The brand new three-bedroom unit #215 at 555 Innes Avenue, one of the 159 units within the second wave of development at the San Francisco Shipyard, was priced at $910,500, or roughly $728 per square foot, back in June of 2016.

And having been reduced to $875,000 at the end of 2017, the sale of the 1,235 square-foot corner unit with parking has just closed escrow with a contract price of $850,000 or roughly $688 per foot.

At the same time, the smaller two-bedroom unit #204 at 570 Innes, which measures 970 square feet and was priced at $760,700 or roughly $784 per foot in May of 2017, has now closed escrow with a contract price of $699,000 or roughly $721 per square foot.

And the even smaller one-bedroom unit #308 at 555 Innes, which measures 611 square feet as prictured below and was priced at $600,500 or roughly $983 per square foot back in 2016, has now closed escrow with a contract price of $580,000 or roughly $949 per square foot.

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by Dave

    This somewhat tracks the leveling and/or drop in prices of new condo units in SOMA. The difference is this is a SFH and, as such, is generally more desirable and less impacted by factors hurting new condo prices in SF. Still, this is a drop from asking so perhaps the price points were too optimistic as set by the developer. The area is somewhat sterile and off the beaten path which may be another factor.

    • Posted by Brisket

      Is it really a single family home – it has a spot in a shared garage, no outdoor space and the listing designates it a condo?

      • Posted by SocketSite

        There are no single-family homes (SFHs) within the Shipyard development.

      • Posted by Dave

        The property description calls it a “corner home”. Real estate speak I guess.

        • Posted by SFMichael

          If the description includes ‘unit #xxx’ it’s a safe bet that it’s a condo or an apartment.

    • Posted by donjuan

      Hunters point is more or less 20-30 minutes outside the city by most people’s standards for ‘city living’. it’s basically living in brisbane so it’s hard to compare it to the rest of the city.

      i think there are still very legitimate concerns about the toxic waste cleanup in the area and the rampant crime.

      • Posted by aerel

        It’s amazing how Bayview’s misplaced reputation for crime never seems to go away. Look at Crime Mapping’s data for SF. I just compared violent crimes in identically sized sections of three neighborhoods with similar population densities over the last four weeks: Bayview/Hunter’s Point: 87 incidents, Inner Richmond: 72 incidents, Noe/Castro: 94 incidents.

        • Posted by Pablito

          But if you look at the reports the radioactive toxic waste is all too real. And right next door to these places….

          • Posted by Charlie in SF

            or under, as in the case of TI

        • Posted by Zack

          It’s changing fasts, gentrification is on.

      • Posted by Zack

        It’s 20 minutes away from downtown, but there is more to the city of San Francisco than just downtown, the Bayview is up-and-coming, and the Dogpatch, to name a few, is already become the new Mission.

        • Posted by Orland

          Dogpatch/Pier 70 is the future of SF.

          • Posted by maisonsaison

            Until they’re maxed out and out of room, then it’s on to the next one. Pier 70 and Dogpatch are small compared to other neighborhoods and megaprojects, including Bayview/HP and Candlestick/Shipyard

    • Posted by 101

      Devolpments in SOMA are no where near what is going on in the Shipyard. I went out there a couple of times for a tour and they won’t build until they sell out a section at a time. The Units I saw had a poor laid out floor plan and is very “boxy”.

      With the recent revelations of contaminated soil not being cleaned up properly, people are being scared off.

      • Posted by curmudgeon

        Yeah. I wouldn’t personally be worried about the soil at this development…it was NEVER dirty (was used for housing not industry during the Naval Shipyard days). However, I would find it very concerning that any development of the rest of the Shipyard is going to be put off for several years as they RE do the decontamination plan. That leaves this area as an island, and delays the delivery of any services.

        For the record, I think there is a lot about this development that is unfortunate. For one, as you say, the floor plans of the units are incredibly uninspired. And for a second thing, they developed this entire development with NO provision for corner retail or other services (there is the temporary “storehouse” on Galvez, but it’s not integral to the development).

