|
|
| Survey of Market Absorption of Apartments (SOMA) |
|
SURVEY OF MARKET ABSORPTION
Estimates of Absorption Rates
(Privately-financed, nonsubsidized, unfurnished units)
Completions in: 2nd quarter 2003 1st quarter 2003 4th quarter 2003
through through through
1st quarter 2004 4th quarter 2003 3rd quarter 2003
Percent Percent Percent
absorbed Standard absorbed Standard absorbed Standard
Area in 3 months error in 6 months error in 9 months error
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA - - - - - -
Anchorage, AK 96 4.3 100 + 100 +
Atlanta, GA 52 7.2 71 1.4 85 1.6
Augusta-Aiken, GA-SC * * 88 + * *
Austin-San Marcos, TX 59 2.6 71 1.6 83 0.9
Baltimore, MD 66 5.1 89 2.4 96 0.6
Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX 100 + * * 100 +
Bergen-Passaic, NJ * * * * * *
Biloxi-Gulfport-Pascagoula, MS 40 + 55 + * *
Bloomington-Normal, IL 46 + 68 + 76 +
Boston, MA-NH-ME-CT * * 96 10.6 96 9.3
Bridgeport, CT * * - - - -
Brockton, MA - - - - - -
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY - - * * * *
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC 52 10.6 65 5.6 75 6
Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI (IL & IN parts)# # 83 3.1 96 2.2
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN 75 4 83 1.1 87 0.8
Cleveland-Lorain-Elyria, OH * * * * * *
Colorado Springs, CO 87 + 92 + 96 +
Columbus, GA-AL (GA part) * * 66 + 100 +
Dallas, TX 52 10.5 77 6.2 92 0.7
Danbury, CT (part) - - - - - -
Dayton-Springfield, OH * * * * * *
Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO 52 2.8 77 1.4 85 1
Des Moines, IA (part) 83 + 62 + * *
Detroit, MI 42 10.3 75 12.9 87 7.8
Duluth-Superior, MN-WI - - - - - -
Erie, PA - - - - - -
Fargo-Moorhead, ND-MN (ND part) 55 + 75 + 90 +
Fort Lauderdale, FL 80 + 77 + 80 +
Fort Wayne, IN 65 5.5 77 9.3 84 9.1
Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 42 15.3 60 13.6 # #
Galveston-Texas City, TX * * * * * *
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, NC 58 + 98 + 100 +
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, PA - - - - - -
Hartford, CT - - - - - -
Honolulu, HI * * * * - -
Houston, TX & Brazoria, TX 50 1.3 69 3.4 83 2.3
Indianapolis, IN 63 4 83 1.7 90 2.3
Iowa City, IA 57 + 96 + 99 +
Jacksonville, FL 59 5 88 0.6 98 0.9
Kansas City, MO-KS 33 7.5 47 8.6 55 12.6
Kileen-Temple, TX * * * * * *
Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL * * 13 + 19 +
Lansing-East Lansing, MI * * 91 + 98 +
Las Vegas, NV-AZ 77 2.5 85 1.6 93 1.9
Lexington, KY - - - - * *
Lima, OH - - - - - -
Little Rock-North Little Rock, AR 65 + * * * *
Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA 62 12.3 75 7.7 86 6
Louisville, KY-IN 72 + 67 + 81 +
Memphis, TN-AR-MS 48 + 85 + 95 +
Miami, FL 69 13 89 5.5 95 2.5
Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI * * * * 83 +
Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI 59 21.6 88 9.4 91 5.5
Mobile, AL (part) - - * * * *
Modesto, CA * * * * * *
Nassau-Suffolk, NY - - * * * *
Newark, NJ & Middlesex-Somerset-Hunterdn, NJ* * * * 83 +
New Orleans, LA 40 5.3 70 0.9 78 1.4
New York, NY 78 16.6 91 3.3 93 3.9
Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News, VA-NC* * 71 6.6 86 6
Oklahoma City, OK 57 11.7 92 1.5 * *
Orange County, CA 67 3.9 83 2.4 94 +
Orlando, FL 69 6.2 92 1.9 98 0.6
Panama City, FL * * * * * *
Pensacola, FL * * * * * *
Philadelphia, PA-NJ 14 # 93 3.2 90 2
Phoenix-Mesa, AZ 68 2.8 87 1 93 +
Pittsburgh, PA * * - - - -
Portland-Vancouver, OR-WA 47 # 75 3.5 82 5.1
Provo-Orem, UT * * * * * *
Richmond-Petersburg, VA (Richmond part)44 + 75 + 75 +
Riverside-San Bernardino, CA 60 7 94 1.7 97 0.7
Sacramento, CA 76 6 82 6.9 94 5.2
St. Louis, MO-IL 65 # 59 7 * *
Salinas, CA * * - - - -
Salt Lake City-Ogden, UT 46 # * * * *
San Angelo, TX - - - - - -
San Antonio, TX 63 6 79 0.8 90 0.5
San Diego, CA 65 5.7 62 15 66 14.3
San Francisco, CA and Oakland, CA 70 5.9 87 1.5 94 1.3
San Jose, CA 60 3 69 3.8 83 1.7
Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA 49 13.4 77 4 91 2.4
Stockton-Lodi, CA 58 + * * * *
Tacoma, WA 58 + 92 + 71 +
Tallahassee, FL 73 + 90 + 88 +
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 59 2.8 77 2 85 1.2
Toledo, OH 59 + 85 + 98 +
Tucson, AZ 74 2.2 * * * *
Tulsa, OK * * * * - -
Tuscaloosa, AL 83 + 74 + 85 +
Washington, DC-MD-VA-WV 65 7.4 80 4.3 92 1.5
West Palm Beach-Boca Raton, FL 60 3.5 68 2.8 80 1.8
Wichita, KS (part) - - - - - -
* = Data suppressed to prevent disclosure
+ = Estimated to be less than one half of one percent OR cannot be estimated
- = No activity
# = Withheld because the estimate did not meet publication standards because of the associated standard error
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of the Census
Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division
Washington, D.C. 20233-8500
