How's Hayward, CA....really? Looking to buy a home there. (San Francisco: 2015, house prices)

[athleticsfan72737489]

Originally Posted by nebuchadnezzar54831

Hey all,
I'm looking to buy a home in Hayward near 92 and the Hayward Animal Shelter. I work over in San Mateo/Foster City. Has Hayward improved the past couple of years? It seems like Hayward is the last refuge for decent home prices that's within 30 mins of the peninsula. Thanks in advance for the insights. I'm mainly worried about safety and resale value. No kids at this time so I'm not worried about schools, but thoughts on that would be appreciated as well.

I'm not sure if I'd actually buy a home near the Hayward Animal Shelter - it's close to some dodgy areas. I grew up in San Leandro and San Lorenzo and have a lot of friends who grew up in Hayward (some still live there). Hayward varies a lot by neighborhood. Areas that I would personally avoid in Hayward include the Jackson Triangle (this is a large swath of the flatlands of the city - look up its boundaries on Google), Longwood, the Tennyson Road corridor and Cherryland (though Cherryland is actually 'unincorporated Hayward" and not part of Hayward proper).

The hills are obviously the nice part of Hayward. However, there are some underrated neighborhoods in the flatlands. The neighborhoods immediately to the north, south, west and east of Chabot College are good (streets like Calaroga, Dodge, Mohr, etc.) The neighborhood between Industrial Blvd. and Folsom in South Hayward is nice (a lot of newer housing stock). I have an old co-worker who lives near Birchfield Park and the police station who likes his neighborhood - I think this neighborhood is okay. Fairway Park is also a good neighborhood.

I'd also take a hard look at both San Lorenzo and San Leandro. Both of these places are nicer than Hayward overall, have better schools than Hayward and both still have median home prices of less than $500,000. IMO, San Lorenzo and the Washington Manor neighborhood of San Leandro are probably the two best bargains in the inner East Bay.

[nebuchadnezzar54831]

Originally Posted by Chuck5000

Hayward definitely has very nice hill areas and is a bargain, but also has some iffy neighborhoods and not so great schools. check GreatSchools - Public and Private School Ratings, Reviews and Parent Community for ratings. If I didn't have kids I would definitely consider it, it's well located. I'd look at San Leandro as well; I'm a fan of that city's potential. If you're looking for an in-town living experience, I don't think you should look at Hayward; that's much tougher to find at low prices.

Worried about resale value? Everyone who isn't rich in the Bay Area should be if they have to buy and resell within a 5 to 10 year period. One could get screwed. In a bubble lower income areas increase proportionately the most, and then decrease the most. I do think that longer term, 10+ years, you'd be fine.

Hey Chuck,
Thanks for taking the time to respond. In your opinion, are we sitting on a bubble? Is it even the right time to buy?

[nebuchadnezzar54831]

Originally Posted by smashystyle

Ignore advice like this, it's useless. If you think Hayward is ghetto, you either don't know what a ghetto is or haven't spent time in Hayward. I'm not saying Hawyard is posh, or even nice for the most part, but I would get advice from people who have actually lived there. Historically, Hayward has been a working class city. It is also a city of 150,000 people, so there are a number of different neighborhoods that range from nice to not-so-nice. You can and should check the crime and school statistics online.

Personally, Hayward wouldn't be my first choice, but I wouldn't be afraid to live there either. I haven't lived in Hayward but have lived in Bay Area cities with similar demographics and enjoyed them. The biggest drawback of a place like Hayward is that there aren't cute, walkable downtowns and some in-town amenities. That said, if you have more time from not commuting and more money because real estate is cheaper, you may enjoy your life more than if you have no time and money. Schools are another issue, but I generally think most kids will do fine in most schools. Exceptions are really bad schools where kids don't feel safe and/or there are no support systems to go to college, and kids with particular/special needs.

Thanks, smashy. For school, chuck pointed out greatschools to such school stats. Where else can I look? Besides city data and crimemapping.com, what other sources would you recommend for crime stats? City Data has most cities, but for some weird reasons doesn't have Castro Valley.

[nebuchadnezzar54831]

Originally Posted by roadwarrior101

If I was going to be looking at a place to live on the inner East Bay and didn't want the urban environment of Oakland/Berkeley, I'd choose Alameda or possibly Fremont. Hayward is not so nice. True, it isn't as bad as some other parts of the East Bay, but its not great either. If you go one city over to Castro Valley, its a lot nicer. If its a matter of saving money, you're better off driving just over the hill to Dublin, which is much safer and nicer.

Thanks, Roadwarrior. Is Dublin cheaper than Castro Valley? I figure it would be more expensive since it's next to Pleasanton. According to city data, average home prices in Dublin is slightly higher than Castro Valley.

[Chuck5000]

Yes, this is a bubble. But it won't explode, it will deflate slowly, IMO. One should buy a home if one needs one. It should not be an "investment" unless one is already wealthy, and even then it's iffy. Historically, that is until recently, housing did not return big money. This is an artifact of the last 15 years, and I don't think it's permanent.

