Houston Area Home Price Trends

[rps324]

There was an article in today's Chronicle about home price trends by subdivision. I don't know if there is a link to it, maybe someone else can figure that out.

There are some variables with the figures, depending upon how many sales there were, if there is a huge variance in the housing stock (new construction & tear downs, on golf course or not, etc), that can affect how accurate the numbers really are in reflecting the pricing trend of the subdivision.

Here were a few areas with their one year price changes from '04 to '05:

Inner loop:

Southampton 21.2%

West U 6.5%

Montrose 21.4%

River Oaks 11.2%

Timbergrove -1.0%

Heights 2.7%

Afton Oaks -0.2%

Memorial area:

Memorial Bend -0.4%

Gaywood 18.3

Hilshire Village -6.9%

First ring suburbs:

Westbury 1.1%

Garden Oaks 2.9%

Sharpstown -0.9%

Garden Villas 15.7%

Glenbrook Valley 12.2%

Suburbs:

Spring Creek Forest -4.7%

Westador -6.8

Candlelight Hills 2.8

Champion Forest 2.8

Memorian NW 2.2

Huntwick -4.0

Woodlands ranged from -1.7 in Windsor Hills to +3.3% in Sterling Ridge.

[Barre]

Linkified

[Original Timmy Chan's]

My neighborhood (South Union) had one of the biggest leaps in value in Harris County, 59%. Apparently we're also one of the cheapest neighborhoods in Houston, as well. That's a surprise, considering some of the crappy neighborhoods in Houston.

Our recent tax appraisal reflected the increase too. According to HCAD our home increased in value by about 50% last year. That's OK...it's still less than half of what a private appraisal has it valued at. Since we're not planning on moving any time in the next 30-40 years, I'm OK with an "undervalued" house.

I wonder...is the low appraisal rate of the neighborhood created in part by the low number of home sales in the neighborhood? Most houses here don't go up for sale...as the original owners have died, the homes are passed on to, and occupied by, the heirs. I assume that it's hard to gauge a market value since there's little to no sales in the neighborhood.

Edited May 8, 2006 by Original Timmy Chan's

[musicman]

I wonder...is the low appraisal rate of the neighborhood created in part by the low number of home sales in the neighborhood? Most houses here don't go up for sale...as the original owners have died, the homes are passed on to, and occupied by, the heirs. I assume that it's hard to gauge a market value since there's little to no sales in the neighborhood.

Last yr when i went to protest, I used data from home sales the first 6 months of 2005 for my protest. I should preface this with this. I met a member of the appraisal board at a bar. Her husband is a judge. She is just does it for "fun". She told me, that the thing to do is take pics of a house that has flaws, basically saying that is doesn't even have to be your house. so i had some pics as well.

But anyway, I presented my HAR data and had the average price /sq ft. then used that average to calculate the supposed priced for mine. The data they had was from houses "in a similar neighborhood" When i questioned what the similar neighborbor, i found out they used an adjacent neighborhood. Of course the county said i didn't have accurate data cause i used data from 2005, not 2004. Of course i pointed out it was more accurate. i told the board members that my data a was from sales in MY neighborhood not a like neighborhood. In the end I believe i accomplished what i wanted. The board raised it 1000. I already know i'm going back this yr. gone up another 10% yet again.

i was look at east side data, looks like idylwood got neg double digits again

Edited May 8, 2006 by musicman

[jm1fd]

I assume that it's hard to gauge a market value since there's little to no sales in the neighborhood.

It is difficult to put a truly accurate price on real estate to begin with since there are SO MANY VARIABLES. A dearth of sales data just makes it all the more difficult.

[lwood]

It is difficult to put a truly accurate price on real estate to begin with since there are SO MANY VARIABLES. A dearth of sales data just makes it all the more difficult.

In the Chronicle's article it's worth seeing how many homes sold in a particular neighborhood and compare that to the total number of homes. When the quantity sold is a small percentage of the total it can really skew the numbers.

[cwrm4]

The only way to do this study accurately is to segregate homes in to three classifications - old and in bad shape/teardown, old and in good shape, and new construction, and then do a two variable regression analysis against lot size price per sq ft and home size price per sq ft. Only then can you really extract meaningful data (over a period of years) about price trends.

However, I suspect such analysis is beyond the staff of the Chron, and, obviously, well beyond comprehension for most of their readers.

As it stands, the "study" is just something to fill space and sell papers.