What would you trade?

From the Record:

What would you sacrifice to afford a home? A report shows the differences between generations

Generations often have differing perspectives on politics, work culture and family dynamics, so it might not come as a surprise that the real estate experiences of different generations vary, too.

While purchasing a home with a domestic partner or spouse is still the most common way (59%) that individuals across all generations are buying a home, millennials — who make up the majority of today’s homebuyers — are more likely than older generations to purchase a home in other ways, whether it be by themselves or with a friend or relative, according to Bankrate’s recent Homebuying Trends Survey.

“Our findings show a shift in how generations have purchased their homes. More millennials have opted for solo home purchases or co-buying with friends or family compared to their older counterparts,” said Alex Gailey, lead data reporter at Bankrate. “That’s likely due to a shift in generational norms. Younger Americans are partnering or marrying later today than in prior generations, but many still want to become homeowners.”

In the survey, 42% of millennials (ages 28-43) said they have purchased a home alone. This is compared to the 34% of Generation Xers (ages 44-59) and 22% of baby boomers (ages 60-78) who said they purchased a home alone.

When it comes to purchasing a home with friends, 10% of millennials said they’ve bought a house this way compared to just 3% of Gen Xers and 1% of baby boomers. And, 10% of millennials also said they have purchased a home with relatives, while only 5% of Gen Xers and 2% of baby boomers said they have done so.

In order to find more affordable housing, millennials are also willing to sacrifice more than their older counterparts, according to the survey. While 49% of Gen Xers and 62% of baby boomers are most willing to downsize their living space compared to other factors like moving out of state or buying a fixer upper, millennials are equally as likely (33%) to take any of these steps to find affordable housing.

Millennials are also more likely to consider moving farther from friends and family (29%), moving to a less desirable area (27%), taking on roommates or living with family members (24%) and moving farther from work (19%) than older generations are.

“Younger generations’ willingness to make more sacrifices amid ongoing affordability issues is a result of being at a point in their lives where they are ready to make the jump from renting to owning,” the report says. “On the other hand, older homebuyers are more likely to be repeat homebuyers who are driven by different motivations.”

Posted in Demographics, Economics, Housing Bubble, National Real Estate | 20 Comments

Price Reduced! Jeter’s House!

From NJ.com:

Derek Jeter’s Greenwood Lake ‘castle’ back on the market at drastically reduced price

Known locally as “the castle” on Greenwood Lake, Derek Jeter’s longtime lake house near the New York-New Jersey border is back on the market at a drastically reduced price.

Listed last week for $6.3 million, the home was previously marketed at nearly $15 million. The property, dating to 1903, has been linked to Jeter’s family for more than 70 years.

The former New York Yankees shortstop took ownership of the property in the early 2000s from the Tiedemann family trust. The existing home had been partitioned into apartments and was in a state of disrepair.

The property was originally built by a New York City doctor, Rudolph Gudewill, for his wife in 1903. Jeter’s grandfather, William Connors, lived on the property after he was adopted by John and Julia Tiedemann, who bought the site in 1952.

A transformation under Jeter’s ownership developed the three-parcel estate with a main house, a guest house, a pool house and a boat house. The grounds hold an infinity pool, intricately manicured gardens and a lagoon and are bordered by 6-foot-high stone walls. Located on the western side of Greenwood Lake, the roughly 4-acre site also includes 700 feet of lakefront.

The stone home at 14 Lake Shore Road in the Town of Warwick, N.Y., is defined by two turrets that give it its castle nickname. There are also two conference rooms, six bedrooms, 13 bathrooms and five kitchens. Four are indoors. One is outdoors and comes with a wood-burning fireplace, says an online listing from Wright Bros. Real Estate Inc. The annual property taxes are roughly $75,000, the listing says.

Jeter, who grew up in Kalamazoo, Mich., was born in Pequannock at Chilton Memorial Hospital. For a short time after, he lived in North Arlington.

Posted in New Jersey Real Estate, Price Reduced | 20 Comments

Nothing is cheap anymore

From MarketWatch:

Rents just surged 10% in this affordable housing market. It was ‘bound to happen,’ one economist says.

