Building Boom or Bust: Which Metros Are Building Enough Housing?

The simplest explanation for the housing affordability crisis is also the most fundamental: we're not building enough homes. But this national story obscures enormous variation at the metro level. Some metros are permitting new housing at 20x the rate of others. The correlation between building activity and housing affordability is not subtle — it's one of the clearest relationships in all of housing economics.

21.4

Permits per 1K residents (The Villages, FL)

0.6

Permits per 1K (Peoria, IL / Springfield, MA)

36x

Gap between most and least active builders

The Top 20 Builders

Measured by building permits issued per 1,000 residents, these are the metros building at the fastest rate in the country:

Rank	Metro	Permits/1K Pop	Total Permits	Population	SF/MF Split
1	The Villages, FL	21.4	3,961	185,292	Almost all SF
2	Punta Gorda, FL	20.1	4,585	228,629	Mostly SF
3	Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL	18.7	15,411	825,635	Mixed
4	Idaho Falls, ID	17.7	2,546	143,522	Mostly SF
5	St. George, UT	17.2	3,152	182,957	Mixed
6	Ocala, FL	15.5	6,729	433,564	Mostly SF
7	Sherman-Denison, TX	15.0	2,142	142,356	Mostly SF
8	Daphne-Fairhope, AL	14.5	3,883	267,416	Mixed
9	North Port-Sarasota, FL	14.5	14,938	1,032,496	Mixed
10	Crestview-Fort Walton Beach, FL	13.5	4,151	308,599	Mixed
11	Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL	13.4	10,384	776,495	Mixed
12	Asheville, NC	12.9	5,378	416,835	Mixed
13	Homosassa Springs, FL	12.7	2,443	191,635	Mostly SF
14	Bozeman, MT	12.3	1,706	138,191	Mixed
15	Hilton Head Island, SC	11.9	3,046	255,009	Mixed
16	Panama City Beach, FL	11.9	2,690	226,938	Mixed
17	Bowling Green, KY	11.7	2,305	196,844	Mixed
18	Provo-Orem, UT	11.6	6,428	554,735	Mixed
19	Boise City, ID	11.4	9,063	796,560	Mixed
20	Greeley, CO	10.6	3,468	326,514	Mixed

The Florida Domination

8 of the top 20 building metros are in Florida. The state's combination of strong population growth, permissive zoning, no state income tax, and available land creates conditions for prolific construction. And it's working: Florida's fastest-building metros — Cape Coral, North Port-Sarasota, and Tampa — are among the only major Sun Belt markets where rents are actually declining (see Where Rents Are Rising Fastest).

The Bottom 20: Not Building at All

At the other extreme, these metros (population >200,000) are building at rates far too low to maintain existing housing stock, let alone accommodate growth:

Rank	Metro	Permits/1K Pop	Total Permits	Population	Median Home Price
1	Peoria, IL	0.6	230	388,550	$160,600
2	Springfield, MA	0.6	443	700,572	$177,200
3	Youngstown-Warren, OH	0.6	274	472,672	$149,700
4	Waterbury-Shelton, CT	0.7	317	457,553	$327,000
5	Utica-Rome, NY	0.9	271	313,935	$173,300
6	Flint, MI	1.0	420	415,138	$181,600
7	Rockford, IL	1.0	336	342,195	$169,500
8	Reading, PA	1.0	397	413,167	$261,200
9	Scranton–Wilkes-Barre, PA	1.0	596	597,437	$189,500
10	Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA	1.0	259	250,645	$1,011,300

⚠️ The Santa Cruz Paradox

Most low-building metros on this list are declining Rust Belt cities where low construction reflects low demand. But Santa Cruz is the glaring exception: the 3rd least affordable metro in America (9.57x price-to-income) permits just 1.0 units per 1,000 residents. This is a pure supply failure — enormous demand, virtually no building, and skyrocketing prices as a result.

Two Types of Low Builders

The bottom 20 contains two fundamentally different kinds of metros:

1. Declining Markets (Low Demand → Low Building)

Peoria, Youngstown, Flint, Rockford — these are shrinking metros with aging housing stock, population loss, and limited economic growth. Low permitting reflects reality: there isn't enough demand to justify new construction. Prices remain low ($149,700 in Youngstown) precisely because existing supply is adequate.

2. Constrained Markets (High Demand → Blocked Building)

Santa Cruz, Waterbury-Shelton, and similar metros have strong demand but regulatory, geographic, or political barriers to construction. These are where low permitting directly causes high prices. The solution here isn't demand stimulation — it's removing building barriers.

The Supply-Price Relationship

The data strongly supports the intuitive connection between building and affordability:

Among metros with permits/capita above 10 per 1,000: average price-to-income ratio of ~4.5x
Among metros with permits/capita below 2 per 1,000: average price-to-income ratio of ~3.5x (dragged down by low-demand metros)
Among high-demand metros with permits below 2/1,000: average price-to-income ratio of ~7.0x+

The lesson: building works. When demand is high and construction keeps pace, prices moderate. When demand is high and construction is blocked, prices explode.

Single-Family vs. Multifamily

The type of housing being built matters as much as the quantity. Among the top 20 builders, most are heavily weighted toward single-family construction — particularly the Florida retirement communities. Metros building significant multifamily housing (like Provo-Orem and Boise) tend to achieve better affordability outcomes because apartments provide more units per acre at lower cost per unit.

State-Level Building Permits

At the state level, building activity varies enormously:

State	Total Permits (2024)	SF Permits	MF Permits	MF Share
Texas	~200,000+	High	High	~35%
Florida	~180,000+	Very High	Moderate	~25%
California	~110,000	Moderate	Moderate	~45%
New York	~50,000	Low	High	~65%

Browse building permit data for every metro on our interactive map (select "Building Permits") or explore the Construction Dashboard.

Methodology

Building permit data from the Census Bureau's Building Permits Survey (2024 annual data). Permits per capita calculated as total permits issued divided by metro population (Census estimate) × 1,000. Includes both single-family and multifamily permits. Note that permits issued ≠ units completed; typical completion rates are 90-95% with a 6-18 month lag.