me v 1 - Keller Williams Realtyimages.kw.com/docs/0/0/5/005868/1203370821825_2007_Cost_vs_Val… ·...

Remod-. n;~s~;6?v,flye k-

Report 2007

an agreeme nt with Rem~ 5 ADAPTED FROM REMODELING MAGAZINE Through 2deling, REALTORB Maga 2 :, brings you the average cost recouped for 29 home improvement proiects in nine regions (see page 34),

' E 2 plus city-by-city cost and recoup value data for four of the most F scts (pages 36-37). ~opular proje

Remoderrrrg 1 1 ~agazine's annual "Cost vs. Value Report" shows !rior and replacement projects

bring the biggest return. tlmc (88.1 midra upsca

ceede year-t home ,me v" ; "'6 "'

The gion, em oj --J -

deck

Home rehabbers who are considering a move in the not-too-distant future should focus mostly on exterior upgrades. That's the message from REAL TORS^ who par- ticipated in Remodeling magazine's 20th annual "Cost vs. Value Report," done in cooperation with REALTOR" Magazine.

REALTORS' in 65 markets were given construction specs and costs on 29 upscale and midrange projects and asked to estimate the percentage return at resale.

Of projects that saw national cost recovery rates of more than 80 percent in 2007, only one-a minor kitchen remodel, with 83 percent of cost recovered- was a strictly interior job. The others were an upscale sidinp; replacement using fiber cement materials

percent), a wood deck addition (85.4 percent), nge vinyl siding replacement (83.2 percent), and le vinyl and midrange wood window replace-

ments (81 percent and 81.2 percent, respective! On most projects, the value of remodeling .

down in 2007 compared with 2006. No pro - d an 88 percent return. The likely culprits for the

:o-year drop: rising remodeling costs and slowing appreciation brought on by the lackluster hous-

.arket in many areas. story was somewha

however, where REA F more than 100 percent for six projects: a wooa addition, : tchen remodel, fiber, t minor ki

.t different LTORS* esti

; in the Pa imated cos

H New this year! FREE CITY REPORTS once YOU register at WWMCOS~

Y). trended ject ex- - .

cific re- h recov- . 1

siding replacement, wood window replacement, and . -- upscale wood and vinyl window replacement.

Nationally, projects at the bottom of the cost-recovery ladder included home office remodels (57 percent), installing i erator (58 percent), 2

adding a r 59.1 percent). s back-up : nid-range I

power gen sunroom (

chen remc :y've consi: ects, accor

tnd

number I

nsiderably :--Ae--- L

rial averag o the sum

7 . F

Put costs ana values in context Looked at over a 3f years, some projects

appear to recoup co: less than others. Home office remodels, for ilawlce. llave been at or near the bottom of the natio~ es since 2005 when project was added b ey. People investing i home office typically ao so to nll a specific need, sucl. -- to start a home-based business or telecommute. A prospective buyer with different space needs won't see the value, regardless of the cost. On the other hand, since minor kit ~dels were added to the report in 2004, the stently ranked among the highest- value proj ,ding to practitioners surveyed.

When looking at cost estimates for individual projects, remember that averaging tends to have a leveling effect on job cost data. Also, seemingly small differences in project size and scope, or in the quality of finishes, can dramatically affect h a 1 project cost.

It's also important to consider whether a remodeled space reduces the perceived number of rooms or avail-

See page 34

the in a h as

I . A map on the slte shows cost comparisons by region.

lue ~ l o m ~ a g 32 UOS. P a Survey changes arrect res Report 20071 able square footage. For example, carving a half-bath Some of the volatility in year-to-year comparisc

out of unused storage space under a staircase is an obvi- results from two changes to the survey itself The h ous gain in usable space. But converting an existing a general overhaul of the project descriptions and c bedroom into a master bath, while a positive devel- estimates, begun in 2006 and completed this y a - . opment in many respects, may reduce the number of bedrooms below the minimum expectation of some prospective buyers.

