After 20 years in San Francisco, John Perry and Rob Picciotto, along with their children, Ben and Louisa, and three dogs, transplanted themselves to Oakland. “I didn’t think we would ever leave San Francisco, but a convergence of things made us consider moving,” said Perry.

In 1998, Perry and Picciotto had stretched to buy their Bernal Heights house and make it work as their family grew. In June it sold for more than triple what they’d paid, a windfall that allowed them to pay cash for a less expensive house in Oakland’s Leona Heights neighborhood in the hills above Mills College.

“We don’t have a mortgage anymore, which is awesome,” Perry said. “We doubled our square footage on more than an acre of land, and have phenomenal neighbors. Oakland is so diverse; it’s a whole new world to learn and explore. There’s more space, more mix.”

For a growing number of San Francisco residents, the math is compelling. Their houses now are worth more than ever. Meanwhile, although homes in the East Bay have had big price run-ups over the past year, they had fallen further during the downturn – meaning they’re still shy of their peaks.

“San Francisco is on the leading edge of the appreciation curve and other places are a step behind,” said Patrick Carlisle, chief market analyst with Paragon Real Estate Group in San Francisco. “The majority of our San Francisco neighborhoods now have met or exceeded their previous peak values reached in 2007 or 2008.”

Huge price differential

The result is that the price differential between San Francisco and other Bay Area counties, especially the East Bay, is greater now than ever, he said. Silicon Valley’s price appreciation has been strong enough that moving there from the city is more of a lateral move.

For David and Tamra Biener, the rising real estate market meant they could finally trade their cramped Dolores Street condo for a bigger place in the East Bay. With children soon to turn 6 and 8, their family outgrew the two-bedroom condo a couple of years ago – they’d converted the dining room to a third bedroom to make do – but were stuck because they were underwater.

“Our kids running up and down the hallway sounded like a herd of elephants to the people above and below,” he said. “We wanted to move in 2011, but at that time the condo was worth maybe $50,000 less than I’d bought it for. I was thinking, it’s another $50,000 in (real estate) commissions, so it will cost us $100,000 to get out of the condo. We can’t do that because we have to come up with 20 percent down on the new house. It’s supposed to work the other way.”

Way over asking price

But now the tide has turned.

“The crazy thing is that two years go by, we list our house for $50,000 more than I paid and get another $125,000 over listing,” he said.

Listed at $875,000, the house went for just a tad over $1 million. As soon as they were in contract, the Bieners made an offer on a five-bedroom Walnut Creek house with lots of room for the kids. It was listed at $1.285 million; their offer was just $15,000 over asking.

“There are two things going on that favor moving from the city to outside the city,” he said. “The prices have gone up way faster in San Francisco than they have outside of it. And the demand is so much higher in the city that you get that extra 10 or 20 percent over listing.”

Agents around the region said they’re seeing a definite increase in San Francisco out-migration.

“There was a time when you could be a move-up buyer in San Francisco, taking the equity out of your home or condo and buying a bigger one in the city, but that’s not the story anymore,” said Steve Dells, an agent for 25 years with Zephyr Real Estate in San Francisco. “The values in San Francisco have escalated so quickly and so much that whatever a move-up buyer can afford likely won’t be enough space to accommodate their reason for moving.”

Ashley Langworthy and Peter Gleason would have liked to be move-up San Francisco buyers, but the financials didn’t pencil out. With twins on the way, the couple needed more space than their one-bedroom Hayes Valley tenancy in common.

‘Cold foggy areas’

“The places in San Francisco where we could afford more space were in cold foggy areas near the edge of Daly City,” said Langworthy, a landscape designer. “We would have stayed in San Francisco if we could have been in neighborhoods we liked.”

Instead, they looked in the East Bay. However, the competition over there meant they got outbid 10 times and ended up paying above asking for a two-bedroom Berkeley house.

Their Hayes Valley TIC went for almost $100,000 more than the $450,000 they paid for it in 2008, not a windfall but enough to help them get a foothold in a stand-alone house in the East Bay. “I think the East Bay is a little more affordable than San Francisco, but it’s still very competitive,” Langworthy said.

Christine Englund and Dean Charlton migrated from the city to the East Bay because she got a dream job in San Ramon.

