CA Counties by Feb 2020 Median Home Price; OC nears $1M, San Mateo nears $2M

[dimondpark]

Everyone's leaving but prices keep climbing and homes are still selling. How odd.:confused::ok:

Riverside has surpassed the half-million dollar mark.

Orange County would be the 9th CA county to surpass a 7-digit median home price,

CA Counties by February 2021 Median Home Price
$1,900,000 San Mateo
$1,786,400 San Francisco
$1,540,000 Marin
$1,486,250 Santa Clara
$1,435,000 Mono
$1,174,080 Santa Barbara
$1,100,000 Alameda
$1,058,000 Santa Cruz
$995,000 Orange
$931,500 Napa
$820,000 Monterey
$817,500 Contra Costa
$765,000 San Diego
$750,000 Ventura
$740,000 Sonoma
$700,000 San Benito
$700,000 San Luis Obispo
$664,120 Los Angeles
$599,500 Placer
$577,500 El Dorado
$525,000 Mendocino
$520,000 Yolo
$519,500 Riversie
$509,750 Solano
$463,000 Sacramento
$441,500 Calaveras
$436,300 San Joaquin
$406,280 Amador
$405,000 Stanislaus
$397,500 Mariposa
$397,000 Butte
$395,000 Sutter
$389,900 San Bernardino
$375,000 Tuolumne
$370,000 Yuba
$360,000 Humboldt
$359,000 Del Norte
$354,500 Madera
$350,000 Fresno
$329,950 Shasta
$329,500 Plumas
$326,500 Lake
$322,500 Siskiyou
$319,500 Glenn
$299,000 Tehama
$295,000 Kern
$288,500 Tulare
$280,000 Kings
$208,250 Lassen

https://www.car.org/en/aboutus/media...s/feb2021sales

Governor Newsom promised 3.5 million new housing units during the election season---Im wondering what the progress on that has been?

[Pedestrian]

Those are sale prices of course but perhaps this rental home is for sale. It would certainly help bring down the averages:

San Francisco man lives in a box (for only $400 a month)

Amy Graff
SFGATE
March 29, 2016

Peter Berkowitz could afford to pay more in rent. He's a successful illustrator who has been busy with freelance work ever since one of his cartoons made it into the New Yorker.

The thing is that the 25-year-old doesn't want to pour all of his money into high-priced San Francisco rent—and so he's living in a plywood box parked in his friend's living room for $400 a month.

This is an unbelievable bargain in a city where the average rent for a one-bedroom apartment is currently $3,590, according to Zumper.

Berkowitz moved into his box about three weeks ago. He built the structure with friends and the highest quality plywood he could find at Home Depot. The result is a simple box that's eight-feet long, four-and-a-half-feet tall and wide enough to accommodate a twin mattress. The box has a door, windows and a skylight. A desk folds down from the wall and over his lap when he wants to work on his illustrations in bed. Behind the headboard of his bed, there's space for his clothes, which are few. He says he owns only five pairs of pants and three pairs of shoes . . . .

https://www.sfgate.com/realestate/ar...#photo-9724188

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

Everyone's leaving but prices keep climbing and homes are still selling. How odd.:confused::ok:

Riverside has surpassed the half-million dollar mark.

Orange County would be the 9th CA county to surpass a 7-digit median home price,

CA Counties by February 2021 Median Home Price
$1,900,000 San Mateo
$1,786,400 San Francisco
$1,540,000 Marin
$1,486,250 Santa Clara
$1,435,000 Mono
$1,174,080 Santa Barbara
$1,100,000 Alameda
$1,058,000 Santa Cruz
$995,000 Orange
$931,500 Napa
$820,000 Monterey
$817,500 Contra Costa
$765,000 San Diego
$750,000 Ventura
$740,000 Sonoma
$700,000 San Benito
$700,000 San Luis Obispo
$664,120 Los Angeles
$599,500 Placer
$577,500 El Dorado
$525,000 Mendocino
$520,000 Yolo
$519,500 Riversie
$509,750 Solano
$463,000 Sacramento
$441,500 Calaveras
$436,300 San Joaquin
$406,280 Amador
$405,000 Stanislaus
$397,500 Mariposa
$397,000 Butte
$395,000 Sutter
$389,900 San Bernardino
$375,000 Tuolumne
$370,000 Yuba
$360,000 Humboldt
$359,000 Del Norte
$354,500 Madera
$350,000 Fresno
$329,950 Shasta
$329,500 Plumas
$326,500 Lake
$322,500 Siskiyou
$319,500 Glenn
$299,000 Tehama
$295,000 Kern
$288,500 Tulare
$280,000 Kings
$208,250 Lassen

