Jacksonville just cracked this list at #25 of Top 25 Housing Markets for 2021 by Realtor.com:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-is-the-top-housing-market-in-the-country-heading-into-2021-hint-its-not-san-francisco-11607352356 (https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-is-the-top-housing-market-in-the-country-heading-into-2021-hint-its-not-san-francisco-11607352356)
Other Florida markets on the list are Sarasota (#17), Melbourne (#19), Tampa/St. Pete (#20) and Orlando (#21).
#1 is Sacramento, CA, benefiting from a work-from-home tech exodus from high priced San Francisco (2 hours away) and being a stable state capitol.
I think this is mostly propelled by home sales in St. Johns County next door, rather than Jacksonville proper. Although, it's entirely possible that as the half-cents start rolling in and the plan to improve DCPS takes effect, we'll start seeing more movement into Jacksonville itself.
Quote from: marcuscnelson on December 07, 2020, 12:39:00 PM
I think this is mostly propelled by home sales in St. Johns County next door, rather than Jacksonville proper. Although, it's entirely possible that as the half-cents start rolling in and the plan to improve DCPS takes effect, we'll start seeing more movement into Jacksonville itself.
St. Johns is hot but so are our beaches, San Marco, Riverside, and Springfield from what I hear. I just spoke with someone who bought a house in Mandarin this summer and they said there were 4 or more offers the day it was listed. This was after they had made multiple offers on other Mandarin homes and were outbid. They lucked out on this house when the seller called them after the first accepted offer failed to get financing.
I know of some others who have had the same experience in Duval County, such as between Downtown and the beaches or St. Johns County line. With record low interest rates and many northerners now looking to Florida, including the Jacksonville area per Realtors I have spoken with, I think most all areas are benefiting right now although Nassau and St. Johns might be a few degrees hotter.
"Entry level" houses under $300,000 seem to be the hottest price range of all as aging millennials (one article said they outnumber baby boomers in numbers by 2 to 1 so a huge demographic) wish to start families. Many are projecting that demand will outstrip supply for years to come.
Apartments continue to sprout up like wild flowers in Downtown, Southside, East Baymeadows and Bartram Park/Flagler Center, etc. Jax is getting its fair share of growth. It's just a bit more cultural diverse and dense, when compared to the new growth taking place in the surrounding counties.
Plenty of action in suburbia too...
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 07, 2020, 12:53:05 PM
"Entry level" houses under $300,000 seem to be the hottest price range of all as aging millennials (one article said they outnumber baby boomers in numbers by 2 to 1 so a huge demographic) wish to start families. Many are projecting that demand will outstrip supply for years to come.
There's about a few million more millenials than boomers.
The majority of boomers will have retired by.... well, really soon. Could be now but probably 2023-ish.
I don't doubt that there will be demand for years driven by demographics. I'm more curious how things shake out once all those boomers start dieing and their SFHs go onto the market.
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on December 10, 2020, 11:28:10 AM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 07, 2020, 12:53:05 PM
"Entry level" houses under $300,000 seem to be the hottest price range of all as aging millennials (one article said they outnumber baby boomers in numbers by 2 to 1 so a huge demographic) wish to start families. Many are projecting that demand will outstrip supply for years to come.
There's about a few million more millennials than boomers.
The majority of boomers will have retired by.... well, really soon. Could be now but probably 2023-ish.
I don't doubt that there will be demand for years driven by demographics. I'm more curious how things shake out once all those boomers start dying and their SFHs go onto the market.
Given our multi-century growing population trend of both the US and globally, I would expect that there will continue to be ever larger numbers of people looking for housing to replace those among us perishing ;D. With that, I am more concerned with my own prospects more than those of the housing market! LOL.
Looks like the region's local housing market is on fire through November:
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/residential-real-estate-inventory-hits-2020-low-point (https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/residential-real-estate-inventory-hits-2020-low-point)
I live on the westside, and a surprising number of new developments have been popping up in 200's. Even in established neighborhoods like Hyde Park, individual lots that have sat empty for years are being built up.
I actually work for a real estate marketing company, and I've been doing a nationwide survey of real estate agents for the last month. Low housing inventory is definitely the top concern among agents even more so than Covid.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 10, 2020, 01:10:57 PM
Quote from: bl8jaxnative on December 10, 2020, 11:28:10 AM
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 07, 2020, 12:53:05 PM
"Entry level" houses under $300,000 seem to be the hottest price range of all as aging millennials (one article said they outnumber baby boomers in numbers by 2 to 1 so a huge demographic) wish to start families. Many are projecting that demand will outstrip supply for years to come.
There's about a few million more millennials than boomers.
The majority of boomers will have retired by.... well, really soon. Could be now but probably 2023-ish.
