January Sales

January is already a distant memory, and we are about to pass the 1/2 way mark for February. With a little bit of 2012 under our belt, how’s the year looking from a real estate perspective?

January 2012 Sales: Data Source SFARMLS

As you can see from the above chart, January 2012 sales are down slightly from 2011, but up significantly from the bottom in 2009, when only 180 homes were sold in January.

From 2002 – 2005, January sales averaged right around 400 sales per month, then it went down to about 350 sales per month during 2006 and 2007, continuing to fall during 2008 (247 sales) until it hit bottom in 2009.

January 2010 sales were back above the two hundred sales mark, with both January of 2011 and 2012 coming in with over three hundred sales.

The reported sales in the San Francisco don’t include any new construction sales (because they aren’t advertised in the MLS, they aren’t listed as sold in the MLS), so I would say you could easily add 20 sales to the number and still be on the conservative side, based on conversations I’ve had with sales offices about their January activity (this isn’t including The Madrone, which would push it even higher).

The stats accurately reflect what I’m feeling in the marketplace, which is plenty of buyers who want to buy but there isn’t inventory that they want to make offers on. I have a feeling that 2012 will be a busy year in San Francisco real estate, with volume picking up in the March – June timeframe.

Rates are low and buyers are out there, so if the homes come on the market (which they will) then I expect that 2012 will turn in a solid performance, and perhaps the best performance since 2008.

It should go without saying (but I’ll say it anyway), that when I’m gazing into my crystal ball the future is always a little hazy. We are in an election year, so who knows how the housing market will be tweaked and treated by politicians, but I’d say it is a safe bet that no candidate wants to be the person who upsets the slow recovery of the housing market.

The statistics used to create the chart are from the San Francisco MLS, the data is believed to be reliable but is not warranted and is not guaranteed. Your mileage may vary. Always buckle up.

Share This:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us

Jeans Feeling Tight? So’s the Market!

We all know how it goes… a few weeks after the holidays have passed you wake up on a gray, rainy morning, throw on your favorite pair of comfy jeans only to discover that they aren’t comfortable anymore! Blame it on the washing machine or all that holiday indulging, but suddenly your jeans feel too tight to be comfortable.

The San Francisco real estate market feels about the same right now. As you can see from the below chart, which is based on data from the SFARMLS deemed to be reliable but not guaranteed, we ended December with less than a two months supply of inventory for buyers. Which is really, really low.

Why the Real Estate Market Feels Tight

Months supply of Inventory is a measure of how quickly things are selling. It essentially looks at the number of homes selling in a given month and compares that to the total number of homes actively for sale. The metric tells you, at the current sales rate, how long it would take for all of the existing to be sold. A real estate market with less than 5 -6 months supply of inventory is generally regarded as a seller’s market, 5 – 6 months of inventory is considered a balanced market, while more than that is considered a buyer’s market.

If you are a buyer in the current market, though, don’t despair. Just like a dedicated fitness and healthy eating plan will have you back in your favorite jeans within a few weeks, San Francisco is due for it’s post-Super Bowl inventory bump. Real estate agents almost always freak out about this time each year, absolutely distraught that there just isn’t enough for sale. And at the moment, there really isn’t.

But if you can be patient, exercise regularly, and eat healthy I promise you that you’ll be able to comfortably wear your favorite jeans to the housewarming party for your new house!

Share This:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us

From $417,000 to $1,403,400

What are the 2012 Loan Limits?

2012 Loan Limits in San Francisco

Curious about how big of a loan you can get to buy a home in San Francisco? The above chart will walk you through what your options are for single family homes, condos, and 2 – 4 unit buildings. Please note that the purchase of a condo home falls under the “one unit” category, regardless of the number of condo homes in the development.

As you can see for a single family home or condo, a conforming Fannie loan is $417,000 and you can go as large as a $729,750 loan through FHA. Regardless of the program (Fannie, Fannie Jumbo, or FHA) you can expect to pay for private mortgage insurance if you have less than 20% down.

Interested in a 2 – 4 unit building? Depending on the building size, you can expect to qualify for a loan of between $533,850 to $1,403,400. If you don’t have 20% down, FHA loans or portfolio lenders (not pictured) are pretty much your only financing options at the moment.

As always, if you have more questions or want details about a particular loan scenario, don’t hesitate to get in touch. We aren’t mortgage brokers or bankers, but we are more than happy to put you in touch with a top-notch San Francisco mortgage broker.

