2006: U.S. Cities With Affordable Real Estate And Homes

real estate37 2006: U.S. Cities With Affordable Real Estate And Homes


The price of housing is a major challenge in the United States. Some estimates note that more than 50% of the population cannot afford a median priced home. According to National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), of the total number of new and existing homes sold nationwide during the third quarter, only 40.4 percent were affordable for families earning the median U.S. income of $59,600.

But it is good news that housing affordability on the national level has not changed much in the third quarter in spite of a rise in the mortgage interest rates during the last quarter. This was because many markets saw a slight decrease in their home prices, which helped offset the rise in mortgage rates.

Indianapolis (Indiana) is the most affordable city for homes in America, based on the 2006 third quarter report of the National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo Housing Opportunity Index (HOI). The city achieved this status for the fifth consecutive quarter.

Of the total number of housing units sold in Indianapolis during the third quarter, 86 percent of homes were priced at or below the U.S. median household income of $65,100. Homes in this metro area had a median sales price of $122,000, which is slightly higher from $120,000 of the previous quarter.

It is interesting to note that the most affordable U.S. cities for homes, condos and other real estate are largely from the northern industrial metro areas. The other larger cities that top the list for affordable homes in the third quarter after Indianapolis are Youngstown-Warren-Boardman (Ohio-Pennsylvania); Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn (Michigan); Buffalo-Niagara Falls (New York); and Grand Rapids and Wyoming (Michigan).

The report also lists the top seven smaller cities in America that have the most affordable housing markets. These are: Bay City in Michigan, Springfield in Ohio, Mansfield in Ohio, Lansing-East Lansing in Michigan, Lima in Ohio, Battle Creek in Michigan and Canton-Massillon in Ohio.

For both major metros and small metros, many of the least affordable cities are located in California. The least affordable major metro areas are Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, Modesto, Stockton, and San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, in that order. The least affordable smaller metros (less than 500,000 people) include: Salinas, Merced, Madera, Napa, and Santa Barbara-Santa Maria.

The good news for homebuyers is that there are many affordable cities in the United States. Moreover, even for cities that rated poorly for affordability, there may be some communities within the larger city that have affordable housing. For example, although the San Diego metro in California rated poorly overall for affordability, there are some communities in San Diego priced to meet the needs of lower-income home buyers. A good real estate agent can help you choose a community where you want to live based on your housing budget and needs.



Clairemont, San Diego, Real Estate Market Trends, Single-family Homes, Mid Year Analysis, 2006

real estate38 Clairemont, San Diego, Real Estate Market Trends, Single family Homes, Mid Year Analysis, 2006


The community of Clairemont (sometimes called Clairemont Mesa) is located in central San Diego County, California. The community is located off Interstate 5 at Balboa Ave and is within the 92117 Zip code.

The real estate and homes for sale in Clairemont fall into the moderate-income category for San Diego County. The number of homes sold in a particular year is relatively high. For example, during the period from January through July 2006, approximately 183 single-family homes sold. Approximately 226 homes sold for the same period in 2005.

One method to analyze pricing trends for a particular community is to evaluate the median and average price of homes for a particular month, and compare that data against the same period last year. What follows is a comparison of the median price and average price of homes for the past seven months (January through July 2006), compared against the data for the corresponding time period in 2005.

The median price of homes represents the point at which half the homes are above a particular price point, and half the homes are below a particular price point. The average price of homes is calculated by adding up the sales price of all homes sold in a particular month, and dividing that value by the number of homes sold.

The median price of homes in July 2006 was $560,000, compared to $562,500 in July 2005, which represents a 0.9% drop. The average price of homes in July 2006 was $575,114, compared to $585,602 in July 2005, which represents a 2.4% drop. Approximately 21 homes sold in July 2006 and 26 in July 2005. The data provides evidence that there was a downward price trend in July 2006 compared to the same period last year.

The median price of homes in June 2006 was $555,000, compared to $570,000 in June 2005, which represents a 2.6% drop. The average price of homes in June 2006 was $586,758, compared to $584,415 in June 2005, which represents a 0.4% increase. Approximately 30 homes sold in June 2006 and 34 in June 2005. The data for June 2006 was mixed, as median prices declined and average prices rose slightly from the same period last year.

The median price of homes in May 2006 was $550,000, compared to $562,000 in May 2005, which represents a 2.3% drop. The average price of homes in May 2006 was $584,012, compared to $582,000 in May 2005, which represents a 0.3% increase. Approximately 33 homes sold in May 2006 and 37 in May 2005. The data was mixed in June 2006, as median prices declined and average prices rose slightly from the same period last year.
The median price of homes in April 2006 was $564,000, compared to $565,000 in April 2005, which represents a 0.20% drop. The average price of homes in April 2006 was $584,722, compared to $612,897 in April 2005, which represents a 4.6% drop. Approximately 32 homes sold in April 2006 and 36 in April 2005. The data provides evidence that there was a downward price trend in April 2006 compared to the same period last year.

