Q12016 quarterlyreport ezine

Quarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016

Beyond the Clouds: Economic Sun RaysContinue to Keep Bay Area Warm 4

Contra Costa County/Tri-Valley 8

East Bay 12

Marin County 16

Napa County 20

San Francisco 24

Silicon Valley 32

Sonoma County 38

Sonoma Valley 42

Lake Tahoe/Truckee 46

Table of Contents

Bay Area 10-Year OverviewHere’s a look at home sales in the Bay Area’s real estate markets in the first quarter of 2016, with a glance back at the 10 preceding first quarters.

Click here to see specific 10-year data on key cities in the Bay Area.

REGION Q1 '06 Q1 '07 Q1 '08 Q1 '09 Q1 '10 Q1 '11 Q1 '12 Q1 '13 Q1 '14 Q1 '15 Q1 '16

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 2,063 1,684 1,310 2,892 2,288 2,457 2,553 2,290 1,916 2,011 1,939

EAST BAY 535 445 338 315 365 469 498 439 430 381 378

MARIN COUNTY 410 427 281 223 349 385 434 431 413 381 334

NAPA COUNTY 245 220 140 244 263 290 313 268 212 258 235

SAN FRANCISCO (SFH) 494 461 221 333 468 501 535 499 468 428 352

SAN FRANCISCO (CONDOS) 484 458 319 216 372 479 485 507 548 476 432

SILICON VALLEY 485 491 329 238 391 411 445 432 393 366 312

SONOMA COUNTY 1,037 885 621 1,028 921 978 1,156 979 893 807 867

SONOMA VALLEY 97 81 75 84 88 103 114 104 95 85 92

LAKE TAHOE/TRUCKEE (SFH) 133 147 132 122 167 182 220 223 180 197 228

LAKE TAHOE/TRUCKEE (CONDOS) 59 46 34 18 64 52 50 61 56 56 68Copyright © Pacific Union. Source: BrokerMetrics / Terradatum, Inc. using data from SFARMLS, EBRD, BAREIS, MLSLSTINGS, TSIERRA, April 6, 2016.

Bay Area: 10-Year Overview of Q1 Homes Sold

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/10year_monsterchart.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/10year_monsterchart.pdf

By Selma Hepp, Pacific Union Chief Economist and Vice President of Business Intelligence

THE U.S. ECONOMY IS SOLIDLY MARCHING FORWARD

To say that we live in the age of information overload is an understatement. If you are not entrenched in economic data, it may be difficult to see the forest from the trees by reading daily news stories. However, after a shaky start to this year, we can now say with some level of certainty that we are on the other side of the tumultuous tunnel and that the economic prospects for 2016 are looking up.

The encouraging signs are both national and international. Nationally, it’s all about jobs. Job growth continues at an exceptional pace; according to the latest U.S. Labor Department survey on new jobs and turnovers, more people – 5.4 million – got a new job in February than in any month since before the recession. Also, we are finally seeing broader improvements in wages, which drive consumption and the service sector. Consequently, industries and companies relying on domestic consumers are doing well.

Businesses affected by a strong dollar and weaker international demand are not doing as well. Internationally, however, the storm has finally subsided. Better news is coming from U.S. trading partners, and oil prices seem to have stabilized. Emerging markets appeared to have weathered the storm, and capital volatility seems to be settling down.

THE BAY AREA IS THE JOB DYNAMO

The Bay Area has been the shining star in the nation’s economic recovery. The region’s economic strength originates from the exceptional job growth over the last four years, and the Bay Area still outperforms the rest of the country. Over the past year, some 120,000 jobs were created locally, most in technology and other high-income sectors. An important advantage to tech-sector jobs is that they have a high multiplier rate, meaning that their economic spillover to local economies is higher than most other types of jobs. Job growth has also been the impetus for the remarkable housing-market recovery and the ensuing home price appreciation that we have seen across the region.

Jobs are critical to Bay Area housing markets, and growth is still happening. In fact, 2015 was the strongest year of regional job growth since the recovery started. And while 2016 started slower, it still may be the second-best post-recession year if hiring continues at its current pace.

However, the theme that permeates all sectors of the economy is normalization, a natural part of economic cycles. Normalization reflects that markets are maturing and relieves the fears of frothing that have recently concerned many.

Beyond the Clouds: Economic Sun Rays Continue to Keep Bay Area Warm

Another critical component to the Bay Area’s economy is that it is an innovation hub and relies heavily on venture capital (VC). While 2015 was the strongest year of investment dollars coming into Silicon Valley since the dot-com collapse, the drop in investments in the last quarter of the year caused some concerns over future availability of venture funds. Various reports, however, suggest no lack of VC activity, and some even show that VC firms are raising money at the highest rate in more than 15 years.

Interestingly, though, VC activity is spreading geographically, and the Bay Area lost some of its edge coming into 2016. A recent survey of technology and life-sciences executives in the Bay Area indicates that capital is tightening and that funders are in search of a more balanced environment, with a focus on fundamentals. Investors are focusing on startups in more mature stages of development. This may be a good thing, as it removes some of the volatility in expectations. And while overall expectations are going through a short-term readjustment, the survey suggests that the optimism among the executives about the long-term future of innovation is still strong.

DID THE STOCK MARKET’S VOLATILITY LEAVE A BAD TASTE WITH CONSUMERS?

Given the first-quarter stock-market and economic volatility and fears on its impact on housing markets, we surveyed Pacific Union real estate professionals to gauge how these changes are impacting their clients’ decisions to buy or sell a home.

Overall, clients’ decision to buy or sell a home were only modestly more influenced (55 percent) than not (45 percent) due to first-quarter volatility. Furthermore, a limited share of clients (19 percent) make decisions to buy or sell a home based the rate of venture-capital investment. Only a very small share — 5 percent — of clients completely exited the housing market due to volatility.

With the majority of buyers and sellers employed in the tech industry and given the large impact that IPOs can have on local housing markets, it is also interesting to see what share of clients actually worked for a startup that recently went public. On average, about 10 percent of clients worked for such a startup. Half of the Pacific Union professionals who responded didn’t have any clients in the IPO world, and a quarter had at least 20 percent or more.

Yet, stock options, with or without an IPO, did not have a marked impact on how most recent transactions were financed. Almost two in five transactions were all-cash deals, where personal and family wealth, along with proceeds of previous real estate sales, were the major sources of cash (see Figure 1). Stock options were only the source of money in only 1 percent of all-cash transactions (see Figure 2).

Of buyers with a mortgage, about one-third of down payments came from savings, another quarter from personal wealth, and another fifth from proceed of previous real estate sale. Family wealth helped in 13 percent of transactions. Stock options and IPOs contributed to down payments in only about 7 percent of mortgaged transactions.

All in all, however, the majority of Pacific Union clients feel optimistic about the Bay Area housing market in 2016 (54 percent), with somewhat a smaller share feeling some concern (44 percent). Very few — 2 percent — feel pessimistic.

36%

25% 4%

35%

All cash Mortgaged with 20% down

Mortgaged with less than 20% down Mortgaged with more than 20% down

1%

21%

50%

25%

13%

6% 5%

13%

24% 21%

35%

2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Stock options from current

employer

Family wealth Personal wealth Sale of previous real estate assets

Savings Client worked for a company that

had an IPO

Source of cash in all cash transactions Source of down-payment in mortgaged transactions

Figure 1: How was the most recent transaction financed?

Figure 2: Where did the funds come from in all cash and mortgaged transactions?

WHAT’S AHEAD FOR THE HOUSING MARKET?

There has certainly been some adjustment of expectations in the market. Overall, the Bay Area continues to experience the highest price appreciation in the country. In some submarkets, prices are still growing at double-digit percentage points on an annual basis.

