5924 Shaw Lopez Row – $3.2 mil

[jimmyle]

Yes, MM schools. But if you can spend $3.2 mil, they expect your children to go to private schools. May be some Qualcomm millionaires can buy them.

[quote=sdduuuude]This is in the Mira Mesa school district, too, isn’t it ?[/quote]

[sdduuuude]

[quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes

“There was no market research behind Shaw Lopez Park, only passion. The developers are not going to the bank for a construction loan. They are putting up their own money to build the first three homes. When those sell, they will build the next batch.”

How’s that working out for you, hippie boy?[/quote]

Wow. That article is 9 years old.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes

“There was no market research behind Shaw Lopez Park, only passion. The developers are not going to the bank for a construction loan. They are putting up their own money to build the first three homes. When those sell, they will build the next batch.”

How’s that working out for you, hippie boy?[/quote]

Wow. That article is 9 years old.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes

“There was no market research behind Shaw Lopez Park, only passion. The developers are not going to the bank for a construction loan. They are putting up their own money to build the first three homes. When those sell, they will build the next batch.”

How’s that working out for you, hippie boy?[/quote]

Wow. That article is 9 years old.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes

“There was no market research behind Shaw Lopez Park, only passion. The developers are not going to the bank for a construction loan. They are putting up their own money to build the first three homes. When those sell, they will build the next batch.”

How’s that working out for you, hippie boy?[/quote]

Wow. That article is 9 years old.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes

“There was no market research behind Shaw Lopez Park, only passion. The developers are not going to the bank for a construction loan. They are putting up their own money to build the first three homes. When those sell, they will build the next batch.”

How’s that working out for you, hippie boy?[/quote]

Wow. That article is 9 years old.

[Fearful]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes
[/quote]
Wow. That article is 9 years old.[/quote]

Try 19.

They bought the land 50 years ago.

A whopping 30 years later they started talking about developing it.

Twenty years after that, they put the first three houses on the market.

This is just so wrong.

I wonder what the story is on the other two houses in the area. I counted the empty and for sale plots and it ties to the 28 mentioned in the article, so those two were probably built before 1992.

Actually, the timing kind of makes sense. Real estate here entered the doldrums beginning around 1992, so they probably put the whole idea on the shelf. Then for whatever reason they were preoccupied during the early 2000’s. They got around to re-starting the project around 2007. Then they sank a good $million or so into the three houses, assuming that real estate was going to come back some time soon. They certainly have patience; the houses have been on the market more than a year. I would be willing to bet, with the owners’ advancing age, the whole project sits for another year until it is sold in its entirety, or the houses break down from neglect and are bulldozed.

Unreal.

[Fearful]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes
[/quote]
Wow. That article is 9 years old.[/quote]

Try 19.

They bought the land 50 years ago.

A whopping 30 years later they started talking about developing it.

Twenty years after that, they put the first three houses on the market.

This is just so wrong.

I wonder what the story is on the other two houses in the area. I counted the empty and for sale plots and it ties to the 28 mentioned in the article, so those two were probably built before 1992.

Actually, the timing kind of makes sense. Real estate here entered the doldrums beginning around 1992, so they probably put the whole idea on the shelf. Then for whatever reason they were preoccupied during the early 2000’s. They got around to re-starting the project around 2007. Then they sank a good $million or so into the three houses, assuming that real estate was going to come back some time soon. They certainly have patience; the houses have been on the market more than a year. I would be willing to bet, with the owners’ advancing age, the whole project sits for another year until it is sold in its entirety, or the houses break down from neglect and are bulldozed.

Unreal.

[Fearful]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes
[/quote]
Wow. That article is 9 years old.[/quote]

Try 19.

They bought the land 50 years ago.

A whopping 30 years later they started talking about developing it.

Twenty years after that, they put the first three houses on the market.

This is just so wrong.

I wonder what the story is on the other two houses in the area. I counted the empty and for sale plots and it ties to the 28 mentioned in the article, so those two were probably built before 1992.

Actually, the timing kind of makes sense. Real estate here entered the doldrums beginning around 1992, so they probably put the whole idea on the shelf. Then for whatever reason they were preoccupied during the early 2000’s. They got around to re-starting the project around 2007. Then they sank a good $million or so into the three houses, assuming that real estate was going to come back some time soon. They certainly have patience; the houses have been on the market more than a year. I would be willing to bet, with the owners’ advancing age, the whole project sits for another year until it is sold in its entirety, or the houses break down from neglect and are bulldozed.

Unreal.

[Fearful]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes
[/quote]
Wow. That article is 9 years old.[/quote]

Try 19.

They bought the land 50 years ago.

A whopping 30 years later they started talking about developing it.

Twenty years after that, they put the first three houses on the market.

This is just so wrong.