https://www.car.org/en/aboutus/media...s/feb2021sales

Governor Newsom promised 3.5 million new housing units during the election season---Im wondering what the progress on that has been?

I realize not all counties are listed; California has 58 counties.

I noticed this when I looked for Inyo County, where Bishop is located... only because I was quite surprised to see the median price of a home for neighboring Mono County is $1,435,000! Daaaaang! It's such a little-populated county, too! I know that Lee Vining is a gateway to Yosemite and attracts tourists, but still, it doesn't look upscale. I guess Mono County is all about the ski resorts and such?

And I was noticing the median home price of San Benito County, too, which also surprised me. It's cute and all there, with Mission San Juan Bautista and the town of Hollister, but I don't see that county as being affluent per se.

Incidentally, my partner has ancestors who lived in Hollister back when San Benito County was created in the 1870s.

[Crawford]

Wow, insanity. But if you already own in CA, it's irrelevant. It really only affects renters who want to own (and don't have CA-residing homeowner parents), and non-Californians who want to buy in CA.

But it's still hard for me to conceptualize, that people are paying $1.5 million (or whatever) for a dumpy Daly City house. And the same home would be 500k - 1million more further down the peninsula. Kinda mind-blowing.

Do universities and other institutions offer housing subsidies? If Stanford hires me as an associate professor, and I'm a non-local, am I living in a garage in East Palo Alto or something?

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

I realize not all counties are listed; California has 58 counties.

I noticed this when I looked for Inyo County, where Bishop is located... only because I was quite surprised to see the median price of a home for neighboring Mono County is $1,435,000! Daaaaang! It's such a little-populated county, too! I know that Lee Vining is a gateway to Yosemite and attracts tourists, but still, it doesn't look upscale. I guess Mono County is all about the ski resorts and such?

And I was noticing the median home price of San Benito County, too, which also surprised me. It's cute and all there, with Mission San Juan Bautista and the town of Hollister, but I don't see that county as being affluent per se.

Incidentally, my partner has ancestors who lived in Hollister back when San Benito County was created in the 1870s.

San Benito(is part of the SJ Metro Area)is nothing special, agreed, but it has become a bedroom community of San Jose that many people have moved to in search of cheaper housing and now prices have gone through the roof there.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Wow, insanity. But if you already own in CA, it's irrelevant. It really only affects renters who want to own (and don't have CA-residing homeowner parents), and non-Californians who want to buy in CA.

But it's still hard for me to conceptualize, that people are paying $1.5 million (or whatever) for a dumpy Daly City house. And the same home would be 500k - 1million more further down the peninsula. Kinda mind-blowing.

Do universities and other institutions offer housing subsidies? If Stanford hires me as an associate professor, and I'm a non-local, am I living in a garage in East Palo Alto or something?

My college roommate grew up in Daly City and I recall him mentioning that his parents house was worth $600k or $700k. This was a good 15 years ago, so the house must be $1.2-1.5M by now.

[LAsam]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Wow, insanity. But if you already own in CA, it's irrelevant. It really only affects renters who want to own (and don't have CA-residing homeowner parents), and non-Californians who want to buy in CA.

This hits the nail on the head. Those who already own in CA ride the equity wave, while those who rent in CA see ownership slip further and further away as an unattainable goal.

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by LAsam

This hits the nail on the head. Those who already own in CA ride the equity wave, while those who rent in CA see ownership slip further and further away as an unattainable goal.

It is possible to own, they just have to be wiling to move to places on the bottom of that list. Especially now with telecommuting, although I would think renters would be less likely to be doing that.