Sales, however, face challenges, in large part due to an ever-slimmer number of homes on the market. The housing picture is not uniform across the region, and affordability seems to play a large role. When compared with last year, sales have dropped the most in the areas with the highest prices, while other more affordable areas have seen sales increase. Buyers appeared to have grown weary of the competitive market and are not pursuing purchases as aggressively. The median time that homes last on the market has extended a little longer when compared with last year in some expensive places such as San Francisco and Marin County. Similarly, the escalation of sales prices over the initial listing prices is slowing, and buyers are exercising more caution when entering bidding wars.

Pacific Union sales numbers show similar trends as the overall market. After falling activity in January and February, March was encouraging, with sales slightly up from last year. Over the past 30 months, Pacific Union listings peaked in March 2015 at 417 and are currently 13 percent below that.

The lack of homes for sale stands as the biggest obstacle for the busy spring season. In all Bay Area regions in which Pacific Union operates, the number of homes for sale is down from the same time last year, with the largest declines in the areas north of San Francisco and in the East Bay — 15 percent and 13 percent respectively. San Francisco and the South Bay have both seen about 3.5 percent declines in homes for sale.

Limited inventory combined with strong job growth will continue putting pressure on prices in the second quarter of 2016, though the appreciation may be more subdued than in past quarters. As noted earlier, normalization will permeate housing markets, and appreciation rates will slow to lower single-digit numbers. Any remaining uncertainty in the market will stem from the upcoming presidential election and continued geopolitical risks that could unsettle the positive consumer sentiment that has been building with a better job market and wage growth.

Ellen AndersonSenior Vice President, Contra Costa [email protected] Sycamore Valley Road West | Danville, CA 94526

Contra Costa County/Tri-ValleyQuarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016

mailto:[email protected]

Contra Costa County/Tri-Valley: Q1 ResultsReal estate activity in our Contra Costa County region showed further signs of normalization in the first quarter, with the average sales price holding steady from the fourth quarter of 2015 and inventory growing by nearly 50 percent. Those extra homes for sale meant that competition was less fierce than in previous quarters and that the market is gradually shifting in favor of buyers.

Another indicator that sellers are no longer in the driver’s seat is that the average Contra Costa County home sold for just less than list price in the first quarter, as multiple-offer situations are becoming less common. In general, buyers were more cautious, the result of stock-market jitters and uncertainty over the upcoming presidential election. Many older homeowners traded large homes for smaller properties or left California entirely, giving those who have been shut out of the market more properties to choose from.

Looking Forward: With the arrival of spring, even more inventory will hit the market as sellers take advantage of this traditionally busy real estate season. We expect prices to level off as market conditions balance, though demand should remain solid thanks to a thriving job market and low interest rates.

Defining Contra Costa County/Tri-Valley: Our real estate markets in Contra Costa County include the cities of Alamo, Blackhawk, Danville, Diablo, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Pleasant Hill, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek. Sales data in the charts below includes single-family homes in these communities.

Contra Costa County/Tri-Valleypacificunion.com

Median Sales Price

Months’ Supply of Inventory

$1,093,500 $1,100,000 $1,110,000

$1,185,000 $1,100,000 $1,069,000 $1,056,000

$1,020,000 $1,049,000

$1,010,000 $1,099,000

$1,051,000 $1,125,000

$100,000

$300,000

$500,000

$700,000

$900,000

$1,100,000

$1,300,000

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes in these Contra Costa County communities:

Alamo, Blackhawk, Danville, Diablo, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Pleasant Hill, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek.

1.5 1.4 1.4 1.3

1.3 1.4

1.6 1.6

1.3

0.7

1.3

2.1

1.4

0.1

0.6

1.1

1.6

2.1

2.6

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes in these Contra Costa County communities: Alamo, Blackhawk, Danville, Diablo, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Pleasant Hill, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/contracosta_chart1_mediansalesprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/contracosta_chart2_msi.pdf


Average Days on the Market

25

19 19 18

23 24 28 28

34 31

43

38

21

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes sold in these Contra Costa County communities: Alamo, Blackhawk, Danville, Diablo, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Pleasant Hill, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek.

Sales Price as a Percentage of Original Price

101.0%

102.4% 101.6%

101.3%

99.8% 99.3% 99.0% 99.5%

96.0%

98.9%

94.2%

99.1%

101.7%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%

100%

102%

104%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes under contract in these Contra Costa County communities: Alamo, Blackhawk, Danville, Diablo, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Pleasant Hill, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek.

Percentage of Properties Under Contract

45.3% 42.4%

40.3% 37.8%

36.7% 35.5% 32.9%

36.2% 36.9% 36.0% 33.5%

41.1% 44.7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes under contract in these Contra Costa County communities: Alamo, Blackhawk, Danville, Diablo, Lafayette, Moraga, Orinda, Pleasant Hill, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/contracosta_chart3_avgdom.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/contracosta_chart5_salesprice_originalprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/contracosta_chart4_percentundercontract.pdf

A Closer Look at Contra Costa County/Tri-Valley

Q1 '15 Q1 '16 % change Q1 '15 Q1 '16 % change Q1 '15 Q1 '16 % change Q1 '15 Q1 '16 % change

Alamo 45,328,525$ 73,164,050$ 61% 28 39 39% 31 44 42% 1,414,050$ 1,685,000$ 19%

Blackhawk 20,772,900$ 36,803,500$ 77% 13 19 46% 56 62 11% 1,459,900$ 1,550,000$ 6%

Danville 137,453,351$ 139,096,623$ 1% 118 109 -8% 27 39 44% 1,077,500$ 1,170,000$ 9%

Diablo 21,655,000$ 9,279,000$ -57% 10 4 -60% 141 44 -69% 1,877,500$ 2,189,500$ 17%

Lafayette 71,970,761$ 67,540,622$ -6% 51 43 -16% 38 39 3% 1,340,000$ 1,425,000$ 6%

Moraga 33,252,188$ 25,571,500$ -23% 28 20 -29% 27 14 -48% 1,159,500$ 1,232,500$ 6%

Orinda 68,592,424$ 37,589,525$ -45% 46 23 -50% 26 23 -12% 1,351,700$ 1,500,000$ 11%

PleasantHill 38,487,609$ 37,784,450$ -2% 59 54 -8% 32 17 -47% 650,000$ 659,500$ 1%

San Ramon 125,438,361$ 116,256,394$ -7% 126 106 -16% 19 27 42% 980,000$ 1,012,500$ 3%

Walnut Creek 74,353,340$ 93,037,308$ 25% 76 91 20% 27 26 -4% 913,500$ 971,000$ 6%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in selected Contra Costa County cities.

Contra Costa County Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015

Sales Volume Homes Sold Avg. Days on Market Median Price


http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/contracosta_chart6_sect2_cities.pdf

pacificunion.com

Pam HoffmanSenior Vice President, Managing Broker, East Bay [email protected] Mountain Boulevard | Oakland, CA 94611

East BayQuarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016


East Bay: Q1 ResultsEast Bay home hunters continued to heavily outnumber sellers in the first quarter of 2016, and the inventory that did come to market usually vanished in less than two weeks. The result was the same sort of bidding wars that have been prevalent over the past couple of years, with well-priced homes in desirable neighborhoods – those in highly walkable locations near BART – seeing the most demand. Homes in the $800,000 to $1 million price point were also popular with buyers.

Even strong El Niño storms didn’t keep home shoppers from venturing out in droves; on one of the rainiest weekends in March, a home in Oakland’s highly desirable Montclair neighborhood attracted more than 70 eager open-house visitors. Because East Bay buyers will most likely have competition for any attractive home in good condition, we advise hopeful homeowners to come right out of the gate with their best bid.

Looking Forward: With the coming of spring, we anticipate that more East Bay sellers will take advantage of the market and list their homes, providing some relief to buyers who have been frustrated with the low inventory conditions of the past few years. As long as the job market remains favorable, we don’t anticipate demand slowing much through the rest of the year.

Defining the East Bay: Our real estate markets in the East Bay region include Oakland ZIP codes 94602, 94609, 94610, 94611, 94618, 94619, and 94705; Alameda; Albany; Berkeley; El Cerrito; Kensington; and Piedmont. Sales data in the charts below includes single-family homes in these communities.

