YourCT.com header image 2

Affordable Housing Down 11% In Gold Coast


by turfgrrl


August 22nd, 2007 · 5 Comments

Chalk this report released by SWRPA as stating the obvious. As real estate prices have shot up in the last few years, the affordable factor in housing disappears. And that’s what the report basically says in today’s Advocate. One solution, the report states is to encourage 40 year mortgages:

The study recommends state and local governments pursue density bonuses and other incentives for developers to create affordable housing in those areas.

Other recommendations include SWRPA becoming an affordable housing information clearinghouse in its role as the region’s main intergovernmental planning agency, and urging lenders to create more flexibility in mortgages so home buyers can borrow more within acceptable limits.

Carty urged caution on increasing the percentage of household income that lenders allow to go toward mortgage and housing costs, saying that was part of the problem that has led many less-qualified borrowers into default in the current subprime mortgage crisis that has roiled the stock markets.

“You don’t want people one paycheck away from disaster,” she said.

Instead, lenders should consider 40-year mortgages, which spread out payments for much longer. Buyers don’t build equity as fast, she said, but they can afford much more home in an expensive market.

Why stop at 40? The reality is that home ownership, for a 40 year mortgage is essentially renting. No one in the housing industry will likely admit that.

source: Advocate , , Study cites decline in affordable housing along ‘Gold Coast’, By Doug Dalena, August 22 2007

Tags: House · In the News

5 Responses so far “Affordable Housing Down 11% In Gold Coast”



  • 1 Anonymous // Aug 22, 2007 at 11:07 am

    There’s an interesting section of the report on something I think they call “functionally affordable”. This is housing that isn’t classified by the government as affordable but at market rates, is in the same price range - either rental or ownership - as governmentally restricted affordable units. A good downturn in the real estate market should boost the functionally affordable stock.

  • 2 Vet Park Junkie // Aug 22, 2007 at 7:53 pm

    #1, interesting thought. Just suppose that we’re heading into a recession led by the housing market, I’d expect that local construction workers would be hit hard. There are about 20,000 males in Norwalk age 25-55 and 14% are in construction. That’s around 2,800 guys. Then let’s say that they match the average household ownership rate as the rest of Norwalk, 67%. Could there be 1,876 guys hurting for mortgage payments? Maybe it’s less if they own without a mortgage?

    Perhaps an influx of houses in the market will drop prices and improve “functional affordability.” However, when I see average cost of new construction increasing in Norwalk, seemingly immune to changes in number of building permits, I think that there might be people out there willing to pay the prices. Doesn’t the heading of this thread point to the same thing? Maybe they’re from that skyline that I see from the boat to the east.

    Could it be the perfect storm for those who wish to see Norwalk become more like Greenwich?

    Also, I’m having a hard time getting a grip on “functional affordability.” How does that help someone in a mortgage based on a higher house value?

    Turf, re: 40 yr mortgages. Better than interest-only “mortgages,” neh?

    Nope, I’m not in Real Estate, just thinking. I used males in my musings because in scanning the data on industry data for Norwalk males & females the “male construction” category seems to be most impacted by a recession lead by real estate.

  • 3 Vet Park Junkie // Aug 22, 2007 at 9:37 pm

    Wife just said, “east?” As Jerry Aldrich would say, “Geezzz!”

  • 4 Anonymous // Aug 23, 2007 at 8:34 am

    Why is it always up to Norwalk to provide affordable housing for the state of CT. Let some of the other towns do something, Norwalk has done their fair share. Always Norwalk, Enough already Mr. Mayor. Enough condo’s dont turn norwalk into condo hell. Change the zoning laws so Norwalk is not so easy for all the developers who get rejected in wilton, westport and darien to build junk like the sideways condos on stewert ave. What a ugly development we have to look at driving by. Shame on the entire zoining board and all others involved. That is only one example. Too much traffic now and you want to add another 1000 condos or so. THINK first before we line the developers pockets. Our new logo should be Norwalk anything goes just say yes. Alot of us are saying no but you dont listen.

  • 5 nwlknative // Aug 23, 2007 at 10:44 am

    Talk about an ugly development - the one on Main Street where they built the condos behind the “historical” houses is awful. Far too crowded and overpowering for the property - but the houses were saved. The beauty of the houses was that they sat on nice, private lots. Now they are sitting fully exposed with overpowering condos behind them and not so pretty.

Leave a Reply