San Ramon Valley Unified: School Score 9.1/ Median Price per SF $304. House in San Ramon for sale.

Blanca Torres
Reporter- San Francisco Business Times

Email
 | Twitter
 | Google+
 | LinkedIn

Location, location, location, right? Isn’t that the mantra for real estate valuation? But what if you have school-age kids? Then the real estate valuation mantra shifts: Location, location, schools.

For families with school-age kids, San Ramon ranks as the best place to buy a home based on school quality and home price, according to data from ZipRealty. Of the top 10 cities, all but two — Palo Alto and Benicia — were in the East Bay.

The Emeryville-based online residential real estate brokerage calculated which Bay Area cities had school districts with the highest test scores, lowest student/teacher ratios and lowest median price per square foot.

“We all know lots of factors — not just price per square foot — go into determining home values,” said Lanny Baker, ZipRealty CEO and president. “Among the most important of these factors for many families today is the quality of local schools in relation to the price of their local real estate.”

Here’s ZipRealty’s list of Top Ten School District Home Values in the Bay Area. Click to right to see slideshow of homes for sale.

Blanca Torres covers East Bay real estate for the San Francisco Business Times.

Article source: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/real-estate/2013/05/east-bay-schools-boost-real-estate.html

The overall index showed a 3.4% drop from October 2010 to October 2011.  In San Francisco, the news was worse.  Home values overall here went down by 4.7% during the same period.  For the 1 month period from September to October, San Francisco saw values fall by 0.7%.  Nationally, the decrease was 0.6%.  But, as we all know, real estate is all about location, location, location.  In locales where the median price is higher, homes aren’t getting hammered as hard.

While the overall figures looks dismal, our friends at SocketSite dug further into the Bay Area numbers and uncovered some variations within the market.  Higher priced homes are faring better in this real estate downturn.  Homes in the $600,000+ range showed a 1 month increase and the yearly figure, which was still down, is not nearly as bad as lower priced homes.

The bottom third (under $319,767 at the time of acquisition) fell 0.9% from September to October (down 9.1% YOY); the middle third was unchanged from September to October (down 8.1% YOY); and the top third (over $599,697 at the time of acquisition) rose 0.3% from September to October, down 1.6% year-over-year (versus down 3.1% in September).

The recent stats follow the overall trend of single family homes in San Francisco.  The homes in the top third have dropped 25% from their peak values while the bottom third and middle third of the market has seen price decreases of 60% and 41%.  And as Anna Marie Hibble wrote, the rise of Bay Area IPOs may just continue to put more zing in real estate, especially in the higher end of the market.

Article source: http://blog.sfgate.com/ontheblock/2011/12/28/in-sf-higher-priced-homes-fared-better/

One real estate sector is still booming; is it about to bust?

^{A version of this article originally appeared on our US site, Fool.com.}

Real estate. They’re not making any more of it. Demand is only increasing. Those arguments helped fuel an epic real estate boom and bust over the past decade — except when it comes to Internet data centres, which have continued to boom on explosive growth in cloud computing. They haven’t been able make those fast enough. But that may be changing, too.

A warning shot over the bow

On its recent earnings call, Akamai (NASDAQ: AKAM.US) was asked about co-location price trends in Internet data centres. Here’s what the company had to say:

… it’s like a real estate market. There are some places where our prices are holding. There are other places where there are very aggressive price declines, and we try to take advantage of that gain in terms of how we deploy our network assets. … The other lever we have on co-location costs, of course, is to make our servers more efficient and get effectively more throughput for our footprint in the co-lo facility.

Based on Akamai’s comments, co-location supply is still constrained in some markets. In others, it’s starting to meet demand. That brings to mind a classic real estate maxim: location, location, location.

Economics 101 teaches us that supply and demand affect pricing. When supply is constrained, prices rise. Internet data centres have been benefiting from that situation. But high prices attract more supply, and eventually supply will catch up with demand. When that happens, prices — and profits — are destined to fall. And that’s starting to happen. What’s more, increasingly efficient IT equipment can offset much of the growing demand for more processing, bandwidth, and storage. What’s good for Akamai can be the opposite for co-location and hosting companies.

Growing up

One factor affecting demand is companies that are shifting from the consumer equivalent of renting to buying their own home. Much like a young adult moving out of Mom and Dad’s place for the first time, companies moving onto the cloud often rent a temporary meets-my-needs-for-now space with no intention of a long-term commitment. As the companies mature, gain a better understanding of their needs, and gather cloud assets, they often began building their own data centres.