“Our house in West Portal is in one of the foggiest neighborhoods in town; 2 miles up from the ocean, you’re totally socked in for the summer,” Englund said. “It’s a two-bedroom one-bathroom, with a little yard, just 1,500 square feet.”

Listed at $799,000, the house got 12 offers and sold in late May for $1.025 million. “We hit just the right time,” Englund said. “Interest rates were still a bit lower than now and inventory was so tight in San Francisco.”

Their East Bay house, located in upscale Piedmont, was cheaper at $905,000 but at least 50 percent larger, with a third bedroom, second bathroom, bigger yard, deck and even a wine cellar.

“We got so much more space for the money, and then the weather, the people, the restaurants, everything we value were also great,” she said.

Fewer school-age kids in S.F.

While the current exodus is too new to have official statistics, longer-range census data underscore San Francisco’s ongoing family drain. San Francisco has about 8,000 fewer school-age youngsters in 2010 than in 2000. Of the city’s 805,235 residents, just 13.4 percent are younger than 18 – a smaller percentage than any other major U.S. city, including the Manhattan section of New York City, where 15 percent of the population is under 18. In San Jose, 24.8 percent of the residents are children; in Oakland, it’s 21.3 percent.

What will it mean to San Francisco if families continue to flee?

Perry, the 20-year resident who recently moved out with his partner and their children, has some sanguine thoughts.

“San Francisco renews itself on a regular basis,” he said. “A lot of cities don’t sustain the same populations through all the stages of (the residents’) lives. There may be different cities for different times in our life.”

Carolyn Said is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: csaid@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @csaid

Article source: http://www.sfgate.com/realestate/article/Families-flee-S-F-for-East-Bay-with-cheaper-homes-4796027.php

After 20 years in San Francisco, John Perry and Rob Picciotto, along with their children, Ben and Louisa, and three dogs, transplanted themselves to Oakland. “I didn’t think we would ever leave San Francisco, but a convergence of things made us consider moving,” said Perry.

In 1998, Perry and Picciotto had stretched to buy their Bernal Heights house and make it work as their family grew. In June it sold for more than triple what they’d paid, a windfall that allowed them to pay cash for a less expensive house in Oakland’s Leona Heights neighborhood in the hills above Mills College.

“We don’t have a mortgage anymore, which is awesome,” Perry said. “We doubled our square footage on more than an acre of land, and have phenomenal neighbors. Oakland is so diverse; it’s a whole new world to learn and explore. There’s more space, more mix.”

For a growing number of San Francisco residents, the math is compelling. Their houses now are worth more than ever. Meanwhile, although homes in the East Bay have had big price run-ups over the past year, they had fallen further during the downturn – meaning they’re still shy of their peaks.

“San Francisco is on the leading edge of the appreciation curve and other places are a step behind,” said Patrick Carlisle, chief market analyst with Paragon Real Estate Group in San Francisco. “The majority of our San Francisco neighborhoods now have met or exceeded their previous peak values reached in 2007 or 2008.”

Huge price differential

The result is that the price differential between San Francisco and other Bay Area counties, especially the East Bay, is greater now than ever, he said. Silicon Valley’s price appreciation has been strong enough that moving there from the city is more of a lateral move.

For David and Tamra Biener, the rising real estate market meant they could finally trade their cramped Dolores Street condo for a bigger place in the East Bay. With children soon to turn 6 and 8, their family outgrew the two-bedroom condo a couple of years ago – they’d converted the dining room to a third bedroom to make do – but were stuck because they were underwater.

“Our kids running up and down the hallway sounded like a herd of elephants to the people above and below,” he said. “We wanted to move in 2011, but at that time the condo was worth maybe $50,000 less than I’d bought it for. I was thinking, it’s another $50,000 in (real estate) commissions, so it will cost us $100,000 to get out of the condo. We can’t do that because we have to come up with 20 percent down on the new house. It’s supposed to work the other way.”

Way over asking price

But now the tide has turned.

“The crazy thing is that two years go by, we list our house for $50,000 more than I paid and get another $125,000 over listing,” he said.

Listed at $875,000, the house went for just a tad over $1 million. As soon as they were in contract, the Bieners made an offer on a five-bedroom Walnut Creek house with lots of room for the kids. It was listed at $1.285 million; their offer was just $15,000 over asking.

“There are two things going on that favor moving from the city to outside the city,” he said. “The prices have gone up way faster in San Francisco than they have outside of it. And the demand is so much higher in the city that you get that extra 10 or 20 percent over listing.”

