Age restricted housing for younger workers?

[Carter711]

First let me just say how great it is that downtown Hartford is attracting so many new residential units, and that this is only posted in the Hartford forum, b/c it seems to be seeing the greatest percentage increase in new housing downtown - In other words this 'problem' is not unique to Hartford. But I do have a concern, not just in Hartford, but really in urban centers around the country, that these kinds of new urban residential developments are priced well out of the price-range of many younger workers. The units are usually being grabbed by those empty-nesters or retired folks. New residents downtown, no matter what age, are still a very good thing for Hartford's economy. But it's the younger folks who go in much greater numbers to the coffee shops, restaurants, nightclubs, and those other establishments that make urban centers such dynamic places.

Up here, the new rage is 'age-restricted' housing for seniors, 55 and up. The thinking is that since these folks don't have kids attending the public schools these developments will actually help bring down ever-rising local property tax rates. Many towns have incorporated zoning rules and even subsidies that encourage these kind of developments. The problem is that in the long-run this influx of seniors into certain areas will create fewer and fewer housing opportunities for younger people, eventually pushing them out of these communities altogether. And when Fidelity goes looking to build a new campus, they're probably going to choose the areas where there's a large pool of younger workers to choose from, and not those areas that are crawling with retirees. So there's a strong sense that over the long-run, pushing these kind of developments can have very negative economic impacts on these areas.

So I guess my question boils down to whether or not age restricted housing for younger workers - say aged 20 - 30 is legal for towns and cities to set up. I can't see why it wouldn't be, but even accounting for the baby-boomers, there seems to be a disporoportionately large number of new housing for retirees with very little marketed towards younger workers.

[HartfordTycoon]

First let me just say how great it is that downtown Hartford is attracting so many new residential units, and that this is only posted in the Hartford forum, b/c it seems to be seeing the greatest percentage increase in new housing downtown - In other words this 'problem' is not unique to Hartford. But I do have a concern, not just in Hartford, but really in urban centers around the country, that these kinds of new urban residential developments are priced well out of the price-range of many younger workers. The units are usually being grabbed by those empty-nesters or retired folks. New residents downtown, no matter what age, are still a very good thing for Hartford's economy. But it's the younger folks who go in much greater numbers to the coffee shops, restaurants, nightclubs, and those other establishments that make urban centers such dynamic places.

Up here, the new rage is 'age-restricted' housing for seniors, 55 and up. The thinking is that since these folks don't have kids attending the public schools these developments will actually help bring down ever-rising local property tax rates. Many towns have incorporated zoning rules and even subsidies that encourage these kind of developments. The problem is that in the long-run this influx of seniors into certain areas will create fewer and fewer housing opportunities for younger people, eventually pushing them out of these communities altogether. And when Fidelity goes looking to build a new campus, they're probably going to choose the areas where there's a large pool of younger workers to choose from, and not those areas that are crawling with retirees. So there's a strong sense that over the long-run, pushing these kind of developments can have very negative economic impacts on these areas.

So I guess my question boils down to whether or not age restricted housing for younger workers - say aged 20 - 30 is legal for towns and cities to set up. I can't see why it wouldn't be, but even accounting for the baby-boomers, there seems to be a disporoportionately large number of new housing for retirees with very little marketed towards younger workers.

I totally agree, and in fact the pricing could be a lot lower than those age restricted to older folks. If you are between 20-30/35 or so and can afford a $150k condo, you're doing alright and are probably the type of resident that Downtown really needs. I think this would be a great idea if it's possible. If adults over 55 can get away with not allowing kids and young people to live amongst them, it's only fair that young adults can have somewhere where no old folks or young kids can live.

[robm324]

I am in agreement that there should be more housing available for people in their 20's and early 30's who can't afford $300,000-500,000 condos. I am one of them. I am 23 years old, have a good entry level job, and I could afford a condo at about $150,000...the problem is there is nothing in downtown anywhere near that price point at this time.

As far as age restrictions are concerned, what would happen when an owner ages out of the restriction? It doesn't give a seller any leverage if they are forced into selling.

[HartfordTycoon]

I am in agreement that there should be more housing available for people in their 20's and early 30's who can't afford $300,000-500,000 condos. I am one of them. I am 23 years old, have a good entry level job, and I could afford a condo at about $150,000...the problem is there is nothing in downtown anywhere near that price point at this time.

As far as age restrictions are concerned, what would happen when an owner ages out of the restriction? It doesn't give a seller any leverage if they are forced into selling.

True, when I think about it who cares if old people live there. Many would choose not too, due to demographics if these buildings are being marketed to the young. I'm good as long as young kids can't live there. No one under 18, because at those prices they would fill up with families with young kids and get trashed.

[Jerry2]

I am in agreement that there should be more housing available for people in their 20's and early 30's who can't afford $300,000-500,000 condos. I am one of them. I am 23 years old, have a good entry level job, and I could afford a condo at about $150,000...the problem is there is nothing in downtown anywhere near that price point at this time.

As far as age restrictions are concerned, what would happen when an owner ages out of the restriction? It doesn't give a seller any leverage if they are forced into selling.

Why do you have to live in downtown? Sure it would be nice but why not be the urban pioneer and move into one of the neighborhoods? I'm sure there are condos around the city that you get for 150K.

[HartfordTycoon]

Why do you have to live in downtown? Sure it would be nice but why not be the urban pioneer and move into one of the neighborhoods? I'm sure there are condos around the city that you get for 150K.

That's true. I want to live Downtown however I am currently considering buying something elsewhere in the city. I think the question is why does everything Downtown have to be so unaffordable though? Young professionals would help Downtown thrive but they are pretty much priced out or what's being built now. I also think many more young professionals are interested in Downtown currently than Hartford area empty nesters.

