July 19, 2007
SocketSite’s Complete Inventory Index (CII): Q3 2007 (SF)
Once again, if you’re truly plugged-in you’re already familiar with SocketSite’s Complete Inventory Index (Cii) for San Francisco. But if you're not:
The goal of the Cii (pronounced “see”; we’re hoping Nintendo views it as flattery) is to paint a complete picture of housing inventory and new development in San Francisco; listed, unlisted, pipeline, and potential. In fact, we believe it represents a fundamental shift from the abstract to the tangible with regard to what’s in the works throughout San Francisco.
We’re now tracking the size, status, probability, and available inventory for nearly 200 new developments throughout San Francisco (20,000+ condominiums in total). And we’re keeping tabs on another 15,000+ “net new housing units” (including rental units) that are either proposed or on the drawing boards. All told, it's a potential inventory of 35,000+ housing units (i.e., the majority of San Francisco’s overall housing pipeline).
As it stands, in addition to the roughly 600 San Francisco condominiums (and 500 single family homes) that are listed and available for sale on the San Francisco MLS, we estimate that there are approximately 225 new condominiums that are not listed, but are currently available for purchase and occupancy. These condos include unlisted inventory in buildings ranging in size from 310 Townsend to The Palms.
We also estimate that there are currently an additional 1,150 condominiums that are actively competing for the attention of buyers and accepting non-refundable deposits in sales offices throughout San Francisco (examples include The Infinity, The Potrero, and The Hayes). And within the next six months, we expect to see an additional 1,000 condominiums begin marketing, accepting deposits, and competing for sales as well (think The Millennium, SF BLU, and Esprit Park).
Looking forward to 2008 we see an additional 2,000 new condominiums that are likely to start marketing/selling in the first half of the year (or relatively soon thereafter). And another 1,600+ that have a shot of making it to market in the second half of 2008. At the same time, keep in mind that at least 1,000 units have fallen out of the pipeline over the past six months (think 250 Brannan or Rincon Towers).
Beyond that (and for building by building updates) you’ll just have to keep plugging in.
∙ SocketSite’s Complete Inventory Index (Cii) [SocketSite]
∙ 310 Townsend: Two New Listings, (At Least) One New Price [SocketSite]
∙ The Palms: Financing Incentives And Inventory Update [SocketSite]
∙ An Incomplete History Of Prices At The Infinity [SocketSite]
∙ The Potrero: South Building Sales (And Incentives) This Weekend [SocketSite]
∙ The Hayes (55 Page): A Plugged In Buyer’s Facts (And Opinion) [SocketSite]
∙ Millennium Tower: Sales Timeline, Additional Details And Renderings [SocketSite]
∙ 631 Folsom: Recently Christened “SF BLŪ” (And Down To 108 Units) [SocketSite]
∙ Esprit Park (900 Minnesota): The Website (Sales Office This Summer) [SocketSite]
∙ An Ode To Offices Or A Rethinking Of Residential? [SocketSite]
∙ Rincon Towers: From Apartments, To Condos, To Apartments [SocketSite]
First Published: July 19, 2007 4:00 AM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Wow - with so much inventory in the pipeline, what will happen to prices in 2008/Q1-Q2? And by that time the mortgage squeeze / sub-prime mess would have really hit the proverbial fan, to make matters worse!
Posted by: TrailerTrash at July 19, 2007 8:59 AM
Interesting quote from a Realtor in the Chron today:
"Even within the Bay Area's desirable hub city, however, there are mixed messages. While homes are selling for multiple millions on Russian Hill or in Pacific Heights, the new inventory in the South of Market area could have a dampening effect."
"South of Market, which was a sure bet for growth in the mid 1990s with Multimedia Gulch and all of the Internet companies and the new lofts being built there ... that's pretty much come to a standstill," Lynn said. "I have sellers there with unreasonable expectations -- they're living in two years ago."
What does this say about all of the new inventory, most of which is coming online in this area? Construction costs alone will insure that these condos are priced in the $800+/sq ft. range. Radiance is pricing at $1000/sq ft. I'm not sure this new construction will dampen prices anywhere outside of SOMA/SoBe because it is going to be so expensive already. I see more of those projects becoming rentals or getting delayed/cancelled if the market won't support enough of a profit.
And then there is always the chance that the City simply stops allowing new market rate housing, which has happened before.
What is so fascinating to me is that I remember when I moved to the City 3 years ago, there was nothing available to purchase in our price range. We finally bought a place in the mission last year when inventory started to pick up, but most of places we looked at (less than 650K, 2BR) were tiny and needed a complete remodel- which is why we ended up in the Mission. There is clearly a lot more inventory now and coming online, but it is all very expensive. I cannot see paying those prices and HOAs. I have my doubts as to whether I'll really be able to climb the housing ladder in this City due to the prices.
Posted by: anono at July 19, 2007 9:49 AM
The market may end up being filled with certain types of units, e.g. 1br lofts or condos at $700k.
But other types of new homes are always going to be rare and valuable. There are not all that many units along the waterfront with unobstructed bay views. And all new development is set much further back from the Embarcadero. So I think a high-floor bay-view unit in the infinity, 1 rincon, watermark, 88 king, or Brannan for example is a great investment. For a bland condo on 10th and bryant (for example, not trying to pick on anyone), I would not have as high hopes in the short term, but in the long term soma is improving dramatically.