Renters are running away from high rents in expensive cities and moving to more affordable ones — but that’s pushing up rents as much as 10% in some major metropolitan areas, according to a new report by Redfin.

In a monthly market report, the residential real-estate brokerage RDFN, -1.57% found that in April, asking rents across 33 major metro areas rose 1.1% from a year ago, which was the first such increase in more than a year. The median U.S. asking rent was $1,648 in April.

The biggest rent increases were seen in markets in the Midwest, the report found, while the biggest declines were in the Sun Belt and in Seattle.

“Rents are only up 1% nationally, and that’s mostly because less affordable rental markets are getting even more expensive, which is bound to happen as people start to move to more affordable metros from expensive ones,” Daryl Fairweather, chief economist at Redfin, told MarketWatch.

Higher rents are an additional blow to many aspiring homeowners who currently rent a home. Elevated mortgage rates and high home prices have made it so unaffordable to buy a house that in February, Realtor.com said that it was cheaper to rent than to own in all of America’s top 50 metro areas.

Posted in Demographics, Economics, Housing Bubble, National Real Estate | 30 Comments

First to fall?

From Mansion Global:

Florida and Texas Show Signs of Home Prices Falling

Gary and Karen Steppe listed a condo in Indialantic, Fla., in February for $294,900. They expected the two-bedroom vacation home, which is in an oceanside town near Melbourne Beach, to sell quickly. But the couple initially received no bids. 

One reason: A rising number of homeowners in the area were also looking to sell. With more properties on the market, “buyers didn’t have that fear of missing out like they did when the inventory was less,” Gary Steppe said. 

The Steppes cut the price, then accepted an offer in April for about $275,000. “I wish I had…sold it two years ago,” when similar condos were selling for higher prices, he said.

In most of the U.S., the limited number of homes for sale is pushing prices back toward record highs. Sale prices for single-family existing homes rose in 93% of U.S. metro areas during the first quarter, according to the National Association of Realtors. The median single-family existing-home price grew 5% from a year ago to $389,400.

Yet the market is cooling and prices have started falling in some cities in Florida and Texas, where robust home-building activity in recent years has helped boost the number of homes for sale. The two states accounted for more than a quarter of all single-family residential building permits every year from 2019 to 2023, according to Census Bureau data.

In 10 Texas and Florida metro areas, the inventory of homes for sale in April exceeded typical prepandemic levels for this time of year, according to Realtor.com. In eight of those markets, pending sales in April fell from a year earlier.

In Florida and Texas, “we’re starting to get into a buyer’s market,” said Rick Palacios Jr., director of research at John Burns Research & Consulting. 

Posted in Demographics, Economics, Housing Bubble, National Real Estate | 80 Comments

Heading back below 7?

From CNBC:

Mortgage demand from homebuyers drops even as interest rates pull back to April lows

Mortgage rates last week dropped to the lowest level since April, but buyers are still struggling to afford today’s housing market. As a result, mortgage demand flattened at a weak pace. Total mortgage application volume inched up just 0.5% from one week earlier, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s seasonally adjusted index.

The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages with conforming loan balances ($766,550 or less) decreased to 7.08% from 7.18%, with points decreasing to 0.63 from 0.65 (including the origination fee) for loans with a 20% down payment.

Applications to refinance a home loan, which are most sensitive to weekly rate changes, increased 5% for the week and were 7% higher than the same week one year ago.

“Treasury yields continued to move lower last week and mortgage rates declined for the second week in a row,” said Joel Kan, MBA’s vice president and deputy chief economist. “The decline in rates led to a small boost to refinance applications, including another strong week for VA refinances. However, the overall level of refinance activity remains low.”

Applications for a mortgage to purchase a home fell 2% for the week and were 14% lower than the year-earlier period. The drop was driven by a 9% decline in FHA applications. Those loans are favored by first-time or lower income buyers because they allow much smaller down payments than conventional loans.

“While the downward move in rates benefits prospective homebuyers, mortgage rates are still much higher than they were a year ago, while for-sale inventory remains tight,” Kan added.