The median price of homes in March 2006 was $558,000, compared to $545,000 in March 2005, which represents a 1.5% increase. The average price of homes in March 2006 was $589,161, compared to $576,227 in March 2005, which represents a 3.60% increase. Approximately 29 homes sold in March 2006 and 39 in March 2005. The data provides evidence that there was an upward price trend in March 2006 compared to the same period last year.

The median price of homes in February 2006 was $560,000, compared to $525,000 in February 2005, which represents a 7.4% increase. The average price of homes in February 2006 was $582,435, compared to $571,708 in February 2005, which represents a 2.50% increase. Approximately 17 home sold in February 2006 and 29 in February 2005. The data provides evidence that there was an upward price trend in February 2006 compared to the same period last year.

The median price of homes was $585,000 in January 2006, compared to $525,000 in January 2005, which represents a 10% increase. The average price of homes in January 2006 was $634,524, compared to $542,708 in January 2005, which represents a 16.9% increase. Approximately 21 homes sold in January 2006 and 25 in January 2005. The data provides evidence that there was an upward price trend in January 2006 compared to the same period last year.

So what does the above data tell us? Overall, there was a 19% decline in the number of homes sold during this period from 2006 to 2005. The pricing trends early in the year (January, February and March) were in the upward direction for both median and average prices, which showed increases year-over-year ranging from 1.5% to 16.9%. However, since then, the pricing trend has been downward or mixed depending on the month. For example, April and July demonstrated downward median and average prices ranging from around half a percent up to 5%. For May and June, the median price was down around 2% from the previous year, and the average price was slightly up around half a percent. These findings suggest that at best, prices have leveled off, and at worst, are starting to decline. Continued monitoring of sale data in subsequent months is needed to identify enduring market trends.

Be sure to consult your Realtor on other factors that influence home pricing before buying or selling real estate in Clairemont.



Buying Real Estate Using Rent-To-Own And Lease-Purchase Options

real estate48 Buying Real Estate Using Rent To Own And Lease Purchase Options


Owing a home is a big part of the American dream. But not everyone is fortunate enough to become a homeowner due to delimiting factors such as insufficient income, bankruptcy, bad or no credit, loss of employment, etc. For people with such troubles, owning a home is a distant dream and some of these people resign themselves to a lifetime of renting. But such people are not without options. Rent-to-own, which is also known as a lease-purchase option, can be an excellent alternative available to some people who are currently unable to buy a home.

A rent-to-own or lease-purchase option is an agreement between a prospective home buyer and a home seller. The agreement is basically a rental contract with a right to purchase the property after a period of time (usually 1 year). When a home seller offers a lease-purchase option, what they are really offering is the option to rent the house at some monthly rate, and to lock in the sales price of the home now, even though the prospective buyer would not actually purchase the house until a later time (if at all).

Here is a hypothetical example. Let’s say the monthly rent for a home is $1700. Under a lease-purchase option, a prospective buyer would rent the home for the $1700 a month, but would also pay an additional premium (e.g., $200-$300) every month for the option to buy the home after a period of time (usually 1 year). So in this example, the total monthly rent is actually $2000, but $200-$300 of the money will be applied toward buying the house at a later time. In other words, the home seller would apply the $200-$300 extra paid every month toward the prospective buyer’s down payment at the end of the year.

The good news for prospective home buyers is that it allows them to lock in the purchase price of the home now, even though they are not purchasing the home until a later time. The bad news is that if a buyer decides not to purchase the home at the end of lease term, the seller often keeps the premium amount paid over the year, although this is usually a point of negotiation.

Prospective home buyers should know that many of the terms described above are negotiable such as how much the monthly rent will be, how much extra has to be paid every month for the option fee (if any), the length of the lease term, etc. The other issue to consider is if it makes sense to lock in a home purchase price now in markets where real estate prices are still declining.

When compared to renting, a lease-purchase can be an attractive alternative because it gives prospective buyers an opportunity to own a home before they normally would be able to. There are some advantages to a lease-purchase option such as:
1) Low or No Initial Down Payment. Many lease-purchase options do not require an initial down payment.

2) Equity Advantage. At the end of the lease term, the value of a home may have appreciated over time, which benefits the purchaser.

3) Living Experience. Prospective home buyers have the opportunity to try out a home and neighborhood before purchasing the property.

4) Leverage Advantage. With just a small investment, a prospective buyer can control a property; yet still have the option of not buying the home if market conditions don’t warrant it.

Rent-to-own or lease-purchase option can be an effective strategy to home ownership. However, there are both positive and negative aspects to this type of approach (as described above). A good real estate agent can help you navigate the complex world of rent-to-own and lease-purchase option properties.



Do You Need A Real Estate Appraiser When Buying A Home Or Condo?

real estate43 Do You Need A Real Estate Appraiser When Buying A Home Or Condo?


If you are considering purchasing or selling a home, condo or any other type of real estate, you will most likely need the services of a real estate appraiser. An appraiser performs an assessment of properties and other types of real estate to help establish its value. While there are several methods appraisers use to establish the value of real estate (e.g. cost method, income method, and comparison method), for residential properties, the comparison method (also known as market value) is the most common approach. The appraiser’s job is to provide an opinion about the value of a property based on its “highest and best use.” If you are financing the purchase of a property, your lender will normally require an appraisal to make sure that the property is really worth the amount loaned.