Share This:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us

Condo Conversions Create Jobs

Blogging over at Beyond Chron, Randy Shaw recently wrote an article about how allowing tenancies-in-common (TICs) to pay a large fee to the city and bypass the condo conversion lottery will kill jobs in San Francisco.

I don’t make a habit of refuting every ridiculous article written about TICs, but this one was so over the top that I feel compelled to bring some facts to the discussion.

In his article, Mr. Shaw posits that:

“… it [condo conversion] would be a huge job killer, eliminating desperately needed construction jobs and making financing for new condo projects even more difficult to obtain.”

While I’ve heard any number of fascinating stories over the years about what condo conversions do or do not do to the city and its housing stock, this is the first time I’ve ever heard that condo conversions kill jobs. The heart of his argument seems to be that any homes converted to condos would reduce the demand for new condos by a ratio of 1:1 (or more, perhaps?).  In particular, Mr. Shaw seems to be concerned with the development of new condo projects in neighborhoods that he identifies as “emerging” like Visitacion Valley and The Bayview. He goes on to state that:

“Building condos creates living wage blue-collar jobs, and most of these new condos are slated to be built as economic engines for emerging neighborhoods like the Bayview and Visitacion Valley.” – Mr. Shaw

I have a few problems with this argument. While I’m shocked to see Mr. Shaw suddenly advocate for the creation of condo developments in San Francisco, particularly when he has a history of taking pride in defeating development opportunities, we’ll put that to the side for now. Once I picked my jaw up off the floor, though, here are some facts that we should take into consideration if we want to have a rational discussion about condo conversions and jobs.

TICs aren’t found in the neighborhoods he expresses concern about
I did a search of all listed TIC sales in the San Francisco MLS from March 1, 2009, to the present. There wasn’t a single sale of a TIC in District 10 in that entire period! In fact, I had to go all the way back to 2008 to find even one TIC sale in district 10 (a 2-unit building in the Excelsior). If I go back over ten years to look at all sales in District 10 since January 1, 2000, in District 10 (here’s a guide to the MLS districts), there have only been six TIC sales in all of the following neighborhoods: Silver Terrace, Bayview, Portola, Excelsior, Mission Terrace, Outer Mission, Crocker Amazon, Visitacion Valley, Little Hollywood, Bayview Heights, Candlestick Point, and Hunters Point.

So, at most, in the emerging neighborhoods that Mr. Shaw is deeply concerned about, six new condos will be created. At most. If they haven’t already been converted to condos.

Where are the TICs?
As  you can see from the map below (which contains the location of all TICs sold for almost the entire past three years), the overwhelming majority of TICs have been sold in central San Francisco. These are neighborhoods like The Castro, Noe Valley, Corona Heights, Duboce Park, Glen Park, Twin Peaks, Mission Dolores, The Haight, Cole Valley and Parnassus Heights. What do these neighborhoods all have in common? For the most part, neighborhoods where you find TICs are neighborhoods that have been almost entirely developed, where the opportunities for ground-up development are incredibly rare.

View TIC Sales in San Francisco in a full screen map

Neighborhoods Aren’t Interchangeable
Mr. Shaw also doesn’t appear to understand that home dwellers (renters and buyers) are rather picky about their San Francisco neighborhoods. Some folks want to live in The Mission or nowhere else. Some set their hearts on Noe Valley and won’t settle for anything less. While most people have a list of five to ten neighborhoods that they are interested in living in, I have seen very few people who view his emerging neighborhoods (Visitacion Valley, Bayview) as interchangeable with their preferred neighborhood. Put another way, I have yet to meet a buyer that says, “Well, if I can’t get what I want in Noe Valley I’ll take something in Visitacion Valley.” While both neighborhoods might have Valley in their name, the similarities pretty much stop there. Neighborhoods are not interchangeable, and the creation of housing stock in one neighborhood does not destroy demand in another neighborhood.

Take a look at the boom years for condo development in South Beach, Yerba Buena, and SOMA. If you take the entire quantity of condos built at The Palms, The Millennium, One Rincon, The Infinity, Blu, SOMA Grand, and The Beacon the total is 2,287 – about 10% more than the 2,000 potential condo conversions that have Mr. Shaw terrified (on a side note, I don’t know if 2,000 is an accurate number of potential condo conversions – anyone care to help?). Did the sale of 2,287 condos in the South Beach/SOMA/Yerba Buena area decimate the condo market in Noe Valley, North Beach, Telegraph Hill or any other part of San Francisco? No, they didn’t! Why? Because for many buyers, the neighborhoods weren’t interchangeable, and even if they were willing to consider neighborhoods with new developments, many objected to the style or the size of the building. Not to mention the fact that demand for housing has almost always out-stripped supply because of the challenges developers face in building homes in San Francisco.

