The other thing that sticks out is that most of the bottom 15 are very flat areas, and most have little or no water. If you took the median price of houses in King County that have no view or water access, it would be much lower. My unofficial, not compiled or guaranteed by NWMLS number is about $340,000 list (and about $350,000 for “Seattle” addresses).

Finally, I believe the top 8 are all major port cities, which not only has income ramifications, but also building limitations.

As for other things on the list. NYC on the list I’m sure combines all of the burroughs, and NYC as a whole is huge with lots of undesirable areas. Same with Los Angeles and Chicago. All of those areas are getting combined in these statistics, which doesn’t make it much of a fair assessment.

I lived in Seattle for years, and now currently live in Chicago. Chicago proper is massive, with lots of “undesirable” areas with a lot less expensive homes, therefore affecting the median price. In comparison, Seattle proper doesn’t have as many of these neighborhoods where homes are priced at 80k. But if you compare areas on the northside of Chicago (or Manhattan in NYC), then it starts to paint a more accurate comparison. Seattle doesn’t have the southside of Chicago, the lower-income areas of the Bronx or Queens. Seattle is just not as big as Chicago or NYC. When you start going out further out from The Loop or Manhattan, those areas are more comparable to places like Tukwila, SeaTac, Renton. I’m sure the median for Seattle would also go down, if thoes areas are included.

By Oswald @ 56:

Your anecdotal evidence of a conversation at a cocktail party cannot reveal the desirability of any city, let alone Seattle.

Actually it merely demonstrates that people tend to like where they live. You could probably go to a cocktail party in El Paso and have people question why you live in Seattle.

I’m not sure. I have lived several places that I just couldn’t wait to get the hell out of.

Perhaps between two (somewhat) comparable cities that just have a different set of positives and negatives, I could see that working. There are some places that are just, well, dumps. Harrisburg, PA. Akron, OH. Yeah, I guess these are smaller cities. Cincinnati is pretty awful.

I must say you are completely on the money regarding hiking. Hiking here is REAL hiking. You can die, or get seriously injured, without too much effort and in all sorts of interesting ways up in the mountains.

I liked the warning sign at the bottom of the Mailbox Peak Trail we encountered last week. You’re not in Kansas anymore, Dorothy.

” Pull HP, Intel, Cisco, Google, and Oracle out of the bay area…”

I don’t think that will leave SF in flames and prices in city plummet. Seriously I don’t. SF was very desirable and relatively expensive prior to those companies and it will continue to be if they go away. Other big employeers will move in pretty quickly and snew startups will form to suck up the competence. Seattle I’m not so sure it would ever recover should MS, Boeing, Starbucks, Amazon and Paccar leave.

RE: cheapseats @ 44 -

These are city limits specifically, which is somewhat distorting. For example, Atlanta is not on the list (but probably fairly close) despite the metro area having about 2x the population compared to Seattle metro.

As for the move-ability of Seattle, I have never met anyone in the several cities I have lived in across the country who was remotely interested in living here. Maybe once you visit, and you like the scenery, you might move. My opinion is that most people who move here are just for their tech jobs and (slightly now) lower cost of living than CA. Most are from the bay area like myself, who will move back in a heartbeat if prices in Cupertino or Mountain View get down to Bellevue levels. An example of this is prudy above, and working in tech I can anecdotally tell you this is a common case.

I mentioned that we should be comparing MSA and not city population. Columbus is very aggressive in annexing suburbs; Seattle has two “suburbs” which are large cities in their own right.

As for move-ability, I think the people reading this site take relocation for granted (common with techies and engineers). Many people never seriously consider relocation; they grow up somewhere and other than college never look at other places to live. I spent 5 years in a city that very few people would say they liked, many outright hated it, but most never did anything about it. People tend to be very complacent about where they live, especially once they have families. Without the dangling six-figure job on the other end, how many people would relocate anywhere?

Here’s a test of universal desirability. Remove the top 5 employeers in the area and see what happens. I’m pretty sure the truly “special” cities quickly replaces the loss and shrugs it off without to much damage to the price of homes etc. How would Seattle do?

