Issue 103 – Climate Change is Causing a Flood of Real Estate Problems

It seems just about every week, we receive an update on a hurricane, flood, or tornado making its presence known around the globe and highlighting the loss of homes — and more importantly, loss of life. The damage to structures and how the natural disaster is stopping bustling cities in their tracks is always in the news. Climate change is indeed taking its toll, and not just exclusively on coastal regions. In addition to impacting lives physically, it also impacts them financially through diminished market value and increased insurance costs. To wit: Climate change is becoming the most significant impact on real estate value.

Just last month, we witnessed massive destruction in Asheville, North Carolina, where storm seasons had not typically been a concern. Sadly, that storm was followed by Hurricane Milton, which targeted the Tampa, Florida, area. In October 2024, Tampa Mayor Jane Castor warned residents in evacuation zones that they would die if they stayed behind. We now brace ourselves against extremely devastating weather events from May through November. Many New Yorkers live in fear of another Hurricane Sandy.

One of the by-products of these increasingly intense hurricanes is how homeowners or would-be buyers will be impacted in terms of homeowner’s insurance coverage, without which one cannot secure a mortgage. Moreover, the city’s flood maps are being rewritten, further increasing insurance premiums for many owners; some may even be dropped by their current insurance provider, resulting in properties in highly desirable neighborhoods being unable to sell — or to sell well.   

According to The Atlantic, “Across the United States, homeowner’s insurance is getting more expensive. In storm-battered Florida and coastal Louisiana, they’ve gone up a lot; the same is true for scorched Colorado and California. But even Ohio and Wisconsin have seen rate hikes greater than 15 percent in a single year.” Clearly, everyone is affected by this, not just in hurricane-prone areas. And if buyers can’t secure homeowner’s insurance or premiums are prohibitively expensive, they won’t be able to take on a mortgage.

The Economist details this trend as well, explaining, “Private insurers burned by huge payouts after disasters are abandoning risky markets. Homeowners are turning to state-backed insurers as a last resort, which offer less coverage for a higher price. When these plans cannot cover claims, taxpayers are often left with the bill. As climate change continues, the uninsurable parts of America will only grow.”  Thus, this outcome becomes the most significant divide in value nationwide and globally.

Yale Connections concurs in a recent story explaining that as storms surge, so do insurance premiums.  “Climate futurist Alex Steffen has described the climate change–worsened real estate bubble this way: ‘As awareness of risk grows, the financial value of risky places drops. Where meeting that risk is more expensive than decision-makers think a place is worth, it simply won’t be defended. It will be unofficially abandoned. That will then create more problems. Bonds for big projects, loans and mortgages, business investment, insurance, talented workers — all will grow scarcer. Then, value will crash, a phenomenon I call the Brittleness Bubble.’” This scenario is not something that can be repaired easily.

That publication also cites a 2023 study in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Climate Change that has drawn attention to a massive real estate bubble in the U.S. — property overvalued by $121 to $237 billion because of current flood risk. It warns, “Declines in property values due to climate risk are unlikely to be temporary, particularly for properties affected by sea-level rise … local governments may need to adapt their fiscal structure to continue to provide essential public goods and services.”

According to a 2024 report from Realtor.com, almost 44.8% of homes in the United States, with a total value nearing $22.0 trillion, confront at least one type of severe or extreme climate risk from either flood, wind, wildfire, heat, or air quality.”

It appears FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] is underfunded, understaffed, and has minimal authority. Many are calling on officials to revamp and increase funds to the organization — and create a National Safety Board.

We are no strangers to the impact of hurricane season in NYC. “New Yorkers face thousands of dollars of hidden costs to consider when purchasing a home in a flood-prone area from flood insurance to major construction projects,” a recent story in The New York Times reported. “Across the five boroughs, over $3.6 billion worth of one- to three-family homes sold last year were likely to flood before the end of a 30-year mortgage, according to a new report from Rebuild by Design, a climate resiliency nonprofit. That represents roughly one out of every five such homes sold in New York City in 2023,” the article continued.

It then quoted two other sources: “Flood insurance premiums can range from $350 to $10,000 a year, depending on the size and type of home, policy specifics and the flood history and zone of the area,” said Monroe Shannon, a program manager for resiliency and insurance at Neighborhood Housing Services of Brooklyn, a nonprofit group.

 “FEMA mapping does not account for stormwater. There’s a misperception that if you’re not in one of these mapped flood zones, then you don’t need flood insurance, and that’s not the case,” stated a climate expert.

Despite all the perils involved with buying in areas in flood zones and reports of massive moves inland, The New York Times separately reported that some intrepid New Yorkers are throwing caution to the wind — and that New Yorkers continue to spend billions on houses in flood-prone areas despite growing awareness of the effects of climate change.

One such intrepid New Yorker interviewed in the article said, “If you want a house with a good view, close to the water, you know what the deal is.”

Regardless of one’s comfort with risk, this problem will only grow, so ignoring it is foolhardy. Going forward, the real estate community must be fully aware of the impact of climate change and bring their clients up to speed. If those needing insurance can’t get it or afford it, that will eventually impact sales because of the inability to secure a mortgage.

Some experts feel sellers must disclose flood risks when selling their property. In addition, they say insurance rates should be based on the market. In the future, more and more people will need to buy coverage, but those who can’t handle increasing rates might consider canceling flood insurance to their detriment. In fact, Zillow just announced it will include climate risk data for each listing — signaling a definite value creation predicated on mitigating risk.