“In contrast, converting a rental or a unit owned as a tenancy in common (TIC) to a condo creates no jobs.” – Mr. Shaw

Condo Conversions Create Jobs
I don’t feel like I’m going out on a limb when I say condo conversion will create jobs. For starters, every unit approved for condo conversion must undergo three inspections by the city – one general building inspection, one electrical, and one plumbing. Any deficiencies noted by the city during these inspections must be fixed as a condition of conversion to a condo (in fact, the violations must be fixed no matter what). All of the work must be done with permits by contractors that are licensed in the appropriate trade. Most of these contractors are smaller outfits – not the big construction companies bidding on large condo project developments. Could they use the work? Absolutely! Would the conversion of 2,000 dwellings to condos put these folks in the soup line? Absolutely not!

In addition to the jobs generated by physical inspections and corrective work, the condo conversion process requires the creation of legal documents (the covenants, conditions, and restrictions – or CC&Rs – along with the bylaws and articles of incorporation) and a survey of  the condominium building. Both the survey and legal documents would bring work to small businesses. While we can argue if creating more jobs for attorneys is a good idea or a bad idea, the reality is that condo conversion will help keep the doors open at small businesses across the city.

“After all, if you were a builder trying to get financing to build an approved project, why would a bank lend money to you when your units will be competing with thousands of newly converted units fresh on the market?” – Mr. Shaw

Condo Converted Homes Are Already Occupied
In contrast with building new developments like SOMA Grand or The Palms from scratch, the conversion of an existing dwelling into a condominium does not create a vacant property. TICs are already occupied – primarily by hard-working home-owners, but also by tenants. A homeowner is not going to sell simply because they converted their ownership from a TIC percentage of the whole building to a condominium. Does it make it easier for them to sell? Absolutely. Does that mean they will? Not necessarily. And guess what – even if they did sell, that would be good for the economy and jobs because it would mean that they would need another place to live.

If they do move, realistically they are going to be interested in “moving up” in their existing neighborhood (or a nearby one), but who knows, maybe they’ll want a condo in one of Mr. Shaw’s developing neighborhoods. In which case, the condo conversion helped create demand for more housing, not reduce it. The sale of a home also generates revenue from transfer taxes that go directly to the city. Not to mention the painters, landscapers, movers and other handy-folk that get business when a home is bought and sold.

“Think we would see many Ellis evictions if speculators knew that 3-6 unit buildings in San Francisco could never become condos? How about addressing this serious risk to long-term tenants instead of figuring out new ways for real estate speculators to get even richer?” – Mr. Shaw

Buildings with Two or More No-Fault Evictions Are Already Prohibited From Conversion (Including Ellis Acted Buildings)
Mr. Shaw published an article on May 11, 2006, in which he was delighted about “tough eviction protection legislation” that had just been passed by the Board of Supervisors and signed by Mayor Newsom. What was this tough eviction protection legislation? It was an ordinance that prohibited the conversion of a TIC to a condo if there was the eviction of an elderly or disabled tenant after May 1, 2005, for any reason unrelated to the tenant’s behavior. The law also prohibits condo conversion if tenants have been evicted from two or more units since May 1, 2005, for any reason unrelated to the tenants’ behavior. This eliminates any building that was vacated using the Ellis Act (or any other no-fault eviction method that removes tenants from two or more units) from eligibility for condo conversion. The law is also building specific, rather than owner specific – restrictions run with the property regardless of who owned the building at the time of the eviction. How quickly we forget…

“… does not change the fundamental issue: 3-6 unit building that were built as rental units, and typically stayed rental units for over eighty years are now off the rental housing market when rental units in San Francisco are more scarce than ever.” – Mr. Shaw

Condos Can Be Rented!
Mr. Shaw argues that the conversion of ownership from TIC to a condominium will eliminate hundreds of buildings from the rental stock. Which is, quite frankly, a blatant lie. As he immediately acknowledges in the next paragraphs of his article, condos can be rented. They are not subject to rent control, which is an entirely different concern.