Similarly, the cost recouped on a given remodeling project depends on a wide variety of factors. These include the condition of the rest of a house, the value of similar homes nearby, and the rate at which property values are ch&'ging in the surrounding area. A home's urban, suburban, or rural setting also affects its value, as does the availability and cost of new and existing homes in the immediate vicinity.

Finally, there can be wide regional swings. A midrange bathroom remodel recovers 85 percent of its cost in the South but only 63 percent in the Midwest.

Where resale value is a major factor in a home owner's decision to remodel, the best course of action is to con- sult with a local remodeler about construction cost- and look closely at the amps and market conditions.

These changes resulted in cost increases larger than would have resulted simply from rising labor and material costs, notably for major kitchen remodels, b projects, and siding replacements. The construct costs are more accurate than in previous years, butt combine with slower home appreciation to creat lower percentage in the value column.

The second change began in 2002 with the introd tion of higher-priced upscale versions of some proje Although the range of costs thus created made report more useful, it impacted year-over-year comI isons. While the trend of core projects turned dow 2003, the trend for a l l projects peaked in 2005 be1 turning downward.

As we continue to survey all 29 projects, we e q trend data to become more reliable. Until then, most useful comparisons are of national data for sir projects and of regional cost and value differences.

ath ion

hey P 0

.UC-

cts. the )ar- I in Fore

Iect the lgle

EM

REGIONAL NEW ENGLAND MIDDLE ATLANTIC SOUTH ATLANTIC I EAST NORTH CENTRAL I EAST SOUTH CENTRAL I 2007 AVERAGES CT, MA, ME, NH. RI, VT NJ. NY, PA CC.DE,R,GA, MO, NC,SC.VA.W IL, IN, MI, OH, WI AL, KY, MS, TN

