Author Archives: Robert Paul

About Robert Paul

Robert is a realtor in Bedford NY. He has been successfully working with buyers and sellers since the early 1980's. His local area of expertise includes Bedford, Pound Ridge, Armonk, Lewisboro, Chappaqua and Katonah. When you have a local real estate question please call 914-325-5758.

Unmasking the Millennials | North Salem Real Estate

Zillow’s new Zillow Group Report on Consumer Housing Trends, authored by Stan Humphries, Chief Analytics Officer and Chief Economist, is a remarkably valuable 21st Century addition to the body of research profiling the changing face of residential real estate.

Its many jewels of new or intuitive findings regarding the mysterious Millennials, the generation that so far has defied expectations, are worth noting Here are some the brighter gems that might help to unmask the Millennials.

 Market domination. Millennials, ages 18-34, comprise 42 percent of all home buyers today, while an additional 31 percent of buyers are members of Generation X (ages 35-49). Baby Boomers (ages 50-64) and the Silent Generation (ages 65-75) together make up the smallest share of home buyers (26 percent), with only 10 percent of buyers over age 64.

Millennials buy later and buy up market.  Millennials are delaying many life milestones that precede homeownership, such as completing their education, getting married or starting families, and thus are renting deeper into adulthood.  When Millennials do become homeowners, they leapfrog the traditional starter home and jump into the higher end of the market by choosing larger properties with higher prices, similar to homes bought by older buyers. They pay a median price of $217,000 for a home, more than Baby Boomers, and just 11 percent less than Generation X. The Millennial median home size is 1,800 square feet, similar in size to what older generations buy. The modern-day starter home is nearly as large as the median home for move-up buyers and costs about 18 percent less.

 New homes are on the table. Younger buyers (50 percent of Millennials and 54 percent of Generation X) are significantly more likely than Baby Boomers or the Silent Generation (38 percent and 39 percent, respectively) to consider newly built properties. Nearly half (48 percent) of all buyers are considering new homes.

Millennials less likely to use agents. The older the buyer, the more likely that buyer is using an agent.  Baby Boomers and the Silent Generation rely most heavily on an agent or broker for real estate guidance, with 83 percent and 81 percent respectively citing them as a resource in their home search. Seventy-four percent of Generation X buyers report using an agent, followed by 70 percent of Millennials.  When they enlist an agent, they do so earlier in the home-search process, shop for a home faster than most older generations, and are more likely to stay in touch with an agent.

Do a better job of shopping for agents. The average number of agents all buyers consider hiring is 2.2.  Sixty-eight percent of the Silent Generation and 57 percent of Baby Boomers considered only one agent, compared to 44 percent of Generation X and 38 percent of Millennials considering just one agent. Millennials are particularly likely to evaluate an agent online, including reading online reviews (61 percent) and delving into past sales data (57 percent).

In an agent, Millennials want a partner, not a control freak. The process of finding or selling a home is much more collaborative for Millennials than for older generations. They bring all available tools to the process, including their smartphones, social media, and online networks. While older generations rely on real estate agents for information and expertise, Millennials expect real estate agents to become trusted advisers and strategic partners.

Definition of household is changing. Seventeen percent of younger Millennials  (ages 18-24) are shopping for a home with a friend or roommate, with an additional 51 percent shopping with a spouse or partner. Older Millennials (ages 25-34) are more like the average buyer, as 73 percent are shopping with a spouse or partner. Seventeen percent of younger Millennials (ages 18-24) are shopping for a home with a friend or roommate.

Millennial are not sold on buying. Millennial buyers (71 percent) are the most likely to consider renting. As buyers age, their interest in renting declines. Just over half, 54 percent, of all Generation X buyers considered renting compared to about one-third (32 percent) of Baby Boomers.  Only 18 percent of those 65 years and older considering renting as well as buying.