For now, the real estate community must do its due diligence to best advise clients about potential risk versus reward, allowing one to make sound investment choices and get the most value from their property ownership. While the 2024 hurricane season has passed, extreme storms are the new normal, and we all need to remain aware of climate change and its impact, especially as we move forward.

Issue 125 – The $5 Million Question: What’s Actually Worth Owning in New York Right Now?

The New York real estate market is entering a period where the old rules of valuation are becoming less reliable. Price per square foot and comparable sales still matter, but buyers are weighing those factors differently — rewarding some attributes while quietly discounting others. The question is no longer simply, “What did the apartment downstairs sell for?” It’s “What are buyers willing to pay a premium for now — and what have they stopped paying for?”

I could identify at least seven factors being repriced in Manhattan right now: outdoor space, views/greenery, turnkey condition, monthly carrying costs, new development versus resale, second-home ownership, and the increasingly important distinction between a great apartment and a great building.

Confusing matters for buyers is that the NYC market is sending contradictory signals. Manhattan inventory is changing by price band, mortgage rates remain challenging nationally, and NYC’s new pied-à-terre tax is creating another potential dividing line in how buyers assess ownership costs.  

In the luxury zone, one way to test those shifting valuations is what I call “The $5-Million-Question.”

I can take $5 million and show clients what that buys today in six completely different versions of New York: Think:

  • $5M on Central Park West
  • $5M downtown
  • $5M in Brooklyn
  • $5M in a new development
  • $5M in a great prewar co-op
  • $5M for something compromised but spectacular

Same amount of money. Same city. Radically different value.

The questions to ponder are:

  • Which one would I buy?
  • Which one would I avoid?
  • Which one has the greatest upside?
  • And which one will be easiest to sell five years from now?

That comparison is more revealing than a market-wide statistic because it shows what the same $5 million actually buys — and what it might be worth to the next buyer.

On the surface, the questions are simple. In practice, answering them requires a sophisticated analysis — price per square foot, carrying costs, taxes, liquidity, buyer pool, neighborhood trajectory, architectural quality, and exit strategy. Buyers should seek out an expert broker not only for information but also for interpretation.

For a long time, value was assessed through familiar metrics: price per square foot, comparable sales, neighborhood, floor, light, views, condition, and building pedigree. Those factors still matter. But buyers are now weighing them differently. We are in a repricing phase — not necessarily of New York City as a whole, but of the individual components that define its value.

At Central Park West, $5 million typically trades square footage for permanence: park frontage, architectural significance, scarcity, and long-term stability.

Downtown, the same budget may secure a more contemporary product — larger windows, amenities, and outdoor space — but often at a higher price per square foot and with higher ongoing costs.

In a new development, $5 million buys condition, services, and immediacy. The question is how much of that price reflects a “new development premium,” and whether the resale market will recognize it when the time comes to exit.

In Brooklyn, the same capital can deliver scale, outdoor space, and architectural character that would be significantly more expensive in Manhattan.

None of these is inherently superior. The real questions are: What are you actually buying, and who will want it next? That second part is often underweighted: Which market is offering more rewards?

Based on buyer behavior, several attributes are becoming more defensible:

Light and views are not replicable. While layouts can be changed, exposure and outlook cannot be transformed.

Functional outdoor space is valuable. Usable terraces connected to living areas are materially more valuable than secondary or awkwardly accessed outdoor areas.

Strong floor plans are key. The pandemic reinforced that usability matters as much as size. Proportion, flow, and flexibility are now critical.

Condition has always mattered — now more than ever. High construction costs and uncertainty have increased demand for finished product. However, there is a ceiling — buyers will not indefinitely overpay for someone else’s design choices.

Low carrying friction is persuasive. Taxes, common charges, assessments, and long-term building health are now central to valuation. High monthly costs can materially impact resale liquidity.

Scarcity can be the tipping point. A strong apartment does not need to be perfect. It needs to be difficult to replicate.

So, where would I be most cautious today?

I would be disciplined about paying a premium purely for newness. New does not hold value on its own — architecture, location, and scarcity do. I would closely evaluate buildings where carrying costs are disconnected from underlying asset value. I would avoid trophy pricing unless there is a true trophy attribute. And I would be careful about pricing that is anchored primarily to renovation cost.

A $2 million renovation does not translate into a $2 million increase in value.

The market does not reimburse cost. It prices outcome.

If I were allocating funds at this level, the guiding principles should be: light over finishes, proportion over decoration, irreplaceable views over amenity packages, and ultimately, best-in-class units in proven buildings over average units in trending ones.

The strongest purchases do two things at once: they function as exceptional homes today and remain desirable assets tomorrow. That means thinking about the exit before the entry — and recognizing that New York isn’t one market, but a collection of micro-markets defined by neighborhood, block, building, floor, and orientation.

While real estate is inherently emotional, value is what remains when emotion fades.

Whether the budget is $1 million, $5 million, or $25 million, the question is ultimately the same: What is actually worth owning?

That is the question the next phase of the market will answer — and it will reward analysis over generalization.

Recent Reports

SUBSCRIBE TO THE KATZEN REPORT

UP-TO-THE-MINUTE PULSE ON REAL ESTATE