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Do universities and other institutions offer housing subsidies? If Stanford hires me as an associate professor, and I'm a non-local, am I living in a garage in East Palo Alto or something?

You can rent a decent 1 bedroom for around $2k in the East Bay. Might even be lower now. People really overstate cost of living in the bay, as if everyone is living in SF proper or something. It's possible to work in tech and save a shitload of money if you're willing to commute like everyone else. Then you could put it towards a nice down payment on a house. The American Dream is alive and well in California.

[LAsam]

Originally Posted by TWAK

It is possible to own, they just have to be wiling to move to places on the bottom of that list. Especially now with telecommuting, although I would think renters would be less likely to be doing that.

True. You can trade a longer commute for increased housing prospects. Based on my experience, though, an hour and a half commute in LA is so soul crushing that a lot of people end up throwing in the towel eventually. Telecommuting could be a game changer, but TBD with regards to how that sticks post-pandemic. Another game changer could be a truly effective grade-separated public transit system. The subway they are building from DTLA to West LA could be revolutionary for this city once it comes on-line.

[LAsam]

Originally Posted by badrunner

You can rent a decent 1 bedroom for around $2k in the East Bay. Might even be lower now. People really overstate cost of living in the bay, as if everyone is living in SF proper or something. It's possible to work in tech and save a shitload of money if you're willing to commute like everyone else. Then you could put it towards a nice down payment on a house. The American Dream is alive and well in California.

Did SF rentals get hammered over the last year similar to NYC rentals? If so, now's a great time to get in... especially with rent controls.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Do universities and other institutions offer housing subsidies? If Stanford hires me as an associate professor, and I'm a non-local, am I living in a garage in East Palo Alto or something?

(Stanford) Staff Home Purchase Assistance Program

Stanford staff are able to take advantage of home purchase assistance through Landed, a personal finance company that provides employees of health care and educational institutions, including Stanford, down-payment support and other home-buying resources.

Program highlights

Down-payment support through Landed:
Stanford staff can receive up to $120,000 in down-payment support to purchase a home
Add the support from Landed to a personal down-payment contribution, for a combined 20% down
In exchange for the down-payment support, Landed shares in the equity gain (or depreciation loss) at the time the home is sold or refinanced, or when the mortgage term ends
When prospective homeowners have a 20% down payment, they typically qualify for lower mortgage interest rates and avoid costly Private Mortgage Insurance (PMI) that lenders often apply to home loans with less than 20% down
The program accelerates the timeline to home ownership, enabling Stanford staff to benefit from tax deductions not available to renters
The down-payment support from Landed is not a loan, so it does not add to an employee’s debt and there are no monthly payments
The program supports the purchase of a primary residence
The program is not limited to first-time home buyers

https://fsh.stanford.edu/buy/purchas...ase-assistance

[chris08876]

Hopefully those prices will go down and tons of units could be built.

This sounds harrowing, these prices for folks starting out. Eventually, something has to give. Either they change and fix it or future generations are screwed.

Maybe once Covid ends or the overblown panic, millions of units will rise.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by LAsam

This hits the nail on the head. Those who already own in CA ride the equity wave, while those who rent in CA see ownership slip further and further away as an unattainable goal.

As we know, California, in particular, had strong appreciation last year; the second best nationally only to Nevada . . . . [And]California had . . . the second highest appreciation of housing prices in the nation over the last almost 40 years (second only to D.C., an interesting proxy for the expansion in the size of the Federal Government). The average rate of appreciation in California came in at 6.77% annually over the 39 year time frame. I think many people might be surprised that the long term average appreciation is this low given some of the anecdotal cases we hear about a home purchased for $40,000 in 1975 being worth over $500,000 by the time the house is sold by the next generation. However, this isn’t an especially surprising result taking compound growth into account. In fact, a $40,000 home appreciating at the long term average rate of 6.77% in California would, in fact, be worth almost exactly $515,000.