ADDITIONS Job Resale Cost Cost Value Recouped

Ifillfl:?&llM-

L Ren

3 r

~~~IIDI:~:IQM I

AnicPedm0.m- .$48.98? $37,584 76.7%. 1$50,845 ...$3 3,?27-..-65:3%.- .&%[email protected]. ... ~ ! 6 7 3 ~ . ? , 5 s ~ a v b ? 0 s - 3 9 ~ 4 9 .... 60.8 .-

REPLACE h.rllBl:~LlO[el3.l

Roofing

I8lSSU:lU

!?Kfing 37,396-.. 2?,016-.. 64 .2 .... .. 37,613. $ 1 1 6 9 9 j 6 , ~ g ~ 2 0 , 5 8 8 563 , -1:5-~ sidin€d!!?e!:E!E!!t) 12~!82L!O!_32Ss8625- '148--8.% -12?43>81-82,4-~~~-31!5777g3,6,6 siding~foam-backed"!n~!)-13d~~--1~517 84:8_.- .-13~359_. 1!,536---821~----J~,4044-1J1p40.9~6~6- -..-L- ~--__1_245 86.1

- Kin!dows (vinyl) 13-9* .__.~ 11,47c'--8?!4.- 7 9 L - 8 0 - l 4 , ~ 9 - - ~ 0 , 2 1 2 71.5 55 2L351 10,152 82.2 Windows (wood) 17,729 13,682 77.2 ,334 77.2 18,271 12,922 70.7 1 16,195 12,989 80.2

107 by Hanley Wood LLC. Republication or redissemination of the Report is expressly prohibited without written permission of Hanley Wood LC. Cost vs. Valueis a registered trademark of Hanley Wm

Job Resale Cost Cost Value Recouped

7cdekngs Cost vs.

1 R E A I

I

_$41.44!.~$32,635_ .?8.8%~]._$49,8~~$34!20~PPPP68~5%.~.~$411686 5 1 5 1 9 1 2 7 9 809.-. 1.. 62.801 .-38.398. 6 1 . 1 . .

Value Report 02C

L T O R B M i

Back:~p.power.gepe?e~tOr .-.-rrr.. $13759 ... _$<317. _5?.2%


$34.822. . .83._5% 52969-~-42!694_80.6--

Igazine D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 7

-$14.27_-$6,687_-_ 4 6 . 9 % ..39,522 ... 22z74 .-... 57.6

14,559.~ 12,155 ......~+5--:1 25,826 16L221-- -.62,8

Bathroom ........ 16.302 . _Q,19?... . . 74.8 ...I ...16,983..... 12,025 . 708.~ ... . 14,M5..~. 11.388 . 7 8 . 8 16.631 .... 11.141.._g0. .

- 1 LLC.

n a g

Bathmom . . .. .. 38,617 .... 5A37~.. ...65.9 .. 1 .40.290 ...22.313. 55.4... . 1 33,236 . 22,670 68.?__. $14043.. .$7.602 54.1% -

Deek.(wo.q 10,634 8,972 ~84.4 .... 1.. 10.6!6 .... 8,861 ...-. 83.1) ..... 1 ... 9:?66.. . _7.936 85:6 1~-10,516--~540~_.~1.7_-


Home.?ffi~e .......... ~ ~ .........- ~ 2Tm"05,39?.~. 55:7..

-$12.06! 48,097 -67.1%

.-.9140 8358-91


.$12,2_q8._- $8,018---65.2%9/.. --

- -

Majo~kitchen-_ 43,848 .- ./7.7 Minor kitchen 18.507 86.0

R8l*YwLlM-

..?8,176.. .!?,866 ... 22.8 ... 1...25,438 ...~!5,209 59.8 ...

. ..33,349~.. . .??.631...- 67O

Famil~roo!! 81.931 5?,713~.~..661K...I. 84!340L 5?.154~~~.~6!:8. 1 70,867 .... 51L004 .~.72.~-~-.83~494.I511630ooo61.8-..~11~0,777777777777_5~~6~~-.9~~ Game -. ... 55,598 .... 37.067 66.7. . .l.~ 56,653.. 34.958 . -61.7 ..13183.-. 36,790~ .74.8-.- _-_569?90..33,P80_.-58.8-. . .-47>543- -35,894_-7

I_. ?8.305_.J4,007-49.5

Ma*e!.suite ~~..- 1023741..-707175 68:3 .... 1~105!978.-_64.675 6l:o...I 88,680 64,549 ... 72.8 104.666 ..... @0?!.~._61.1..... ..-88,~-_65.052.--7333333-._

. .!%750..-4!!427_-.!1.7 -..I- 52,659 ...-. 41,766.-. 79.3 .... :~

Sunmom.-- 71,064 . . . .. -. 41,289~ . 58.1L-~I. 72,728. 4_1,?%Cj6.8. _(~_65.43~22,025 ._-_6~~2 -72,??6-27,833.-_52,32,32,3III65,273-~40,764_4_.62,52,5~-- 1

Two-story 143,298 105,475 73.6 148,578 98,882 66.6 127.072 99,464 78.3 146,337 95.364 65.2 126,860 96,759 76.3 U8ISXUi1U-

EthrOo 67J23--49,982.--74:5 !!eck~(com.ps!t -_14,240-~1,39~-800 Garagerage-- _23!65-522_14-7P,9 Master suite 204,833 136,125 66.5

..P6t988.._3Zs656 6 9 . 5 . 52,839 32,458 -..-- 61.4~-_ 47 ,036~35,840, 76L2__- 104,893 78.008 74.4 1 ' '111,953- 74,497 66.5 (105,421 81,498 77.3

Bathroo'!-.- -~ 33,?15.

21,908 16,859 77.0 57,496.-_400704PPP 70x:z[152,3_56 42249888811c

53,598 .3?,304 6 0 . 3 .

20,221 16,727 82.7 21,863 16,010 73.2