Agents around the region said they’re seeing a definite increase in San Francisco out-migration.

“There was a time when you could be a move-up buyer in San Francisco, taking the equity out of your home or condo and buying a bigger one in the city, but that’s not the story anymore,” said Steve Dells, an agent for 25 years with Zephyr Real Estate in San Francisco. “The values in San Francisco have escalated so quickly and so much that whatever a move-up buyer can afford likely won’t be enough space to accommodate their reason for moving.”

Ashley Langworthy and Peter Gleason would have liked to be move-up San Francisco buyers, but the financials didn’t pencil out. With twins on the way, the couple needed more space than their one-bedroom Hayes Valley tenancy in common.

‘Cold foggy areas’

“The places in San Francisco where we could afford more space were in cold foggy areas near the edge of Daly City,” said Langworthy, a landscape designer. “We would have stayed in San Francisco if we could have been in neighborhoods we liked.”

Instead, they looked in the East Bay. However, the competition over there meant they got outbid 10 times and ended up paying above asking for a two-bedroom Berkeley house.

Their Hayes Valley TIC went for almost $100,000 more than the $450,000 they paid for it in 2008, not a windfall but enough to help them get a foothold in a stand-alone house in the East Bay. “I think the East Bay is a little more affordable than San Francisco, but it’s still very competitive,” Langworthy said.

Christine Englund and Dean Charlton migrated from the city to the East Bay because she got a dream job in San Ramon.

“Our house in West Portal is in one of the foggiest neighborhoods in town; 2 miles up from the ocean, you’re totally socked in for the summer,” Englund said. “It’s a two-bedroom one-bathroom, with a little yard, just 1,500 square feet.”

Listed at $799,000, the house got 12 offers and sold in late May for $1.025 million. “We hit just the right time,” Englund said. “Interest rates were still a bit lower than now and inventory was so tight in San Francisco.”

Their East Bay house, located in upscale Piedmont, was cheaper at $905,000 but at least 50 percent larger, with a third bedroom, second bathroom, bigger yard, deck and even a wine cellar.

“We got so much more space for the money, and then the weather, the people, the restaurants, everything we value were also great,” she said.

Fewer school-age kids in S.F.

While the current exodus is too new to have official statistics, longer-range census data underscore San Francisco’s ongoing family drain. San Francisco has about 8,000 fewer school-age youngsters in 2010 than in 2000. Of the city’s 805,235 residents, just 13.4 percent are younger than 18 – a smaller percentage than any other major U.S. city, including the Manhattan section of New York City, where 15 percent of the population is under 18. In San Jose, 24.8 percent of the residents are children; in Oakland, it’s 21.3 percent.

What will it mean to San Francisco if families continue to flee?

Perry, the 20-year resident who recently moved out with his partner and their children, has some sanguine thoughts.

“San Francisco renews itself on a regular basis,” he said. “A lot of cities don’t sustain the same populations through all the stages of (the residents’) lives. There may be different cities for different times in our life.”

Carolyn Said is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: csaid@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @csaid

Article source: http://www.sfgate.com/realestate/article/Families-flee-S-F-for-East-Bay-with-cheaper-homes-4796027.php

Still, area assessors pointed out that results were mixed. In some counties, most growth in assessments came from the annual 2 percent increase for inflation allowed under Proposition 13. In all counties, thousands of properties were worth less than their previous assessed value – the purchase price plus inflation – because 1978′s Proposition 8 lets the assessment temporarily drop to match the fallen property value.

“Remember, property values plummeted so low that we haven’t come close to making up the losses we’ve experienced,” said Jean Hurst, legislative representative for the California State Association of Counties. “This is no windfall by any means, but it’s a function of the stabilization and the gradual uptick that economists tell us the recovery will look like.”

San Francisco, Santa Clara and San Mateo counties had the biggest increases in the Bay Area, and among the biggest in the state.

“We are clearly on the way back up,” said San Francisco Assessor Phil Ting, noting that it is the only county in the state that never experienced a downturn in its property tax roll over the past few years. “We believe this is probably the last year that many homeowners will be getting a reduction (of assessed value) because the market is coming back.”

Silicon Valley growth

Both San Mateo and Santa Clara counties said they benefited from Silicon Valley firms’ expansion.

