Seems questionable to draw an analogy here, given the loss of population in Japan, which has both harmed their economy and (from what little I know) caused housing costs outside their major metros to fall

Housing costs have been remarkably stable within the major metros, despite stable or rising urban populations.

Now, I suppose there’s some substitutability between suburban and exurban housing and urban housing, but the fact of the matter is that the Japanese are better at delivering new housing in their city centers. 

As Robin Harding remarks, there were more housing starts in 2014 in the city of Tokyo (142,417) than there were in the state of California (83,657) or the entirety of England (137,010), although Tokyo has less than half the population of either California or England.

Japan faces somewhat unique demographic problems, but it has nonetheless enjoyed respectable growth in output per working age adult, while its unemployment rates are still at world-beating lows – they just hit 2.8 percent, a 22-year low – while both unemployment and labor force participation rates have improved markedly since Shinzo Abe became premier.

It’s no cure for the fertility crunch, but it’s pretty good all the same.