Millennials social support in decision-making.  Millennials rely on their personal networks. They’re the generation most likely to turn to a friend, neighbor, or relative to share the details of their home search (58 percent, versus 52 percent of Generation X buyers, 42 percent of Baby Boomers, and 37 percent of the Silent Generation). Millennials seek input from friends, relatives, and neighbors 58 percent of the time, versus the Silent Generation, who poll friends just 37 percent of the time.

Millennial home buyers are more diverse. Fourteen percent of Millennial buyers are Latino/Hispanic, whereas roughly 11 percent of Gen X, 7 percent of Baby Boomers and 6 percent of Silent Generation buyers are Latino/Hispanic. Some 6 percent of Millennials are black/African-American, a smaller share than Gen X (9 percent) or Boomer (8 percent) buyers who are black/African-American.

They are more suburban than urban animals, and they buy locally.  Nearly half of Millennial homeowners live in the suburbs (47 percent), while one-third settle in an urban setting (33 percent), with eight in 10 adults under 25 living outside an urban core. While only 11 percent of buyers are moving out of state, it’s notable that older buyers are more likely to make these long-distance moves. While just 7 percent of both Millennials and Generation X are moving across state lines, Baby Boomers and the Silent Generation make such moves 20 percent and 29 percent of the time, respectively.

Millennials aren’t just buyers. The biggest group of home sellers belongs to Generation X (38 percent). A quarter of home sellers is Millennials (26

 

read more…

 

http://www.realestateeconomywatch.com/2016/11/unmasking-the-millennials/

Are Starter Homes Going the Way of the Station Wagon? | Mt Kisco Real Estate

The millennial generation’s slow start in adulthood is still causing aftershocks in the housing economy.  Unemployment, underemployment and student debt have delayed their household formation beyond the timeframe of earlier generations.  Low interest rates and low down payment programs were enough to get millions of potential buyers into affordable homes before prices soared. Now it looks like an icon of the homeownership experience—the starter home—may be on the chopping block, soon to follow past icons of young family hood like station wagons and cloth diapers into obsolescence. Young buyers—Gen Xers as well as Millennials— are bypassing the traditional first rung of the housing ladder, the starter home and buying up. With inventories of affordable housing chronically slim and overpriced, especially the metros where they want to live, young prospective buyers are renting a year or two longer until they can afford a larger home that will meet their needs for many years to come.  That may be one reason buyers today are saying intending to stay at least 15 years in their new homes (see Americans Move Less and Impact the Economy. Some 14 million single family rentals, a number that swelled during the foreclosure crisis and continues to grow with the popularity of real estate investing, make the transition from rental to ownership easier for young families by providing a rental option that’s almost like ownership.

2016-11-14_15-27-12Source: Bank of America

The first alarms that starter homes may be on their way out were sounded last March when Bank of America released its first Homebuyer Insights Report, which found that:

  • Seventy-five percent of first-time buyers would prefer to bypass the starter home and purchase a place that will meet their future needs, even if that means waiting to save more. Thirty-five percent want to retire there.

 

  • More Gen Xers than Millennials have put off purchasing their first home because of debt.

 

  • Young buyers’ goals are not urban hot spots by family-friendly suburbs. More than half (54 percent) of buyers are looking for a home in the suburbs, including 52 percent of first-time buyers.

Now the new Zillow Group Report on Consumer Housing Trends, which was released on Halloween, confirms the Bank of America findings. “When Millennials do become homeowners, they leapfrog the traditional “starter home” and jump into the higher end of the market by choosing larger properties with higher prices, similar to homes bought by older buyers. They pay a median price of $217,000 for a home—more than Baby Boomers, and just 11 percent less than Generation X. The Millennial median home size is 1,800 square feet, similar in size to what older generations buy,” Zillow found. At $217,99p per property that has a 1,800-foot floor plan, the youngest generation is paying almost the median price for a median-sized home today, far from the definition of a starter home.

 

read more…

http://www.realestateeconomywatch.com/2016/11/are-starter-homes-going-the-way-of-the-station-wagon/

Are Trophy Homes Losing their Lustre? | Waccabuc Real Estate

Are Trophy Homes Losing their Lustre?