Generally, it’s the largest, most attractive tenants that make that shift. Recent examples include Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL.US) and Facebook. They’re following the example of Google (NASDAQ: GOOG.US), which has built its own data centres for some time. As the horde of young companies pursuing cloud strategies gain scale and mature, many more are likely to follow in Google’s, Apple’s and Facebook’s footsteps.

Other tenants are likely to go bust. From a co-location landlord’s perspective, that’s the corporate equivalent of having a tenant lose his or her job and move back in with Mom and Dad. Too much of that, and rental rates take a hit.

Build it and they will come?

Many data-centre developers are doing the equivalent of building on speculation that there will be a tenant. To wit, the CEO of Equinix, a large data-centre operator, has acknowledged that overbuilding is a “main concern.” 

Equinix invests heavily in the IT infrastructure used to serve its clients. Given the rapid depreciation on IT equipment, pricing pressure could make Equinix’s capital expenditures less profitable than anticipated. Pricing pressure is potentially a huge risk for the company.

Say when

When might co-location and hosting supply catch up with demand? Tier1 Research estimates that data-centre utilization in key markets is currently running between 81% (Northern Virginia) and 88% (Silicon Valley). That’s less than I’d expect in an exceptionally tight market.

And it’s a fast-moving market. In the San Francisco Bay area, which includes the Silicon Valley, rental rates for large tenants have reportedly declined 20% over the past 18 months thanks to new supply that’s coming online. A fresh surge of supply is expected in the area before year’s end. In the coming two quarters, data-centre landlord CoreSite Realty predicts that the new supply will outpace demand by as much as 50%.

A recipe for getting burned

With the sector viewed as a cloud play, valuations are sky-high. P/E ratios typically exceed EPS growth rates — that is, when EPS is positive. Over the last four quarters, CoreSite’s EPS was -$0.31 while Internap’s was -$0.10.

The trouble is, supply will catch up with demand sooner or later… and it looks like it might be sooner. When that happens, prices, profits, and P/E ratios are likely to plummet. A UBS analyst stated last December that data-centre developers were grappling with slowing growth, rising competition, and pricing pressure that made their valuations “unsustainably high.”

Foolish takeaway 

When prices sneeze, revenues catch a cold and profits catch pneumonia. Akamai’s comment about pricing trends in co-location centres signals that it may be time for investors to break out the handkerchiefs.

More on US shares:

• Where Should You Invest? This Indicator Will Tell You
• This Oil Stock Has Incredible Opportunities
• A Tale Of 2 Silicon Valleys

The Motley Fool owns shares in Google.

Article source: http://www.fool.co.uk/news/investing/2011/08/01/the-coming-digital-real-estate-bust.aspx

Shared NFL stadium could be real treasure

With the 49ers and the Raiders needing new stadiums, talk heated up again earlier this week about the teams joining forces to build and share a facility.

The NFL reportedly has encouraged the teams to work together, much as the Giants and Jets did in New Jersey, but one obstacle stands in the way.

As they say in real estate: location, location, location.

The 49ers are working on a plan in Santa Clara, and Raiders boss Al Davis has repeatedly said Oakland is the best place for his team.

Is there a neutral site in the Bay Area that would be acceptable to both?

Many argue that Santa Clara would be ideal. Others have suggested Fremont, Jack London Square in Oakland and San Jose.

OK, we know it’s a bit crazy, but here’s a thought: Why not Treasure Island?

The man-made 400- acre island between the two Bay Bridge spans was created to host the Golden Gate International Exposition in 1939-40 and it was initially planned as the site for San Francisco’s first international airport.

Sure, traffic would be a huge issue, but ferries could shuttle fans from all sides of the bay; how much fun would that be ? take the train from downtown Sacramento to Jack London Square, have breakfast, then hop a ferry to the game?

If you think ATT Park looks great on national TV, imagine how Treasure Island Stadium would look.

What to watch

Baseball, Giants at Cincinnati, 4:10 p.m., CSNBA: Ryan Vogelsong goes for the ninth victory in his dream season.

Today’s poll

Where should a shared football stadium in the Bay Area be built?

? San Francisco

? Oakland

? Santa Clara

? Treasure Island

? Both teams should have their own stadium

Vote above or leave your comments in the comment field; Or, go to www.sacbee.com/sports

Thursday’s poll results

Best free-agent cornerback the 49ers should target?

