Most lists of the least affordable metros in America include San Francisco, New York, Boston, and Washington – four cities that share a notable characteristic beyond their hefty housing prices. They all have solid public transit, an asset that should, in theory, allow residents to devote more of their income to housing than would be typical in, say, car-dependent Kansas City. Most housing affordability metrics, however, aren’t good at capturing these local differences. A family with a median income, buying a median home in metro San Francisco, for example, historically devotes more than twice the share of monthly income to housing as a family with a median income, buying a median-priced home, in Atlanta. It suggests that San Franciscans are willing to pay more for housing. Does that willingness mean, by extension, that more housing is within reach of people in San Francisco than we often think? [Read this article]
The post Why Some Expensive Cities May Be More Affordable Than We Think appeared first on The Open Door by Lennar.