The real estate appraiser is tasked with carrying out a completely objective assessment of a property and will normally provide a written evaluation report. This is accomplished by a physical inspection of the property, as well as a comparison to other similar properties for which the value is already established. To make a determination about value, the appraiser gathers details such as the size of a property, size of the lot, location, condition, best use of the property, amenities, etc.

After this initial inspection, the appraiser may scout the neighborhood to compare the property with other similar properties in the neighborhood by age, size, price range, etc. The appraiser then gathers additional data from several sources such as the local Multiple Listing Services (MLS), which provides information on current and recent comparable sales. The appraiser also gathers information from his/her own past experience in the local market. All of these sources of information are taken into consideration while writing the appraisal report, which will provide an estimate about the value of a property.
There are many reasons to use the services of a qualified appraiser. When purchasing real estate, an appraisal provides you with a negotiating tool and helps ensure that the price you are paying is appropriate. If you are selling your property, the appraisal will help you determine an appropriate price range. Besides real estate and mortgage transactions, you may need to order an appraisal to lower the tax burden (assuming the value is really lower than the value established by taxing authorities), to establish the replacement cost of insurance, to settle an estate, etc. An appraiser only gives an estimate of the value of the property. A real estate appraiser is not to be confused with a home inspector.

If you are considering buying or selling a home, condo or any other type of real estate, you can use the services of a qualified real estate appraiser who will provide an estimate of the fair market value of your property.



Top 20 Real Estate Foreclosure Markets, Mid-Year 2007

real estate59 Top 20 Real Estate Foreclosure Markets, Mid Year 2007


Stockton, California reported the highest foreclosure rate among the nation’s 100 largest metro areas from Jan to Jun 2007, according to RealtyTrac, an online marketplace for foreclosure sales. Detroit and Las Vegas documented the next highest foreclosure rates. RealtyTrac’s 2007 Midyear Metropolitan Foreclosure Market Report showed the foreclosure activity in the top 100 metro areas for the first half of 2007. As foreclosure rates continue to rise, 82 out of 100 metro areas recorded year-over-year increases in foreclosures.

Stockton reported one foreclosure filing for every 27 households with a total of 8,169 foreclosure fillings on 4,239 properties. The rate of foreclosure has increased exponentially to three times more than the number reported last year, for the same period.

Detroit, with one in 29 households going for foreclosure, recorded the second highest foreclosure rate. A total of 28,705 foreclosure filings were made on 20,231 properties, which is almost double the number reported from Jan-June 2006.

Las Vegas documented one foreclosure filing for every 31 households, making it the third highest in foreclosure activity among the 100 metro areas. It reported 22,928 foreclosure filings on 13,028 properties, double the number reported during the first half of 2006.

Six of the top 20 metro areas with the highest foreclosure rates were in California and four in Ohio.

The following are the top 20 U.S. housing foreclosure markets from Jan to Jun 2007, the total number of foreclosure filings and households per foreclosure filing.

1. Stockton, California: 8,169 foreclosure filings; one foreclosure filing for every 27 households.

2. Detroit/Livonia/Dearborn, Michigan: 28,705 foreclosure filings; one filing per 29 households.

3. Las Vegas/Paradise, Nevada: 22,928 foreclosure filings; one filing per 31 households.

4. Riverside/San Bernardino, California: 41,351 foreclosure filings; one filing per 33 households.

5. Sacramento, California: 20,516 foreclosure filings; one filing per 36 households.

6. Denver/Aurora, Colorado: 23,842 foreclosure filings; one filing per 42 households.

7. Miami, Florida: 20,275 foreclosure filings; one filing per 46 households.

8. Bakersfield, California: 5,365 foreclosure filings; one filing per 47 households.

9. Memphis, Tennessee: 10,800 foreclosure filings; one filing per 49 households.

10. Cleveland/Lorain/Elyria/Mentor, Ohio: 8,844 foreclosure filings; one filing per 50 households.

11. Fort Lauderdale, Florida: 15,720 foreclosure filings; one filing per 50 households.

12. Atlanta/Sandy Springs/Marietta, Georgia: 36,502 foreclosure filings; one filing per 54 households.

13. Fort Worth/Arlington, Texas: 13,221 foreclosure filings; one filing per 57 households.

14. Fresno, California: 4,867 foreclosure filings; one filing per 60 households.

15. Indianapolis, Indiana: 11,677 foreclosure filings; one filing per 62 households.

16. Dayton, Ohio: 5,966 foreclosure filings; one filing per 63 households.

17. Dallas, Texas: 23,284 foreclosure filings; one filing per 65 households.

18. Akron, Ohio: 4,378 foreclosure filings; one filing per 70 households.

19. Oakland, California: 13,482 foreclosure filings; one filing per 70 households.

20. Columbus, Ohio: 10,706 foreclosure filings; one filing per 70 households.