A few different looks at what has happened to San Francisco median homes sales prices over the last 20 years, and over the past 6 months. As you can see, there has been quite a bounce up since the new year began -- which seems to parallel the surge in buyer demand and the decline in inventory available to purchase that SF has experienced in 2012. April in particular saw a huge jump in median sales price -- the highest since the double tax credit rush of April 2010 -- but we will have to wait for future months' readings to see if that jump was an anomaly or a true reflection of increasing home prices in the city.  

Here are 3 mapped analyses of recent SF home sales by median sales price and average dollar per square foot. Even quarterly statistics can fluctuate within neighborhoods without great significance, because in every quarter a different basket of relatively unique properties sell. However, these maps still give an interesting overview of prices and values in the different areas of the city.

Under the maps, you will find a sampling of specific 2012 San Francisco home sales. [More]

As we've been noting for some time, San Francisco's home market has been recovering much faster than most of the Bay Area, state and country. Here is a good article from the San Jose Mercury News about their analysis of home value changes in the Bay Area, zip code by zip code. One thing you might note is the huge variety in statistics as shown on the article's map within the 5 counties of SF, Marin, Contra Costa, Alameda and San Mateo -- which together make up the Case-Shiller SF "Metro Area". This is a good snapshot of why the Case-Shiller Index applies very poorly to the city of San Francisco itself -- too many utterly disparate markets are lumped together in the same basket. Even within just the city itself, different neighborhoods are recovering (or not yet recovering) at different speeds -- with the more affluent neighborhoods in the central and northern districts of the city leading the recovery. Indeed, buyer competition is currently ferocious in some of these neighborhoods -- causing the resultant upward pressure on prices. Here is an excerpt from the Mercury News article: "According to an analysis by this newspaper of home values by ZIP code, with higher priced homes, such as the core of Silicon Valley and parts of San Francisco, have recovered much of the home equity lost in the crash. The data is for all types of homes: single-family, condos and townhouses. But neighborhoods with low-cost homes, especially those in parts of Alameda and Contra Costa counties, are still far below peak values, hurt by the waves of foreclosures that struck those areas." Here is the link to the entire article and map: http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_20402461/bay-area-sees-patchwork-recovery-from-housing-crash?source=rss    

The luxury home segment in San Francisco makes up about 10% of the overall home market in the city (by unit sales; more by dollar volume). One of the most interesting dynamics playing out right now in the SF luxury home market is the large increase in high-tech industry buyers with huge sums of new money at their disposal. Their presence is strongly impacting the market, especially in certain neighborhoods they've deemed most appealing. We expect this influx of new, wealthy buyers to continue throughout 2012 in the Bay Area. And, of course, as general economic conditions and confidence improves, we expect that this market segment will become increasingly active and competitive.

For our complete report:

[More]

District 5 soared in value between 1996 and 2008 and was one of the last districts to peak in value before the financial markets meltdown in September 2008. Values then fell 15% to 20% very quickly and then stabilized in 2009 and 2010. With the surge in high-tech buyers in 2011, many of whom wish to be close to highways to the peninsula -- and love the lifestyle and ambiance of District 5 neighborhoods and its commercial districts -- activity in this district picked up dramatically.


Now in 2012, the competition between qualified, motivated buyers here has become ferocious: inventory is very low, certainly not enough to satisfy buyer demand, and many of the listings are selling very quickly in multiple-offer, competitive-bidding situations. This is exerting considerable upward pressure on prices.


[More]

More condos sell in the South of Market (SoMa)-South Beach-Yerba Buena-Mission Bay neighborhoods than anyplace else in the city. Of course, this is where by far the greatest number of new condos have been built since the 1990's. The market here has been heating up very rapidly, especially as the number of brand new condos on the market has been rapidly declining. This is also one of the areas where high-tech buyers are concentrating in the city. [More]

Several times in the past 25-odd years, the San Francisco real estate market has turned up or down quickly and dramatically: in the mid-eighties – up; early nineties – down; 1996 – up (and up and up, except for the dotcom hiccup); 2008 – way down; and now, we believe we are seeing another big, dramatic recovery in our homes market.