East Baypacificunion.com

Median Sales Price


$900,000 $925,000 $915,000 $910,000 $918,500

$850,000 $865,000 $913,500 $925,000

$877,500 $880,000 $875,000

$977,500

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000

$900,000

$1,000,000

$1,100,000


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes in the East Bay.

1.1

0.9 1.0

0.8 0.9 0.9

1.5

1.2

0.7

0.4

1.0

1.7

1.1

0.1

0.3

0.5

0.7

0.9

1.1

1.3

1.5

1.7

1.9


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes in the East Bay.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/eastbay_chart1_mediansalesprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/eastbay_chart2_msi.pdf



20

16

23

17 17

22 20 19 20

24

41

23

17

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes sold in the East Bay.


115.7% 115.6% 115.2% 115.8% 114.9%

112.7%

110.6%

114.1%

112.2% 110.8%

104.2%

112.3%

114.7%

98%

100%

102%

104%

106%

108%

110%

112%

114%

116%

118%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes under contract in the East Bay.


50.1% 50.8% 50.1% 50.6%

46.6% 42.6%

39.6%

45.5%

51.4%

46.3%

37.9%

45.7%

56.2%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes under contract in the East Bay.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/eastbay_chart3_avgdom.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/eastbay_chart5_salesprice_originalprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/eastbay_chart4_percentundercontract.pdf

A Closer Look at the East Bay


Alameda 47,352,697$ 58,158,984$ 23% 52 58 12% 23 27 17% 839,000$ 952,500$ 14%

Albany 7,170,000$ 16,339,888$ 128% 9 17 89% 11 16 45% 800,000$ 848,888$ 6%

Berkeley 82,636,400$ 86,234,300$ 4% 78 82 5% 25 26 4% 952,500$ 901,000$ -5%

El Cerrito 17,335,888$ 23,510,300$ 36% 24 29 21% 23 31 35% 706,000$ 775,000$ 10%

Kensington 13,005,500$ 2,550,000$ -80% 14 3 -79% 20 14 -30% 880,000$ 715,000$ -19%

Oakland* 163,364,963$ 195,054,670$ 19% 186 181 -3% 26 26 0% 800,500$ 905,000$ 13%

Piedmont 39,154,005$ 19,748,000$ -50% 18 8 -56% 34 18 -47% 2,001,003$ 2,500,000$ 25%

East Bay Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in selected East Bay cities; *Oakland ZIP codes 94602, 94609, 94610, 94611, 94618, 94619, and 94705.



Under $500,000 12,894,530$ 8,861,375$ -31% 34 22 -35% 44 26 -41% 381,000$ 410,525$ 8%

Over $500,000 357,124,923$ 392,734,767$ 10% 347 356 3% 23 26 13% 890,000$ 920,000$ 3%

$500,000 - $1 million 167,940,848$ 156,553,877$ -7% 222 204 -8% 22 27 23% 757,500$ 761,000$ 0%

Over $1 million 189,184,075$ 236,180,890$ 25% 125 152 22% 25 24 -4% 1,300,000$ 1,276,000$ -2%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for SFH in the East Bay: Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, El Cerrito, Kensington, Piedmont, and Oakland ZIP codes 94602, 94609, 94610, 94611, 94618, 94619, and 94705.

East Bay Price Range Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015


Q1 '15 Q1 '16 % change Q1 '15 Q1 '16 % change

Montclair / Joaquin Miller 38 46 21% $1,017,124 $1,103,225 8%

Crocker Highlands / Grand Lake 20 14 -30% $975,663 $1,110,892 14%

Rockridge / Claremont 23 21 -9% $1,443,677 $2,519,108 74%

Glenview / Oakmore 13 15 15% $911,834 $1,038,143 14%

Laurel / Dimond 13 12 -8% $593,423 $676,833 14%

Redwood Heights / Lincoln Heights 24 8 -67% $736,607 $813,462 10%

Crestmont / Ridgemont / Skyline 5 4 -20% $1,188,600 $1,287,000 8%

Temescal / Piedmont Ave. 9 9 0% $913,556 $925,111 1%

Oakland Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015

NeighborhoodHomes Sold Average Price

Source: EBRD, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in selected Oakland neighborhoods.


http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/eastbay_chart6_sect2_cities.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/eastbay_chart7_sect2_prices.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/eastbay_chart8_sect2_oaklandprices.pdf

pacificunion.com

Brent ThomsonPresident, Marin [email protected] Redwood Highway, Suite 150 | Mill Valley, CA 94941

Marin CountyQuarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016


Marin County: Q1 ResultsThe first quarter of 2016 followed typical seasonal patterns in Marin County, with a slow January and February, mostly due to a lack of homes on the market rather than diminishing buyer demand. Inventory began to increase in March, though El Niño storms put more of a damper on activity than usual. Continued inventory constraints are evidenced by the fact that listings were down from the first quarter of last year by about 10 percent.

Mill Valley, Kentfield, Ross, and Tiburon remain highly coveted communities, and there is no shortage of buyers that can afford to pay all cash for homes. Properties priced from $1 million to $1.5 million were most popular with buyers, with many homes in this range garnering multiple offers.

Looking Forward: As the skies clear and spring arrives, expect an influx of new listings to flood Marin County. As in past years, we project that activity will remain vigorous through the second quarter before slowing in the summer, when both buyers and sellers turn to thoughts of vacations instead of real estate.

Defining Marin County: Our real estate markets in Marin County include the cities of Belvedere, Corte Madera, Fairfax, Greenbrae, Kentfield, Larkspur, Mill Valley, Novato, Ross, San Anselmo, San Rafael, Sausalito, and Tiburon. Sales data in the charts below includes single-family homes in these communities.

Marin Countypacificunion.com

Median Sales Price


$1,160,000 $1,175,000 $1,175,000

$1,112,000 $1,056,000

$1,100,000 $1,055,000

$1,201,908 $1,200,000 $1,125,000

$965,000

$1,150,000 $1,150,000

$100,000

$300,000

$500,000

$700,000

$900,000

$1,100,000

$1,300,000


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes in these Marin County communities: Belvedere, Corte Madera, Fairfax, Greenbrae, Kentfield, Larkspur, Mill Valley, Novato, Ross, San Anselmo, San Rafael, Sausalito, and Tiburon.

1.6

1.3 1.4

1.5 1.4

1.6

2.3

1.7 1.6

1.0

2.0

2.3

1.8

0.1

0.6

1.1

1.6

2.1

2.6


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes in these Marin County communities: Belvedere, Corte Madera, Fairfax, Greenbrae, Kentfield, Larkspur, Mill Valley, Novato, Ross, San Anselmo, San Rafael, Sausalito, and Tiburon.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/marin_chart1_mediansalesprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/marin_chart2_msi.pdf




47

59 56

38 38

51 57

48 54

62

54

78

45

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes sold in these Marin County communities: Belvedere, Corte Madera, Fairfax, Greenbrae, Kentfield, Larkspur, Mill Valley, Novato, Ross, San Anselmo, San Rafael, Sausalito, and Tiburon.

43.7% 42.4%

37.0% 39.4%

36.6%

31.1% 30.7%

34.9%

31.4%

26.7%

30.2% 33.9%

43.6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes under contract in these Marin County communities: Belvedere, Corte Madera, Fairfax, Greenbrae, Kentfield, Larkspur, Mill Valley, Novato, Ross, San Anselmo, San Rafael, Sausalito, and Tiburon.