“The resurgence here is being led by business,” said Larry Stone, assessor for Santa Clara County, where the overall roll was up 3.25 percent. “The office market is on fire. As spaces lease up, they begin to build out the insides.”

Once businesses lease space and add staff, they buy equipment. That was apparent in both counties as the category of “business personal property,” which includes machinery, computers and fixtures, rose 6.48 percent in Santa Clara County and 5.45 percent in San Mateo.

Still, both counties had tens of thousands of homes that were assessed lower.

“It appears we’re gradually pulling out of the slump,” said Mark Church, assessor of San Mateo County, where the roll rose by 3.33 percent. “We’re moving in the right direction, but we’re not there yet.”

Property tax revenue is split among schools, counties, cities and special assessment districts. The plunge in real estate values resulted in an even tighter budget crunch for those entities.

This year, after three years of minimal or negative growth, Santa Clara County, with the biggest roll in the Bay Area – reflecting the value of Silicon Valley businesses and affluent residential communities – saw an extra $9.7 billion in assessed value. At a 1 percent tax rate, that translates to $97 million more in tax revenue.

But in Solano, the worst-performing Bay Area county, the roll was down by 3.12 percent or $1.22 billion, meaning $12.2 million less in tax revenue.

Wide disparities were evident even within a single county.

Take San Mateo, for instance. Atherton, where the cheapest house for sale is asking $1.595 million, saw assessed values rise more than 9 percent, but in East Palo Alto, where many home values hover around $300,000, the assessments were down 2 percent.

“We’re seeing sharp contrasts between the high-end locations and the entry-level locations,” Church said.

East Bay moderate

In East Bay counties, increases were more moderate.

Alameda County was up 2.14 percent, just a tad ahead of the inflationary increase. “It’s going to take a long time” to fully recover from the downturn, said Brian Hitomi, chief deputy assessor.

Contra Costa’s 0.86 percent growth was largely due to an appeals board decision that increased the value of Chevron’s Richmond refinery for 2007, 2008 and 2009. The tax bump for all three years is reflected in the 2012-13 roll.

“It’s a one-time thing,” said assessor Gus Kramer. “Anyone who hangs their hat on that economically going forward is a fool.”

Contra Costa’s real estate market is basically flat, he said.

“The market is bouncing on the bottom and trying to recover,” he said. “There are some areas that are pretty healthy,” such as the affluent communities of Danville, Lafayette, Moraga and Orinda.

Likewise, the North Bay was fairly stagnant, other than Solano County’s 3.12 percent decline. With towns like Vallejo ravaged by the foreclosure crisis, Solano reduced assessments for more than half of all properties. Since 2007, its roll has fallen by 17.16 percent or $7.849 billon.

Napa County saw a 2.06 percent rise, “mostly due to the inflationary increase,” said Steve Schellhamer, assistant assessor. “Although it’s positive, it would be premature at this point to declare that we’re out of the slump.”

Marin nearly flat

Marin County’s assessed roll nudged up just 0.82 percent.

“The good news is that we don’t see things going dramatically south anymore,” said Assessor Rich Benson. “I don’t think it’s time to say that the market has turned around yet, but we’re seeing some positive indicators.”

He and other assessors pointed out that home sales have been robust throughout the spring. Since assessments for the 2012-13 tax year look at values as of Jan. 1, 2012, those stronger sales aren’t yet factored in.

Sonoma County, which got an extension to close its roll in late July, expects it to be flat.

“I hope we’re close to the bottom,” said Bill Rousseau, chief deputy assessor.

Property tax assessments slowly rise

For the 2012-13 tax year, property tax rolls in most Bay Area counties edged up, even while thousands of homes still had assessments temporarily reduced because their values had declined. Assessments consider value as of Jan. 1, so the recent surge in the real estate market is not yet reflected.

{+1} In billions

{+2} Under Proposition 8, passed in 1978, properties are temporarily assessed lower when their market value falls below their previously assessed value – the purchase price plus an annual increase of 2% or the California Consumer Price Index, whichever is less. When the market rebounds, properties can be reassessed to this “factored base year value.”

{+3} Sonoma County numbers are estimates; roll will close in late July.

Source: County assessors

Carolyn Said is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: csaid@sfchronicle.com

Article source: http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Property-tax-assessments-gradually-bouncing-back-3690479.php