I’ve been a tenant in San Francisco, and I’ve been a homeowner. The creation of condos from TICs might do a lot of things — like help the city balance its budget. But to suggest that it will somehow kill jobs is perhaps the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever read.

Share This:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us

Going Up? San Francisco Inventory Is!

It’s Tuesday, which means that as soon as I finish writing this post, I’ll be out the door and touring homes for the rest of the day. From the north end to the south side I’ll be hoofing it all over the city in the hybrid, all so you don’t have to see the ugly ones on Sunday!

I’ve been using TheoTour as a beta-tester for the past several months, and one of my favorite features is the at-a-glance snapshot of market inventory. As you can see, while we are far from the October 2011 fall peak of 300 new listings, new listings have taken a substantial tick upward from the beginning of the year. Our first real estate buying/selling season begins in earnest in February (tomorrow!), running through June (roughly). Then things will momentarily pause for the fog in July and August, and pick up again in September and October before they quiet down for the holidays in November and December.

Today the are 136 new listings on tour today, up from less than 50 at the beginning of January.

Broker's Tour Stats for January 31, 2012

With interest rates at historic lows and improved consumer confidence, my prediction for San Francisco real estate in 2012 is that it will be a very good year, with an increase in volume and a slight increase in prices.

We are also beginning to come to the end of our new construction inventory, with only one new condo building opening this year (The Madrone). Given the uptick in buyer interest, I’m willing to predict that buildings like One Hawthorne, The Millennium, Blu, and One Rincon will sell out their remaining inventory in 2012.

Am I crazy? Ridiculously optimistic? Professionally informed? Talk amongst yourselves in the comments, I’d love to hear your thoughts about the San Francisco real estate market in 2012!

Share This:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • Technorati
  • del.icio.us

2011 Most Expensive homes in SF

What were the most expensive homes sold in San Francisco during the 2011 calendar year? I always have to wait for the tax records to catch up with December recordings, but now that they have, the results are in. It was a blockbuster year for luxury real estate in 2011!

    2840 Broadway

    2840 Broadway, Sales Price: $33,000,000

    2950 Broadway

    2950 Broadway, Sales Price: $29,500,000

    188 Minna, The St. Regis

    188 Minna St., Penthouse A, Sales Price: $ 28,000,000

    2920 Broadway

    2920 Broadway, Sales Price: $23,473,000

    3070 Pacific Ave., Sales Price: $20,000,000

    3070 Pacific Ave., Sales Price: $20,000,000

    3701 Washington

    3701 Washington, Sales Price: $12,100,000

    2550 Green St.

    2550 Green St., Sales Price: $9,500,000

    3362 Jackson St.

    3362 Jackson St., Sales Price: $9,250,000

    2323 Hyde St.

    2323 Hyde St., Sales Price: $9,000,000

    60 Normandie Terr.

    60 Normandie Terrace, Sales Price: $8,800,000

    To refresh your memory, here is our 2010 list of the most expensive homes in San Francisco. As you can see from the list below, Pacific Heights dominated the top 10 sales list, with 6 out of the most expensive homes sold in 2011 located in that neighborhood. Presidio Heights comes in second place with two sales, and Yerba Buena and Russian Hill each have one sale.

    Rank        Address                              Sales Price           Source
    1 2840 Broadway $ 33,000,000 Tax
    2 2950 Broadway $ 29,500,00 Tax/MLS
    3 188 Minna St. – PHA $ 28,000,000 Tax
    4 2920 Broadway $ 23,473,000 Tax
    5 3070 Pacific Ave. $ 20,000,000 Tax
    6 3701 Washington $ 12,100,000 Tax/MLS
    7 2550 Green St. $ 9,500,000 Tax/MLS
    8 3362 Jackson $ 9,250,000 Tax
    9 2323 Hyde St. $ 9,000,000 MLS
    10 60 Normandie Ter. $ 8,800,000 Tax/MLS

     

    2840 Broadway was an off-market deal, while 188 Minna St. (the only condo to make the list this year, with all of the other sales being single family homes) was the foreclosure sale at The St. Regis that received plenty of press during the year.

    It was clearly a good year to be among the 1%, with the 2011 most expensive sale coming in more than twice as high as the top 2010 sale (2600 Pacific Ave). Five of this year’s most expensive real estate deals were valued at $ 20,000,000 or more, while not one of the 2010 sales broke the twenty million dollar mark. Broadway Avenue kept it’s ranking as the most expensive street to live on, with three of this year’s sales located in the Pacific Heights stretch of Broadway, which was the same as last year.

