The Burlingame Voice

$15 million Is a Lot of Golf

We have followed the redevelopment of the Bayfront driving range for quite sometime all the way back to criticizing the original contract made by a Council that couldn't negotiate its way out of a wet paper bag.  Most recently the skating rink vs. badminton vs. better golf controversy was discussed here.  The DJ was paying attention on to the quiet council meeting before the holiday

The Burlingame City Council unanimously approved Monday, July 3, continuing exclusive negotiations with the company wishing to rejuvenate the former Burlingame Golf Center.

The sizable rent offering once the facility is up and running amounts to nearly $1 million more than the initial figure floated by the company specializing in golf-style chipping games amidst a sports bar setting.  Additionally the company will construct a new facility offering 102 hitting bays spread across three stories along with a full bar and restaurant plus additional amenities expected to cost roughly $15 million.

The company offered a $500,000 payment to address community benefits as well. Once the final terms of the contract are agreed upon, a completed contract will return before the council for ultimate approval.

If you want to bother, you can click through and read the part of the article where the B'game socialists want the new money for "affordable housing".  These little irritants feel no compunctions about grasping at any bit of revenue the City stumbles into.  As for the real residents, i.e. those without an EPA law consortium feeding them bad ideas, we will be asking why we need a higher sales tax if TopGolf is adding to the city coffers so nicely?  But it is on the November ballot.  At least we won't need golf at the new Rec Center!

Wave that Flag, Wave it Wide and High

Housing Leveling Off?

The Wall Street Journal has a piece noting that things are (maybe) slowing down a bit in the EssEff area.  They note

San Francisco, once the hottest housing market in the U.S., is now one of the coolest, in a reversal that could presage a broader slowdown if more buyers decide it isn’t worth chasing rapidly rising prices.  Prices in San Francisco increased 5% in April, making the Bay Area one of the slowest growing markets in the U.S. and well behind markets such as Atlanta, Boston, San Diego, Las Vegas and Phoenix.

San Francisco’s apartment market also is sluggish. Average rents decreased 0.3% in the second quarter compared with a year earlier, according to data released this week by Reis Inc.

Economists said the weakening is being caused by a confluence of factors: slowing job growth, less demand from new buyers put off by high prices and, on the rental side, an increase in new apartment supply as developers try to cash in on a multiyear boom.

In many ways San Francisco is a unique market. The average home price has more than doubled since 2009, according to Case-Shiller, making a slowdown virtually inevitable. The number of home sales in the Bay Area in February sank to its lowest level since 2008, down 3.5% from a year ago and off 12.5% since 2015, according to PropertyRadar, a California real-estate research firm.

So supply and demand work their way back into some semblance of balance sans government price controls or perhaps in spite of it given SF's various flavors of rent control.  There are a number of For Rent signs around B'game--more than there was a year ago it would appear.  Good thing rents can float down as well as up.....