New homes won’t cure California’s housing affordability problems

“Numerology” tries to find reality within various measurements of economic and real estate trends.

Buzz: Construction is not a quick cure for homebuying affordability headaches because the bulk of the new homes being built are pricier and larger than the rest of what’s sold on the market.

Source: My trusty spreadsheet spied a Zillow study comparing existing residences sold in May with newly constructed ones in 46 big US metropolitan areas – including six in California.

Fuzzy math:  Developers argue they need to build bigger homes to make the expensive land they buy, plus other construction costs, pencil out financially.

Topline

Yes, it’s only one month of sales, however, think about California through the median results for the six cities studied.

Buyers paid $1.14 million for new homes vs. $935,000 for existing ones. So what’s being built is 22% pricier.

Now some of that premium price can be tied to mortgage rate discounts offered by builders that allow house hunters to pay up for new homes.

But the bulk of those higher prices are because builders typically sold a 2,020-square-foot house vs. 1,585 for existing ones. So the new stuff is 27% larger.

Please note that this is not only a crazy California thing.

Nationally, new homes had a $418,000 median sales price vs. $365,000 existing – that’s 15% higher.

Amd US homebuyers typically got 1,990 square feet new vs. 1,710 for existing homes – 16% larger.

Details

Ponder the new vs. “used” patterns within California, ranked by the price premium builders got …

San Jose: $2.87 million median for new construction vs. $1.6 million for existing homes – 79% higher (the fourth-biggest gap of the 46 metros). That bought 2,360 square feet new vs. 1,600 existing – or 48% larger (No. 4).

Sacramento: $745,920 median new vs. $575,000 existing – 30% higher (No. 24) for 2,340 square feet new vs. 1,670 existing – 40% larger (No. 8).

San Diego: $1.14 million median new vs. $900,000 existing – 27% higher (No. 25) for 2,060 square feet new vs. 1,480 existing – 39% larger (No. 10).

Los Angeles-Orange County: $1.15 million median new vs. $970,000 existing – 19% higher (No. 27) for 1,970 square feet new vs. 1,520 existing – 30% larger (No. 16).

Inland Empire: $610,805 median new vs. $562,500 existing – 9% higher (No. 32) for 1,980 square feet new vs. 1,720 existing – 15% larger (No. 30).

San Francisco: $1.27 million median new vs. $1.23 million existing – 4% higher (No. 38) for 1,380 square feet new vs. 1,570 existing – 12% smaller (No. 46).

Bottom line

This is not just a greedy builder problem.

In large part, these pricing gaps are the result of a host of policy and marketplace challenges that make it far easier to produce high-end housing.

FOLLOW US ON GOOGLE NEWS

Read original article here

Denial of responsibility! Todays Chronic is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – todayschronic.com. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Leave a Comment