Posted in Economics, Housing Bubble, Mortgages, National Real Estate | 53 Comments

Different this time?

From the NY Post:

US home prices have soared 47% since 2020

A recent analysis by ResiClub of the Case-Shiller National Home Price Index has unveiled a jaw-dropping surge in US home prices, soaring a lofty 47.1% since the dawn of this decade.

The boom witnessed in the early years of the 2020s has outpaced not only the growth of the 1990s and 2010s — but is now threatening to surpass the entirety of the 2000s. 

Even the dizzying heights reached before the 2007 housing market meltdown are within striking distance.

This decade’s housing market frenzy was ignited by a perfect storm — the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic triggering an unprecedented rush among buyers. 

The result? A staggering 20% surge in prices within a mere 12 months.

Despite mortgage rates skyrocketing to around 7%, double what they were at the peak of the pandemic, home prices refuse to plateau. 

That’s due the insatiable appetite for housing coupled with a crippling shortage in supply.

“Because the Fed kept rates too low for too long during the pandemic, listing inventory was essentially wiped off the map, keeping prices rising sharply despite the surge in mortgage rates,” appraiser Jonathan Miller told The Post. “Would-be home sellers that bought or refinanced at a 2.5% to 4% rate during the pandemic became trapped due to the lock-in effect. They became reluctant to list their homes because, as new buyers, they would get a lot less for their money because of the much higher mortgage rates. The way out of this appears to be to hope for a drop in mortgage rates, but that could take years.”

To put things in perspective, the median US home sale price hit $420,800 in the first quarter of this year. Compare that to a modest $327,100 at the beginning of the decade. It was $124,800 at the dawn of the ’90s. 

Lance Lambert, co-founder of ResiClub, says housing price growth in the first 50 months of this decade has outpaced not just one, but the last three decades combined. 

It’s all an unfortunate cycle of events for those looking to achieve the American Dream — and for one age bracket in particular.

Posted in Demographics, Economics, Housing Bubble, National Real Estate | 95 Comments

90% of the country overpriced

From Fitch:

Real Home Price Appreciation Aligns with Sustainable Price Trends

Fitch Ratings estimates national home prices were 11.1% overvalued for 4Q23 on a population-weighted average basis, showing negligible difference from the previous quarter. 

The consistency in Fitch’s overvaluation estimates, maintained from the last quarter, was underpinned by concurrent increases in the Home Price Index and Sustainable Home Price (SHP). The increase in SHP for 4Q23 was primarily driven by rise in rents. Meanwhile, other factors such as unemployment rates, mortgage rates, real income, and household growth remained comparatively stable, leading to a moderation in the SHP Index. 

However, overvaluation still dominated nationwide. As of 4Q23, home prices in 90% of the country’s MSAs were overvalued, with 56% of these areas by 10% or more. The top three overvalued MSAs in the U.S. are Memphis, TN-MS-AR; Buffalo-Cheektowaga-Niagara Falls, NY, Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson, IN.

There are early signs of a correction in the U.S. housing market, as indicated by the uptick in both active and new property listings. Challenges such as high mortgage rates and elevated home prices, which aggravate the affordability issue, continue to moderate the pace of this normalization.

In light of Fitch’s Global Economic Outlook (March 2024), Fitch predicts that the Fed will postpone rate cut until its meeting on July 30-31, 2024, which is a delay from the previously anticipated June timeline. Fitch also expects nominal national home prices to decelerate to 0%-3% in 2024 from 5.5% in 2023, as per Fitch’s Global Housing and Mortgage Outlook (December 2023).

Posted in Demographics, Economics, Housing Bubble, National Real Estate | 102 Comments

Fire all the professors

Not real estate related, but had to post this snarky masterpiece:

From The Atlantic:

No One Knows What Universities Are For

Last month, the Pomona College economist Gary N. Smith calculated that the number of tenured and tenure-track professors at his school declined from 1990 to 2022, while the number of administrators nearly sextupled in that period. “Happily, there is a simple solution,” Smith wrote in a droll Washington Post column. In the tradition of Jonathan Swift, his modest proposal called to get rid of all faculty and students at Pomona so that the college could fulfill its destiny as an institution run by and for nonteaching bureaucrats. At the very least, he said, “the elimination of professors and students would greatly improve most colleges’ financial position.”

