urbnlivn, a seattle condo & real estate blog

Year of the condo?

February 11th, 2007 · Comments · By Matt

Seattle Times declares this year, The year of the condo in downtown Seattle!

Some of the more notable quotes from the article:

  • Thyer insists that Seattle isn’t like other cities, where developers are struggling with an oversupply of new condos. There’s a demand for condos in downtown Seattle, he says, drawing a contrast with the speculative buying frenzy that has led to a boom-bust scenario elsewhere in the country.
  • More than a dozen residential projects are in some stage of planning. They would add more than 3,000 units downtown if all were built, according to the city’s planning department.
  • Leslie Williams, the president of a local condo-marketing firm, says some developers who had intended to build condos are considering apartments instead. They like the economics of apartments as vacancy rates decline and rents rise.
  • Since 2004, five condominiums totaling about 700 units have been completed in downtown Seattle, an area that includes the retail district, Denny Triangle and Belltown. Those numbers are nearly certain to double and triple by the end of 2009.
  • Twelve condo projects for about 2,100 units are under construction, and several more are expected to start construction this year. Thyer’s development, Olive 8, is scheduled to be completed in fall 2008.
  • Jones estimates that speculators accounted for 30 percent or more of all new condo purchases in Miami and Las Vegas, compared with “no more than 15 percent” in Seattle. Now, developers require buyers to disclose if they intend to live in their new condos in an effort to limit speculators, Jones said.
  • Ten of the 12 condos under construction have sold about 1,200 of the 1,700 units to be built, according to a Jan. 28 report by Seattle real-estate agent Brett Frosaker.
  • “The sweet spot of the market is always the low end. The question is, what’s the low end?” Williams said. “Five years ago, we would have said it’s under $300,000. Now it’s under $1 million. Pretty scary.”

A few thoughts…

I think the inventory numbers might be deceiving because they don’t include conversion and town home inventory. Both categories compete with the condo inventory.

I think that there are more flippers and speculators than the article would like us to believe. Just because you didn’t check off the investor check box doesn’t mean you cannot not occupy your unit and flip it. I would suspect our speculator rate is close to 20%.

I think the author of the article should have dug into Leslie’s comments about the economics favoring apartments over new construction. Just last summer we saw a huge number of quick conversion projects because the economics favored condos over apartments. What’s changed so quickly? Are the developers afraid of a bubble or is something else at play here?

I think we need an article that looks at the demand side of the equation instead of focusing on supply. Just who are these people who can afford $600+/square foot? Are there really that many suburbanities moving downtown? Is there a big influx of hires coming into Google/Amazon/Microsoft? At what point do they get priced out of the market?

Realtor Ben Kakimoto also attended the mentioned Downtown Economic Forum and blogged about it 2007 State of Downtown:

Currently, over 32 condominium projects have been proposed providing 9,000+ new housing units to the downtown area in the next few years. Though, Matthew Gardner, a real estate analyst & economist, expects that only 60% of the proposed projects will be built, a lower estimate than he provided at the Downtown Realtor Symposium this past June.

When asked if there will be an over supply of high-end condos, Gardner didn’t believe so stating that developers have been more cautious compared to other markets and that downtown will likely actualize approximately 5,400 units over the next 4 years. He did mention, however, that the realization of smaller units with higher prices may keep suburbanites away. I’m not an economist, but intuitively, it does seem a reach to believe the buyer pool is large enough to support 1000’s of condos where 1-bedrooms start at $500,000 and 2-bedrooms start at $800,000.

I definitely agree with Ben’s comment. I too am skeptical there is a sustainable market for one bedrooms at $500k+. We’ve heard a number of times that the rising cost is due to the increasing cost of construction. I’d love to see someone dig into this more and look at construction costs over the last ten years and the prediction for the next ten. What are the factors at play causing construction costs to rise so rapidly? What might cause them to fall?

Popularity: 4% [?]

Tags: Seattle Times

Like this blog? Subscribe to new posts via email or via RSS.

Want to start a new discussion? Check out the Urbnlivn Forums.
  • jo
    Population density means jack on it's own.

    I'm originally from Cleveland which has roughly the same density of Seattle...and you can pick up a house for 50k in Cleveland.
  • Chris
    Second thought. Find out what marketing firms work with the developers and learn their assumptions on demand. they may not be correct, but when you go to a bank/fund for 100 million in financing, you better have some good marketing studies to back it up
  • Chris
    Population density of the city is not helpful, the metro area is more informative. LA and SF Bay have very dense metro areas because of land constraints, which helpls bolster prices. Even that only gets you so far. Run a OLS regression on that. Would be curious

    Keep in mind the numbers thrown out are for NEW construction of high-end downtown highrises. Not average across the city or region. The demand of high income individuals relative to supply is the stat you really want Bubble people. Take Seattle's market areafor high end condos - say Alaska to Oregon east to montana, and divide the number of people earning say $200k/year by the number of high-end condos in the market area. Use Fed Reserves Survey of Consumer finances to get the former. Bet you Seattle comes fares well.
  • Ben
    The comparison to population densities to major cities is somewhat irrelevant as those are cities with multi-million people population to tiny Seattle. More useful would be to also integrate housing unit supply among other factors. Nonetheless, I'm skeptical about the demand and available buyer pool for the number of higher priced units under construction. Besides Seattle, Bellevue is building upwards of 1000 million-dollar plus units.
  • This discussion inspired me to do a more detailed comparison of population, land area, and density for these cities and a few more. You can see my full findings in this post.
  • brain
    Land Areas of the cities above (all in km2):

    NYC 785
    Hong Kong 1,104
    San Francisco 121
    Tokyo 2,187
    Vancouver, BC 114

    Chicago 588
    Boston 125
    London 1,579
    Philadelphia 350
    Los Angeles, CA 1,215


    Seattle 217
    Detroit 359
    Cleveland 201
    Milwaukee 249
    San Jose 453

    Sacramento 252
    Las Vegas 293
    Portland 377
    Houston 1,558
    Phoenix 1,231

    Suddenly these places aren't ranked in the same order. And it is amazing to realize how small NYC is compared to some major international cities.
  • brain
    Ummm, these stats would be more useful if someone could post the ratio of people to km2, or 1 person per _____ km2.

    I can walk across the Boston zip codes in 30 minutes if I get walk signs at all the traffic lights. It would take me all freaking day to walk from South Park to Shoreline.
  • That's people per km, by the way.
  • Population Densities of a few cities:

    New York, NY 10,316
    Hong Kong 6,295
    San Francisco, CA 6,111
    Tokyo 5,796
    Vancouver, BC 5,252

    Chicago, IL 4,867
    Boston, MA 4,457
    London 4,761
    Philadelphia, PA 4,202
    Los Angeles, CA 3,165

    Seattle, WA 2,665
    Detroit, MI 2,647
    Cleveland, OH 2,381
    Milwaukee, WI 2,400
    San Jose, CA 2,014

    Sacramento, CA 1,617
    Las Vegas, NV 1,604
    Portland, OR 1,533
    Houston, TX 1,344
    Phoenix, AZ 1,188
  • Bob
    I know Seattle isn't as crowded as the other cities. But I am only looking at the prices and what people are willing to pay until they say, no way. There has to be middle class in those cities and they are using more of their paychecks to cover their mortgages.
  • Donna
    I'm a non-Seattleite who is in the middle of buying a small downtown condo as a vacation home, so maybe I can provide a different perspective. Although I've been following the commentary in this and other blogs and in the press on the future of the Seattle real estate market, and in particular the condo market, I'm still buying. My reasons are as follows: 1) I want it. Seattle is the nearest big city to me. The price per square foot in Vancouver, New York, San Diego, etc., has no relevance for me, because I can't normally get to those places for the weekend. 2) I can afford it. I make a good living, but I'm not spectacularly wealthy. There are many, many, many people who make more than I do. I'm not buying this as an investment, I'm buying it to use. I'm aware there's a risk that the market will decline, but there's nothing I can do about that. I want a place in downtown Seattle, and I'm willing to accept some risk in order to get it. I could rent, but it just wouldn't be the same. It's a purely emotional purchase, but then most luxury purchases are. I bet there are a lot of people like me.
  • EconE
    Per Wikipedia...the population Density of Vancouver is 5252/sq km.
  • Also of interest is this SocketSite (they're a SF real estate blog) that talks about condo inventory in SF: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2007/02/sock...

    They have a lot of available inventory coming online too. I'm thinking more and more it's time to get out of the market and instead rent a condo.
  • What cities do have similar population densities? What's the population density of Vancouver? Do you have a source with more info?
  • In case anyone was actually wondering, but too lazy to look it up, here are the population densities of the aforementioned cities:

    New York: 10,316/km
    Tokyo: 5,796/km
    Hong Kong: 6,295/km
    London: 4,761/km

    Seattle: 2,665/km

    One of these things, is not like the others,
    One of these things, doesn't belong...
  • Matthew
    Comparing New York, Tokyo, Hong Kong and London to Seattle is ludicrous. Do you realize what the population density of those cities as compared to Seattle?
  • Chris
    "Whats changed so quickly?"

    The pipeline for debt financing. Unless you're bringing in a pension fund/hedge fund, etc, financing is becoming really difficult. In seattle, the change seemed to occur around the summer from what I gather from bankers and mortgage brokers.
    the fundamentals haven't changed all that much, but underwriting standards follow the domino effect
  • Bob
    Whether there will be a condo crash depends on supply and demand. But I just think the prices haven't reached the point where most people think are absolutely ridiculous. When I look at the prices in New York, Tokyo, Hong Kong and London where new apartments can routinely fetch $1500 per sqft, Seattle still isn't that expensive but it is getting there.

    Don't underestimate the determination of people who want to own something, no matter how misguided you think they are. It is not impossible to save enough for a down payment before the age of 30. Earning an average of $40k from the age of 21-30 is already enough and many in technology earn much more.
  • brain
    I don't see how one can claim that $1m is the low end of the market. The more I read real estate articles in Seattle (and also the NY Times and Boston Globe) the more I realize that any statistics being bandied about vary from "somewhat accurate" to "no idea where that number got pulled from". This of course happens all the time in other venues, but I feel as though it is far more dangerous economically to be guilty of cloudy numbers when it comes to real estate.
  • Ben
    Just a comment on 2200 - Many have been on the market for awhile, some with several price drops, and they will be there for some time to come as long as sellers expect to realize up to a 60% return which the market won't support. If agents & sellers were more realistic, perhaps 2200 resales would be fairing better. I suspect more developers may turn away from high-end condos...the commercial market is tight at the moment.
  • EconE
    Construction costs did rise when building was at it's peak last summer. Copper, Steel and Concrete prices increased dramatically. Last June...Copper was trading for close to $4 per pound...today it is around $2.50.

    In addition...warehouse stocks for both short and long term are between 2x and 4x the levels that we saw during 2005-2006.

    What does that mean? Construction material prices cost less now. Going to HD or Lowes and telling me that copper pipe and sheetrock are still the same price is a futile argument. The big boys aren't shopping at Lowes. They don't get the department store prices...they get something more in line with "world prices"

    Will 2007 be the year of the condo downtown.

    If we are honest with ourselves I think that we can say no...it won't be...and quite possible some drastic falls. It is just like the 500k+ condos that are out there that you mention.

    I feel that the number of investors was underestimated but only time will tell. All one needs to do is look towards the 2200 westlake project as a barometer that shows how all these condos just aren't selling...nor renting for the prices being asked. I think that this will become a trend. The MLS does not accurately represent the units that are for sale...and it also doesn't reflect the large amount of builders that have units coming on line soon.

    Will 2007 be the year of the condo?

    Lets see what happens when funny money loans dry up and what near term actions are taken globally after this past weekends G7 meeting.
blog comments powered by Disqus