With pressure on the homebuilding industry to build fewer trophy homes and concentrate on filling the demand for affordable housing, the data does not bode well for builders.

Median prices of new homes have risen steadily during the recession. In September, the median sold price of a new home hit $313,500, 5.5 percent higher than last year’s median of $296,400 and 25.2 percent higher than the median price for existing homes in September.

Even so, over the past two years super expensive homes priced at one million or more are on the decline, according to data from the Census Bureau’s Survey of Construction.  In 2015, a total of 1,762 homes were started for sale with a price of $1 million or more and new homes started for sale with a price of $1 million or more decreased as a share in absolute number in 2015. That number was significantly lower than in 2013 (3,347 homes) and 2014 (3,019).

 

2016-11-16_14-05-42

In percentage terms, these expensive homes represented 1.06 percent of all new homes started for sale in 2015, from a peak of 1.26 percent in 2014 but about the same as in 2013 (0.99 percent). This represents a much higher percent share compared to other years. For instance, from 2008 to 2012 the percent share of $1 million or more homes started for sale was less than 0.50 percent, while it was at most 0.66 percent during the boom period, reported the National Association of Home Builders’ Eye on Housing blog.

To put things in perspective, Trulia reported in May that since 2012 the share of all million dollar homes in the United States has increased from 1.6 percent to 3 percent, but many metros and neighborhoods have seen a much larger increase.

read more…

http://www.realestateeconomywatch.com/2016/11/are-trophy-homes-losing-their-lustre/

Santa’s home on zestimate | Katonah Real Estate

Santa’s House  The North Pole

3 beds 2 baths 2,500 sqft

OFF MARKET
Zestimate®:$656,957
EST. REFI PAYMENT$3,228/mo
A toy-lover’s paradise nestled on 25 idyllic acres at the North Pole – perfect for spirited reindeer games. The home, constructed in the 1800s of gorgeous old-growth timber logged on site, is steeped in Old World charm but offers modern-day amenities, thanks to a 2013 renovation.

A welcoming entryway leads to the living room with a floor-to-ceiling river rock fireplace for roasting chestnuts. The gourmet kitchen is a baker’s dream, boasting an oven with 12 different cookie settings... More 

FACTS

  • Lot: 25 acres
  • Floor size: 2,500 sqft
  • Home type: Single Family
  • Year built: 1822
  • Last remodel: 2013

FEATURES

  • Santa’s Toy Workshop
  • Reindeer Stables
  • River Rock Fireplace
  • Sleigh Parking Garage

Zestimate Details

Zestimate
$656,957
+$1,144 Last 30 days
$610K

$700K

Zestimate range
Rent Zestimate
$3,300/mo
+$46 Last 30 days
$2.8K

$3.5K

Zestimate range
Zestimate forecast
$671,451
+2%
One year
  • Zestimate

*Endorsement by the United States Department of Defense or NORAD is not intended nor implied.

Why Foreclosures are Never-ending Credit Nightmares | Cross River Real Estate

The popular belief that the seven million Americans who lost their homes to foreclosure during the Housing Crash are healed, whole and forgiven of their debts after seven years have passed is only partly true.

For foreclosures, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac set a seven-year waiting period before defaulters can apply for a mortgage, measured from the completion date of the foreclosure action.  With time foreclosures, bankruptcy filings and tax liens disappear from credit records but the impact of their misfortune lingers for years in the form of substandard credit ratings and scores.

A new study from the Urban institute, The Lasting Impact of Foreclosures and Negative Public Records, corrects the conventional wisdom by chronicling the painful punishment suffered by victims of the foreclosure floods and the Great Recession that began in earnest a decade ago and the impact not just upon individual families but on the economy as a whole.

The researchers found that It takes a long time for a consumer’s credit score to recover from the impact of a foreclosure—far longer than the seven years the foreclosure remains on the credit report.

 

2016-11-18_14-39-13

From 2004 through 2015, 7.1 million borrowers experienced a foreclosure filing, and 34.4 million consumers acquired an adverse public record other than foreclosure. Altogether, 41.5 million people, or 16 percent of the 264 million US consumers with credit records, experienced a financial crisis that impacted their credit.