Administrative growth isn’t unique to Pomona. In 2014, the political scientist Benjamin Ginsberg published The Fall of the Faculty: The Rise of the All-Administrative University and Why It Matters, in which he bemoaned the multi-decade expansion of “administrative blight.” From the early 1990s to 2009, administrative positions at colleges and universities grew 10 times fasterthan tenured-faculty positions, according to Department of Education data. Although administrative positions grew especially quickly at private universities and colleges, public institutions are not immune to the phenomenon. In the University of California system, the number of managers and senior professionals swelled by 60 percent from 2004 to 2014.

How and why did this happen? Some of this growth reflects benign, and perhaps positive, changes to U.S. higher education. More students are applying to college today, and their needs are more diverse than those of previous classes. Today’s students have more documented mental-health challenges. They take out more student loans. Expanded college-sports participation requires more athletic staff. Increased federal regulations require new departments, such as disability offices and quasi-legal investigation teams for sexual-assault complaints. As the modern college has become more complex and multifarious, there are simply more jobs to do. And the need to raise money to pay for those jobs requires larger advancement and alumni-relations offices—meaning even more administration.

But many of these jobs have a reputation for producing little outside of meeting invites. “I often ask myself, What do these people actually do?,” Ginsberg told me last week. “I think they spend much of their day living in an alternate universe called Meeting World. I think if you took every third person with vice associate or assistant in their title, and they disappeared, nobody would notice.”

Complex organizations need to do a lot of different jobs to appease their various stakeholders, and they need to hire people to do those jobs. But there is a value to institutional focus, and the past few months have shown just how destabilizing it is for colleges and universities to not have a clear sense of their priorities or be able to make those priorities transparent to faculty, students, donors, and the broader world. The ultimate problem isn’t just that too many administrators can make college expensive. It’s that too many administrative functions can make college institutionally incoherent.

In an email to me, Smith, the Pomona economist, said the biggest factor driving the growth of college admin was a phenomenon he called empire building. Administrators are emotionally and financially rewarded if they can hire more people beneath them, and those administrators, in time, will want to increase their own status by hiring more people underneath them. Before long, a human pyramid of bureaucrats has formed to take on jobs of dubious utility. And this can lead to an explosion of new mandates that push the broader institution toward confusion and incoherence.

Bureaucratic growth has a shadow self: mandate inflation. More college bureaucrats lead to new mandates for the organization, such as developing new technology in tech-transfer offices, advancing diversity in humanities classes through DEI offices, and ensuring inclusive living standards through student-affairs offices. As these missions become more important to the organization, they require more hires. Over time, new hires may request more responsibility and create new subgroups, which create even more mandates. Before long, a once-focused organization becomes anything but.

In sociology, this sort of muddle has a name. It is goal ambiguity—a state of confusion, or conflicting expectations, for what an organization should do or be. The modern university now has so many different jobs to do that it can be hard to tell what its priorities are, Gabriel Rossman, a sociologist at UCLA, told me. “For example, what is UCLA’s mission?” he said. “Research? Undergraduate teaching? Graduate teaching? Health care? Patents? Development? For a slightly simpler question, what about individual faculty? When I get back to my office, what should I spend my time on: my next article, editing my lecture notes, doing a peer review, doing service, or advancing diversity? Who knows.”

Goal ambiguity might be a natural by-product of modern institutions trying to be everything to everyone. But eventually, they’ll pay the price. Any institution that finds itself promoting a thousand priorities at once may find it difficult to promote any one of them effectively. In a crisis, goal ambiguity may look like fecklessness or hypocrisy.

Posted in Crisis, Economics, Employment | 57 Comments

The Worst Time?

From Kiplinger:

Is This the Worst Time To Buy a Home?