[jcrc]

I think condos in American Airlines Building are to be moderately priced.

[HartfordTycoon]

I think condos in American Airlines Building are to be moderately priced.

That's good to know. If so I'll definately be interested. Any idea when more information will be coming out?

[jcrc]

That's good to know. If so I'll definately be interested. Any idea when more information will be coming out?

I think this is the latest.

http://hartfordinfo.org/issues/documents/d...rant_121705.asp

[Jerry2]

That's true. I want to live Downtown however I am currently considering buying something elsewhere in the city. I think the question is why does everything Downtown have to be so unaffordable though? Young professionals would help Downtown thrive but they are pretty much priced out or what's being built now. I also think many more young professionals are interested in Downtown currently than Hartford area empty nesters.

Tycoon.....the real question is...Why does everything downtown HAVE to be so affordable? If there is enough interest in the city for luxury units and the market supports it, let them move there. You once said (not too long ago) that there was nothing under 250K in the whole metro. That's simply not true. These homeownership opportunities exist in many urban areas...the trick is getting people in the metro region and beyond to re-invest in the city. If people come to downtown Htfd. that have money, it will create a spillover effect into the city's outlying areas. I say bring them on....

There are many middle-class people that think that they cannot afford to buy a home. What they don't know is that there are community re-investment acts that are promoted in cities all over the country where one can buy an owner-occupied home for no money down pending qualification. I won't solicit on this site because I know it's against the rules, but Hartford, New Britain, New Haven, and Norwich among others are all cities within HUD's community lending program where people can buy single-family homes with 0% down and 2-family's with 3% down pending credit and income verification. You don't need excellent credit and the terms and rates are very reasonable. Anyone interested can PM me.

There is a tremendous potential for the city to move ahead and that takes urban pioneers like you and me to make a difference. Homeownership is that first step and holding the media accountable for their outrageous reporting is the second. It's not enough to let a city ( the capitol of the richest state in the US) stand on its own....even if you are one of few willing to fight for it......

PS...Even though I disagree with some of your political views, I can tell that you are sincere...very admirable!

[HartfordTycoon]

Tycoon.....the real question is...Why does everything downtown HAVE to be so affordable? If there is enough interest in the city for luxury units and the market supports it, let them move there. You once said (not too long ago) that there was nothing under 250K in the whole metro. That's simply not true. These homeownership opportunities exist in many urban areas...the trick is getting people in the metro region and beyond to re-invest in the city. If people come to downtown Htfd. that have money, it will create a spillover effect into the city's outlying areas. I say bring them on....

There are many middle-class people that think that they cannot afford to buy a home. What they don't know is that there are community re-investment acts that are promoted in cities all over the country where one can buy an owner-occupied home for no money down pending qualification. I won't solicit on this site because I know it's against the rules, but Hartford, New Britain, New Haven, and Norwich among others are all cities within HUD's community lending program where people can buy single-family homes with 0% down and 2-family's with 3% down pending credit and income verification. You don't need excellent credit and the terms and rates are very reasonable. Anyone interested can PM me.

There is a tremendous potential for the city to move ahead and that takes urban pioneers like you and me to make a difference. Homeownership is that first step and holding the media accountable for their outrageous reporting is the second. It's not enough to let a city ( the capitol of the richest state in the US) stand on its own....even if you are one of few willing to fight for it......

PS...Even though I disagree with some of your political views, I can tell that you are sincere...very admirable!

Thanks. Well there are deals to be found, but picking are kind of slim when you get under $250, and I'm spoiled due to what I was renting in Atlanta. I look at apartments and condos and do have a hard time finding something I'm willing to pay for when I can live at home for free. Still trying to mull over what's the best first move when it comes to buying a home.

[asylumhill]

It's illegal to ban kids, and this 55+ restriction is also on shaky legal grounds but no one seems to care because of the tax benefits.

I live in Hartford in Asylum Hill, in a condo under $150K, and I love it here. It's definitely better than living with the folks.

The reason that downtown housing is so expensive is

a) any new construction or major renovation is going to cost more to build than most of us would be able to pay for it.

and

b) Downtown is insanely small, there's just not enough square footage for everyone who wants to live next to Hartford 21 to do so in the (suburban) manner to which they are accustomed.

That being said, some of the older rental properties that I've seen downtown aren't half bad.

[runawayjim]

That's true. I want to live Downtown however I am currently considering buying something elsewhere in the city. I think the question is why does everything Downtown have to be so unaffordable though? Young professionals would help Downtown thrive but they are pretty much priced out or what's being built now. I also think many more young professionals are interested in Downtown currently than Hartford area empty nesters.

suppy and demand. simple economics are why downtown is unaffordable. i'd like to live in one of the new condos being built in downtown providence, but i don't have the money for a $500k condo.

[HartfordTycoon]

suppy and demand. simple economics are why downtown is unaffordable. i'd like to live in one of the new condos being built in downtown providence, but i don't have the money for a $500k condo.

I certainly understand supply and demand, and if they can sell everything for these prices good for them and for Hartford. I'll end up buying elsewhere for the time being since there's no way I'm affording anything Downtown right now or for the forseable future.

[runawayjim]

I certainly understand supply and demand, and if they can sell everything for these prices good for them and for Hartford. I'll end up buying elsewhere for the time being since there's no way I'm affording anything Downtown right now or for the forseable future.

that's really what it comes down to and it sort of sucks for people like us who can't afford them, but that's the way it is... when i buy, my fiancee wants to live outside of the city with a yard and room for a pool and stuff... so i'll be moving out of providence within 5 years most likely. and most property is cheaper outside of the city anyways.