100.8%

95.7% 94.8%

102.5%

100.2%

97.8%

95.1%

98.3%

96.1% 96.5% 95.8% 95.9%

100.6%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%

100%

102%

104%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes under contract in these Marin County communities: Belvedere, Corte Madera, Fairfax, Greenbrae, Kentfield, Larkspur, Mill Valley, Novato, Ross, San Anselmo, San Rafael, Sausalito, and Tiburon.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/marin_chart3_avgdom.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/marin_chart4_percentundercontract.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/marin_chart5_salesprice_originalprice.pdf

A Closer Look at Marin County


Belvedere 33,111,500$ 20,790,000$ -37% 8 6 -25% 84 131 56% 3,225,000$ 3,512,500$ 9%

Corte Madera 24,509,000$ 12,890,000$ -47% 20 9 -55% 32 36 13% 1,055,000$ 1,365,000$ 29%

Fairfax 3,867,500$ 10,964,300$ 183% 5 12 140% 19 57 200% 750,000$ 830,000$ 11%

Greenbrae 10,221,000$ 13,029,000$ 27% 6 7 17% 26 16 -38% 1,682,000$ 1,900,000$ 13%

Kentfield 41,319,450$ 17,373,000$ -58% 17 6 -65% 52 34 -35% 2,115,000$ 1,737,500$ -18%

Larkspur 14,759,592$ 20,911,700$ 42% 8 13 63% 52 80 54% 1,813,500$ 1,500,000$ -17%

Mill Valley 97,216,515$ 56,368,800$ -42% 56 38 -32% 51 62 22% 1,422,500$ 1,345,000$ -5%

Novato 86,829,318$ 87,264,065$ 1% 95 91 -4% 66 67 2% 850,000$ 881,000$ 4%

Ross 19,775,000$ 24,625,000$ 25% 4 5 25% 45 47 4% 4,862,500$ 2,735,000$ -44%

San Anselmo 24,630,500$ 21,441,000$ -13% 21 19 -10% 37 37 0% 900,000$ 965,000$ 7%

San Rafael 84,194,006$ 94,579,940$ 12% 87 81 -7% 52 46 -12% 840,000$ 1,018,000$ 21%

Sausalito 15,375,000$ 27,955,000$ 82% 9 11 22% 47 44 -6% 1,500,000$ 2,595,000$ 73%

Tiburon 51,739,815$ 52,162,000$ 1% 19 15 -21% 56 69 23% 2,700,000$ 2,000,000$ -26%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in selected Marin County cities.

Marin County Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015



http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/marin_chart6_sect2_cities.pdf

pacificunion.com

Linda CarrollRegional Executive, Napa [email protected] Main Street | Napa, CA 94559

Napa CountyQuarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016


Napa County: Q1 ResultsReal estate activity in the first quarter of 2016 looked remarkably similar to the same period last year in Napa County. January and February were typically slow, with sales picking up in March despite strong El Niño storms. Although inventory was tighter than in past quarters, the market appears to be balancing, with sellers not having the same advantage as they do in other parts of the Bay Area.

As such, bidding wars have cooled down. Properties in the $400,000-to-$500,000 range sometimes attracted multiple offers, but only if they were priced correctly and in prime condition. Unlike in other parts of the region, contingencies are still very much a fact of life in Napa County, as sellers attempt to stay in the current home while they search for their next one.

Looking Forward: We expect more owners to list their properties in the second quarter, as spring blooms give Napa County homes an extra splash of curb appeal. Larger estates in the northern part of the county will hit the market in April and May, typically one of the busiest times of the year for real estate.

Defining Napa County: Our real estate markets in Napa County include the cities of American Canyon, Angwin, Calistoga, Napa, Oakville, Rutherford, St. Helena, and Yountville. Sales data in the charts below includes all single-family homes in Napa County.

Napa Countypacificunion.com

Median Sales Price


$559,750 $633,000

$586,250 $600,000 $630,250

$571,316 $620,000

$655,000 $685,000

$595,500 $579,500

$650,000 $649,750

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes in Napa County.

2.7 3.2

2.9 2.9

2.4

3.6 3.4

5.7

3.3

2.4

3.0

4.1

2.8

0.1

1.1

2.1

3.1

4.1

5.1

6.1


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes in Napa County.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/napa_chart1_mediansalesprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/napa_chart2_msi.pdf




91 93

71 71 72

60

72

92 85

80

102 112

95

0

20

40

60

80

100

120


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes sold in Napa County.

28.2% 25.4% 25.1%

23.5% 24.2% 21.7%

13.8%

21.5%

17.2% 19.0%

20.4%

28.2% 28.2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes under contract in Napa County.


94.5% 95.9%

94.7% 96.5% 95.8% 96.4%

94.2% 94.6%

92.9%

95.0%

84.4%

89.4%

95.0%

78%

80%

82%

84%

86%

88%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes under contract in Napa County.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/napa_chart3_avgdom.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/napa_chart4_percentundercontract.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/napa_chart5_salesprice_originalprice.pdf

A Closer Look at Napa County


American Canyon 14,303,713$ 12,061,500$ -16% 36 28 -22% 83 105 27% 383,500$ 422,000$ 10%

Angwin 919,000$ 6,194,913$ 574% 2 3 50% 196 134 -32% 459,500$ 2,140,000$ 366%

Calistoga 13,607,300$ 24,570,000$ 81% 12 10 -17% 170 288 69% 648,000$ 1,035,000$ 60%

Napa 122,570,430$ 141,600,197$ 16% 179 166 -7% 86 89 3% 525,000$ 622,500$ 19%

St. Helena 19,224,500$ 34,460,000$ 79% 15 24 60% 183 101 -45% 801,000$ 1,195,000$ 49%

Yountville 13,256,421$ 2,533,333$ -81% 7 3 -57% 180 87 -52% 1,300,741$ 845,000$ -35%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in selected Napa County cities.

Napa County Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015



Under $500,000 44,448,699$ 29,516,999$ -34% 119 72 -39% 79 90 14% 387,000$ 424,500$ 10%

$500,000 - $999,999 66,837,999$ 80,348,656$ 20% 101 115 14% 93 74 -20% 629,000$ 652,325$ 4%

$1 million - $3 million 51,037,921$ 66,212,288$ 30% 31 41 32% 188 137 -27% 1,580,000$ 1,550,000$ -2%

Over $3 million 31,456,295$ 48,045,000$ 53% 7 7 0% 176 462 163% 3,380,750$ 4,900,000$ 45%

Median Price

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in Napa County.

Napa County Price Range Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015

Sales Volume Homes Sold Avg. Days on Market


http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/napa_chart6_sect2_cities.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/napa_chart7_sect2_prices.pdf

pacificunion.com

Patrick [email protected] Van Ness Avenue | San Francisco, CA 94109

San FranciscoQuarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016


San Francisco: Q1 ResultsWhile the San Francisco real estate market remains tilted in favor of sellers, conditions continued to normalize in the first quarter of 2016. Condominiums, for instance, received fewer multiple offers than in quarters past, particularly those at the high end of the market. We also noticed that buyers were entering negotiations with higher expectations; a home not priced properly or one that needed extensive repairs was likely to sit on the market for a while before selling.

Attractive single-family homes priced less than $2 million, however, sold rapidly, while sales in the $2 million to $3 million range began to cool as the quarter wound down. Although a lack of inventory still plagues San Francisco, we did see some relief in the form of more condominium listings. Young, affluent tech workers competing for limited housing continued to push prices up, particularly for entry-level condos.

Looking Forward: Home stagers and inspectors were almost fully booked by the end of the first quarter, a sure sign that sellers are preparing to list their properties in the traditionally busy spring season. We expect that a strong local economy and historically low interest rates will combine for a healthy 2016 for San Francisco’s real estate market.

San Franciscopacificunion.com

Single-Family Homes – Median Sales Price

Condominiums – Median Sales Price

$1,250,000 $1,307,500

$1,400,000 $1,300,000

$1,280,000 $1,225,444

$1,155,000

$1,270,000 $1,275,000 $1,201,500 $1,175,000

$1,405,000 $1,355,000

$100,000

$300,000

$500,000

$700,000

$900,000

$1,100,000

$1,300,000

$1,500,000


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes in San Francisco.