“We believe this extended impact at least partially explains the slow recovery after 2010, the study found,” wrote the authors, Wei Li, Laurie Goodman and Denise Bonsu.

More than 60 percent of consumers with these negative financial events still had VantageScore credit scores below 620 in 2015. More than 60 percent of them had delinquent debt in 2015, and only 8 percent of them were able to obtain new mortgages as of 2015. And, more than 70 percent of them were the age that preferred homeowning (between 29 and 59 years old) in 2015; this large group of potential borrowers with negative financial events profoundly affects the homeownership rate.

At least at the peak of crisis, when the spike in foreclosure filings jammed up judicial foreclosures, the long judicial foreclosure process might have prevented foreclosed-upon borrowers from moving on.

A large number of consumers will retain adverse events on their records for a considerable time, making it hard for many of them to borrow again. At the end of 2018, 22.8 million consumers—almost 9 percent of the adult consumer population—will still have a foreclosure or adverse public record.

Middle-aged consumers were hit hardest by these credit blemishes. Seventy-three percent of consumers (30 million) who experienced foreclosure or other adverse public records were between 29 and 59 years old in 2015, yet this age group accounts for only 53 percent of adult consumers. The middle-aged consumers hit hardest by these adverse credit events have had a profound impact on the homeownership rate because their age group has the strongest preference for homeownership.

 

read more…

 

http://www.realestateeconomywatch.com/2016/11/why-foreclosures-are-never-ending-credit-nightmares/

U.S. new home sales jump to four-month high | Bedford Hills Real Estate

New U.S. single-family home sales rose more than forecast to a four-month high in November, likely as expectations of higher mortgage rates drew buyers into the market.

Other data on Friday showed consumer sentiment holding at near a 13-year high this month as Americans anticipated that a stronger economy would create more jobs.

The Commerce Department said new home sales increased 5.2 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 592,000 units last month.

Economists polled by Reuters had forecast single-family home sales, which account for about 9.5 percent of overall home sales, rising 2.1 percent to a 575,000-unit rate last month.

New home sales, which are derived from building permits, are volatile on a month-to-month basis and subject to large revisions. Sales were up 16.5 percent from a year ago.

Separately, the University of Michigan said its consumer sentiment index edged up to a reading of 98.2 from 98 earlier this month. That was the highest reading since January 2004.

The U.S. dollar .DXY pared gains and was trading lower against a basket of currencies after the data. Prices of U.S. Treasuries were trading higher while U.S. stock indexes were mixed.

Mortgage rates have been rising rapidly in the wake of Donald Trump’s victory in the Nov. 8 U.S. presidential election, which economists say could be pulling procrastinators into the market in fear of further increases in borrowing costs.

Trump’s plan to boost infrastructure spending and cut taxes is expected to stoke inflation. A report on Wednesday showed sales of previously owned homes rose to near a 10-year high in November.

INVENTORY RISE

Since the election, the interest rate on a fixed 30-year mortgage has increased more than 70 basis points to an average of 4.30 percent, the highest level since April 2014, according to data from mortgage finance firm Freddie Mac.

Mortgage rates are likely to rise further after the Federal Reserve raised its benchmark overnight interest rate last week by 25 basis points to a range of 0.50 percent to 0.75 percent. The U.S. central bank forecast three rate hikes for next year.

Higher borrowing costs come at a time when house price increases are outstripping wage gains, which could make purchases unaffordable for many first-time buyers.

 

read more…

 

http://www.marketbeat.com/stories.aspx?story=http%3a%2f%2ffeeds.reuters.com%2f~r%2freuters%2fbusinessNews%2f~3%2f96u5-iu_kio%2fus-usa-economy-idUSKBN14C1NI

Builder Confidence Holds Firm in November | South Salem Real Estate

Builder Sentiment Up

Builder confidence in the market for newly-built single-family homes held steady in November at a level of 63 on the National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo Housing Market Index (HMI).