What is important to remember is that this appreciation is before routine repair and maintenance that must be done on homes, let alone eventual updating and ongoing landscaping and other costs that would reduce the “net” appreciation considerably. In my work conducting financial planning with clients I often counsel them to budget at least $500 per month for these costs in Napa. Other researchers, such as mortgage research firm HSH.com estimate these costs at a minimum of about 1% of home value, very close to my own estimate. So the true value of appreciation in Napa real estate net of these required costs is closer to 5.77%, or less. Good but hardly spectacular.

However, we are not done with annual costs required for a real estate “investment” purchase. Real estate is subject to annual property taxes and direct fees (e.g. bond assessments) that, as a rule of thumb, may average about 1.25% annually of the assessed value of the home. This assessed value in California is limited to the Prop 13 annual increase of 2% so that over the long term, property tax will significantly trail true market value based costs. Over 39 years. for example, property taxes increasing at the annual maximum of 2% would be just $1,082 on a $515,000 home- about $5400 a year less than if it was based on true market value- an 83% saving. Nevertheless, the 1.25% annual property tax and direct fees expense is another mandatory expense of residential real estate and need to be accounted for in determining the real estate investment’s true return. Under the most favorable assumption that a property is held for 39 years the annual percentage cost for property taxes and fees would be 0.25% of a home’s market value by the end of the period. However, given that this is the lowest percentage likely over that time frame and that it takes a holding period of 39 years to achieve I have assumed a more conservative cost estimate of 0.50%. Using 0.5% would reduce our annual net appreciation further from 5.77% to 5.27%.

However, we are still not done. Real estate entails significant purchasing and selling costs in the form of broker commission- typically 6% of the transaction price. This cost is born by the seller and reduces net proceeds received. If we were to return to our “typical” Napa home and reduce the appreciated price from $515,000 by 6% we get a net price of $484,100. This would mean our true appreciation wasn’t 6.77% as we originally estimated but 6.6% over a 39 year time period (and much lower if we used a shorter holding time period). After accounting for the costs I’ve already mentioned, the true net appreciation of owning that home is approximately 5.1% annually. This assumes, of course, that future appreciation will match past appreciation- a questionable assumption given shifting demographics in Napa and California and changes in-migration versus out-migration statistics for high tax states like California that may be expected to affect demand.

Historically, the S&P 500 stocks have averaged between 3-4% annually. If we look at the period from 1975 to 2013 the dividend yield from the S&P 500 index would have added over 3.2% to annualized return, for a total return of 11.86% (assuming dividends were reinvested). More recently that figure has been closer to 2-3% annually. If we assume that stocks going forward are likely to yield 3% in dividends then investors might expect a total annualized return closer to 11% going forward.

Of course, although stocks have no maintenance costs and no updating and insurance costs etc. there may well be management and/or advisory expenses of about 1.0-1.5% a year. Add to this expected trading costs of 0.5% annually and we have a combined approximate cost to the investor of about 2% of the value of the portfolio. This would reduce the total net return to the investor to about 9% annually.

https://www.jacobsonwealth.com/p/is-...er-than-stocks

The moral: Rent (preferably under rent control) and invest the amount you would otherwise pay each month on a mortgage minus your rent payment in stocks.

[sloppy toppy]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Wow, insanity. But if you already own in CA, it's irrelevant. It really only affects renters who want to own (and don't have CA-residing homeowner parents), and non-Californians who want to buy in CA.

But it's still hard for me to conceptualize, that people are paying $1.5 million (or whatever) for a dumpy Daly City house. And the same home would be 500k - 1million more further down the peninsula. Kinda mind-blowing.

Do universities and other institutions offer housing subsidies? If Stanford hires me as an associate professor, and I'm a non-local, am I living in a garage in East Palo Alto or something?

Disrespect Daly City one more time and see what happens...

[chris08876]

Spike in lumber prices could affect plans for homebuyers

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (Dakota News Now) -The pandemic has increased the prices of some building materials like lumber. According to the National Association of Home Builders, it’s leading to some new home contracts being canceled.

Lumber prices have spiked due to increased demand and supply constraints.

“The industry just has not had time to catch up. You know, we had the COVID-related items, some shutdowns were seen there. Still, supply site has been very tight and the housing and construction boom has just not let up at all,” said Dana Iverson, Allied Midwest Sales Manager in the lumber division.