By virtually every statistical measure of supply and demand, the city’s market is experiencing major acceleration. Multiple-offer situations have hit levels not seen in years and this is putting strong upward pressure on values in many of San Francisco’s neighborhoods. The more affluent areas of the city – never much impacted by distress sales and now highly sought after by buyers – are leading the recovery. [More]

The January report of the Case-Shiller Index was just released on March 27th.

Note: The numbers on the 2 charts below are based upon the January 2000 value of homes being calculated at 100. Thus the number 144 signifies a value 44% above that of January 2000; the

number 184 signifies 84% above January 2000. However, a decline from 184 to 144 equals a 22% decline in value from one point to the other.

Before trying to apply Case-Shiller Index trends to specific cities, neighborhoods and homes -- which can be deeply misleading -- please read the explanation of how the Index works, which is below

the charts. [More]

In January, we suggested that the San Francisco real estate market turned a corner in 2011, and indeed that we might be at a point similar to 1996, when the market began to accelerate after the 4-5
years of down market in the early nineties. (See the Case-Shiller chart below.) Consumer confidence, buyer demand and general economic conditions in the city improved markedly last year, and we also experienced surging high-tech employment and wealth (which looks likely to continue), skyrocketing rents, climbing stock market values and the lowest interest rates in history.

Everything we’ve seen since 2012 began only reinforces January’s conclusion. The major statistical measures of supply and demand – which constitute the dynamics that ultimately result in changes in value – show a market dramatically accelerating. Besides the statistics, this is also what we’re viscerally experiencing on the street, in the day-to-day business of representing our clients buy and sell real estate. [More]