If you want stability, lots of space, and access to schools, those are great reasons to buy. But if one can afford rents, and there is no need, I would rent. I am renting now, btw. My situation is different, we are sorting out our careers.

In the USA, home owning is a religion. It's a bit crazy. I think it's too bad that rental options across the US are so spotty. In Germany, they have great housing policies, and most people rent. Imagine, you can just pick up and move easily and find quality housing anywhere.

[nebuchadnezzar54831]

Originally Posted by smashystyle

Dublin's significantly more expensive than Hayward -- the lastest home sales stats I saw had Hayward at $335/sq. ft and Dublin at $400. San Leandro and San Lorenzo were slightly higher than Hayward too. These statistics obscure some of the disparities in Hayward home prices, but Dublin isn't a same-priced alternative. You also have to figure out how much you value the lost hours of your life commuting.

Good point! I already lose about 2-2.5 hours a day sitting in traffic from oakland to san mateo. And, I have to agree with you versus Roadwarrior that Dublin is not a same-priced alternative as Castro Valley.

[nebuchadnezzar54831]

Originally Posted by athleticsfan72737489

I'm not sure if I'd actually buy a home near the Hayward Animal Shelter - it's close to some dodgy areas. I grew up in San Leandro and San Lorenzo and have a lot of friends who grew up in Hayward (some still live there). Hayward varies a lot by neighborhood. Areas that I would personally avoid in Hayward include the Jackson Triangle (this is a large swath of the flatlands of the city - look up its boundaries on Google), Longwood, the Tennyson Road corridor and Cherryland (though Cherryland is actually 'unincorporated Hayward" and not part of Hayward proper).

The hills are obviously the nice part of Hayward. However, there are some underrated neighborhoods in the flatlands. The neighborhoods immediately to the north, south, west and east of Chabot College are good (streets like Calaroga, Dodge, Mohr, etc.) The neighborhood between Industrial Blvd. and Folsom in South Hayward is nice (a lot of newer housing stock). I have an old co-worker who lives near Birchfield Park and the police station who likes his neighborhood - I think this neighborhood is okay. Fairway Park is also a good neighborhood.

I'd also take a hard look at both San Lorenzo and San Leandro. Both of these places are nicer than Hayward overall, have better schools than Hayward and both still have median home prices of less than $500,000. IMO, San Lorenzo and the Washington Manor neighborhood of San Leandro are probably the two best bargains in the inner East Bay.

Thanks, A's fan for the thorough breakdown...this is actually 2nd time I cam across Cherryland in my research. I appreciate the tip on San Lorenzo and Washington Manor.
P.S. How come San Lorenzo isn't listed on here --> //www.city-data.com/crime/crime-California2.html ?

[honobob]

Originally Posted by Chuck5000

Yes, this is a bubble. But it won't explode, it will deflate slowly, IMO. One should buy a home if one needs one. It should not be an "investment" unless one is already wealthy, and even then it's iffy. Historically, that is until recently, housing did not return big money. This is an artifact of the last 15 years, and I don't think it's permanent.
.

Home prices in the Bay Area double about every 10years. $50,000-100,000 houses in the 70"s sold for $100,000-$200,000 in the 80's. $200-400 in the 90's and $400-800 in the 00's . 5 years left to see $800-1.6M. We've already seen some of that appreciation but definitely have a ways to go.

When rates start to creep up you are going to see housing prices through the roof!!
CA real estate is the gold standard for investing.

[Chuck5000]

honobob, you are not factoring in inflation. It's signifcant. At 2% per year, after 20 years, that's 40%. Historically housing has not been the "gold standard" for investing, that is a an unsupportable statement. You could cherry pick a 10 or 20 year period and say, THIS is the reason XYZ is the best investment.

Actually when rates creep up, prices will decline because monthly payments for any given price point will be higher. It could be a wash for a while.

This could get into a very long conversation that I won't have time to participate in. I recall many conversations with Bay Area people telling me with certainty that house prices here never go down. Just not true.

I'd suggest anyone interested read Robert Schiller or other economists who were associated with calling the last housing bubble. The bubble here is supported largely by high wage jobs , but there is no reason to believe that job growth will continue indefinitely at this torrid pace, supported by absurd tech company valuation. Could get into a long conversation

For those interested in an article about Bay Area housing and why it's so expensive, this is a great article: How Burrowing Owls Lead To Vomiting Anarchists (Or SF’s Housing Crisis Explained) | TechCrunch

[roadwarrior101]

Originally Posted by nebuchadnezzar54831

Thanks, Roadwarrior. Is Dublin cheaper than Castro Valley? I figure it would be more expensive since it's next to Pleasanton. According to city data, average home prices in Dublin is slightly higher than Castro Valley.

Yeah, probably more expensive, unless you're talking about the Castro Valley hills. Castro Valley may be a little cheaper because while nice, it borders some iffier areas.