$1,105,000 $1,069,000

$1,138,000 $1,139,000 $1,102,563

$1,050,000 $1,020,000

$1,110,500 $1,150,000 $1,100,000 $1,115,000 $1,112,500 $1,122,500

$100,000

$300,000

$500,000

$700,000

$900,000

$1,100,000

$1,300,000


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for condominiums in San Francisco.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart1_mediansalesprice_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart2_mediansalesprice_condos.pdf


Single-Family Homes – Months’ Supply of Inventory

1.7 1.5

1.7 1.6 1.5

1.8

2.6

1.6 1.6

0.9

2.4

3.1

2.0

0.1

0.6

1.1

1.6

2.1

2.6

3.1

3.6


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes in San Francisco.

Single-Family Homes – Average Days on the Market

27 26 24

30 28 29 29 28 29

34

43

31

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes sold in San Francisco.

Condominiums – Months’ Supply of Inventory

1.3 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.5

1.9

3.1

1.9 1.8

1.0

2.8 2.7

1.9

0.1

0.6

1.1

1.6

2.1

2.6

3.1

3.6


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for condominiums in San Francisco.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart3_msi_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart5_avgdom_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart4_msi_condos.pdf


Condominiums – Average Days on the Market

31 34

32 28 29

27

36

27

34

44 46

36 32

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for condominiums sold in San Francisco.

Condominiums – Percentage of Properties Under Contract

43.8% 39.9% 39.2%

40.9% 38.2%

29.8% 30.1%

35.0% 34.6%

24.9% 24.5%

30.9% 28.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of condominiums under contract in San Francisco.

Single-Family Homes – Percentage of Properties Under Contract

40.9% 36.9%

38.4% 35.2% 35.1%

31.5% 33.2%

38.2%

35.2%

28.8% 24.6%

29.6%

36.0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes under contract in San Francisco.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart6_avgdom_condos.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart8_percentundercontract_condos.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart7_percentundercontract_sfh.pdf


Single-Family Homes – Sales Price as a Percentage of Original Price

109.6%

112.7%

109.8%

113.8% 112.2%

110.8%

116.4%

110.3%

107.1% 107.0%

104.7%

108.3%

110.3%

98%

100%

102%

104%

106%

108%

110%

112%

114%

116%

118%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes under contract in San Francisco.

Condominiums – Sales Price as a Percentage of Original Price

108.4%

107.2%

109.3%

108.3%

106.5%

108.2% 109.1%

108.2%

105.7%

102.7% 101.9%

104.9%

104.0%

98%

100%

102%

104%

106%

108%

110%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for condominiums under contract in San Francisco.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart9_salesprice_originalprice_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart10_salesprice_originalprice_condos.pdf

Delving into San Francisco’s Districts

San Francisco is defined by 10 separate districts, each of which encompasses several neighborhoods.

District 1: Inner Richmond, Central Richmond, Outer Richmond, JordanPark/Laurel Heights, Lake, Lone Mountain, Sea Cliff.

District 2: Outer Sunset, Central Sunset, Inner Sunset, Outer Parkside, Parkside, Inner Parkside, Golden Gate Heights.

District 3: Pine Lake Park, Merced Manor, Lake Shore, Lakeside, Stonestown, Merced Heights, Ingleside, Ingleside Heights,

Oceanview.

District 4: Balboa Terrace, Diamond Heights, Forest Hill, Forest Hill Extension, Forest Knolls, Ingleside Terrace, Midtown

Terrace, Miraloma Park, Monterey Heights, Mount Davidson Manor, Sherwood Forest, St. Francis Wood,

Sunnyside, West Portal, Westwood Highlands, Westwood Park.

District 5: Buena Vista/Ashbury Heights, Clarendon Heights, Cole Valley/Parnassus Heights, Corona Heights,

Duboce Triangle, Eureka Valley/Dolores Heights, Glen Park, Haight-Ashbury, Mission Dolores, Noe Valley, Twin Peaks.

District 6: Alamo Square, Anza Vista, Hayes Valley, Lower Pacific Heights, North Panhandle, Western Addition.

District 7: Cow Hollow, Marina, Pacific Heights, Presidio Heights.

District 8: Downtown, Financial District/Barbary Coast, Nob Hill, North Beach, North Waterfront, Russian Hill, Telegraph Hill,

Tenderloin, Van Ness/Civic Center.

District 9: Bernal Heights, Central Waterfront/Dogpatch, Inner Mission, Mission Bay, Potrero Hill, South Beach,

South of Market, Yerba Buena.

District 10: Bayview, Bayview Heights, Candlestick Point, Crocker Amazon, Excelsior, Hunters Point, Little Hollywood,

Outer Mission, Mission Terrace, Portola, Silver Terrace, Visitacion Valley.


pacificunion.com



District 1 66,338,150$ 61,772,500$ -7% 34 29 -15% 22 35 59% 1,722,500$ 1,900,000$ 10%

District 2 74,925,185$ 81,781,986$ 9% 68 65 -4% 28 32 14% 1,075,000$ 1,177,000$ 9%

District 3 21,153,204$ 37,417,161$ 77% 23 33 43% 40 31 -23% 845,000$ 1,050,000$ 24%

District 4 75,519,388$ 75,296,480$ 0% 53 48 -9% 45 25 -44% 1,250,000$ 1,487,500$ 19%

District 5 157,107,331$ 117,225,930$ -25% 65 47 -28% 25 30 20% 2,100,000$ 2,277,700$ 8%

District 6 6,007,000$ 9,805,000$ 63% 4 3 -25% 52 69 33% 1,507,500$ 2,830,000$ 88%

District 7 103,391,500$ 90,096,352$ -13% 19 18 -5% 25 33 32% 5,200,000$ 3,625,000$ -30%

District 8 5,810,000$ 4,000,000$ -31% 3 1 -67% 27 18 -33% 2,100,000$ 4,000,000$ 90%

District 9 87,173,725$ 57,459,473$ -34% 59 37 -37% 25 27 8% 1,400,000$ 1,420,000$ 1%

District 10 73,775,979$ 57,889,396$ -22% 100 71 -29% 43 39 -9% 717,500$ 810,000$ 13%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in San Francisco districts.

San Francisco Snapshot: SFH, Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015



District 1 19,009,500$ 26,926,000$ 42% 15 24 60% 30 21 -30% 1,200,000$ 1,112,500$ -7%

District 2 8,165,000$ 8,245,000$ 1% 9 6 -33% 67 23 -66% 805,000$ 1,400,000$ 74%

District 3 3,615,880$ 4,989,595$ 38% 7 8 14% 28 24 -14% 495,000$ 600,000$ 21%

District 4 5,571,000$ 3,398,000$ -39% 9 5 -44% 24 56 133% 600,000$ 650,000$ 8%

District 5 92,433,119$ 76,378,988$ -17% 74 58 -22% 29 36 24% 1,154,444$ 1,260,000$ 9%

District 6 54,951,256$ 57,828,371$ 5% 52 48 -8% 34 41 21% 944,500$ 1,197,500$ 27%

District 7 94,779,401$ 76,048,650$ -20% 57 39 -32% 23 30 30% 1,603,000$ 1,665,000$ 4%

District 8 85,249,862$ 66,093,526$ -22% 64 56 -13% 46 32 -30% 1,020,000$ 905,000$ -11%

District 9 212,958,175$ 209,768,851$ -1% 180 177 -2% 40 43 8% 1,047,500$ 1,095,000$ 5%

District 10 6,202,250$ 7,165,837$ 16% 9 11 22% 43 42 -2% 721,000$ 630,000$ -13%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for condominiums in San Francisco districts.

San Francisco Snapshot: Condos, Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015


pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart11_sect2_districts_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart12_sect2_districts_condos.pdf



Under $1 million 132,497,157$ 82,027,013$ -38% 173 104 -40% 43 36 -16% 775,000$ 807,500$ 4%

$1 million - $3 million 349,555,305$ 346,065,413$ -1% 217 214 -1% 27 29 7% 1,465,000$ 1,496,685$ 2%

Over $3 million 189,149,000$ 164,651,852$ -13% 38 34 -11% 27 37 37% 4,580,500$ 3,925,000$ -14%

San Francisco Price Range Snapshot: SFH, Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in San Francisco County.