        It would have been a lot nicer, IMO, if there were some modest retail and other ground floor uses serving the development, and that’s particularly stark now that it looks like the residents will be waiting a long time for neighbors!

      • Posted by Zack

        It’s just a matter of time, the soil problem is only delaying the biggest neighborhood projects ever to date in San Francisco.

  2. Posted by bachman_erlich_overdrive

    Are there direct comparables from the “first wave” that show these are a big discount?

    I have driven this development and it always feels safe or at least neutral to me. If anything it is too remote to feel much of anything. The little market has necessities and once more new homes are built, it might even be a viable business.

    Nice that most of the places out there are ownership (vs. renting). At least that was my impression. Hope there is an owner-occupancy requirement.

    Brand new appliances, windows, doors, energy efficiency, 10 year legislated structural warranty? Deep pocketed builder for when some lawyer convinces everyone to sue? I say well bought at $850K. Are there other brand new homes for less than 300K per bedroom in San Francisco?

  3. Posted by Pero

    507 Donahue Street:
    Sold 2/21/2018 for $899’000
    Bought 4/21/2015 for $659’000
    That’s a total appreciation of +30% or a yearly average appreciation of 10%.
    This doesn’t sound like a slip in prices to me.

    • Posted by Notcom

      It’s a slip from its peak, which was b/w 2015 and today. OTOH, I bet I can find a property in Detroit or Youngstown that sold for more – much more !! – than it did in 1825…certainly proving those cities are on the rise.

    • Posted by SocketSite

      While they didn’t close escrow until 2015, the Donahue Street units were actually priced, and the first contracts signed, in 2014, which includes 507 Donahue which was priced at $545 per foot and after which prices were increased once sales momentum was built.

      And with a sale price of $899,000, versus having been listed for $949,500 last year, that’s $740 per square foot for the two-bedroom townhouse in 2018.

      • Posted by SFrentier

        I thought list price don’t matter? Still a rise from 2014/2015 actual. Can’t argue that one!

  4. Posted by Pero

    A few general remarks on these properties:

    1) This feels like an entirely different neighborhood from the rest of Bayview. While it used to be two blocks of houses in the middle of nowhere, the recent expansion makes it feel like a proper neighborhood with some parks, dog walkers and upper-middle class cars seaming the sides of the streets.

    2) The dodged testing took place on parcels down the hill which were scheduled for the next round of developments. The current residential blocks sit on a hill which has never been used for any nuclear or military activities. While this issue might delay further development, the built blocks are not directly impacted.

    3) When it comes to real estate buying, I think it’s worth of thinkink in 10 year best/worst case scenarios:
    Worst case: Lennar doesn’t build out the rest of it’s planned development. In this case, your condo at HP will remain an isolated, yet uncrowded part of the town. If a recession depresses real estate prices in SF, you own one of the few modern condos in the city.
    Best case: More jobs move to SOMA (Facebook, Airbnb, Stripe, Salesforce) and Mission Bay (Uber, Dropbox). Due to continuous traffic grid lock, the thousands working at these places prefer housing in the South East corners of the city. You own a condo with amazing views in the now fully-build out, sought-after neighborhood of Hunter’s Point.

    To sum it up: This is far from being the worst real estate ‘bet’ in SF in 2018.

    • Posted by SFrentier

      Yuppers. Plus the whole eastern corridor will have serious gravitas: shipyard, candlestick, Schrag lock parcel, India basin, pier 70. Plus all the tech and office space slated to be built there. Plus the awesome and continuous bayside park and natural wildlife the area will offer. Yup, in 10 years it will be a highly desirable, and integral part of the real SF. Bayview too 🙂

      • Posted by zig

        It does not even need to be “real” SF. Many people live on the fringe areas of SF and rarely go downtown and drive everywhere. They just want a convenient location with short commute, some amenities and a place to walk their little dog

    • Posted by zig

      Don’t forget the continued development going in one exit south in Oyster Point. I can think of 4 rather large developments under construction right now. This is an easy commute from HP. There is already 10’s of thousands of high tech jobs around Sierra and Oyster Point.

