method that is fairest given the prevailing circumstances. The interpretation championed by the second line of cases renders the second sentence of § 506(a) virtually meaningless. Moreover, it would allow a reorganizing debtor to reap a windfall by stripping down the hen to liquidation value and quickly selling the collateral at fair market value, thus pocketing equity that would have been completely beyond reach save for the filing of the bankruptcy petition. Cf. Butner v. United States, 440 U.S. 48, 55, 99 S.Ct. 914, 918, 59 L.Ed.2d 136 (1979) (bankruptcy law should “prevent a party from receiving a windfall merely by reason of the happenstance of bankruptcy”) (quotation omitted). It is true that the debt- or’s intention to reorganize under Chapter 11 is w 4-86 (9th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>), cert. granted and judgment vacated on other
holding that for chapter 12 plan confirmation purposes hypothetical costs should not be deducted from fair market value in valuing collateral to be retained by debtor holding that second sentence of  506a precludes deduction of hypothetical costs of sale in valuing chapter 13 debt ors real property to be retained by debtor recognizing that a debt ors sequential filing of a chapter 7 petition and then a chapter 13 petition is the socalled chapter 20  holding that for chapter 12 plan confirmation purposes hypothetical costs should not be deducted from fair market value in valuing collateral to be retained by debt or holding that  506a does not require or permit a reduction in the creditors secured claim to account for purely hypothetical costs of sale of chapter 13 debtors residence