This Place Sure Has Changed: Which Cities Have Changed the Most?

A MagnifyMoney analysis looks at a decade of data to determine which communities are undergoing dynamic transformations, and which are standing still.

The cities that have changed the most in 10 years

“This place has changed” is a refrain you often hear from a city’s longtime residents. But change is a curious, inconstant thing; as some communities undergo great transformations, others seem frozen in time.

MagnifyMoney looked at nine elements of local change from 2006-2016 among the 50 largest metros in the United States, creating a Change Score (0-100) for each. The score factors in such measures as the changes in commute times, income, house prices, crime rates, building permits and more.

Change isn’t necessarily a good or bad thing. Big growth in commute times and rents can be negative, but they can also be a function of positive developments like job and income growth. Similarly, places without as much change could be more attractive to people working their way up the salary ladder or those retirees on fixed incomes, offering more affordable housing and less congestion.

But change often brings underlying challenges to the forefront, prompting communities to make tough calls on things that could hamper positive transformations going forward, like diversification of industries, infrastructure investment and tax policy.

MagnifyMoney is highlighting these places to encourage discussion in communities dealing with rapid change.

1. Austin, Texas (90.4). Austin is a magnet for change, with the fastest job growth in the nation (+40% since 2006), 60% of residents moving since 2010, and a 54% rise in house prices since 2006, the most of the 50 metros ranked. Relatively lower living costs than tech centers like the San Francisco Bay Area and Seattle, along with a combination of satellite offices of larger tech companies, a burgeoning startup scene and no state income tax all contribute to Austin’s change leadership. The lowest-ranked element of Austin growth, building permits (No. 25 of 50), explains some of the outsize housing price appreciation.
2. Dallas-Fort Worth (89.7). Dallas isn’t tops for change in any of the nine categories we looked at, but it ranks high because it’s in the top 10 for five categories, and ranks no lower than No. 19 (growth in rent, at 31% since 2006) for any single category. Dallas-Fort Worth’s top rank is for the decline in its crime rate, No. 4 (and down 43% from 2006).
3. Houston (86.2). Houston rounds out the trio of big Texas cities at the top of the change list, led by housing factors. It ranks No. 2 for house price appreciation, at 38% from 2006, and No. 3 for building permit expansion. It lags on crime rate change (-27% from 2006), on which it ranked No. 23 of 50 metros.
4. Nashville, Tenn. (84.8). Ranking fifth in the nation for employment growth (24%) and building permit expansion, Nashville is the most changed city outside Texas in our ranking. In all, 53% of Nashville residents report moving since 2010, and median nominal income is up 26% from 2006. More challenging, median rent growth has far outpaced income growth, up 38% since 2006.
5. Tie: Portland, Ore., and Denver (83.9). Income, rent and commute times are where Portland ranks highest for change. Portland’s median rent of $1,158 a month is up 52% from 2006, while median income is up 31%, an impressive figure, but one that leaves many stretched in the face of rapidly rising rents. Commute times are up 12% on average from 10 years ago. As for Denver, its story is one of rising housing costs outpacing big job growth. It ranks No. 2 for rent increases of 60% and No. 3 for house price increases of 35% in 10 years. Employment growth of 23% ranked No. 6, while income growth of 31% also ranked No. 6 of the 50 metros examined.

Places that changed the least

50. Birmingham, Ala. (61.1) Birmingham ranks in the bottom half of change for all nine metrics we analyzed, and notably lags in employment growth, at 3% in the 10 years between 2006 and 2016. House prices, a double-edged sword, are down 2% from their 2006 level as of 2016, while commute times are identical to levels seen at the start of the 10-year period.

49. Milwaukee (61.7) Milwaukee also lags in employment growth, at 4% in 10 years, but it’s one of the few areas where rent growth hasn’t significantly outpaced income growth, with median rent up 19% in 10 years (while incomes rose 15% over the same period).