There are probably only 3 cities (NYC, LA, Chicago) that could survive that.* Pull HP, Intel, Cisco, Google, and Oracle out of the bay area… not any different than having B, M$, Amazon, Starbucks, and Paccar (just picking 5 big ones, not sure who the 5 largest in either area are) leave here. The only difference is that many of the cities on that list (particularly the midwest and Texas cities on the list) have nothing to really offer if 10-20% of the jobs disappear – Chicago aside. Seattle and San Fran still have geography on their side.

* Making the assumption that you exclude US Govt, State Govt, Local Govt, and School District which are typically 4 of the top 6 employers in any city, but are basically proportional to population.

I have also been to many other great American cities and each one of them has their own special pride – Kary is right in saying that people tend to like where they live. To its residents, the city’s benefits outshine its defects.

The job market in San Francisco/Bay Area is exponentially larger than the one in Seattle or the suburbs. Its not even remotely close, even if you are in the technical field. This is a big factor on why I don’t think housing prices in Seattle will be able to sustain their current prices. Just not as many high-paying ($100K+) jobs to support these prices.

When looking at houses in Seattle I find the prices to be VASTLY disproportionate to the median income that people make. I mean $600K+ houses, $300K condos, who is going to buy these houses? Where is that money coming from? Its definitely not the young couple.

When you combine the weak and lower-paying job market, with the fact that (as harsh as this sounds), not a ton of people are flocking to Seattle to live there, I don’t see any way the housing prices can stay as high as they are.

I love Greenlake and Queen Anne but am I really going to pay $700K+ to live there in a house? Is anyone?

I love Pacific Heights and Telegraph hill in San Francisco, and I can guarantee that someone will pay $700K for a large 1 bdrm condo there.

By
Even when you include the outer boroughs, the vast majority of the city isn’t sitting around $300/sq ft like seattle. Maybe outer queens and staten island, but NY as a whole? not happening.

Who said anything about sqft prices? There are thousands and thousands of places in outer boroughs where you can get tiny condos and duplexes for less than median quoted on the chart. While Manhattan is stratospheric, it is small compared to the outer boroughs and price plummeting quickly as you spread out from Manhattan.

I would love to live in SF but I would equally love to stay in Seattle – and in Seattle I can actually afford to buy a home in a neighborhood that I love and the home is much bigger than an 1100 sq foot box.

Oh, and I can buy a home that’s exactly what I’m looking for – that’s key as well.

Your anecdotal evidence of a conversation at a cocktail party cannot reveal the desirability of any city, let alone Seattle.

Actually it merely demonstrates that people tend to like where they live. You could probably go to a cocktail party in El Paso and have people question why you live in Seattle.

Think, people. Different strokes for different folks. Your anecdotal evidence of a conversation at a cocktail party cannot reveal the desirability of any city, let alone Seattle. There is no one universal quality that makes one city better than another.

I like mountains, rainy weather, and a small city (well one that feels small). That is why I live here. If I liked a giant metropolis with real cold weather I would move to Chicago. If I liked warm weather and the ocean I would move to Huntington beach. See how this works?

This past weekend, I was out-of-town for a wedding near Chicago. I had some great conversations with people of many different ages, and a surprising topic of conversation was effectively “why are you living in Seattle?” – I’ve never had to justify this to anyone on the west coast.

Once I started to share some of the negatives, including the rather expensive square footage for housing, “company town” atmosphere, and the attitude of many residents, I found myself wondering the same…

Yeah; but the people that question the wisdom of living in Seattle are the ones that have never been there. All you hear is the same broken record….”I could not handle all the rain”.

Here in the deep South, the people that have visited always ask me “tell me again why you left Seattle to move here??”.

And as I tell everyone that wants to argue about Seattle vs. Sunny climates in the Southeast…”the day I can sell my Florida duplex for $300K and buy an equivalent unit in Seattle for $120K; I will be extremely happy to admit I was wrong; but unfortunately, as long as the opposite is the case, I am right!!!”

The Tim’s price chart is nothing more that a “desirability table”. Argue all you want; but those top 5 cities are where most people want to live in. Might not be for you; but they are for most people.

Sorry for the mood. Fall is around the corner; and while you’ll get a chill in the air and color foliage, I am getting daily highs of 92° and breathing water.