Under $1 million 152,378,493$ 140,568,396$ -8% 210 186 -11% 41 43 5% 732,750$ 775,000$ 6%

$1 million - $2 million 294,077,804$ 284,839,422$ -3% 215 207 -4% 31 34 10% 1,310,000$ 1,345,000$ 3%

Over $2 million 136,479,146$ 111,435,000$ -18% 51 39 -24% 36 29 -19% 2,480,000$ 2,600,000$ 5%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for condominiums in San Francisco County.

San Francisco Price Range Snapshot: Condos, Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015


pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart13_sect2_prices_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sanfran_chart14_sect2_prices_condos.pdf

David BarcaVice President, Silicon [email protected] El Camino Real, Suite 220 | Menlo Park CA 94025

Silicon ValleyQuarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016


Silicon Valley: Q1 ResultsThe first quarter began sluggish in our Silicon Valley region, with a slower than average January and February. But as the rain fell in March, the real estate floodgates opened, and sales volume surged, compensating for the first two months. Multiple offers were common for well-priced properties in attractive neighborhoods, though some buyers are sitting out, perhaps spooked by the stock market, as well as layoffs at local tech companies and rumors of more downsizing to come.

Even with more inventory, prices don’t appear likely to top out this year due to continued strong demand. As has been the case for the past couple of years, nearly one-third of homes sold in Silicon Valley in the first quarter never hit the MLS, which helps sellers retain their privacy but doesn’t guarantee they will get the best possible price.

Looking Forward: Based on March’s bustling sales pace, we predict another healthy spring season, traditionally one of the busiest times for real estate. Prices should continue to rise until the middle of summer, and hopefully local sellers will take advantage of the opportune environment.

Defining Silicon Valley: Our real estate markets in the Silicon Valley region include the cities and towns of Atherton, Los Altos (excluding county area), Los Altos Hills, Menlo Park (excluding east of U.S. 101), Palo Alto, Portola Valley, and Woodside. Sales data in the charts below includes all single-family homes in these communities.

Defining the Mid-Peninsula: Our real estate markets in the Mid-Peninsula subregion include the cities of Burlingame (excluding Ingold Millsdale Industrial Center), Hillsborough, and San Mateo (excluding the North Shoreview/Dore Cavanaugh area). Sales data in the charts below includes all single-family homes in these communities.

Silicon Valleypacificunion.com

Median Sales Price


$2,800,000 $2,665,000 $2,625,000

$2,700,000 $2,700,000 $2,750,000

$3,280,000

$2,750,000 $2,612,500 $2,641,500

$2,500,000 $2,675,000 $2,800,000

$100,000

$600,000

$1,100,000

$1,600,000

$2,100,000

$2,600,000

$3,100,000

$3,600,000

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes in these Silicon Valley communities:

Atherton, Los Altos (excluding County area), Los Altos Hills, Menlo Park (excluding east of U.S. 101), Palo Alto, Portola Valley, and Woodside.

1.4 1.3 1.2 1.3

1.3 1.4

2.5

2.1 2.2

1.2

2.8

3.2

1.8

0.1

0.6

1.1

1.6

2.1

2.6

3.1

3.6

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes in these SIlicon Valley communities:


pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/siliconvalley_chart1_mediansalesprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/siliconvalley_chart2_msi.pdf



26

19 21 22

20 23 24

18

24

37 39

30

19

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes sold in these Silicon Valley communities:



106.1% 106.5%

104.0% 104.9%

103.0% 104.2% 104.4% 104.7%

99.4%

96.7%

98.4%

102.5% 103.2%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%

100%

102%

104%

106%

108%

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes under contract in these Silicon Valley communities:



45.3% 44.0% 42.0%

36.2%

41.5%

30.3% 28.5%

32.8%

26.1%

18.8% 20.2%

28.4%

43.5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes under contract in these Silicon Valley communities:


pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/siliconvalley_chart3_avgdom.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/siliconvalley_chart5_salesprice_originalprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/siliconvalley_chart4_percentundercontract.pdf


A Closer Look at Silicon Valley


Atherton 87,730,000$ 78,357,000$ -11% 11 13 18% 72 31 -57% 7,000,000$ 4,600,000$ -34%

Los Altos* 185,806,000$ 103,919,650$ -44% 60 35 -42% 15 11 -27% 2,800,000$ 2,725,000$ -3%

Los Altos Hills 121,482,500$ 47,461,000$ -61% 24 13 -46% 41 60 46% 3,650,000$ 3,660,000$ 0%

Menlo Park** 118,527,000$ 121,493,500$ 3% 46 49 7% 19 21 11% 2,562,500$ 2,500,000$ -2%

Palo Alto 177,638,200$ 182,120,588$ 3% 58 61 5% 21 20 -5% 2,600,000$ 2,500,000$ -4%

Portola Valley 24,866,000$ 29,381,000$ 18% 8 9 13% 37 34 -8% 2,580,500$ 2,700,000$ 5%

Woodside 49,302,000$ 51,350,000$ 4% 16 12 -25% 82 78 -5% 2,575,000$ 4,000,000$ 55%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in selected Silicon Valley cities. *Excludes County area **Excludes east of U.S. 101

Silicon Valley Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015


pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/siliconvalley_chart6_sect2_cities.pdf

Mid-Peninsulapacificunion.com

Median Sales Price

$1,590,000 $1,688,000

$1,400,000

$1,600,000

$1,800,000

$1,501,000 $1,575,000

$1,550,000 $1,530,000

$1,775,000

$1,514,000

$1,650,000 $1,778,000

$100,000

$300,000

$500,000

$700,000

$900,000

$1,100,000

$1,300,000

$1,500,000

$1,700,000

$1,900,000

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes in these San Mateo County communities:

Burlingame (excluding Ingold Millsdale Industrial Center), Hillsborough, and San Mateo (excluding the North Shoreview/Dore Cavanaugh area).


21 21

14

21 21 19

22

34

25

20

26

16

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes sold in these San Mateo County communities:



0.9 1.1 1.0 0.9 1.0

1.2

1.6

1.2

0.9 0.8

1.8

2.8

1.3

0.1

0.6

1.1

1.6

2.1

2.6

3.1

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes in these San Mateo County communities:


pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/midpen_chart1_mediansalesprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/midpen_chart3_avgdom.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/midpen_chart2_msi.pdf

Mid-Peninsulapacificunion.com


53.3%

47.2% 50.8% 50.0%

46.6%

36.7% 42.0%

43.4% 43.0%

35.9%

22.8%

37.0%

48.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes under contract in these San Mateo County communities:


A Closer Look at the Mid-Peninsula


Burlingame* 63,710,055$ 46,126,500$ -28% 35 22 -37% 26 22 -15% 1,760,000$ 1,950,000$ 11%

Hillsborough 105,139,000$ 68,768,500$ -35% 24 17 -29% 72 46 -36% 4,067,500$ 3,500,000$ -14%

San Mateo** 118,595,850$ 113,203,378$ -5% 84 81 -4% 18 18 0% 1,281,250$ 1,310,000$ 2%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in selected San Mateo County cities. * Excludes Ingold Millsdale Industrial Center ** Excludes the North Shoreview/Dore Cavanaugh area

Mid-Peninsula Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015



107.8% 107.3%

110.6%

106.7%

105.3% 105.3%

100.9% 101.7%

101.0%

103.0% 102.5%

106.7%

102.0%

96%

98%

100%

102%

104%

106%

108%

110%

112%

Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes under contract in these San Mateo County communities:


pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/midpen_chart4_percentundercontract.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/midpen_chart6_sect2_cities.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/midpen_chart5_salesprice_originalprice.pdf

Rick LawsSenior Vice President, Sonoma [email protected] Mendocino Avenue, Suite 210 | Santa Rosa, CA 95403

Sonoma CountyQuarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016


Sonoma County: Q1 ResultsThe first quarter saw median home prices in Sonoma County climb to just over the $550,000 ceiling of 2015. Buyer demand remained intense, with multiple offers on most attractively priced homes up to the $1.5 million price point. In some high-end markets like Healdsburg, buyers appeared hesitant and resistant to prices in the early part of the quarter, possibly spooked by fears of a tech-sector fallout and global economic concerns. But by March that sentiment had settled down, and buyers seemed more willing to cut checks.