48. New Orleans (63.4) While New Orleans is third from the bottom in terms of change, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, it has made big progress in one key metric; employment is up 30% since 2006, giving this city a No. 3 ranking among the 50 largest metros for growth. Where it lags is in metrics where too much change is a negative: rent growth and commute-time growth. Median rent in the New Orleans area is up 17% in 10 years, ranking No. 48 out of 50, while commute times are up just 1%, ranking No. 47.

What about the tech-heavy Bay Area?

With the rapid growth of tech companies in the last decade or so, there is some expectation that San Francisco and San Jose, the two metros that comprise the greater Bay Area, would rank higher on change than Nos. 24 and 10, respectively.

They are ranked Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, on income, Nos. 2 and 1 on commute-time growth, and Nos. 5 and 1 on rent growth, indicating significant shifts. The median income in San Francisco, the Peninsula, Marin and East Bay is up 37% in 10 years, while in the South Bay (San Jose) it’s up 36%, both leading the metros in our ranking.

Meanwhile, commute times increased 18% across both the San Francisco and San Jose metros, also ranked No. 1 of 50 metros, on top of already high levels of congestion from the peak of the last business cycle.

But house prices, while setting records and sitting among the most expensive in the country, have not grown as much over 10 years as other metros like Dallas, Houston, and Austin, which had less of a run-up during the housing boom of the mid-2000s.

San Jose ranked No. 20 for house price growth since 2006, while San Francisco ranked No. 47, using an index that accounts for all communities in the metro, not just desirable suburbs and neighborhoods that have seen outsize appreciation. And crime rates have not declined as rapidly in the Bay Area as in other parts of the country, further limiting change rankings, with San Francisco ranking No. 44 for change in its crime rate.

Ranking Highlights

Commute times

% change in commute times, 2006 – 2016

1. San Francisco +18%
2. San Jose + 18%
3. Los Angeles +12%
4. Boston +12%
5. Portland +12%

Employment

Employment change, 2006 – 2016

1. Austin +40%
2. Raleigh +32%
3. New Orleans +30%
4. San Antonio +29%
5. Nashville +24%

Income

Median income change, 2006 – 2016

1. San Francisco +37%
2. San Jose +36%
3. Austin +34%
4. Oklahoma City +31%
5. Portland +31%

House prices

House price index change, 2006 – 2016

1. Austin +54%
2. Houston +38%
3. Denver +35%
4. Las Vegas -34%
5. Dallas +32%

Rent

% change in median rent, 2006-2016

1. San Jose +68%
2. Denver +60%
3. Seattle +55%
4. Portland +52%
5. San Francisco +49%

Recent moves

% of residents who moved into their residence in 2010 or later

1. Las Vegas 66%
2. Phoenix 61%
3. Austin 60%
4. Orlando 58%
5. Denver 56%

Median age

Change in median age of residents, 2006 – 2016

1. Riverside, Calif. +3.4 years
2. Phoenix +2.8 years
3. Sacramento, Calif. +2.6 years
4. Detroit +2.4 years
5. Los Angeles +2.3 years

Methodology

We looked at nine factors to assess change, including:

• Commute times — the percentage change in average commute times reported for each metro area in the U.S. Census American Community Survey, released in September 2017 and covering 2006-2016.
• Building permits — The number of residential building permits issued, 2007-2016, as a percentage of the 2006 base of households, using data from the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
• Median age — The change in median age of residents, 2006-2016, via the American Community Survey.
• Employment — The percentage change in people employed from 2006-2016, via the American Community Survey.
• Income — The percentage change in nominal median household income, 2006-2016, via the American Community Survey.
• House prices — The percentage change in the nominal house price index, 2006-2016, via the Federal Housing Finance Agency.
• Rent — The percentage change in median rent from 2006 – 2016, via the American Community Survey.
• Crime rate — The percentage change in the crime rate from 2006-2016, via the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting program.
• Recent moves — The percentage of residents who moved into their current residence in 2010 or later, via the American Community Survey.

Ranks for each of the nine factors were evenly weighted to create a Change Score for each metro, from 0-100, with 100 representing the top score.