Sorry to flood your in-boxes. Another comment required a new post so I could paste another chart in response. (Original post. First Follow-up.) The comment was a question about unit types. This is single-family units and multi-family units among various types of cities. (Closed Access is NYC, LA, Boston, San Francisco & San Jose, and San Diego. Contagion is cities in inland California, Arizona, Nevada, and Florida.)
Census data would show otherwise. A lot of the fastest growing cities have large suburban growth, and it's is 2020s. Florida, Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Tennessee.
I was intrigued by your observation that: "Single-family homes in the exurbs was the band-aid on our broken city-building governance."
I might be reaching a bit on this, but the exurban surge basically describes the post war housing boom, which coincided with significant declines in urban core populations that reached its nadir in the late 1970's. Based on the graphs in this post, you set the game clock in the 1990's, when outer ring suburbs were starting to max out land capacity with low density development. By that point, many older cities were in full resurgence--but the regulatory screws were being tightened dramatically so that functionally obsolete neighborhoods persisted and enjoyed the massive surges in values that became the sacred trust of single family homeowners.
The hammer blow of the Great Recession and the endurance of tightened lending standards has had the pernicious effect of propping up home values in places that defy common sense---i.e. dilapidated houses in remote locations command high prices because of the broad scarcity. Meanwhile, second tier cities still have run-down urban cores which still haven't recovered from the value collapse of the 1960's and 1970's.
Granted, I'm talking more about the Northeast than other parts of the U.S. Somebody like Ed from Austin still seems to be operating in a real estate environment that resembles the 1990's---but the money flows are far more constrained now than they were then. Large scale apartment developers in metro Boston face remarkable challenges with site acquisition, permitting, and construction. The payoff is always guaranteed in terms of rental capacity because of the supply environment, but it's a brutal process.
Census data would show otherwise. A lot of the fastest growing cities have large suburban growth, and it's is 2020s. Florida, Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Tennessee.
And post meltdlown the supply chain shrank which prevented multifamily construction to pick up the slack.
I was intrigued by your observation that: "Single-family homes in the exurbs was the band-aid on our broken city-building governance."
I might be reaching a bit on this, but the exurban surge basically describes the post war housing boom, which coincided with significant declines in urban core populations that reached its nadir in the late 1970's. Based on the graphs in this post, you set the game clock in the 1990's, when outer ring suburbs were starting to max out land capacity with low density development. By that point, many older cities were in full resurgence--but the regulatory screws were being tightened dramatically so that functionally obsolete neighborhoods persisted and enjoyed the massive surges in values that became the sacred trust of single family homeowners.
The hammer blow of the Great Recession and the endurance of tightened lending standards has had the pernicious effect of propping up home values in places that defy common sense---i.e. dilapidated houses in remote locations command high prices because of the broad scarcity. Meanwhile, second tier cities still have run-down urban cores which still haven't recovered from the value collapse of the 1960's and 1970's.
Granted, I'm talking more about the Northeast than other parts of the U.S. Somebody like Ed from Austin still seems to be operating in a real estate environment that resembles the 1990's---but the money flows are far more constrained now than they were then. Large scale apartment developers in metro Boston face remarkable challenges with site acquisition, permitting, and construction. The payoff is always guaranteed in terms of rental capacity because of the supply environment, but it's a brutal process.
Thanks for going up and reporting on your mistakes! Will you update the paper?
OK. For the first time I think fully I get the supply side argument.