Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Sale Pending

sale pending
Originally uploaded by kidmissile
Anyone else notice that a few "sale pending" signs have gone up in Lincoln Park within the past week? Two of them are homes that have sat on the market for awhile.

It just goes to show you how being in an historic district can better preserve home values, despite what is happening further east of us. How lucky these buyers are to get a home in this area for slightly less than they were going for a couple years ago.

We get a great bang for our buck here in Pomona.



Anonymous said...

Maybe the homeowners just dropped the price! Since you don't mention the listing price or know the sale price how can you say a historic district protected the values?

sherlock said...

I'm also excited to see the homes finally sell, but anon's comments are correct and point out a common misperception in the historic districts. If you look at the price/sq ft of home sales for Pomona, you won't see a difference between the historic districts and the adjacent neighborhoods.

Anonymous said...

Ditto to sherlock and anon. No correlation between living in an HD and property value.

me said...

Not according to this study by the New York City Independent Budget office:


G of P

Anonymous said...

Im sorry- I should have been more clear: In Pomona No correlation between living in an HD and property value. Especially if you live in Wilton or Hacienda PArk.

calwatch said...

I agree with that, because you can see a very clear drop in prices when you head east of Towne Avenue. On the other hand, the prices for the 1950's homes directly north of Lincoln Park (north of McKinley), which is not in a historic district, are comparable to the prices in Lincoln Park itself. It's more location than it is the historic district.

Anonymous said...

In Pomona, no correlation between living in a HD (Hacienda Park/WH) and property value because the residents in these districts are not as adamant about preserving the nature of their homes like the residents in LP. Of course the property value of homes will be affected when you have homeowners stuccoing over siding, double hung wood windows being changed out with vinyl or gorgeous doors being replaced with those beautiful fiberglass or steel doors. In order for the HD's to have a significant affect on the property values as GofP's link states the residents need to focus on maintaining their homes to their original state, this will in turn draw like minded buyers, as other cities HDs do.

Anonymous said...

I totally think that the Lincoln Park H.D. has helped the price not go as bad as in could be. A 1250 square foot house in south Pomona or even north Pomona (Claremont adjacent) isn't even close to what you get for the money in Lincoln Park.
As for the other two districts...my opinion is that the homes are not as consistent in originality and quite frankly the areas around them have major flaws.
As for the sales of homes... I for one am happy to see some of the signs come down. It was depressing.

LinknPark said...

I am actually pretty confident about all of our historic districts in Pomona. If you review the price increases over the past 10 years they are pretty staggering. I originally grew up in Chino Hills and watched the slow transformation in this neighborhood. My wife and I bought in this area because we knew it was up-and-coming as far as Southern California historic neighborhoods go, and we haven't been disappointed in the area or in regard to the quality of people that have been moving in over the past year or so, even with the housing crunch. If all of us continue to be active in the community and push for commercial redevelopment in the historic districts and north Pomona, I think we will all be surprised at how much better the community will be in another 5-10 years.

Sherlock said...

I don't see much price difference, even east of Towne. According to the numbers on Zillow.com, it looks like most homes in the area are priced around $300/sqft. Obviously, that's asking price and not sales, but I doubt that you'll find much difference.

I do agree that there may be value in a historic district designation, but I don't see the numbers bearing out the argument that being in a historic district deserves any credit in the real estate appreciation. Of course, I may be wrong so can someone point at some non-anecdotal info to support the opposite position?

Ed said...

Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse, but for those of you who didn't read the study that Goddess cited, the last line was particularly informative.

"Finally, there is not sufficient evidence to conclude that
districting itself causes higher prices or greater price appreciation."

That quote should sum up Mark's point, Linkin Park's point, and the HD pundits' point.

John Clifford said...


Take Zillow with a grain of salt. I've seen plenty of BAD information there. They don't calculate prices by neighborhood so much as by square footage and average for the neighborhood. I know that they show my next door neighbor's 1960s house for more than my 1931 house based on square footage. He has a pool and NO backyard, I have a HUGE back yard, no pool, and I know that the historic nature of my home would fetch a better price (especially in a down market) than the newer, characterless, home.

Sherlock said...

The valuation of properties on Zillow can be skewed, but I was referring to the Homes for Sale info that they are now offering. I'm assuming the info is from the MLS. Basically, I was just comparing the price/sqft, since as you pointed out, individual houses will vary. My point is that based on asking prices, I don't see much difference across neighborhoods. We could quibble over whether being in a historic district adds $10/sqft or $20/sqft, but I don't think given the sales volume and the volatility in the market, that you can pull that conclusion from the data.

Didn't mean to step on toes and I do like the historic homes. At this juncture, the numbers just don't support the boasted value argument.

calwatch said...

Best way to check real prices is to use redfin.com.

Ed said...

Thanks, Cal. The $233/sqft for 91767 is closer to the number that the LA Times is reporting for the Zip code.

Really cool site for real estate junkies.