      With the above said I think the HP units are unlikely to miss if you have a long term outlook. They also are the “missing middle” sort of housing that we really need for those who don’t want to be downtown but also don’t need a SFH

      • Posted by Dave

        Also, Baylands will have a massive workforce with little housing. Its office component dwarfs what is proposed for HP/CP. As many as 40K workers potentially. Ironically, hopes that the housing at HP/CP will help alleviate the housing crisis in SF could be waylaid by Baylands and the Oyster Point projects. I’m aware of 2 major developments there right now – if it is four that adds more so to the housing demand that could swamp HP/CP. Additionally, with the M office cap firmly in place going forward (no extra space available in the large pool), mega developments with 800K or more office space will have to look outside SF to build. SSF is encouraging office/tech development west of 101 and that could add thousands of more workers on top of Baylands and Oyster Point.

        • Posted by zig

          “SSF is encouraging office/tech development west of 101 and that could add thousands of more workers on top of Baylands and Oyster Point.”

          Where is that? Not sure that is correct as I think it is all east of 101 which is somewhat unfortunate because the BART station is on El Camino and not heavily used and many miles from the office density

          The whole mistmatch between the existing BART line in North San Mateo Country and all the job clusters being along 101 is unfortunate.

          • Posted by jimbo

            at the same time, biotech companies in oyster point and east of 101 in SSF are pushing against proposed housing on east side of 101 due to “traffic concerns”. i really wish socketsite would cover as this is way more relevant to SF than Oakland housing

          • Posted by Dave

            On top of that, Brisbane residents and the developers of Baylands are opposing any significant housing within the development which will be west of 101. All these offices and workers will severely impact SF housing. The lack of a regional authority to require north SMC to build thousands of new housing units is a huge miss. The El Camino from SSF to Burlingame which is transit rich as well as surrounded by parking lots and one and two story commercial buildings has seen hardly any new housing development in the past decade. So bio-tech does not want housing east of 101, Baylands does not want it west of 101 and the county apparently does not want it along El Camino.

          • Posted by Orland

            I’ll never understand why the BART extension to SFO didn t just bust out of the south wall of 24th St. Station and continue directly there via Candlestick. I don’t care if it would have meant an elevated trackway in the 101 median. Going to the airport through Daly City was and will always remain plain nutz!

          • Posted by Dave

            If, as unlikely as it is, there is ever a second tube built and given the massive office development planned in Brisbane, SSF and down towards the airport, the tube should connect to the SSF area and include a spur to the airport – so as not to dead end in SSF.

          • Posted by Zig

            Jimbo: I don’t think it is due to traffic concerns. It is due to a concern about conflict in uses as many companies have research labs and there is also manufacturing. New residents who pay a lot for their units might complain.

            Also they don’t want rezoned land values to increase.

        • Posted by SFrentier

          Dave, I agree that there will be a dearth of housing east and west of 101 south of SF, and that there will be much more office and bio spaces added. And it’s music to my ears! That’s exactly why Bayview, the shipyard and candlestick will become the premier housing choice for all those new workers. This dynamic will help make the eastern part of SF prime SF. Which is why it’s such a smart investment choice today. As an investor you want limited housing; that’s what makes it more valuable. Sure it sucks for renters…but it’s great for landlords 🙂 Otherwise you get red states type of (non) appreciation and (perpetually cheap) rents. Think I’ll stick with the elite liberals mindset thanks!

  5. Posted by Jesus

    You all realize there is ~1% Mello Roos tax on top of the SF property tax at the Shipyard? This means on a $900k purchase price, your annual property tax is ~$19k.

    • Posted by SFrentier

      Really? Each and every year you gotta pay that, it’s not a one time thing?

      • Posted by Dave

        The tax stays in effect until the principal and interest on the bonds are paid off along with any reasonable administrative costs incurred in collecting the special tax or so long as it is needed to pay the expenses of services, but in no case shall exceed 40 years. It can go up no more than 2%/year.

  6. Posted by Fred

    That property tax is going to be a killer especially under the new tax laws. Maybe people are factoring that into the price now?

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *