Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1 Nashville
2 Portland
3 Austin
4 San Francisco
5 Denver
6 Seattle
7 San Jose
8 Salt Lake City
9 Raleigh
10 San Diego
Quote:
Methodology
Rankings are based on an analysis of the change that each metro experienced across the following ten housing market and demographic metrics:
Total population
Homeownership rate
Median home value
Median rent
Share of building permits comprised of multi-family
Share of population identified as white
Share of adult population with a college degree
Share of households earning $100,000 or more
Share of households that include a married couple
Share of households with children under 18
All data comes from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 1-year estimates, with the exception of building permits data, which comes from the Census’ Building Permits Survey. For each metric — again with the exception of building permits — we compare the 2010 estimate to the estimate for 2018, the most recent data currently available...
Nashville sure did change this decade and going into the 2020s it will change even more.. for the better. However, I do think that they need to watch their rent prices because Nashville companies could easily move to Raleigh or Atlanta if it becomes more expensive.
Nashville sure did change this decade and going into the 2020s it will change even more.. for the better. However, I do think that they need to watch their rent prices because Nashville companies could easily move to Raleigh or Atlanta if it becomes more expensive.
Location: That star on your map in the middle of the East Coast, DMV
8,128 posts, read 7,550,614 times
Reputation: 5785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubb Rubb
I mean, change could be good or bad.
Yea it could. Seattle I agree with being high as well as some others.
But I'm not sure how you can say the DC metro area isn't one of the 10 metros that saw the most "change" over 2010's either. It probably "changed" more this decade than it did between 2000-2010.
SF metro as an example I'm not sure how much "change" should be considered over 2010-2020, outside of gentrification and a shrinking white and black population. One could call it diversifying I suppose. I understand it has a booming economy, but I'm not sure if it's changed 4th most a metro. With San Jose metro I could see that.
But on this list I see they are talking about residential housing, if this encompassed infrastructure and other impactful events that helped "change" these metro areas the last 10, then it would look a lot different.
Nashville sure did change this decade and going into the 2020s it will change even more.. for the better. However, I do think that they need to watch their rent prices because Nashville companies could easily move to Raleigh or Atlanta if it becomes more expensive.
Dallas is more likely than any of the cities mentioned here.
Dallas has more professional workers and lower rent and no state income tax.
I'm already getting job opps from companies that are moving teams from San Fran to Dallas.
Though i have my beefs with Dallas, I honestly don't get the appeal of Nashville, it's kind of a monoculture. Tennessee also pays way worse than Texas.
Totally agree. Change for change sake isn't good. Someone's "good" can be someone else's "bad". It can be pretty relative. Nevertheless, I love Nashville and see a bright future. BUT, as one poster said, they REALLY need to keep an eye on their COL (not just rent). Nashville's overall COL is 97.80% of the national average, but the metro's housing prices are 120.46% of the national average, puting their purchasing power 12.24% worse than the national average (in relation to their average salary per the national average). It's in an "acceptable" range now, but when a metro gets to 133% of the national average or higher, it's considered unaffordable and there is no going back. Wages and inflation won't ever be able to bring it into an affordable alignment again. So Nashville's leaders really have to watch this or they will become like Portland, Seattle, and Denver: Once affordable areas than became unaffordable due to poor fiscal and political decisions. Don't create the storm, then whine when it rains.
One of the most flawed methodologies and inconclusive rankings I've ever seen.
Some of these metrics may actually indicate the opposite of "change". A city that blocks all housing and new development despite demand will cause an increase in home values/rents. So even though nothing actually changed in the city, it somehow ranks higher?
Also, why is there no metric on building permits (#, units, GSF, etc.) other than the ratio of single-family to multi-family? Population growth is not a substitute, especially in high-priced metros where young people increasingly must live with their parents, apartments/single-family homes are chopped up to accommodate more residents, or strangers must co-habitate.
Lastly, is "change" good or bad, positive or negative?
Another huge win for Nashville. This proves its emerging into a city that is a major player on the national stage.
This isn't something you "win".
Change for the sake of change is not a good thing. Look at the 10 metrics. Only two are positive (household income and college education). The rest are either neutral or negative:
Total population
Homeownership rate
Median home value
Median rent
Share of building permits comprised of multi-family
Share of population identified as white
Share of households that include a married couple
Share of households with children under 18
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.