Major kitchen ... -. 54,689 76.7 1 ~ 112,721 76,672 68.0

20,412 17.341 85.0

About the survey Construction cost estimates for the 2007 Cost vs. Value Report come from HomeTech Information Systems (~hometechonline.com), a remodeling estimating software company based in Bethesda, Md., which regularly collects current cost information from a nationwide network of remodeling contractors and suppliers and applies an adjust- ment factor to account for regional pricing variations. Construction cost figures include labor, material, subtrades, and contractor overhead and profit.

Over the last two years, project specifications and estimating templates have been updated to clarify dimensions,

modify material specs, and ensure that special requirements such as laying tile on the diagonal were properly accounted for. In some cases, this process resulted in prices that are higher than what would be expected from price inflation alone. Although such pricing adjustments affect year-over-year price comparisons, all of the values in the 2007 Cost vs. Value Report are based on the refreshed prices, which we consider to be more accurate than before.

For each project, the value data are aggregated from estimates provided by members of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS'. E-mail surveys containing project descriptions, construction costs, and median home price data for each city were sent to more than 100,000 appraisers, sales associates, and brokers. Survey respondents were asked to use this information to estimate the value that the remodeling projects would add to the house at resale in the current market, assuming that the project was recently completed.

The survey took place over eight weeks in July and August 200% The survey was administrated by Specpan

(www.specpan.com), an Indianapolis-based market research company specializing in business-to-business Web- based surveys.

For the national averages, the confidence level is 95 percent +/-2 percent based on 2,770 survey respondents. This means that 95 percent of the time, natic ley will fall within 2 percent of either side of the results of this year's survey.

WEST NORTH CENTRAL WEST SOUTH CENTRAL MOUNTAIN IA. KS. MN, MO, NE, ND, SD AR, LA, OK, TX AZ, CO, ID. MT. NM. UT. NV, WY AK. CA, HI, OR. WA I Job Resale Cost Job Resale Cost Job Resale Cost Job Resale Cost Cost Value Recouped Cost Value Recouped Cost Value Recouped Cost Value Recouped

$13.993 . _$7,088. 50.7% .$12.052 $8,198.--68.0%... $.12.916 ..... $7,311 ~.. ..56&%_ .$15,220 $9,681 63.6%_ 38,995 21 ,980 .. .. 56.4 32,482 .... 24,558 ..... ~75.6... . 35,480.L24,239 68:3 . 43,884 . 36,657.~. 8 3 . 5 ..... 10,546.L 7,928 ..!5.?. PJ82.~. -7,859.. ..85:6 .. los!!? P 2 4 4 86.3..- - L. 12,812 13,836_-.!0820QQQQ 83,999 .... 47,654 57.3 70,029 .... 5 3 4 2 . ... !!:5.. . 76,068 ..... 51,781 68111111 .~.92,710 ..... 78,647 g . 8 .... 56,163 ... 32,538 -. . 57.9~~ .. .- -47.529 _- 34,842 . 733 . . 53. ,270 ... 32557.. 70.5._.1.. 63,485 55,839 88.0 .... 103J31.. WON. .. - 3 9 . . 87,122 62.480.. 7 1 7 . .?56...~~Si121. , 6 8 7 [::135-. . l 0 1 2 2 ~ . 87.2~ .~72.1?3-392165 54.3 34,219- W o k - - -58.9 68,27?-37,240_-4.5 78,055.--54,1l--.. 69.4__ 145,657 95.097 65.3 124,183 94,623 76.2 134,132 99,632 74.3 1160.637 146.021 909

'mag December 2 0 0 7

Projects with highest national pt age of cost recouped (see pages

88% lent

Window replace ' $ . - &- W (wood)

83% Kitchen remodel

; I ' (minor)

NATIONAL 2007 AVERAGES

ADDITIONS Job Resale ---. Cost Value Recouoed

Cnct