Posted by: cb650 at July 19, 2007 1:04 PM
Sadly, I imagine that very little of the new condo inventory will consist of affordable 3-bedroom units or be family-friendly. It's really no wonder SF has the smallest population of children of any metropolitan area in the US.
Posted by: frustrated at July 19, 2007 1:47 PM
This is sad because I am moving to SF next year. It looks like I have to live further away from SF.
Right now, I am renting a one-bedroom apt. in East Harlem for $2300. I couldn't afford anywhere else in Manhattan for the right apt. To get something in the nice area costs about 500 more. And I don't even want to mention about owning in Manhattan.
And now, SF prices seem to be equally pricey as Manhattan.
Posted by: Chris at July 19, 2007 7:20 PM
There are plenty of nice places in SF where you can spend less than $2300 for a one bedroom apartment. If you're willing to spend the same amount, you will find a very nice place.
Posted by: Brutus at July 19, 2007 8:07 PM
If one is willing in somewhat less convenient SF neighborhoods, SF can be quite much cheaper than your place in East Harlem. A friend rented a really beautiful 1930's 2 bedroom flat in the Excelsior, fixed up with refinished hardwood floors, for $1600/mo. It's a bit of a walk to BART, but then only minutes to downtown. You can find one bedrooms for less than $2300/mo in most neighborhoods.
In general, SF is quite a bit cheaper than Manhattan, to rent or own.
Posted by: Dan at July 19, 2007 8:35 PM
Pretty much the only way to make SF rents look good is to move from Manhattan. Manhattan is much, much more expensive than SF (my experience having recently rented in Hell's Kitchen and Washington Heights). Plus, you can skip the rental broker tax, since that lunacy hasn't sunk in here yet.
You can pick up a two bedroom place in the Richmond between 10th and 25th Avenues for those prices. At $1800 you have mostly charmless but decent three story boxes; for $2300 you can get a nice place. Expect 1000 square feet or more. The 1A bus express runs straight downtown with only a few stops; it's similar to the 4 train if you're going from East Harlem to downtown, but less crowded and less frequent service.
Posted by: David at July 19, 2007 9:10 PM
I just came off a round of new apartment hunting (looking for a two-bedroom) and I can tell you there's a decent market in the sub-$2300 level for both one and two-bedrooms (though most of the twos are only "sort of" two bedrooms). You can find places in SoMa, the Mission, Haight, Upper Market/Castro, and other central locations. Pretty much all the two bedrooms had something "quirky," but in the end my partner and I actually had a choice between two that we really liked. It seems that $2000 is about the upper limit for "typical" one-bedrooms that have amentities like dishwashers, etc., though if you want something luxe of course it's going to be more.
Posted by: Phil at July 20, 2007 9:54 AM
"In general, SF is quite a bit cheaper than Manhattan, to rent or own."
I'm working with a NY agent right now on a potential move to NYC (focusing on Manhattan). I won't be able to afford something the caliber of what I now have in SF. But, in NY the range of properties and inventory of coops (which are less expensive than condos)makes home ownership more possible to lower-income buyers. There are lots of 1-bedrooms in the $400k range. And if you go outside Manhattan, things are even more affordable. My agent says "theres' something for everyone, so keep an open mind." Granted, the process there is more difficult than in SF, and coops have more restrictions associated with them. But, at the very least, it does appear that the entry-level threshold in NY is lower than SF.
Posted by: seehsee at July 20, 2007 11:46 AM
Thanks for the replies. Looks promising, however I am planning to own a place.
It seems like the rental market in SF has not caught up with the housing market. Just looking at the new developments on this site is very discouraging to say the least. Based on this site, it would seem that the rental market is up there with owning.
Seehsee, are you really moving to NYC? I will tell you that you won't find anything for $400K in Manhattan. I have looked. I moved from LA and I am so adept to that quality of life that I can't stand NYC. You will have to go far out to own a okay place but the commute will drive you nuts. An 8 mile commute on the subway is like an hour. I couldn't live that far and driving in NYC is very expensive. Daily discounted parking is at least $30/day in Manhattan.
Also, beware of certain coops. Some are downright nasty meaning they could reject you (making you wait for 4 months, and rejected you for no apparent reason). It's no wonder all the new developments in NYC are all condos. Even my agent recommended me to just look for condos.
Posted by: Chris at July 21, 2007 5:02 PM
Chris: Thanks for your comments. I hear you loud and clear. Not sure if NYC is definite. I've heard the coop stories, too, and actually have a co-worker dealing with "the wait" right now. My agent is pretty tough (and is recommending condos), so I hope he will look for me. He did have a couple of horror stories about clients getting into new construction developments they couldn't get out of without forfeiting their entire down payment, which we delayed a year. I'll be avoiding those, too!
Posted by: seehsee at July 22, 2007 5:27 PM
San Francisco also looks cheap compared to London, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Paris, etc. A 1 BR condo in London will run $1 million. It motivated me to stay in SF.
Posted by: Eric at September 26, 2007 3:46 PM
Is there anyway to get the actual inventory list? I would love to look into the unlisted and pipeline condos. I am looking to buy something in SF early next year.
Posted by: Sonia at December 17, 2007 9:46 AM
Can anyone estimate how much it would cost to rent a small $300-$400k condo.
Posted by: Seaside at May 12, 2008 7:08 PM