Lumber companies are also seeing a delay in product.

“I actually ordered material last November and December to arrive the second quarter of this year already. So it’s that far out,” said Iverson.

Labor shortages are also contributing to the problem.

This is having an effect on those looking to build a new home. According to the National Association of Home Builders, the increase in lumber prices has added over $24,000 dollars to the price of an average, new single-family home since April of 2020.

However, Tom Jarding, President of the Homebuilders Association of the Sioux Empire doesn’t want all this to deter people from considering building and purchasing a new home.

“Lumber prices and materials where they’re at, I mean it’s all still doable, it’s all still feasible. You look at what lumber has done cost-wise and on a 30-year mortgage, you know you’re talking about 100 bucks (more) a month spread out over your mortgage,” said Jarding.

“We’re still looking at great interest rates when we look at historic rate levels.”

=======================
https://www.kfyrtv.com/2021/03/17/sp...or-homebuyers/

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Hopefully those prices will go down and tons of units could be built.

This sounds harrowing, these prices for folks starting out. Eventually, something has to give. Either they change and fix it or future generations are screwed.

Maybe once Covid ends or the overblown panic, millions of units will rise.

That is not the historical experience. Previous recessions and economic dislocations in industries especially relevant to CA have caused only transient reductions in home values and within a few years new highs were being reached.

Land is scarce in the most desirable parts of CA (near the coast, scenic mountain areas and so on). Numerous communities have "green belt" laws and other restrictions on building.

This is a map of Marin County (medial home price $1,540,000), the San Francisco suburban county just north of the Golden Gate Bridge. The white areas are essentially the areas open to development including housing construction. Note what a small proportion of the total county land this is:


http://calag.ucanr.edu/Archive/?article=ca.v056n01p6

Still, Marin County dairy farms do produce some spectacular milk and cream and especially artisanal cheeses.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by sloppy toppy

Disrespect Daly City one more time and see what happens...

I believe Daly City inspired Pete Seeger:

• Video Link

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

That is not the historical experience. Previous recessions and economic dislocations in industries especially relevant to CA have caused only transient reductions in home values and within a few years new highs were being reached.

Land is scarce in the most desirable parts of CA (near the coast, scenic mountain areas and so on). Numerous communities have "green belt" laws and other restrictions on building.

This is a map of Marin County (medial home price $1,540,000), the San Francisco suburban county just north of the Golden Gate Bridge. The white areas are essentially the areas open to development including housing construction. Note what a small proportion of the total county land this is:


http://calag.ucanr.edu/Archive/?article=ca.v056n01p6

Still, Marin County dairy farms do produce some spectacular milk and cream and especially artisanal cheeses.

Are the jobs meaning salaries scaling to the home prices in CA? So would someone say starting out, a young folks, right out of college, how would they fair? Or say someone working 5 years for example, say mid career?

You'd probally have to have a husband and wife making like 120k each to afford some of those home prices.

Or a single guy making 120k a year.

Seems like it would be fine for folks in good sectors, but your blue collar worker or public worker must be in dire situations. I mean I get super commuters, but dam. Seems like hell if one isn't say mid career in a good sector or field or isn't in tech.

I use to bitch about NJ being expensive, but CA makes it seem like affordable housing, even with our 2.3-3.5% property taxes. Seems like a bargain, even the NYC metro in general.

My house in PA would be like 3 million in some of those areas, I have no doubt.

[LAsam]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Seems like it would be fine for folks in good sectors, but your blue collar worker or public worker must be in dire situations. I mean I get super commuters, but dam. Seems like hell if one isn't say mid career in a good sector or field or isn't in tech.

An astute point. Many people in those situations end up cramming in multi-generational and/or multiple family residences to be able to put a roof over their family's head. I suspect this had something to do with why Covid-19 ravaged Southern California so badly. The people who had jobs that didn't allow for the luxury of telecommuting had to go out and get exposed to Covid-19 risk, then bring the virus back to crowded housing environments with potentially high risk individuals (grandparents/great grandparents).