The Federal Reserve is holding interest rates steady, and mortgages are hovering over 7%. House prices are still rising. Housing supply is still not close to meeting demand. 

Is this the worst time to buy a home? Polling shows we’re at a modern low, at least in sentiment. For the second year in a row, over 75% of Americans say it is a bad time to buy a house, according to a Gallup poll released this week

This is a notable low period. Gallup has been asking if it is a good time to buy a home annually since 2005, and also asked the question in 1978, 1991 and 2003. In every single one of those polls up until 2022, at least 50% of people said it was a good time to buy a home. Now, we’re down to only 21% of Americans saying it is a good time to buy a home.

It’s not hard to see why. The housing market is crunching out would-be buyers, between high prices and mortgage rates and low sellers and overall supply. After a brief dip, 30-year mortgage rates continue to average above 7%, according to Freddie Mac, while Redfin reports the median sale price of homes is up 4.8% from last year, continuing a long-standing upward trend of prices. 

So not only are would-be buyers not getting a deal on prices, they’re also getting crushed on mortgage rates. Basically, if you missed out on the heyday of low mortgage rates in 2020-2021, you’ve got a problem if you want to buy a home.

Because mortgage rates are so high, many homeowners are unwilling to move, shrinking the supply of houses on the market. The Kiplinger housing forecasting team believes that inventory of homes for sale will continue to stay low in the near future, pushing home prices higher against the demand. 

That short-term supply issue is compounded by the long-term housing supply issue. The amount of homes in the United States simply has not kept up with population growth. So even if this were a less interest-rate-crunched market, there still wouldn’t be enough houses for the people who need them. 

Meanwhile, we also have a pricing problem. Home prices have risen 2.4 times faster than inflation, according to a recent report from Clever Real Estate. If home prices had kept pace with inflation, the median home would be $177,500 today, per the report. Instead, it’s over $400,000. So if you aren’t already a homeowner who has seen the worth of your home appreciate past inflation, the path to homeownership is that much more difficult. 

Posted in Crisis, Demographics, Economics, Housing Bubble, National Real Estate | 35 Comments

This again?

From Quartz:

‘Fractional home ownership’ wants to fix real estate’s woes. What is it and could it work?

There’s more than one way to own a house these days.

Sites including real estate startup Pacaso are opening up a new market for people looking to own just a fraction of a house — for a fraction of its total price. Instead of laying claim to an entire single-family home, Pacaso sells luxury single-family homes to groups of buyers, a practice known as fractional home ownership. Someone could, for example, own one-eighth of a multi-million dollar mansion in Florida’s coveted Marco Island for just $736,000.

“There is a pressing issue: an affordable housing crisis,” Austin Allison, Pacaso’s CEO and co-founder, said in an emailed statement. The effect of fractional home ownership models like Pacaso’s is two-pronged, he said: They create additional inventory and optimize the use of existing housing to help keep up with demand and improve affordability, he said.

While Pacaso, which was founded in 2020, says it helps ease the affordability burden and supply constraints, it remains a niche part of the real estate market, Bankrate analyst Jeff Ostrowski said. And while it does address supply, he said, the effects are felt more in discretionary markets given that most of its listings are luxury properties.

“The real housing shortage problem is not a shortage of beachfront vacation homes,” Ostrowski said. “It’s a shortage of three-bedroom, two-bathroom homes, near schools and jobs that families can live in.”

Co-buying itself isn’t new: 62% of home buyers said they purchased and share ownership of their home with at least one other person, according to a 2023 report by real estate listing platform Zillow. But the fractional home ownership model as it exists today is aimed at wealthier individuals who are looking for a second home, Ostrowski said, rather than first-time buyers or those who are looking for their primary residence.

“I think this is pretty clearly targeted to the upper-middle class folks,” he said. “People who have enough wealth that they can own their primary home and they can consider buying a second home, but either don’t want to or don’t have the cash to go out and spend $1 million or $2 million on a second home.”