I don't doubt that there will be demand for years driven by demographics. I'm more curious how things shake out once all those boomers start dying and their SFHs go onto the market.
Given our multi-century growing population trend of both the US and globally, I would expect that there will continue to be ever larger numbers of people looking for housing to replace those among us perishing ;D. With that, I am more concerned with my own prospects more than those of the housing market! LOL.
Hard to believe but within 20 years most baby boomers will be gone.
Florida is booming and it seems like covid, work from home and corresponding regulations are just speeding up the exodus of businesses and people to places like Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, the Carolinas, Arizona and Texas.
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 10, 2020, 01:10:57 PM
Given our multi-century growing population trend of both the US and globally, I would expect that there will continue to be ever larger numbers of people looking for housing to replace those among us perishing ;D.
With all due respect, that's not a thing. That growth is driven by demographics. Specially 18-35 years olds because they're the ones have kids.
The western world is falling off a demographic cliff that can't be undone. Heck, most of the world is treading water and even on the path to shrink. It's increasingly looking like the world ill hit peak people ( think peak oil ) in a generation or two.
BTW - China or Brasil is already older than the US. The other is about to be soon, too. I can't remember which off the top of my head. Those demo graphical imbalances are going to cause huge problems especially for china.
Excerpt from a really interesting article...
https://quillette.com/2020/12/11/the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it/
QuoteTo say the geopolitical and economic consequences of this fact will be profound is an understatement. The Gates research further darkens the already bleak picture painted last year by two Canadian researchers, Darrell Bricker and John Ibbitson, in their insightful and carefully documented book, Empty Planet: The Shock of Global Population Decline. They warn:
The great defining event of the twenty-first century—one of the great defining events in human history—will occur in three decades, give or take, when the global population starts to decline. Once that decline begins, it will never end. We do not face the challenge of a population bomb, but of a population bust—a relentless, generation-after-generation culling of the human herd. [emphasis added]
The Gates scholars agree with the Empty Planet scenario, marking 2064 as humanity's demographic high-water mark at just 9.73 billion human souls, short of the long predicted 10 billion. Academic demographers are not given to hyperbole. The unsustainability at work here is extreme. The Gates team explains:
The number of global citizens under five years of age will fall from 681 million in 2017 to 401 million in 2100, a 41 percent drop.
The number of over 80-year-olds will soar from 141 million in 2017 to 866 million in 2100, a whopping 514 percent increase.
^ I understand that fewer younger people will be "supporting" greater numbers of older people. I won't be around in 2100 unless they solve the aging process but I am going to project that technology will help solve this concern. It's also possible, with improved medicine, that people remain productive later into their lives as we have already seen in modern times.
Aside from that, I am not sure a declining population is all that bad. It's clear that too many people are causing a major degradation of our environment, especially as expanding populations have demanded more food, energy and land for housing while producing ever increasing piles of waste. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the destruction of the Brazilian rain forest. Our planet has only so much capacity to support our way of life, whatever that limit is. So it is inevitable that population will begin to decline at some point. The only question is when and how - by voluntary and controlled steps or involuntarily, by a catastrophic crossing over the line (could that be global warming or some other irreversible damage to the planet?).
Soooo... you didn't read the article....
Interesting article, but I will need to look into the various organizations cited. The bio-blurb of the primary author is concerning:
Quote
Glenn T. Stanton is the director of global family formation studies at Focus on the Family in Colorado Springs, CO
Focus on the Family is a fundamentalist Christian organization whose teachings and politics are based on "six pillars" including:
"The Permanence of Marriage - to serve both the public and private good as the basic building block of human civilization. Marriage is intended by God to be a thriving, lifelong relationship between a man and a woman"
"The Value of Children - We believe that children are a heritage from God and a blessing from His hand."
"Sanctity of Human Life - from conception to natural death" and "We don't believe that it's wrong to prevent fertilization, but we oppose any method of so-called birth control that functions as an abortifacient (any method that acts after fertilization to end a human life by preventing implantation in the womb)."
"The Value of Male and Female" - they oppose any recognition of same-sex relationships
Above from the Focus on the Family website https://www.focusonthefamily.com/about/foundational-values/
From Wikipedia's Focus on the Family
Quote
Focus on the Family promotes creationism,[6] abstinence-only sex education,[7] adoption only by heterosexuals,[8] school prayer, and traditional gender roles. It opposes pre-marital sex, pornography, drugs, gambling, divorce, and abortion. It lobbies against LGBT rights, including LGBT adoption, LGBT parenting, and same-sex marriage.[9]
sources:
6 - Padian, Kevin (January–April 2006), "The Dover Victory", Reports of the National Center for Science Education, Berkeley, CA, 26 (1–2): 49–50, ISSN 2158-818X, archived from the original on April 20, 2015, retrieved May 6, 2014; Wallace, Tim (2007) [Originally published 2005], "Five Major Evolutionist Misconceptions about Evolution", The True.Origin Archive, Hergiswil, Switzerland: Tim Wallace, archived from the original on March 21, 2015, retrieved April 25, 2011.