~~~-

Masteruite ~~-~... 98,863 6 8 , 1 7 2 .... . 69.0...~~. S""O!?~. -_-- ~ -. -69.817 ---.- P ! Z ---... 59.1- Twc 139,297 103.010 73.9

l l l Y Bat 73,145 .... 50,44? 69.O . -

Dec 15203% ---. 11.67i?-.-7776--- Gar.6. .--_____.-- _8_2:!08~-53cO56-64.6--. Master suite 220,149 141,12C -

REMODELS l~~IlD1:Ji~flICl A%F"om . . $46,691 . $35571 76.6%- Baseme". .-.. ?,435..-%2!~!. ..~ 75.1 Bathroom . . . . . . . ...... -.!5,789.. -12,366 78.3 !!!om office-.~ .... ............ ..~2?!9L.~~Ss4?~888888~?Oooo .

Maior.K*chen.- ..~ .--55:503 ..._ 43!363.-_ 78.1 ..... Minor kitchen 21,185 17,576 83.0

III%Y6?:14 Bat~room - - _- __- 50.590 35,588 68.4-- Major kitchen 109,394 81,096 74 1

REPLACE! Ilriliwi:rijs[etr-

RO?"g .~ .- $18.042..-$12.166 .. ..~67.4%_. Siding. ... ~ _. 9919. .._P,245 83:2 ..... Windowsjvinyl) . . !0,1?48 8.290-.-/9.3 Windom (wood) 11,384 9,241 81.2

4llaYu~le- I_ Roofing 33,151 ... 21.769 . 65.7.~.._ siding (fiber-cement) 13,21?1?1116331188~1 ading(foam:backed~in~I).--1?&32 2.2..2 9t668.-I?17--. Windows_(vinyl)~. ~.-.-.L3,4~PP_14?l_3_38~.?P Windows (wood) 17,383 13,784 79.3

Renmdek

Cost@vanue Report 200'

Siding replacement (upscale) THE SPECS Replace 1,250 square feet of existing siding with new

4/4 and 5/4 trim using either fiber-cement board Middle Atlantic $13,359 JllA95 ,10.676 $8.861 83%

. _ A ! P _ a ! ! ~ ~ I l r L - _ 1 S L 3 3 7 ~ . ~ 1 0 ~ ~ 10209.-8,278_-_81.1 -__A!e~!ownLP'-.~j.?34 _!!,060 2a3---~~P.8

10,561 6,531 61.8 E~g !o ,NY~- . ! 3~416 -~1 ,~5_~ HarrLsbu~g, Pa. 13,031 9,078 69.7 9,484 41422 -67.7

New York 13.921 15.899~..- 114.2 --~.068LJ?&??3-_19Z!. i 11.099 10,026 90.3 .~ I$!adelph@--131387p12.?S2---95.3-. .. .. Pittsburgh 13,189 32,012 91.1 10,248 9,914 96.7

South Atlantic $12,910 $a536 $9,266 $7,936 86% Baltimore 12,980 10.223 - 9,712 -- . 7.895-81.3 . .

--Wa~h!~pt~?,PL-!3~4111--~1C4Otr~~. 10,260 10,067 98.1 -.... ---.-

-- Wilmin@oQeL~-l~122PP1212Q333 _lo,2??-8,?64__.E At!!n!a.-_l3046_--14!4!? it'?:?- __-PJ46_ 9513---9?_6

Columb!aL$& [email protected]!Z?---23:3 ??L'@! 78694---26:1 --Ja@so~i!!e, FIa. g1821- -10,221 3 7 88865---5810_ o_o_-.. 76.8

Miami 13,142 11,563 ~ - 88.0 -- 9,759 ----~ 8,432 .- 86.2 --....6 63-1. ---8,642--.P~?8!_-1?*:'

.-2%~_d0~~!~~.-J_2~&14~_11L71?~--?~3_ ?~%1--8,2!1~8?:8 721 Rale$hLNL---121F,46--9Z44--- ~ , 0 8 8 - 6 , ! ? 5 8 ! - 4 . 9

Richmond, Va. .~ 12,734 14,109 110.8 8.553 ~~ 7,171 83.8 Tampa, Fla. 13,084 13.180 100.7 9,961 8,655 86.9

East North Central $13,404 $11,040 82% $10,516 $7.540 72% Chicago 13,981 14,107 100.9 12,242 11,538--.95? --

~-~n~nati.-13,?_5L10P86--.7P-1-1.-1-1 998p_0 p_o-.p_o 7,3?8_IZ_5?! 10,667 7,611 71.4 ~!!~~!~nd-_131394.--?J166667?L 9,572 .___.. 5.470 ..