    So there you have it – the top 10 most expensive San Francisco home sales in 2011. Talk amongst yourselves about these homes and their respective sales prices. Good investment for the years to come, or outrageous and unjustifiable at any price? Keep your comments friendly but interesting :-)

     

    Share This:
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
    • StumbleUpon
    • Digg
    • Technorati
    • del.icio.us

    31 Years Later…

    It’s been a big hole in the ground for a very, very, very long time. 2299 Market St. was once home to the Trinity Methodist Church, but it was destroyed by fire in 1981. More than 30 years later, the replacement building is finally arriving. Construction has begun on the development that will include 18 residential homes (all market rate, BMRs to be built off site) over roughly 5,000 square feet of ground floor retail. According to the planning department’s July 2010 discretionary review analysis, the mix of home sizes will consist of eight (8) one-bedroom homes, nine (9) two-bedroom homes, and one (1) three-bedroom home.

    2299 Market St. - January 2012

    2299 Market: Someday Soon?

    At one point, the renderings done by the project architect, ib+a architecture, had an Apple logo on the ground floor retail space, setting the intertubes abuzz with gossip of a possible Apple Store at the location. The fruity giant to the south never confirmed nor denied such speculation, but more recent renderings have removed all such hints… The folks at ib+a have done plenty of other projects in San Francisco, with 555 4th St. (The Palms) being one of the larger projects that comes to mind, but their 1600 Webster project is much closer in size to this development.

    As you can see from the above photos, a large hole in the ground (once the seasonal home of Delancey’s Christmas Tree sales) will be replaced with a five story building, with basement parking for 18 spots (achieved in part with a mechanical auto stacker, according to the architect’s website). The garage entrance will be on 16th street, next to Starbelly.

    No word on when these will be completed, but if you feel like it you can track the progress of the building permits for 2299 Market St. online (the project has been in planning for years, the permits were finally issued in September of 2011).

    The project developer is Angus McCarthy, who has to be happy that after years of negotiations with neighbors and neighborhood groups the shovels have finally hit the dirt at 2299 Market St.

    Share This:
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
    • StumbleUpon
    • Digg
    • Technorati
    • del.icio.us

    Zephyr is #1… or #2?

    Statistics. You know the trite saying. I recently came across some 2011 San Francisco real estate market share statistics by brokerage. Below is the chart, please click on it for a larger image that is slightly easier to read.

    Zephyr 2011 Market Share compared to other SF Brokerages

    There are an (almost) infinite number of ways to calculate market share. One of the more common is to look at either units (number of sales) or dollar volume (the combined value of all sales). Real estate brokerages that list expensive property tend to look bigger when you compare dollar volume (even with fewer units, they have a higher market share using dollar volume because of their higher list and sales prices).

    The above chart uses dollar volume, and since Zephyr does a broad business and isn’t focused exclusively on luxury listings there are firms on the list that have an average list/sale price that is higher that Zephyr.

    The other thing to be aware of is the TRI/Coldwell Banker distinction. TRI, in my experience, operates as a distinct brand and client experience. Invite a TRI agent to your home, and I’m willing to bet that they won’t position themselves as Coldwell Banker agents, but instead as TRI agents – a distinct brand with a unique service/value proposition.  That’s not to be negative about either TRI or Coldwell Banker, just the reality that I experience in the San Francisco market.

    If we consider TRI and Coldwell Banker as two distinct brands, then Zephyr is number one in 2011 real estate market share by dollar volume, coming in just shy of 10% of the total market, with just shy of one billion dollars in total transactions by dollar. If we lump TRI and Coldwell Banker together, then Coldwell Banker comes in as the largest real estate brokerage in San Francisco with about 15% of the total dollar volume and Zephyr comes in second place.

    Either way, I think it is a wonderful testament to the strength and spirit that is Zephyr real estate in San Francisco!

    Disclaimers: Data source is BrokerMetrics (which gets its data from the SFAR MLS). Geographic area is SF MLS districts 1 – 10. Time frame is January 1, 2011 – December 17, 2011 (the most current data when the report was generated). All data is believed to be reliable but not warranted. Your mileage may vary. Always wear your seat belt. ;-)

    Share This:
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
    • StumbleUpon
    • Digg
    • Technorati
    • del.icio.us
    Please view our comment policy, disclaimers, and copyright notice (if that's your thing).