I wonder what the story is on the other two houses in the area. I counted the empty and for sale plots and it ties to the 28 mentioned in the article, so those two were probably built before 1992.

Actually, the timing kind of makes sense. Real estate here entered the doldrums beginning around 1992, so they probably put the whole idea on the shelf. Then for whatever reason they were preoccupied during the early 2000’s. They got around to re-starting the project around 2007. Then they sank a good $million or so into the three houses, assuming that real estate was going to come back some time soon. They certainly have patience; the houses have been on the market more than a year. I would be willing to bet, with the owners’ advancing age, the whole project sits for another year until it is sold in its entirety, or the houses break down from neglect and are bulldozed.

Unreal.

[Fearful]

[quote=sdduuuude][quote=Fearful]Wow, this is unreal. Is this LA Times article about the one and same development? http://articles.latimes.com/1992-08-27/news/vw-6593_1_canyon-homes
[/quote]
Wow. That article is 9 years old.[/quote]

Try 19.

They bought the land 50 years ago.

A whopping 30 years later they started talking about developing it.

Twenty years after that, they put the first three houses on the market.

This is just so wrong.

I wonder what the story is on the other two houses in the area. I counted the empty and for sale plots and it ties to the 28 mentioned in the article, so those two were probably built before 1992.

Actually, the timing kind of makes sense. Real estate here entered the doldrums beginning around 1992, so they probably put the whole idea on the shelf. Then for whatever reason they were preoccupied during the early 2000’s. They got around to re-starting the project around 2007. Then they sank a good $million or so into the three houses, assuming that real estate was going to come back some time soon. They certainly have patience; the houses have been on the market more than a year. I would be willing to bet, with the owners’ advancing age, the whole project sits for another year until it is sold in its entirety, or the houses break down from neglect and are bulldozed.

Unreal.

[an]

These house has been removed from the market. I just noticed that the lot is only 8k and it’s on a lower part of the slope too. The question is, how much does it really cost to build a 4k sq-ft custom home? If you really want to live in 92121 and have a custom home, wouldn’t it be more economical to buy a house like this one: linky for mid $700k, tear it down, and build a 4k sq-ft house on it? Even at $300/sq-ft, that’s only $1.2M on top of $700k, you have 13k sq-ft vs 8k sq-ft, western view vs southern view, and best of all you’ll have a truly custom home to your 100% liking vs a custom home that someone built for them and not you. Or, you can spend $625/sq-ft to get a $3.2M 4000 sq-ft house on a much better lot. With $625/sq-ft, you can have some VERY exotic high end materials.

[an]

These house has been removed from the market. I just noticed that the lot is only 8k and it’s on a lower part of the slope too. The question is, how much does it really cost to build a 4k sq-ft custom home? If you really want to live in 92121 and have a custom home, wouldn’t it be more economical to buy a house like this one: linky for mid $700k, tear it down, and build a 4k sq-ft house on it? Even at $300/sq-ft, that’s only $1.2M on top of $700k, you have 13k sq-ft vs 8k sq-ft, western view vs southern view, and best of all you’ll have a truly custom home to your 100% liking vs a custom home that someone built for them and not you. Or, you can spend $625/sq-ft to get a $3.2M 4000 sq-ft house on a much better lot. With $625/sq-ft, you can have some VERY exotic high end materials.

[an]

These house has been removed from the market. I just noticed that the lot is only 8k and it’s on a lower part of the slope too. The question is, how much does it really cost to build a 4k sq-ft custom home? If you really want to live in 92121 and have a custom home, wouldn’t it be more economical to buy a house like this one: linky for mid $700k, tear it down, and build a 4k sq-ft house on it? Even at $300/sq-ft, that’s only $1.2M on top of $700k, you have 13k sq-ft vs 8k sq-ft, western view vs southern view, and best of all you’ll have a truly custom home to your 100% liking vs a custom home that someone built for them and not you. Or, you can spend $625/sq-ft to get a $3.2M 4000 sq-ft house on a much better lot. With $625/sq-ft, you can have some VERY exotic high end materials.

[an]

These house has been removed from the market. I just noticed that the lot is only 8k and it’s on a lower part of the slope too. The question is, how much does it really cost to build a 4k sq-ft custom home? If you really want to live in 92121 and have a custom home, wouldn’t it be more economical to buy a house like this one: linky for mid $700k, tear it down, and build a 4k sq-ft house on it? Even at $300/sq-ft, that’s only $1.2M on top of $700k, you have 13k sq-ft vs 8k sq-ft, western view vs southern view, and best of all you’ll have a truly custom home to your 100% liking vs a custom home that someone built for them and not you. Or, you can spend $625/sq-ft to get a $3.2M 4000 sq-ft house on a much better lot. With $625/sq-ft, you can have some VERY exotic high end materials.

[Author]

Posts