57.1 @!!mbu~oh~-_13~zo! 1009~OOO~831C .-. .. 11,588 6,757 58.3 -__-Oet'oitit1%!i?L2?LB 6gf0_ .____.-

. - ~ a _ n d ~ a p _ i d s ~ u ~ ~ _ - ~ ~ ~ o ~ 2 ~ 9 . ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . _-9,482-_6,998-.-!3,8_ 63.0 ~.!ndiana~~!!~~13J9L--9?6l---J1.7- 1!?,215-..~-6,437

.--Madiso?,.Wi~~r3,~OL~1??L3_!O!L8ss 10264.--8t37L-_81.6216 Milwaukee 13,558 11,974 88.3 10.813 7,291 67.4

West North Central $l3,406 $11.002 82% $10,546 $7,928 75%

- -Oe~~~!n".10~a_-13~167~?_o~5_O0~~7K-~-9~568--~~5_Q5.~~8-4 Kansas - ---.--. City 13,548 9,576 70.7 !!,!?3L..7,665 --.-- 29-5

12,154 8,460 69.6 -M innea~~ ! i s__ . .~ l 3~B511~ !?45 - - - ! ! ~~ - ____.... - ...

.-.--.----.st:~~u~s ~ 6 4 6 11.451 EL ~ ~ 2 3 ~ 8,aii Z ~ P Wichita. Kan. 12,820 12,237 95.4 8,731 7,200 82.5

East South Central $12,982 $12,145 94% $9,140 $8,358 91% Birmingham, ... ~ Ala. 13,104 10,742 - 9 4 6 8 8 , 0 9 3 85.5

Memphis, Tenn. 13.031 13,531 103.8 9,235 9,147 99.0 West South Central $12,898 $12,023 93% 1 $9.182 $7,859 86% 1

Tulsa, Okla. 12,671 9,825 77.5 8,593 6,796 79.1 Mountain $13,114 $10,834 83% 1 $10.717 $9,244 86% 1

Pacific $13,637 $13,766 101% $12.812 $1 8% I 13,262 : Los An.%@!?les_ 13!5?8 14445L5106,3- !trO 11,909 ~0~!!3!Lo!e?.13,604 .-.44 12L553-3-B2-3- ~ 16.9

>a_c'a_m_e!!%3!ifL_!3645-~3JPoo- _1OO!L .--~~06-,.~ -2% &G!e~-_1336.5.3 l ? l ? Z ? L ..-. 93L 12,879_--!3!!3!!--l0!04

- S ~ " ' ~ @ S C O - ~ ~ L ? 13,166 960 --135@ 17,665 130.8 Seattle 13,610 15991 117.5 12.205 14701 17nA

I . ~ ~ - -.,. -- ,

essly pmhi6ded without written permission of Hanley Wood LLC. Cost w. Value is a registered trademark of Hanley Wood LLC.

Magazine D e c e m b e r

~ a a ~ u e Report 2007 i :

New England $11,697 $9,514 81% $21.516 $18,507 86% ..-. .... .---- Boston 13.321 - 11.385- 85.5- 22,889 20.056 87.6 . .--...

k!i?g!o": "t: .-._ 9!44P__ .._?,'??5- L4.6.. 19*?23-..16,702 86.0 HarHo!d~..Con~_!?!51_7_ .... _.._7_ 1 0 3 4 8!?. ........ ??,?78 18,775 55_...5. 842

a?chestes-N,tl, ..... ...-.6 77?5PPPPPPP~.741~~ ..... ... i 20n3--.15.165 73.1 Providence, R.I. 12,551 10,937 87.1 22,258 21,837 98.1

1 Middle Atlantic $12.026 $9.793 81% 1 $21.908 $16,859 77% 1

Window replacement (wood) THE SPECS Replace 10 existing 3-by-5-foot double-hung windows with insulated wood replacement windows, exterior clad in vinyl or aluminum. Wrap existing exterior trim as required to match. Do not disturb existing 'I interior trim.