What Costs How Much Where in San Francisco San Francisco Home Values by Neighborhood February 1, 2011 - January 31, 2012 The first group of statistics below (in table format) apply only to non-distress home sales with at least 1 car parking, as reported to MLS. Distress sales – bank-owned property sales and short sales – typically sell at a substantial discount due to condition-of-property issues and/or deal-aggravation issues, and if included in the analysis, would reduce the median sales price and average dollar per square ($/sq.ft.) figures in certain neighborhoods. (Distress sales, though occurring everywhere in the city, are generally clustered in less affluent neighborhoods and in the lower price ranges.) The average size of homes vary widely by neighborhood: for example, the average size of a 4-bedroom house in Pacific Heights is much larger than one in Noe Valley. Besides affluence, the era and style of construction often play a large role in these disparities. Some neighborhoods are well known for having “bonus” bedrooms and baths built without permit (often behind the garage). These additions can add value, but being unpermitted are not reflected in average dollar per square foot ($/sq.ft.) figures. If a price is followed by a “k” it references thousands of dollars; if followed by an “m”, it signifies millions of dollars. Sales unreported to MLS are not included in this analysis, and where abnormal “outliers” were identified that significantly distorted the statistics, these were deleted as well. Please see the definitions and caveats at the end of this report. Trends in Dollar per Square Foot Values for Houses in Selected San Francisco Neighborhoods Trends in Median Sales Prices for 2-Bedroom Condos in Selected SF Neighborhoods The MEDIAN SALES PRICE is that price at which half the properties sold for more and half for less. It may be affected by “unusual” events or by changes in buying trends, or seasonal trends, as well as by changes in value. Low Price & High Price are self-explanatory, but the low price might be for a property that needs significant work just to be habitable. Within a single neighborhood, it is possible for the low and high prices to be millions of dollars apart – the difference between a small, dark 2-bedroom condo above a Laundromat, and a lavishly appointed, full-floor, 2-bedroom penthouse with spectacular views in a prestige high-rise. AVERAGE SALES PRICE is calculated by adding up all the sales prices and dividing by the number of sales. It is different from median sales price, but like medians, averages can be affected by other factors besides changes in value, such as fluctuations in average unit size. Averages may also be distorted by a few sales that are abnormally high or low, especially when the number of sales is low. Average sales prices are usually higher than median sales prices. DOLLAR PER SQUARE FOOT is based upon the home’s interior living space and does not include garages, storage, unfinished attics and basements; rooms and apartments built without permit; decks, patios or yards. These figures are typically derived from appraisals or tax records, but can be unreliable, measured in different ways, or unreported altogether: thus consider square footage and $/sq.ft. figures to be very general approximations. Generally speaking, about 60-80% of listings report square footage, and dollar per square foot statistics are based solely on those listings. All things being equal, a house will have a higher dollar per square foot than a condo (because of land value), a condo will have a higher $/sq.ft. than a TIC (quality of title), and a TIC’s will be higher than a multi-unit building’s (quality of use). All things being equal, a smaller home will have a higher $/sq.ft. than a larger one. The highest dollar per square foot values in San Francisco are typically found in upper floor condos in prestige buildings with utterly spectacular views. The AVERAGE SIZE of homes of the same bedroom count may vary widely by neighborhood: for example, the average size of a 4-bedroom house in Pacific Heights is much larger than one in Noe Valley; and the average of a Marina 2-bedroom condo is larger than one in South Beach. Besides the affluence factor, the era and style of construction often play large roles in these disparities. Some neighborhoods are well known for having additional ROOMS BUILT WITHOUT PERMIT, such as the classic 1940’s Sunset house with “bedrooms” and baths built out behind the garage. These additions often add value, but being unpermitted are not reflected in $/sq.ft. figures. Many aspects of value cannot be adequately reflected in general statistics: curb appeal, age, condition, views, amenities, outdoor space, “bonus” rooms, parking, quality of location within the neighborhood, and so forth. Thus, how these statistics apply to any particular home is unknown. In real estate, the devil’s always in the details. SAN FRANCISCO REALTOR DISTRICTS District 1: Sea Cliff, Lake Street, Richmond (Inner, Central, Outer), Jordan Park/Laurel Heights, Lone Mountain District 2: Sunset & Parkside (Inner, Central, Outer), Golden Gate Heights District 3: Lake Shore, Lakeside, Merced Manor, Merced Heights, Ingleside, Ingleside Heights, Oceanview District 4: St. Francis Wood, Forest Hill, West Portal, Forest Knolls, Diamond Heights, Midtown Terrace, Miraloma Park, Sunnyside, Balboa Terrace, Ingleside Terrace, Mt. Davidson Manor, Sherwood Forest, Monterey Heights, Westwood Highlands District 5: Noe Valley, Eureka Valley (Castro, Liberty Hill), Cole Valley, Glen Park, Corona Heights, Clarendon Heights, Ashbury Heights, Buena Vista Park, Haight Ashbury, Duboce Triangle, Twin Peaks, Mission Dolores, Parnassus Heights District 6: Hayes Valley, North of Panhandle (NOPA), Alamo Square, Western Addition, Anza Vista, Lower Pacific Heights District 7: Pacific Heights, Presidio Heights, Cow Hollow, Marina District 8: Russian Hill, Nob Hill, Telegraph Hill, North Beach, Financial District, North Waterfront, Downtown, Van Ness/ Civic Center, Tenderloin District 9: SoMa, South Beach, Mission Bay, Potrero Hill, Dogpatch, Bernal Heights, Inner Mission, Yerba Buena District 10: Bayview, Bayview Heights, Excelsior, Portola, Visitacion Valley, Silver Terrace, Mission Terrace, Crocker Amazon, Outer Mission Some Realtor districts contain neighborhoods that are relatively homogeneous in general home values, such as districts 5 and 7, and others contain neighborhoods of wildly different values, such as district 8 which includes both Russian Hill and the Tenderloin. Statistics such as these are generalities, subject to fluctuations due to a variety of reasons (besides changes in value). Average figures in particular may be distorted by a few sales substantially higher or lower than the norm, especially where the sample size is small. Generally speaking, the fewer the sales, the less reliable the statistics. New-development condo sales not reported to MLS – of which there are quite a few in San Francisco – are not included in this analysis. All information herein is derived from sources deemed reliable, but may contain errors and omissions, and is subject to revision.