A number of readers pointed out USA Today’s “Close to home” profile of the Seattle residential real estate market. There’s not a lot of substance to it, and this quote is almost the entire text:
Seattle’s strict growth- management policies and an economic rebound are buffering the region’s real estate market from cooling trends. The number of new jobs has outpaced building permits for single-family homes and condos by 30% the past 15 months. Though single-family home sales fell about 7% in April, compared with April 2005, there’s only a three-month supply of homes in the Seattle market — half the national average. That’s largely why prices rose nearly 18% that month, according to the latest data available.
There’s something really fishy about those numbers… Take a look at the graphic on the right. It shows the median home price in Seattle at $275,700, while all of Washington State is $320,000… huh? Not only is that backward (I’m certain that Seattle has a higher median than the state as a whole), but even if you simply reverse them, the $320,000 number doesn’t match up with any numbers I have available. They’re talking about April, so take a look at the April MLS numbers. King County median home price: $377,000. Seattle median home price: $410,000.
They highlight some 950 sqft. house with a price tag of $279,000 as the “median-price home.” Not only is a home that cheap nearly impossible to find in Seattle, but good luck finding such a house at that price pretty much anywhere in King County. I have to wonder… what were they smoking?
Regarding the write-up portion, I don’t really have anything to add over what we just discussed last month. There is however an active discussion on the topic going on over at Sound Politics, where contributor Matt Rosenberg seems to think that the primary reason that Seattle home prices have gone so high is growth management.
The “no affordable housing” plaint also betrays an ignorance of the effect – especially pronounced in other Seattle communities – of the basic laws of supply and demand under the heavy hand of regional growth management regulations.
I would buy that argument if Seattle was alone in its wild appreciation, but the housing bubble is not a localized phenomenon.
(Noelle Knox, USA Today, 06.05.2006)