I South Atlantic $10.242 $8.226 80% 1 $20.221 $16,727 83% - Baltimore -- ... 10!608-~-8:!!47_.-. _. S!??.. 20,787 ...... 16.171 - . 728

Wa5hin@oncD:C__.-~11:!?84 .~ .... 9,278 83.7.. ....... 3 ! 0 9 17,280 .......... 81.9 Wi'!!NgP":De!: 1115PL 9,588 83.0- 21*631_-.. .!51967 Z Z Z . Z 7 3 4

.. . Atlanta 10,895 9,448 86L 20213 ..... 2 0 . 3 2 2 ~ ........ 9%

Columbia. s:G_.. .. 9,030 5,971 2?6.! 19,351 14,324 74.0 .--Ja~k_~on~i!le~F!a~ Pr85L_.P,393 64.9 .......... 19,576 ...... 14,879~ !6:0

~ 20,575 ...... 19,517 94.9 Mia"L_1063'? 10.199 P5.9.. ..... Norfolk: "a; ... ..9!53* 7?20 ... -- -73.6 !Y!! ...... 3 6 Q 9 _~..~!o:l

................ Orlando, F'a. 10,222 -..--.89031 7S.6.. 0 ! 2 5 8 ~7,2?Sssssss~SI~ -.__~a~~Bh,N.,C, P:189 6?P4 2.4- 19!!04.--147246-~24.6.

. Richmond, ........ Va. 9,524 ....... 8 j 4 L 87.6.~ 19.510 18!4% ...... 2 4 . 8 Tampa, Fla. 10,794 9,706 89.9 20.527 18,654 90.9

I East North Central $U,146 88,758 72% 1 $21.863 $16,010 73%

I Kitchen remodel (minor) m-, West North Central $121046 $8,550 71% $21,672 $169089 74%

........ Des MoinesL!qwa--10,9!8 ?4?3 .-~.6?.4.. 20,838 ... 15,257 73.2 ... ...... KansasCitY 12,613 ....... 8,486 67.3.. ~.2?,140 15,229 68.8

.- 23,204 12722 76.4

. . Minneapolis 14,019.-_9,993_.--11:33 St.Lguis,~ .... _1?.,685-. -8,910 ....... ~-70.2 .-: 22@9 15.786 71.5

Wichita. Ka? ,--. 9,933 3940 19.9 20.107 16.450 81.8 East South Central $10.437 $8,424 81% $20,412 $17,341 85%

.... ....... Birm!?gh!m,A!a: 10,935 7,391 676- 20,953 16,129 _9-9... 77.0 . . . . . . . . ---Knoxvil!%Te??,- . . 9,588 - . 9,294 2-5.9- 19:69!? 19,254 ~ 9 7 . 8

_____L?uis"i!'e~.K~-. .19,740.-.~8,072 ...75:2.. 0,458-._15,?04. _.--IZ.! Memphis. Tenn. 10.486 8,938 85.2 20,545 18,078 88.0

West South Central $10.174 $8212 81% $20,029 $17,694 88% ..... Dal las . . 10,039 Z053.- 70.3- 19905 14,643 73.6

_Ho_~_'tsto? 10!5!9_- -8,975 ........ 85.3 .... 20,195 18:79?.-. 23.1 ........ ---New Orlean~__lo~75!? 8,611 -ll.....l 80.1.. 20~36?-_~8.639-- -91.5

....... sari Antonio 10,17? 9,851~ ._96!- ..~ ?0,12L.-l9,!?8 95.1 Tulsa, Okla. 9,390 6,572 70.0 19,561 17,268 88.3

www.REALTOR.org/ rea l tormag December 2007 REALTOR@ M a g a z i n e rn 37

me v 1 - Keller Williams Realtyimages.kw.com/docs/0/0/5/005868/1203370821825_2007_Cost_vs_Val… ·...

Documents

Transcript of me v 1 - Keller Williams Realtyimages.kw.com/docs/0/0/5/005868/1203370821825_2007_Cost_vs_Val… ·...