Rockford as the top real estate market in the US

One source suggests affordable housing plus job opportunities means Rockford has a lively real estate market:

Photo by Erik Mclean on Pexels.com

ROCKFORD — The city is now home to the top real estate market in the country, according to a new ranking released Thursday by the Wall Street Journal and Realtor.com.

The housing market ranking evaluates the real estate market and economic health of the 200 most populous metro areas in the country. The Rockford metro area was the only one in Illinois to crack the Top 50. Peoria landed at 59.

“It’s a great validation of what we’re seeing locally in the market with our year-over-year price increases, hitting our record highs,” said Conor Brown, CEO of the NorthWest Illinois Alliance of Realtors. “We know we’re such an affordable market, but we have seen an influx of people from Chicagoland and elsewhere coming into the market being so impressed with how much they can buy, and they’re really helping drive the prices.”

The new report is a major turnaround from one released by the Wall Street Journal a decade ago, when Rockford was declared the underwater mortgage capital of America. At that time, about 32% of the metro area’s homes were valued at less than the money owed on the mortgage.

Now, the city is being praised for an affordable housing stock and growing health care, aerospace and logistics industries.

Several things strike me as interesting in this ranking and reaction:

  1. An important part of the story is that the city/real estate market was not doing well not too long ago. This is not just about things improving; it is also about coming back from challenges.
  2. Increasing housing prices is seen as a good sign. Do these rising prices also make it more difficult for some to find housing?
  3. Missing from this story is any mention of the population. Rockford’s population is roughly flat over the last two decades. Is Rockford growing? Or growing in certain areas (like particular sectors or neighborhoods or communities)?
  4. Proximity to Chicago appears to be a positive factor. Do these people commute to the Chicago region or need to be in the office infrequently? Is Rockford seeing an influx of remote workers?
  5. How long can such a streak continue? Rockford can have the hottest market at the moment but it could be surpassed by other places or the local market could cool off. What does the narrative become then?

Aging and complex infrastructure, losing over 1 billion gallons of water

Rockford, Illinois is likely not alone in such problems: losing lots of water in a complex city system.

But city meters show just 5.1 billion gallons made it to customers. That means 1.3 billion gallons of water were lost last year alone. That’s enough water to fill 1,968 Olympic-size swimming pools or 10.4 billion water bottles…

Water loss is a challenge that plagues water utilities across the nation, some of which are also battling a dwindling or damaged water supply because of climate change. As temperatures across the United States rose over the past decade because of climate change, heavy runoff led to a deterioration of source water quality in some areas of the country, damaged water utility infrastructure in others and brought on drought in the West that crippled water supplies, according to the American Water Works Association.

A consultant with specialized equipment that “listens” to pipes and can detect changes in frequency identified the locations of at least 39 previously undetected leaks after monitoring 250 miles of pipe across the southwest quadrant of the city. Some of the city’s oldest infrastructure is located in that area, Saunders said.

Eight service lines were leaking 70 gallons per minute, four water mains were leaking 60 gallons per minute, 18 valves were leaking 51 gallons per minute and nine hydrants were leaking 9 gallons per minute. The previously unreported leaks were repaired, preventing an estimated 99.8 million gallons of water a year from leaking out of the Rockford distribution system.

What is a few hundred million gallons of water here and there? Infrastructure is not typically sexy but replacing aging systems – think water, gas, electricity, mass transit, and more – is necessary while also time-consuming and expensive.

I’m wondering why it took so long to try to reduce these leaks. Would an electric company or gas company accept such a percentage of lost product? Water is a unique product in the US. On the consumer end, it is probably much too cheap – it encourages overuse and waste. Does the same thing happen on the municipal end?