7 - Alters, Brian (January–April 2006), "'Ties' to Canada", Reports of the National Center for Science Education, Berkeley, CA, 26 (1–2): 51–52, ISSN 2158-818X, archived from the original on April 20, 2015, retrieved May 6, 2014
8 - Focus on the Family Issue Analysts, "Our Position (Adoption)", Focus on the Family, archived from the original on December 3, 2013, retrieved April 10, 2014; Culver, Virginia (February 5, 2002), "Adoption plan stirs controversy Gays applaud doctors' stance; Focus on Family denounces it", The Denver Post; Draper, Electa, "Adoption initiative halves numbers of kids needing families", The Denver Post, archived from the original on August 12, 2014, retrieved April 10, 2014.
9 - [1] Archived April 5, 2010, at the Wayback Machine SPLC on anti-gay groups.
No doubt the author comes at the subject from a particular perspective... but the main point that I gather is the narrative that humans are destroying the planet may be a bit of an exaggeration... humans are actually taking better care of the environment than ever before... couple that with the coming population decreases... things ain't as bad as some have you think...
"things ain't as some have you think" - except the author says the population decline ("cratering") he foresees will be catastrophic. He also says of climate change "that fears of a climate apocalypse are unfounded." He also claims that modern agriculture produces enough food to feed 10 Billion people, compared with the world population of just under 8 Billion. A couple of questions about this claim: 1. Does he support the massive realignment of economic systems, especially in the USA and other capitalist countries, to more equitably distribute this "overabundance" of food? 2. At what dietary level is this possible? I seriously doubt that everyone can eat at the level common in developed countries. Will people in the USA and wealthy countries have to adopt the subsistence diets common in much of the world?
Urban housing prices now going up as people take a second look at cities following vaccine rollouts. Are we seeing this in Jax?
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/housing-prices-booming-u-cities-120001312.html (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/housing-prices-booming-u-cities-120001312.html)
(https://finance.yahoo.com/news/housing-prices-booming-u-cities-120001312.html)
Quote
Maybe you've heard: The pandemic is killing cities, fueling a rush to spacious houses in the suburbs. But beyond pricey New York and San Francisco, real estate demand is booming in downtowns across America.
From Pittsburgh to Detroit and Phoenix, condos and townhouses within stumbling distance of bars and restaurants are hot. Like the families now upgrading to bigger suburban homes, young white-collar workers are taking advantage of record-low mortgage rates and flexible remote-work policies to move to desirable cities with relative affordability.
Home prices in urban U.S. markets rose 15% in the three months through late January, slightly ahead of the annual pace in suburbia, according to data from brokerage Redfin, based on geographic designations developed by the Census Bureau. It's a shift from early in the pandemic, when prices were lagging behind outer areas or even falling, a sign that Covid-19 vaccines are helping to fuel demand as nightlife makes its return....
(https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/UKp4rdpJClGct.7cSXMY.Q--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtoPTU3Ni4yOTYyOTYyOTYyOTYz/https://s.yimg.com/uu/api/res/1.2/GjgGtqnTrTO6dLf7Do1O0A--~B/aD03Nzg7dz0xMjk2O2FwcGlkPXl0YWNoeW9u/https://media.zenfs.com/en/bloomberg_markets_842/4224acfe743f0ef7a54591549d8a92de)
Urban Jax is an apples to oranges comparison to NYC (where there has been an oversupply for quite a few years of higher end housing construction), where there have been pockets of price depreciation. Frankly NYC has been the driver of a depression in 'urban' housing prices in 2020, a narrative that some lazy and/or clueless media members have pushed but isn't necessarily true. Most of urban Chicago, San Francisco haven't really seen price drops en masse... but the marketing times of existing inventory has increased. Most urban housing pricing is still either stable or increasing nationwide.
Housing prices in Jax have continued to climb throughout the pandemic... and that's as true of 'urban' neighborhoods like San Marco, Springfield, Riverside (and even investment properties in Eastside, New Springfield and Brentwood that have been scooped up by out of town investors with shockingly low cap rates).. as it has been for the scattered for-sale inventory at Berkman, San Marco Place, Peninsula and Churchwell.
https://www.noradarealestate.com/blog/san-francisco-real-estate-market/
The median price for a single-family home in San Francisco was $1,581,000 in December, down 6.9% MTM and up 9.0% YTY.