We've spoken before about how much electricity is going to be demanded by data centers in the future. According to this study, data center energy usage is expected to represent somewhere between 6.7-12% of total electricity consumption in the US by 2028. And according to McKinsey, demand for data centers is going to at least 4x by the end of this decade. So the consensus is that we are going to need more, not less, data centers in the foreseeable future.

But if data centers represent the physical infrastructure needed for our digital activities, it's both interesting and valuable to think about where this stuff wants to go, especially since tech is, in some ways, a decentralizing force for cities. Interestingly enough, they exhibit the same economies of agglomeration as many other urban activities in that they want to be near density and other data centers. Maybe even more so.

Here's an excerpt from a Harvard Business School report (2022) called "Where the Cloud Rests: The Location Strategies of Data Centers."

The study finds a pervasive urban bias in the location of third-party data centers. For example, we find that all large metropolitan areas with over 700,000 population have at least one supplier. Less dense areas may or may not have any. Moreover, local entry rises with the presence of local information industries and intensive data users, such as finance, insurance, and real estate. Because less supply locates in the areas with lower density, a high fraction of buyers in small and medium-sized locations must get their services from non-local suppliers—likely located in the closest major city. Relatedly, we also find supply of more specialty services in denser and more competitive locations. We interpret all these patterns as the result of tension between economies of scale and user preference for proximity.

And here's a quote from LA-based Rising Realty Partners:

Once a data center hub is entrenched, it tends to create its own gravitational pull. Data center tenants want to be near other data center tenants. And the main hubs also boast high levels of connectivity. The calculus is straightforward: It’s far easier to run a fiber optic cable across the street or across town than to run a connection across the state or country.

This is what is happening in Northern Virginia with "Data Center Alley" and what is now now referred to as the world's largest data center hub. As of July 2024, Loudoun County, VA (which is located just 34 miles from Washington, DC) had 43 million square feet of existing data centers and ~47 million more square feet in the pipeline. This represents an increase of ~60 million square feet compared to where the area was as recently as 2022.

Overall, there are only so many "primary" data center markets in the US. CBRE lists 8. This makes it a relatively concentrated real estate asset class in terms of geography.

Cover photo by Claudio Schwarz on Unsplash

According to this annual survey by Henley & Partners (first chart from Bloomberg), these are the top 10 wealthiest cities in the world when you count the number of high-net-worth individuals (i.e. people with investable wealth greater than US$1 million):

However, if you instead count billionaires, the top city flips from New York City to the Bay Area (which includes San Francisco and all of Silicon Valley). This isn't all that surprising.

Also not surprising is the precipitous decline in the number of HNWIs residing in Hong Kong. From 2012 to 2022, the number declined by 27%. That said, a bunch of other cities fared even worse. The city that lost the most millionaires over this same decade was Moscow. It declined by 44%.

For those of you wondering about Toronto, we placed 12th, just after Chicago, with 105,200 millionaires, 193 centi-millionaires, and 18 billionaires:

The next city in Canada on the list is Vancouver, and following that is Montreal:

It is interesting to see how much further behind Montreal places with these metrics given that it is an urban region with about 1.6x the population of that of Vancouver's.

Also interesting -- given its size and global importance -- is Paris (18th when it comes to HNWIs):

However, when it comes to seasonal draw, Paris is second only to Miami, which appears to be the undisputed global destination for rich people in the winter. Paris has 126 centi-millionaire residents, but during its peak holiday month (presumably summer), this number is believed to increase to over 300:

Finally, looking at Park City, Utah, it has 8 permanent centi-millionaires and this number is thought to increase to over 100 during the winter snowboarding season. And to be clear, this transient population figure only includes people who own a second home there. It does not include rich people paying US$3,700 per night to stay at Deer Valley. That's pretty good for a small town of only 8,500 permanent residents.

To check out the full list of 97 cities, click here.

On July 1 of this year, a new California bill, called the "Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022", will go into effect. And the goal of this legislation is to significantly increase the supply of new homes in the state by allowing multi-family construction on lands that are currently zoned for commercial uses.

On some level, it is of course curious that there even needs to be this bill. Because what we are effectively saying is, "hey, we should allow people to build a mix of uses on our main streets and with high enough densities that we might actually be able to support transit." Why was this not always the case? (Rhetorical question.)

In the words of architect and planner Peter Calthorpe, who was recently interviewed here in ArchDaily, this is a "landmark piece of legislation" that has "received very little attention." So that's why we're talking about it today.

Calthorpe was actively involved in crafting this legislation, and his work apparently started with different scenario land-use models. The first experiment looked at a 43-mile stretch of El Camino running from San Francisco to San Jose (pictured below). And what they found was that this one strip alone could accommodate somewhere around 250,000 new infill homes.

To put this into context, the state of California is currently building about 140,000 new homes each year, through a roughly equal (1:1) split of multi-family and low-rise single-family. Already this represents a shift, as supply used to be slanted (3:1) toward low-rise. (I don't know when exactly this was the case, but Calthorpe mentions the figure in his interview.)

Moving on from El Camino, Calthorpe and his team then ran a similar exercise for the five-county inner Bay area. And here they found that some 700 miles of commercial land could produce up to 1.3 million multi-family homes at "reasonable densities." This was then expanded to the entire state of California and the number increased to 10 million new homes.

Of course, as we have talked about before on this blog, not all of this land might actually be feasible for development. Sometimes the math doesn't work even at a zero land cost; you might need a negative land cost in order to pencil a new development. Meaning, you might need to be paid, perhaps through some sort of subsidy.

So what Calthorpe and the team did was use MapCraft to quickly run development feasibilities on the above sites. They had it run 6 different pro formas using local rents, construction costs, city fees, and so on. And what they determined was that this 10 million number drops down to 2 million when you apply the economic realities of the world.

As a disclaimer, I'm not at all familiar with MapCraft. But I'm going to take this number at face value and say that this is still a lot of new homes. And this is what people are hoping for come July 1 of this year.

Image: HDR / Peter Calthorpe