Other models of fractional homeownership have also cropped up allowing investors to own a share of homes much like retail investors can own shares of companies. Sites like Jeff Bezos-backed Arrived, and Fundrise, which received $770 million in financing from JPMorgan Chase, allow people to directly invest in residential real estate.

Kurt Carlton, president and co-founder of the real estate investment marketplace New Western, said these ventures are a net positive for the housing market. With 15.1 million vacant homes in the U.S., accounting for 10.5% of all housing inventory, there is a demonstrated need for innovative models to shore up investment in the sector, particularly when it comes to single-family residential units, he said.

For Carlton, anything that encourages investment in the single-family market is good — but it may not be the future of real estate investing just yet, given that their market share is still small. Instead, he sees the “real winner” as local independent real estate investors who are buying in neighborhoods they know and understand.

“They’re not nonprofits, but they’re completely aligned with the needs of the community in terms of they’re finding vacant inventory, returning it to market, and giving the builders a run for their money right now as well,” Carlton said. “And that’s what we need. We need supply.”

Posted in Demographics, Economics, Housing Bubble, National Real Estate | 47 Comments

To be honest, there are some signs…

From Business Insider:

Home sellers are facing a summer from hell

The past few years were very good to people who decided to sell their homes. The massive relocation shuffle meant most homes hitting the market were the subject of bidding wars. Rich baby boomers jumped in with all-cash offers, and sellers scored huge windfalls as weary buyers pushed prices to new heights. There was no question who had the upper hand.

Now, sellers’ fortunes are changing. Home prices are still rising, at a modest pace, around most of the country, but gone are the days of throwing up a for-sale sign and waiting for the feeding frenzy to begin. As buyers’ options slowly increase, sellers may have to slash asking prices or wait longer for a viable offer to come along. Today’s home shoppers aren’t so willing to pass on inspections or give up other contingency rights to expedite a sale, either. Unlike their predecessors at the height of the pandemic, buyers can now afford to kick the tires before jumping into a deal.

Most painfully, mortgage rates have spiked to 7% from their record lows of less than 3% in 2021, which has not only deterred prospective buyers but also changed the calculus for many sellers. Since most people have to turn around and buy another property to live in, even the ones who profit handsomely off a sale are finding it hard to upgrade their digs, given the increased borrowing costs. It’s shaping up to be a cruel summer for sellers who aren’t ready to come to terms with this new reality.

Of course, it could always be worse. There are no signs that home prices are on the verge of collapse, and more sales are happening now than a year ago. After all, people have to move for a wide variety of life reasons; mortgage rates be damned. The number of homes for sale at any given moment is also growing, which means we’re inching closer to a “normal” market. The Housing Ice Age is slowly thawing.

But the peak months of home selling, which last from the spring into the middle of summer, may come with a rude awakening this year. Those who hoped that lower mortgage rates would grease the wheels of the housing market, nudging more buyers to get off the sidelines and bid up home prices, are realizing that dream scenario won’t come to pass. Sellers may still have an advantage, but it’s getting slimmer.

Posted in Demographics, Economics, Housing Bubble, National Real Estate | 50 Comments

Northeast the strongest?

From Fast Company:

As the Northeast housing market heats up, Florida’s is cooling down

Researchers at John Burns Research and Consulting (JBREC) publicly released the results from their March survey of real estate agents, and it paints an interesting picture.

It aligns with what inventory data has been telling us for months: There’s some softening of the housing market occurring in pockets of Florida and Texas, where active listings are close to pre-pandemic levels, while there’s still a great deal of competitiveness in tight inventory markets in the Northeast, Midwest, and Southern California.

According to the survey, 94% of resale agents in the Northeast said buyers outnumber sellers in their market. Meanwhile, just 30% of resale agents in South Florida said buyers outnumber sellers in their market.

In most markets, homebuyers still outnumber home sellers.

Posted in Demographics, Economics, Housing Bubble, National Real Estate, New Jersey Real Estate | 73 Comments

Not quite the 70s…

From Yahoo Finance:

Return to the ’70s? Today’s housing market has echoes of dark era.

High inflation and a disappointing report on economic growth — followed by a sudden drop in stocks late last month — made for a familiar economic combination.

