisions in areas zoned rural.
The concentrated/high-density development model (eg, rowhouses in Little Washington) will only be favored when energy costs get to be too high for sprawl development to be "cheap".
Montpellier,
Yes, the property owners parcel off these sizes of lots. This is Rappahannock:
"For all practical purposes, Rappahannock is a closed county. Its leaders saw growth coming almost four decades ago and took measures to stop it at their doorstep.
Twice during the intervening years, zoning laws have been tightened. Now 25 acres are required to build a home in all but the few village areas of the county."
A lady friend told us about moving to a subdivision of McFarms in Bealeton. (I dislike calling them that, even, because most of the time the owners don't do a thing with the property).
Anyway, at this one, I think it's called "Coventry", you're *only* allowed to have horses. So when they moved there they had to find homes for their other farm animals.
Fauquier has rules about how many animals per acre, obviously, so it wasn't a matter of acreage but of the HOA.
I thought it was ridiculous. Some animals are more equal than others, indeed.
Post a Comment