I find in my daily chats with people, that the public’s perception of Kirkland Real Estate is a far cry from its reality. So this morning, with one eye open drinking my coffee, I put together some stats for you to bring this point home. I think you will be surprised by this piece I will call “perception vs. reality” which also points out the “housing bubble” area of Kirkland.
For the purpose of these numbers, I have used the mls and not the tax records.
People ask me all of the time in passing, at parties, etc…”How can anyone afford to live in Kirkland?” General perception being that real estate prices in Kirkland are all over a million dollars. That is greatly because the consumer looks at what is for sale. Reality is in what has sold, not what is for sale. We call “for sale” that which has not sold and not particularly reflective of the marketplace.
We will be using an economic forecasting tool called the Rate of Absorption, which is further described in my blog.
Of the 2,042 properties sold in Kirkland (PO) in 2005, only 92, less than 5%, sold over a million dollars.
- 616 (30%) sold for less than $300,000
- 856 (42%) sold between $301,000 and $500,000
- 349 (17%) sold between $501,000 and $750,000
- 129 (6%) sold from $751,000 to a million dollars
- Only 30 properties sold between a million and $1.2 million
- Only 14 properties sold from $1.2 million to $1.3 million
- And 48 properties sold higher than $1.3 million in 2005
Many people think that Kirkland is the town for millionaires. That is because they look at what is for sale creating this “perception vs. reality” issue. Only 2% of homes sold in Kirkland last year sold for $1.3 million or more BUT a whopping 26% of the homes currently for sale are priced over $1.3 million.
Now let’s get to rate of absorption before my client comes to my house to sign an offer on his way to work.
616 properties sold in 2005 under $300,000. 56 properties on market are priced under $300,000. That’s about a one month supply. If it takes a year to sell 616, it should take a month to sell 56.
856 properties sold in 2005 from $301,000 to $500,000. 63 properties are for sale in that range. That’s slightly less than a one month supply.
349 homes sold in 2005 between $501,000 and $750,000. 62 properties are for sale in that range. At a rate of 29 homes sold in a month, it will take about two months to sell 62 (two months supply on market).
Here’s where it gets very interesting (to me anyway).
While only 129 homes sold last year between $751,000 and a million dollars, there are currently 47 for sale. That’s a 4-5 month supply carrying over from last year. Add that to people who list their homes in the next 4-5 months and you have an oversupply.
While only 11 homes sold last year between a million and $1.2 million, there are currently 30 for sale. Let’s call that a 3 month supply.
21 sold from $$1.2 to $1.3 million and 14 are for sale that’s about an 8 month supply coming out the gate into the new year.
And now for the Piece de resistance! !! (apologies to the French)
While only 48 properties sold over $1.3 million…there are currently NINETY (90) N I N E T Y!! for sale!!! That is almost a TWO YEAR supply! I’m not shouting at you, but I find that incredible. Next they’ll be saying the bubble is bursting because there is pressure on this high end! Oh yeah, they already said that just yesterday in the King County Journal.
Yesterday one of my agents posed this question. Her client was buying a condo for $142,500 and was worried about “the bubble bursting”. I have a client today buying a condo for $99,900. Is HIS bubble going to burst? Of course not. Unless you are up in the air in “bubble territory” over a million dollars, you don’t have to worry about the air getting too thin.
Have a good day! If you would like me to find the bubble range in your neighborhood, just ask as a comment, or email me. While Dustin has “dubbed” me “the Kirkland Specialist”, I have actually sold more property outside of Kirkland than in it, at present. I have sold real estate in PA, NJ, FL, Sacramento and L.A. (kind of two states) Seattle and Eastside. So ask any question you like, about any place you like.
Pingback: Seattle’s Rain City Real Estate Guide » Bubble-bursting round-up
Pingback: ShackBlog » 3 Reasons to Use ShackPrices.com
Ardell – your article on Kirkland is really informative. We just moved from MSP. I work downtown and my wife works at Redmond. I have noticed in the last 3 days I went to office at downtown, the traffic on the opposite side, both mornning and evening…amazing, seems like people have bought houses in Seattle and are now commuting into the east side…you might have some stats around that. Anyways, we are trying to find a house, want to spare my wife the commute…however, I want to keep it as close as possible to Seattle….Bellevue, Kirkland and Redmond, all seem to be satured areas, pretty expensive places…any advice.
Kumar, MSP? Minneapolis-St. Paul? As to Eastside communities being “saturated” and expensive, it depends on price range and housing style. No, I do not believe that people who regularly work on the Eastside are buying in Seattle vs. Eastside. I do think that people who lived in Seattle are getting jobs, more and more, on the Eastside without moving across…yet.
The exception being single people who want to live in Downtown, Belltown or Capitol Hill. But by and large, people’s preference is to live on the same side of the bridge where they work.
Personally, I’m a “drive around the lake”, person. It’s such a beautiful drive to take Juanita around to Bothell/Lake City Way and down into Northgate/Greenlake. So from my perspective, I’d say the value for you might be Juanita/Finn Hill/Kenmore, given the fact that your wife works in Redmond and you in Seattle. Lake Washington Schools or Northshore School District, without going too far into North Kenmore or Bothell. There are still good values in all of those areas.
Without knowing your price range…hard to be more specific than that. If your price range is over $450,000, and you don’t have children, my advice would be different.