Grew up in the 95124 and moved here when I was 19. I would never EVER move back home to San Jose. I spent two weeks this summer at Santa Cruz ,Marine World (Discovery Kingdom), and Campbell. Vallejo appears to be gangland territory and downtown Santa Cruz is horrendous. In returning home to Campbell and staying at the Pruneyard I was able to rest easy again but the Bay Area is not near what it used to be. No more Frontier Village…………Thats a crime. At least my High School Del Mar is still there…………You can keep the Bay Area!

I tell you in all my travels through AZ, NV, WA, Bay Area, and Sacramento I have found no better, safer, healthier, affordable place to live then the 98322.

The Tim,

Since you publish all this info free of charge, one should be happy with the content regardless of what it is.

If you are, however, interested in the actual analysis and price comparisons, perhaps you should spend little more time before putting out such info. For instance, median price in Tokyo is about $450,000, but one needs to remember that median dwelling there is about 400sqf.

I think you could find lots of little statistical faults with Tim’s posting, but I think his larger message is spot on — Seattle is among the highest priced cities for housing and is much more expensive to comparable cities in the country. Now maybe Seattle’s really #5 instead of #3 or whatnot, but you’d hard time compiling a list of lesser cities with a higher cost of living.

Since you publish all this info free of charge, one should be happy with the content regardless of what it is.

If you are, however, interested in the actual analysis and price comparisons, perhaps you should spend little more time before putting out such info. For instance, median price in Tokyo is about $450,000, but one needs to remember that median dwelling there is about 400sqf.

Take a look at reports by Canadian sources, they usually publish three sets of data, for detached, attached and condo units and those units also have specific sqf metrics. 900 sqf for condo, 1,200 for detached and 1,500 sqf for attached, if memory serves. This way the information is accurate and presents a clear picture. What you presented in this post amounts to statistical waste pile.

These are city limits specifically, which is somewhat distorting. For example, Atlanta is not on the list (but probably fairly close) despite the metro area having about 2x the population compared to Seattle metro.

As for the move-ability of Seattle, I have never met anyone in the several cities I have lived in across the country who was remotely interested in living here. Maybe once you visit, and you like the scenery, you might move. My opinion is that most people who move here are just for their tech jobs and (slightly now) lower cost of living than CA. Most are from the bay area like myself, who will move back in a heartbeat if prices in Cupertino or Mountain View get down to Bellevue levels. An example of this is prudy above, and working in tech I can anecdotally tell you this is a common case.

The Portland Housing Blog http://portlandhousing.blogspot.com/ seems to be the most popular though I think Clint, the originator, is getting burned out like a lot of us are. I like to use my RN ICU reference in explaining the bursting of the RE bubble: no matter how many meds, how many tubes, or how many machines we have hooked up to this patient they are gonna die. It may take two days or 2 months but it’s gonna happen. But they are fighting it ever inch of the way with interest rates, $8K housing credits, etc.

I have learned sooo much from the bloggers and posters. I feel like I have an honorary economics degree/psychology degree/BS spotter degree! I can only contribute my own personal experience in RE, ie buying too much mortgage w/ a VA loan, no savings, no plans for layoffs which occurred 3 years after move-in, no plans for kids/childcare expenses…we did sell at the peak, though:O)

I head over to a few realtor’s blogs just to see what BS they are spouting…it always seems to be a great time to buy, huh? http://portlandrealestateblog.com/ Turner’s blog was popular during the run up and through the peak. Some posters swearing that Portland had strong fundamentals, special, blah, blah, now not too many comments if any these days.

The Oregonian’s Front Porch by Ryan Frank has some interesting posts though not many comments
http://blog.oregonlive.com/frontporch/index.html

And Ian has a different approach to Portland though he is a busy guy with not much free time on his hands. I think both of the Portland housing blogs are run by guys in their early 20’s.

http://portlandrealestateoutsider.blogspot.com/

Two realtors that I think I could trust, Ron Are and Scott Quick, have blogs.
http://www.portlandwaterfront.com/ (fairly new blog)
http://repdx.com/

Yeah, hard time blaming the UGB when we have thousands of vacant homes on the market….and they are STILL building!

Cheers!

Regaring your comment: Seattle is still special (at least in the minds of sellers)!

Buyers are equally, or more to “blame”. Someone’s buying at these prices. Demand has to fall for prices to fall. People want to live in Seattle so bad they’ll seemingly pay anything to do so. It’s not simply the mind of sellers that makes the prices high, some buyer is willing.

