Rents creeping back up in San Francisco, San Jose and Oakland

Back in May, tenants may have felt a ray of hope when San Francisco rents fell an iota. But now, for the second month in a row, they have inched back up.

That’s according to a July report from the ApartmentList.com website. It shows the month-over-month median rents in San Francisco up 0.6 percent to $2,430 for a one-bedroom apartment and $3,060 for a two-bedroom. Compared with a year ago, however, rents in the city have remained flat.

Compare those numbers with San Jose, the most expensive city in the Bay Area after San Francisco. Year-over-year rents rose 2.0 percent to $2,060 for a one-bedroom and $2,580 for a two-bedroom.

Get tech news in your inbox weekday mornings. Sign up for the free Good Morning Silicon Valley newsletter.

And these are the Oakland numbers: $1,740 for a one-bedroom and $2,180 for a two-bedroom, up 3.8 percent year-over-year.

Looking beyond the San Francisco metropolitan area, the report stepped back for some perspective.

For instance, while San Francisco rents flat-lined year-over-year, rents were up 5.6 percent in Seattle from one year earlier, compared with increases of 5.0 percent in Phoenix and 4.6 percent in Chicago. Yet, if you are contemplating a move elsewhere in the West, the median two-bedroom rent in Phoenix still is only $1,020 — just a third of the same in San Francisco.

Looking around the San Francisco metro, the report noted that Pleasanton had the fastest rent growth among the dozen or so cities surveyed: a 6.7 percent year-over-year increase, with a one-bedroom going for $3,000 and a two-bedroom for $3,770.

San Mateo had the most expensive rents in the metro: $3,420 for a one bedroom and $4,300 for a two-bedroom, up 2.1 percent from a year earlier.

Here’s the report.

And here’s a chart that breaks down the San Francisco metro on a city-by-city basis:

Photo: An apartment building on Mission Street in San Francisco.  (Eric Risberg/AP)

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

 

Share this Post



 
 
 
  • TheOne

    I don’t get it. The article states that San Jose is the second most expensive city after San Francisco in the Bay Area, yet that chart shows many other cities are more expensive than than both SJ and SF.

 
 
css.php