? Nnamdi Asomugha: 82%

? Antonio Cromartie: 3%

? Johnathan Joseph: 12%

? Ike Taylor: 3%

Total votes: 331

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

Contact Tom Couzens at tcouzens@sacbee.com or (916) 321-1097.

? Read more articles by Tom Couzens

Article source: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/07/29/3802618/leading-off-shared-nfl-stadium.html

The same appears to be true now in California when it comes to the ease of getting an accurate property tax assessment.

For the third consecutive fiscal year, the real estate market has faltered— unprecedented since property tax reform took effect with Proposition 13 in 1978 — calling into question the values of homes and businesses for tax purposes.

Assessors are required to come up with accurate values, but state law does not dictate how, and the process varies wildly by county: it can be simple, or a contentious ordeal.

“A lot of it is reflective of how the office operates,” Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which advocated for Proposition 13, said of the state’s assessors.

Three years in, the different approaches of some assessors are emerging as mirrors of their communities: friendly in the suburbs, high tech in Silicon Valley, and in San Francisco — a city where a protest of some sort occurs nearly every day — cantankerous.

“It was very adversarial,” said David Zisser, who appealed the assessment of his Japantown condominium.

Mr. Zisser, a lawyer who spoke animatedly with his paperwork strewn across a table in the downtown Olympic Club, bought his home in 2005, near the height of the market, for $604,000. But in 2009, even after the housing market had collapsed, the San Francisco Assessor-Recorder’s Office placed its value at $653,000.

Mr. Zisser won his appeal — his 2009 assessment was revised to $572,000, then later lowered to $565,000 for 2010 — but he said the process took about 40 hours of work to research, file paperwork and shepherd his case through the system.

“Dragging people through this is ridiculous,” he said, noting that he is still waiting for refunds.

He is not alone: 6,600 assessment appeals were filed in 2009, and another 5,500 in 2010.

Phil Ting, the city’s assessor-recorder, who is also a candidate for mayor, said he hoped fewer than 5,000 property owners would appeal their 2011 assessments. Value estimates are being mailed this month.

Mr. Ting said he had been able to settle 80 percent of appeals without full hearings, which he considered an accomplishment given the size of the task. Property values throughout much of the city remain down from pre-recession highs, prompting many owners to seek reassessment.

“This is not a market correction.” Mr. Ting said. “This is like a U.S. economy correction.”

To cope with the situation, this year his office has proactively reduced the assessments on 18,841 of 200,000 total parcels in the city — eliminating the need for those owners to appeal.

But despite these efforts, Mr. Ting said that the antiquated computer system he inherited when he took office in 2005 was a hindrance. “Think of it as Fred Flintstone,” he said.

Those limitations mean that owners cannot see exactly how their properties’ values were determined until an appeal is well under way — a situation that creates contention and requires time-consuming efforts to find information elsewhere (frustrations I experienced firsthand when I appealed my assessment, and won).

“We would like to have a more transparent system,” Mr. Ting said, noting that his office has been working on improving the computer system.

By comparison, in Santa Clara County in Silicon Valley, as of this year homeowners can go online, enter a privacy code and see their account in detail, including the county’s math. Disagree with the result? An appeal can also be done online.

Larry Stone, the Santa Clara County assessor, said, “Each year we’re adding electronic functionality to do what we do.”

Mr. Stone said that since the new system was installed, the culmination of 15 years and millions spent on innovation, inquiries to his office had dropped by half.

In the Sacramento area, according to Mr. Coupal, the taxpayer advocate, reduction appeals were handled at amiable weekend workshops for property owners.

As in San Francisco, other counties have proactively reduced assessments in recognition of the downturn. In Santa Clara County, Mr. Stone said that this year 124,148 properties (one-third of the county’s total) were assessed below their purchase price.

“But they are not legally required to do so,” Mr. Coupal said of the proactive reductions. Ultimately, “the burden is on the property owner,” he pointed out.

In San Francisco, Mr. Zisser just received his latest assessment: up $15,000 to $580,000. He disagrees with that figure, but said appealing this time was not worth the grief.

“The city has made the process adversarial so people won’t go through it,” he said.

Scott James is an Emmy-winning television journalist and novelist who lives in San Francisco.

sjames@baycitizen.org

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/22/us/22bcjames.html