REALTOR® · CalRE #01262913
213.792.6997
[email protected]
REALTOR® · CalRE #02178644
626.456.2957
[email protected]
Profile in plain terms. The subject is a comfortable, age-appropriate Altadena home with the bones, layout, and lot scale typical of the neighborhood — but it has not been recently modernized. The kitchen reads as good rather than updated, which is the single most important variable when weighing it against the comp set below.
Area note — 2025 Eaton Fire. 91001 sits inside the broader Eaton Fire footprint. The subject property and its immediate area are unaffected (Dunia verified directly), and all five comparable sales used in this analysis were similarly outside the burn scar. Comps are post- and pre-fire mixed, but no fire-affected sales are included in the set, so the indicated value is not distorted by burn-scar dynamics.
Why this profile matters for your offer. A "good but not updated" home in a market that has been rewarding renovated kitchens will trade at a measurable discount to the updated comps — and at a meaningful premium to original/un-updated ones. The subject sits in the middle of that band, and the comp grid that follows quantifies exactly where.
The subject is 2.5 bath; every comp in this set is 2 bath. The half-bath is a small but consistent positive adjustment on each comp.
Where the subject is larger than a given comp, that delta is credited at $250/sf. Most material on Braeburn (+110 sf) and Sonoma (+145 sf).
Subject and all five comps are mid-1950s or older — true age peers. One less variable to argue, and a tighter set than a mixed-vintage market would give us.
Four of the five comps (Allen, Mendocino, Vistillas, plus Sonoma per exterior) present as updated. The subject is "good, not modernly updated." That spread is the biggest single variable in this CMA — and the reason the subject doesn't earn the full updated-comp price level.
Three comps have meaningfully larger lots than the subject's 9,136 sf (Sonoma 12,200; Braeburn 11,822; Allen 10,914), each adjusted downward at $15/sf to bring those comps to the subject's lot scale.
Vistillas has a pool; the subject does not. That feature is stripped out of Vistillas at $50K to make the comparison apples-to-apples.
The anchor at the low end of the set — original condition, well kept. This sale establishes the floor for what a "not updated" home of this size and age commands in this submarket.
| Adjustment | Amount |
|---|---|
| Subject larger living area (+110 sf) | +$27,500 |
| Comp larger lot (−2,686 sf) | −$40,300 |
| Subject half-bath advantage | +$10,000 |
| Subject superior condition (good vs original) | +$25,000 |
Updated kitchen and baths on a larger lot, but one bedroom short of the subject — the bedroom adjustment and the condition strip account for most of the gap.
| Adjustment | Amount |
|---|---|
| Comp slightly larger living area (−24 sf) | −$6,000 |
| Comp larger lot (−1,778 sf) | −$26,700 |
| Subject extra bedroom (+1) | +$30,000 |
| Subject half-bath advantage | +$10,000 |
| Comp updated kitchen & baths | −$50,000 |
An off-market sale — exterior reads as a character home in good condition, but the interior was not visible. Adjustments below treat condition as neutral pending verification; if the interior were confirmed as updated, the indicated value would shift down by roughly $50K.
| Adjustment | Amount |
|---|---|
| Subject larger living area (+145 sf) | +$36,300 |
| Comp larger lot (−3,064 sf) | −$46,000 |
| Comp extra bedroom (−1) | −$30,000 |
| Subject half-bath advantage | +$10,000 |
| Condition — unverified interior | Neutral (pending) |
One of the tightest physical matches in the set — similar living area, similar lot, same bed count. The price gap is almost entirely the condition delta.
| Adjustment | Amount |
|---|---|
| Comp slightly larger living area (−40 sf) | −$10,000 |
| Comp slightly larger lot (−453 sf) | −$6,800 |
| Subject half-bath advantage | +$10,000 |
| Comp updated kitchen & baths | −$50,000 |
The top of the comp set — updated character home with a pool, on a slightly smaller lot than the subject. The condition and pool strips together account for most of the gap to the subject.
| Adjustment | Amount |
|---|---|
| Comp larger living area (−114 sf) | −$28,500 |
| Subject larger lot (+867 sf) | +$13,000 |
| Subject half-bath advantage | +$10,000 |
| Comp updated kitchen & baths | −$50,000 |
| Comp has pool · subject does not | −$50,000 |
Reading the five comps. Adjusted indicated values span from ~$1.43M (Braeburn — original-condition floor) to ~$1.72M (Mendocino and Vistillas — updated-condition ceiling). The three updated comps cluster tightly at $1.66M–$1.72M, which defines the realistic top of the subject's value. Braeburn proves the gap that "updated vs not updated" carries in this submarket — roughly $250K — and tells us the subject (good, but not updated) will sit closer to the updated cluster than to the original floor, but below the top of it.
Why this band, anchored where it is. The updated comps (Allen, Mendocino, Vistillas) cluster at $1.66M–$1.72M after their update premium is stripped out — that's the subject-equivalent value if the kitchen were modernized. Because it isn't, the subject earns less than the top of that cluster. Braeburn ($1.43M, original condition) shows what "no updating" looks like in this market — and the subject is meaningfully better than Braeburn but worse than the updated set. That places it in the upper-middle of the range, not at the top.
The five comps frame a clear band. Braeburn ($1.43M, original) is the floor; the three updated comps cluster at $1.66M–$1.72M; Sonoma sits between (with an interior caveat). The subject is "good but not modernized" — meaningfully better than Braeburn, meaningfully behind the updated cluster. That puts the supportable value in the high-$1.6Ms, not the low-$1.7Ms.
$1.65M sits just under the updated cluster's floor — exactly the right place for a home that's almost at that condition tier but not all the way. It honors the upside the subject genuinely has (size, half-bath, lot, age peer), without paying the updated-kitchen premium for a kitchen that isn't updated. We recommend opening lower (in the high-$1.5Ms or low-$1.6Ms) with room to come up, treating $1,650,000 as the disciplined max where the data still supports the price.
Anything above $1.70M asks the comp set to support a price the data doesn't justify. In a competitive scenario the temptation is to chase — but the appraiser will look at the same five comps, and a low appraisal forces either the buyer to bring extra cash or the seller to renegotiate. Pricing above the comp set is, in effect, paying for a comp that doesn't exist. Walk, don't chase, above $1.70M.
Only new, verifiable information that the current comp set doesn't capture — for example: a confirmed updated interior at Sonoma that materially shifts its adjusted value upward; additional recent close comps that sit higher than the current cluster; or property-specific upside (permitted ADU potential, view, etc.) that wasn't priced into this analysis. Without that kind of evidence, the $1.70M ceiling holds.
Lead with discipline, not enthusiasm. A clean offer in the high-$1.5Ms with reasonable contingencies, a strong financing position, and a flexible close timeline often beats a stretched price under pressure. If multiple offers emerge, escalate within the band — to $1,650,000 thoughtfully, to $1,700,000 only with real cause — and be prepared to step aside if the room moves above that. The right house is the one you bought at the right number.
It is our privilege to represent Aaron and Laura Wasielewski in pursuit of 1644 Morada Place. Our role is to bring you the comp set, the math, and the discipline — so the offer you make is grounded in what the market actually supports, and the home you buy is the one you bought at the right number.
REALTOR® · CalRE #01262913
213.792.6997
[email protected]
REALTOR® · CalRE #02178644
626.456.2957
[email protected]