This kind of display is interesting.

This past weekend, I was out-of-town for a wedding near Chicago. I had some great conversations with people of many different ages, and a surprising topic of conversation was effectively “why are you living in Seattle?” – I’ve never had to justify this to anyone on the west coast.

Once I started to share some of the negatives, including the rather expensive square footage for housing, “company town” atmosphere, and the attitude of many residents, I found myself wondering the same…

Then I’d hear about the beautiful condos in downtown Chicago that can be had for $350k, up 50 floors, beautiful furnishings, and a world-class city… or the suburban neighborhoods with great schools, outdoor activities with plenty of biking, hiking, and Bravern-style shopping… and 4,000 sq. ft. for $400k.

Actually, this always happen when I visit a cooler place, and then try and come home. It’ll wear off in another few days… feel free to ignore me.

Chicago is NOT cooler than Seattle.

Not even close.

I’d rather live in Cleveland. What? Yeah, you heard me. If I have to endure the Midwest weather, I at least want to be in a manageable city, without the insane population pressures of Chicago. Plus Erie is just plain better for windsurfing. Oh, and drinks are cheap… housing is close to free these days.

Everyone wants something different from their city. I suppose if you never take advantage of the incredible geography of the Puget Sound region, and live most of your life indoors, Seattle would be a pretty bad choice. For me, it offers the sophistication of a big city without the sprawling, ugly mass of suburbia that surrounds virtually every other large city in the States – with old-growth forests, glacial lakes, and incredible back-country snowboarding only hours away. Win.

Also do you participate in any PDX blogs? Which ones?

This past weekend, I was out-of-town for a wedding near Chicago. I had some great conversations with people of many different ages, and a surprising topic of conversation was effectively “why are you living in Seattle?” – I’ve never had to justify this to anyone on the west coast.

Once I started to share some of the negatives, including the rather expensive square footage for housing, “company town” atmosphere, and the attitude of many residents, I found myself wondering the same…

Then I’d hear about the beautiful condos in downtown Chicago that can be had for $350k, up 50 floors, beautiful furnishings, and a world-class city… or the suburban neighborhoods with great schools, outdoor activities with plenty of biking, hiking, and Bravern-style shopping… and 4,000 sq. ft. for $400k.

Actually, this always happen when I visit a cooler place, and then try and come home. It’ll wear off in another few days… feel free to ignore me.

Seattle- world-class city, four months of the year.

When the jobs are gone, but the rain remains, then what will be be?

Do you consider Dubai or Toronto world class cities? Seattle has better weather than these cities. I prefer Seattle weather over even Chicago’s.

One theory for the jump in price between Chicago and Boston is the coast. All of the top seven places are on either the East or West coast. All other entries are, more or less, not directly on the ocean.

Packet, that is because NYC includes its outer boroughs; Queens, Bronx, Queens, and Staten Islands in addition to Manhattan. While prices in Manhattan may be stratospheric, the outer borough house prices are much more reasonable (relatively).

And “Chicago” includes the gold coast ($$$$) but also South Chicago (dirt cheap).

About the only thing I would take from this is that the top 6 (maybe 7) are significantly limited in their expansion by geography. The rest, except Philly and Baltimore (which are both basically ghettos), are not. No water, no mountains, no other cities to compete against. This might be interesting if you measure the MSA, and not the city limits. As it is, this is a worthless comparison.

Packet, that is because NYC includes its outer boroughs; Queens, Bronx, Queens, and Staten Islands in addition to Manhattan. While prices in Manhattan may be stratospheric, the outer borough house prices are much more reasonable (relatively).

Even when you include the outer boroughs, the vast majority of the city isn’t sitting around $300/sq ft like seattle. Maybe outer queens and staten island, but NY as a whole? not happening.

Ditto for san francisco. Unless you’re including the parts of the city that will get you shot, it’s just not anywhere near the same price. I recently moved from SF partially because for the same price as in SF, I can get a place 3-4 times the size here in seattle.

Actually, I doubt there are any world class cities I’d want to live in, because they’re all probably too big.

When the jobs are gone, but the rain remains, then what will be be?

I think Seattle is desirable and has a lot going for it, but I am just as frustrated as others here with where prices are today and an inability to find, with my wife, a home that really works for us in Seattle, at a rational price.