Single-story homes and those with in-law units were especially popular with buyers throughout Sonoma County, and most well-priced properties quickly went into contract. New inventory was scarce, compounded by the fact that 15 to 20 percent of transactions occurred off the MLS. Such off-market deals may save sellers the hassle of showing a crowd of buyers their home, and entertaining multiple bids, but they don’t always guarantee the highest price.

Looking Forward: As buyers appear to have put economic concerns in the rearview mirror, we expect demand to pick up even more in the spring. More listings hit the market by the end of the first quarter, which should translate into a healthy second quarter.

Defining Sonoma County: Our real estate markets in Sonoma County include the cities of Cotati, Healdsburg, Penngrove, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, and Windsor. Sales data in the charts below includes all single-family homes and farms and ranches in Sonoma County.

Sonoma Countypacificunion.com

Median Sales Price


$510,000 $536,000 $545,000 $546,000 $545,000 $541,000 $541,500

$529,750 $526,750 $549,450 $555,000 $542,000

$572,990

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

$450,000

$500,000

$550,000

$600,000


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes and farms/ranches in Sonoma County.

2.3

1.8 1.9 1.7 1.7

2.1

2.5

2.2 2.0

1.5

2.1 2.3

1.6

0.1

0.6

1.1

1.6

2.1

2.6

3.1


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes and farms/ranches in Sonoma County.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomacounty_chart1_mediansalesprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomacounty_chart2_msi.pdf



66

56 63

56 59 60 60 60 65

73

81 79

69

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes and farms/ranches sold in Sonoma County.


98.5%

99.6%

96.9%

99.5%

97.9%

95.1%

97.7%

96.7% 96.4%

93.8% 93.9%

96.7%

95.4%

90%

91%

92%

93%

94%

95%

96%

97%

98%

99%

100%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes and farms/ranches under contract in Sonoma County.


36.4% 36.7% 34.4% 34.6%

31.4% 28.1% 28.0%

30.9% 29.2%

25.2% 28.6%

35.1%

43.0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes and farms/ranches under contract in Sonoma County.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomacounty_chart3_avgdom.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomacounty_chart5_salesprice_originalprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomacounty_chart4_percentundercontract.pdf

A Closer Look at Sonoma County


Cloverdale 16,340,600$ 19,436,200$ 19% 27 33 36% 105 89 -15% 409,500$ 456,000$ 11%

Healdsburg 37,551,310$ 50,797,550$ 35% 33 45 36% 85 117 38% 830,000$ 829,000$ 0%

Petaluma 61,008,440$ 72,751,800$ 19% 104 100 -4% 63 58 -8% 518,250$ 606,500$ 17%

Rohnert Park 19,026,100$ 24,701,800$ 30% 43 50 16% 55 79 44% 435,000$ 478,000$ 10%

Santa Rosa 192,711,128$ 204,527,475$ 6% 350 343 -2% 74 67 -9% 467,850$ 525,000$ 12%

Sebastopol 21,869,457$ 29,320,180$ 34% 29 39 34% 91 84 -8% 665,000$ 710,000$ 7%

Windsor 24,526,394$ 36,244,100$ 48% 45 66 47% 63 67 6% 501,000$ 527,000$ 5%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes and farms/ranches in selected Sonoma County cities.

Sonoma County Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015



Under $1 million 375,273,221$ 435,687,346$ 16% 740 777 5% 74 72 -3% 477,250$ 534,000$ 12%

$1 million and over 109,141,125$ 147,157,131$ 35% 67 90 34% 141 104 -26% 1,425,000$ 1,282,500$ -10%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes and farms/ranches in selected Sonoma County cities.

Sonoma County Price Range Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015



http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomacounty_chart6_sect2_cities.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomacounty_chart7_sect2_prices.pdf

pacificunion.com

Jill SilvasRegional Executive, Sonoma [email protected] West Napa Street, Suite 200 | Sonoma, CA 95476

Sonoma ValleyQuarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016


Sonoma Valley: Q1 ResultsThere was no shortage of buyers in Sonoma Valley early in the first quarter, but there were very few properties on the market for them to choose from. When new listings hit the market, they were likely to be in contract the following day – particularly true for homes priced less than $1 million. Buyers were active despite the rainy weather, and by the end of the quarter, new listings poured in. As usual, many sellers waited for the beginning of spring to list their homes and found themselves in competition with other sellers using the same strategy.

Prices appeared to begin stabilizing, as the run-up over the past couple of years has taken its toll on buyers. Although interest rates and other economic indicators are still mostly positive, the volatility of the stock market during the first quarter may have cooled some buyers’ interest. But clearly others believe that real estate is a more secure investment than stocks and made their move.

Looking Forward: The second quarter may prove to be the greatest indicator of activity for the rest of the year. If inventory continues to rise and prices normalize, we may see a more balanced market than we have seen for a while. Second-home and vacation-home sales have a substantial impact on Sonoma Valley real estate, and discretionary income will continue to play a part in overall market health.

Defining Sonoma Valley: Our real estate markets in Sonoma Valley include the cities of Glen Ellen, Kenwood, and Sonoma. Sales data in the charts below refers to all residential properties – including single-family homes, condominiums, and farms and ranches – in these communities.

Sonoma Valleypacificunion.com

Median Sales Price


$572,000

$756,000

$665,000 $637,000

$712,500

$640,000 $575,000

$740,000

$672,150

$759,000

$675,000 $633,000

$665,000

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes, condominiums, and farms/ranches in Sonoma Valley.

3.2

2.3 2.0

2.3 2.5

2.1

3.9

2.5 2.7

2.1 2.2

3.3

2.3

0.1

0.6

1.1

1.6

2.1

2.6

3.1

3.6

4.1


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes, condominiums, and farms/ranches in Sonoma Valley.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomavalley_chart1_mediansalesprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomavalley_chart2_msi.pdf



64 66

53 47

65 60 58

68 69

85 87

71

61

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes, condominiums, and farms/ranches sold in Sonoma Valley.


96.7%

100.5%

95.4%

101.4%

96.7%

98.8% 98.5%

93.5%

96.5%

89.4%

91.0%

97.9%

95.9%

82%

84%

86%

88%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%

100%

102%

104%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes, condominiums, and farms/ranches under contract in Sonoma Valley.


32.2% 31.8%

27.9%

23.5%

28.4%

24.9% 25.0% 21.8%

25.2%

15.0%

32.3%

27.7%

32.5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes, condominiums, and farms/ranches under contract in Sonoma Valley.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomavalley_chart3_avgdom.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomavalley_chart5_salesprice_originalprice.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomavalley_chart4_percentundercontract.pdf

A Closer Look at Sonoma Valley


Glen Ellen 4,235,125$ 7,711,000$ 82% 6 7 17% 91 117 29% 566,000$ 798,000$ 41%

Kenwood 2,733,500$ 4,230,000$ 55% 4 5 25% 82 112 37% 527,500$ 760,000$ 44%

Sonoma 56,247,765$ 69,150,950$ 23% 74 80 8% 73 65 -11% 554,500$ 640,000$ 15%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes, condominiums, and farms/ranches in selected Sonoma Valley cities.

Sonoma Valley Snapshot: Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015



http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/sonomavalley_chart6_sect2_cities.pdf

pacificunion.com

Sally GardnerRegional Executive, Tahoe/TruckeeTahoe City 530.581.1882 | Truckee 530.587.7098 | Squaw Valley [email protected]

Lake Tahoe/TruckeeQuarterly Real Estate ReportQ1 2016


Lake Tahoe/Truckee: Q1 ResultsThe return of snow to the Sierra Nevadas brought visitors flocking to the Lake/Tahoe Truckee region in the first quarter and boosted home sales volume substantially. Inventory was tight in January and February before more homes hit the market in March. The average sales price for properties still hasn’t fully rebounded from its peak a decade ago, giving savvy buyers plenty of opportunity to score a bargain, particularly given that interest rates remain low.

