I’ve been showing houses to a number of buyers lately and a frequent comment I hear is surprise at the number of vacant homes we encounter during our viewings. I’ve discussed this subject on the blog in the past so I thought an update to my “vacancy” table was in order. The last time I updated this table was in July of this year. [See July’s and May’s numbers]
The table below shows the proportions of Vacant/Owner-Occupied/Tenant-Occupied residential listings for various MLS areas in the Reno/Sparks area. The table is sorted by Vacancy rate - highest to lowest.
| MLS Area | Vacant | Owner | Tenant |
| Southeast | 55% | 31% | 14% |
| Northwest | 54% | 37% | 9% |
| North | 53% | 33% | 14% |
| Somersett | 45% | 45% | 10% |
| Old Southwest | 44% | 50% | 6% |
| Sparks - East | 41% | 51% | 8% |
| Sparks | 40% | 48% | 12% |
| Southwest | 37% | 60% | 3% |
| North Valleys | 37% | 55% | 8% |
| Spanish Springs | 35% | 60% | 5% |
| South Meadows | 35% | 55% | 10% |
| Southwest Suburban | 34% | 66% | 0% |
| Sparks - Suburban | 34% | 61% | 5% |
| South Suburban | 32% | 64% | 4% |
| West Southwest | 22% | 75% | 3% |
| Old South Suburban | 21% | 74% | 5% |
Vacancy rates increased across the board since July, except for the Southwest Suburban MLS area, which saw a slight decrease in its proportion of vacant listings (from 37% to 34%). The Southeast Reno MLS area again tops the list with a 55% vacant listings rate. Add to that a 14% tenant-occupied rate for the area and that leaves just 31% of listed homes as owner-occupied.
Sparks and Spanish Springs saw big increases in their proportions of vacant listing since July. For example, the proportion of vacant listings in Sparks–East jumped from 33% in July to 41% today.
In previous posts, I have mentioned the overall vacant listing rate for all of Reno-Sparks. Today that number is 38% (up from 34% in July). But considering that Reno has three times the number of listings that Sparks has (3,424 to 1,102, at the moment); I decided to run the numbers for each city. Comparing all Sparks to all Reno yields the following results:
| Vacant | Owner | Tenant | |
| All Reno | 39% | 54% | 7% |
| All Sparks | 36% | 58% | 6% |
| Entire MLS | 38% | 55% | 7% |
As always, unlisted builder inventory is not included in the numbers above.
Data courtesy of NNRMLS October 2007.
7 comments
Guy wrote, “As always, unlisted builder inventory is not included in the numbers above.” I beg to question, HOW much builder inventory isn’t listed, especially in the 89523 zip. Not much has been surprising me in this R.E. market, but this gave me pause.
According to the MLS, there are 2 homes on Laurel RIdge for sale,one looks like an REO. The county assessor site has over a dozen homes on the same street, all built and sitting, held by Toll Brothers. Ditto on Graysburg and TImaru Trail, but not as high of volume.
Countrywide Mortgage REO site had a “glitch” in their REO positng last week. It was quickly revised. The site usually has around 13,000+ REOs listed throughout the country. The day of the glitch, it jumped to 195,000. Speculation is the entire list of homes in the foreclosure process, not yet REO’s hit the list. Countrywide insisted it was all in error.
I don’t subscribe to any conspiracy crap, nor accuse anyone of nefarious activities. I support free enterprise, but the homeseller and homebuyer need think about what the market is going to be like if all this pent up inventory hits at once.
NAS stated “the homeseller and homebuyer need think about what the market is going to be like if all this pent up inventory hits at once.”
They have. And the response is, “I don’t need to sell if I have to price my property at fmv.”
My response is I’ll tell you what; [given I’m renting and have no pressure to buy], let’s see who blinks first.
This is why I think it’s going to very interesting in about 18 months; especially if the number of vacant listings increases.
I’m looking to buy in about 12 to 14 months…… that’s assuming that the sellers have come to grips with reality.
38% total vacancy? WOW.
There are a LOT of owners/sellers paying $2, $3, $4,000/mo in carrying costs, probably hoping for a miracle next spring.
Sad story about a housing foreclosure casualty down in Texas …
http://blondesense.blogspot.com/2007/10/lengthy-standoff-ends-in-spring-with.html
oops - should have posted the original story link - http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5244051.html
Mike Z wrote “There are a LOT of owners/sellers paying $2, $3, $4,000/mo in carrying costs, probably hoping for a miracle next spring.”
Well here’s one in St. James Village paying a whole lot more hoping for a renter who will pay $3,985/month: http://reno.craigslist.org/apa/463226719.html . Brand new, 1.22 acres, 5,000 square feet and vacant!
I guess Dickson Realty couldn’t sell this beast and now it’s acting as a leasing agent. Does anyone know what this home was listed for?