These conditions were hallmarks of the 1970s, when inflation ran high, leading the Federal Reserve to hike interest rates. The central bank’s measures to tame inflation drove up borrowing costs for real estate developers and ultimately shrunk homebuyers’ purchasing power.

As a result, the housing market stagnated, and the decade itself became synonymous with stagflation, an economic cycle characterized by high inflation, tepid growth, and weak employment, leading to a stagnant economy.

While those trends may sound familiar, the current housing market is resilient. Not to mention, job growth is solid.

The major problem today: a dearth of inventory.

“You could argue that there is weakness in the housing market at the moment, caused by a supply-side shock,” Mark Fleming, chief economist at First American, told Yahoo Finance. “In other words, restriction in the supply of a good, which is causing inflation. … But I wouldn’t say we are in stagflation,” noted Fleming. “The problem isn’t weak demand, it’s weak supply.”

Claudia Sahm, former Fed economist and chief economist at New Century Advisors, LLC, agreed with this sentiment.

“This is not stagflation,” said Sahm. “GDP numbers look soft, but consumer spending is just trucking along. … But we are in this ongoing struggle with inflation, and people call inflation all sorts of things.”

Posted in Demographics, Economics, Employment, Mortgages, National Real Estate | 83 Comments

Hottest markets in NJ right now

From NJ1015:

21 of this spring’s hottest real estate markets are in NJ

Out of 10,770 towns nationwide realtor.com looked at the hottest real estate markets in the country. They calculated the rankings by looking at the number of days properties remained listed on its site before selling and how often people were viewing the homes in any given town.

The results bode well for the Garden State. At least, if you’re a homeowner. Buyers might see this differently.

Of the top 100 hottest markets in the country 21 New Jersey towns made the list. In other words over 20% of the nation’s hottest home selling markets are right here in New Jersey.

98 Clifton $522,500

97 Summit $1,695,000

92 Chatham $1,850,000

84 Voorhees $448,900

81 Pompton Plains $599,000

79 Somerville $505,000

69 Blackwood $355,000

65 Middlesex $520,000

55 Red Bank $599,000

51 Hillsborough $610,000

50 Mount Laurel $404,500

47 Westfield $1,299,500

43 Old Bridge $580,000

35 Marlton $477,450

28 Fair Lawn $687,000

27 Montclair $1,034,000

25 Cherry Hill $562,450

16 Cranford $749,999

15 Ramsey $699,000

11 Ridgewood $1,195,000

8 Fairfield $629,900

Posted in Housing Bubble, New Jersey Real Estate | 69 Comments

Uh oh.. NJ hits peak-warehouse

From NJ Spotlight News:

Warehouse industry reports point to possible slowdown

Recent data from state and industry sources shows a sharp slowing in the number of building permits issued for warehouse construction last year in New Jersey. Those sources also show a new rise in vacancies, and a lower rate of increase in rents for the giant buildings, which have been springing up throughout the state for several years.

Analysts and companies that collect data on the industry say the breakneck pace of growth over the last several years can’t be sustained because supply from developers has already exceeded demand from customers. High interest rates are deterring investors from adding more space and uncertainty over economic growth is sapping confidence in any further expansion, they say.

The data on rents, vacancies and building permits suggest that warehouse tenants are less willing to pay top dollar for space; that more of the vast structures are remaining empty after a frenzy of speculative construction, and that developers are scaling back plans to build more of them.

Industry sources also note that developers continue to feel headwinds from warehouse opponents fighting the buildings at the local level. In the Legislature, two dozen warehouse-related bills first introduced last year now await consideration by lawmakers in response to rising local concern that the buildings are snarling traffic, worsening air quality, and contributing to warehouse “sprawl.”

According to data from New Jersey’s Department of Community Affairs, the area covered by building permits for “storage” buildings — mostly warehouses — in 2023 dropped sharply to 16.2 million square feet, a decline of about half compared with the previous two years, and the lowest level since 2018.

Posted in Economics, Employment, New Development, New Jersey Real Estate | 22 Comments