On average, homes sold for a few percentage points less than list price, and bidding wars were uncommon. Sellers needed to price their properties exactly right in order to ensure a speedy sale; those priced unrealistically high tended to languish on the market for months. The Lake Tahoe real estate market depends heavily on second-home buyers from the Bay Area, and continued economic prosperity should continue to drive home sales this year.

Looking Forward: As El Niño fades and the snow melts, we expect more homes to come on the market in the second quarter. That added inventory should spur an uptick in sales, as buyers take advantage of favorable market conditions to secure a vacation getaway.

Defining Lake Tahoe/Truckee: Our real estate markets in Tahoe/Truckee include the communities of Alpine Meadows, Donner Lake, Donner Summit, Lahontan, Martis Valley, North Shore Lake Tahoe, Northstar, Squaw Valley, Tahoe City, Tahoe Donner, Truckee, and the West Shore of Lake Tahoe. Sales data in the charts below includes single-family homes and condominiums in these communities.

Lake Tahoe/Truckeepacificunion.com

Single-Family Homes – Median Sales Price

Condominiums – Median Sales Price

$650,000

$535,000 $530,500 $560,000

$585,000 $577,500 $605,500

$579,000 $550,000

$595,000

$661,500

$727,500

$650,000

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for single-family homes in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

$362,500

$281,000

$339,000

$385,000

$356,000

$427,500

$391,500 $375,000

$335,000 $330,000 $321,000

$361,900 $359,500

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

$450,000


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Median sales price for condominiums in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart1_mediansalesprice_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart2_mediansalesprice_condos.pdf


Single-Family Homes – Months’ Supply of Inventory

6.3

7.1

8.6

6.8 6.9

8.2

5.5 5.8 6.4

4.7

6.1 5.6

4.7

0.1

1.1

2.1

3.1

4.1

5.1

6.1

7.1

8.1

9.1


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for single-family homes in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

Single-Family Homes – Average Days on the Market

183

102

83

59

80 81 95 89

98 111

148

130 114

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for single-family homes sold in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

Condominiums – Months’ Supply of Inventory

9.4

19.3

9.4

12.5

9.0 8.3

12.2

6.3

11.0 11.6 11.4 11.8

7.7

0.1

5.1

10.1

15.1

20.1

25.1


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Months' supply of inventory for condominiums in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart3_msi_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart5_avgdom_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart4_msi_condos.pdf


Condominiums – Average Days on the Market

112 100

73

42

107

55

107 119

103

122

173

92

114

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Average days on market for condominiums sold in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

Condominiums – Percentage of Properties Under Contract

6.3%

9.7%

7.8% 7.3%

12.2%

7.7%

11.3%

7.7%

6.1% 6.6% 6.6%

11.3%

8.5%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of condominiums under contract in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

Single-Family Homes – Percentage of Properties Under Contract

12.0%

14.3% 13.6%

9.5%

14.9%

12.1% 12.5% 13.4%

11.2% 11.3%

14.6%

17.2% 17.2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Percentage of single-family homes under contract in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

pacificunion.com

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart6_avgdom_condos.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart8_percentundercontract_condos.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart7_percentundercontract_sfh.pdf

Single-Family Homes – Sales Price as a Percentage of Original Price

95.0%

92.1% 91.5%

96.5%

86.8%

90.6%

92.9% 93.3% 93.4% 93.5% 93.4%

91.3% 91.6%

80%

82%

84%

86%

88%

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for single-family homes under contract in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

Condominiums – Sales Price as a Percentage of Original Price

94.3% 94.3% 94.1%

96.5% 95.9% 95.6%

90.2%

91.6%

92.8% 93.4%

93.9%

96.1%

95.1%

87%

88%

89%

90%

91%

92%

93%

94%

95%

96%

97%


Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Sales price as % of original price (including adjustments) for condominiums under contract in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.


http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart9_salesprice_originalprice_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart10_salesprice_originalprice_condos.pdf

pacificunion.com

A Closer Look at Lake Tahoe/Truckee


Alpine Meadows 5,774,500$ 2,455,000$ -57% 5 3 -40% 104 97 -7% 1,080,000$ 750,000$ -31%

Donner Lake 2,254,000$ 2,840,000$ 26% 5 4 -20% 578 124 -79% 435,000$ 540,000$ 24%

Donner Summit 463,000$ 6,359,000$ 1273% 1 12 1100% 6 204 3300% 463,000$ 512,500$ 11%

Martis Valley 55,112,991$ 62,171,551$ 13% 23 25 9% 178 168 -6% 1,953,000$ 1,600,000$ -18%

North Lake Tahoe 39,285,000$ 36,970,560$ -6% 32 42 31% 133 101 -24% 642,500$ 545,000$ -15%

Northstar 600,000$ 12,847,000$ 2041% 1 7 600% 291 289 -1% 600,000$ 1,740,000$ 190%

Squaw Valley -$ 5,690,000$ n/a 0 2 n/a 0 39 n/a -$ 2,845,000$ n/a

Tahoe City 18,052,000$ 18,136,500$ 0% 13 15 15% 110 88 -20% 815,000$ 849,500$ 4%

Tahoe Donner 27,296,900$ 41,637,818$ 53% 41 60 46% 85 104 22% 580,000$ 634,950$ 9%

Truckee 62,602,551$ 72,375,551$ 16% 39 41 5% 128 140 9% 594,481$ 730,000$ 23%

West Shore 43,077,825$ 20,293,400$ -53% 37 17 -54% 210 142 -32% 545,000$ 720,000$ 32%

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for single-family homes in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.

Lake Tahoe/Truckee Snapshot: SFH, Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015



Alpine Meadows 330,000$ -$ n/a 1 0 n/a 32 0 n/a 330,000$ -$ n/a

Donner Lake -$ -$ n/a 0 0 n/a 0 0 n/a -$ -$ n/a

Donner Summit 165,000$ -$ n/a 1 0 n/a 417 0 n/a 165,000$ -$ n/a

North Lake Tahoe 5,470,000$ 3,822,810$ -30% 15 13 -13% 58 128 121% 335,000$ 290,000$ -13%

Northstar 5,207,000$ 6,943,100$ 33% 12 14 17% 119 134 13% 385,000$ 397,500$ 3%

Squaw Valley 4,321,500$ 3,443,000$ -20% 8 9 13% 369 285 -23% 517,250$ 360,000$ -30%

Tahoe City 2,294,000$ 2,730,310$ 19% 6 8 33% 101 126 25% 339,500$ 330,000$ -3%

Tahoe Donner 2,196,500$ 4,361,000$ 99% 6 14 133% 39 61 56% 424,750$ 333,000$ -22%

Truckee 3,948,500$ 5,638,000$ 43% 7 10 43% 111 127 14% 342,500$ 487,000$ 42%

West Shore -$ -$ n/a 0 0 n/a 0 0 n/a -$ -$ n/a

Lake Tahoe/Truckee Snapshot: Condos, Q1 2016 vs. Q1 2015

Source: Terradatum, April 6, 2016. Data is for condominiums in the Lake Tahoe/Truckee region.



http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart11_sect2_communities_sfh.pdf

http://docs.pacunion.com/2016q1/tahoetruckee_chart12_sect2_communities_condos.pdf

pacificunion.com

pacificunion.com

Follow Pacific Union

pacificunion.com

https://www.linkedin.com/company/pacific-union-international

https://twitter.com/pacunion

https://www.facebook.com/pacificunionrealestate

https://www.youtube.com/user/pacuniontv

http://blog.pacunion.com/

Documents

Q12016 quarterlyreport ezine