Builder sentiment has held well above 60 for the past three months, indicating that the single-family housing sector continues to show slow, gradual growth. Ongoing job creation, rising incomes and attractive mortgage rates are supporting demand in the single-family housing sector. These factors will help keep housing on a steady, upward path in the months ahead.

 

hmi_nov

It is worth noting that most of the November HMI responses originated before the elections. Thus, builder confidence remained unchanged as the industry awaited the results.

Derived from a monthly survey that NAHB has been conducting for 30 years, the NAHB/Wells Fargo Housing Market Index gauges builder perceptions of current single-family home sales and sales expectations for the next six months as “good,” “fair” or “poor.” The survey also asks builders to rate traffic of prospective buyers as “high to very high,” “average” or “low to very low.” Scores for each component are then used to calculate a seasonally adjusted index where any number over 50 indicates that more builders view conditions as good than poor.

The HMI components measuring buyer traffic rose one point to 47, and the index gauging current sales conditions held steady at 69. Meanwhile, the component charting sales expectations in the next six months fell two points to 69.

 

read more…

 

http://eyeonhousing.org/2016/11/builder-confidence-holds-firm-in-november/

Mortgage rates average 4.30% | Bedford Real Estate

Freddie Mac (OTCQB: FMCC) today released the results of its Primary Mortgage Market Survey® (PMMS®), showing average fixed mortgage rates moving higher for the eighth consecutive week.

News Facts

  • 30-year fixed-rate mortgage (FRM) averaged 4.30 percent with an average 0.5 point for the week ending December 22, 2016, up from last week when it averaged 4.16 percent. A year ago at this time, the 30-year FRM averaged 3.96 percent.

  • 15-year FRM this week averaged 3.52 percent with an average 0.5 point, up from last week when it averaged 3.37 percent. A year ago at this time, the 15-year FRM averaged 3.22 percent.

  • 5-year Treasury-indexed hybrid adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) averaged 3.32 percent this week with an average 0.4 point, up from last week when it averaged 3.19 percent. A year ago, the 5-year ARM averaged 3.06 percent.

Average commitment rates should be reported along with average fees and points to reflect the total upfront cost of obtaining the mortgage. Visit the following link for the Definitions. Borrowers may still pay closing costs which are not included in the survey.

Quote
Attributed to Sean Becketti, chief economist, Freddie Mac.

“A week after the only rate hike of 2016, the mortgage industry digested the Fed’s decision and this week’s survey reflects that response. Following Yellen’s speech last Wednesday, the 10-year Treasury yield rose approximately 10 basis points. The 30-year mortgage rate rose 14 basis points to 4.30 percent, reaching highs we have not seen since April 2014.”

Trump’s Plan to Fix the Nation’s Infrastructure | Katonah Real Estate

The President-elect’s ambitious proposal relies on private financing, but the plan has its critics.

 

According to President-elect Donald Trump, the answer is yes. You can get $1 trillion in infrastructure using a “revenue neutral” model of private financing that won’t burden government budgets.

The declining state of America’s infrastructure has long been a major issue for both Democrats and Republicans, but the parties have disagreed about how to pay for what the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has identified as a $3.6 trillion investment gap.

Trump’s senior policy advisers say they have an answer. In late October, Wilbur Ross, a private equity investor, and Peter Navarro, a University at California, Irvine business professor, released a detailed plan for Trump’s vision on infrastructure, which calls for investment in transportation, clean water, the electricity grid, telecommunications, security infrastructure, and “other pressing domestic needs.” Trump’s vision relies heavily on private companies to make American infrastructure great again.

Road work in Kitsap County in Washington state

Kitsap County Public Works – Roads Division via flickrRoad work in Kitsap County in Washington state

To finance $1 trillion dollars worth of new infrastructure, the Trump plan would entice private companies to invest $167 billion of their own equity into projects. In return, these companies would get a tax incentive equal to 82% of that equity investment, or roughly $137 million in government tax breaks. Companies could then leverage their initial equity investment and tax credit financing to borrow more money on private financial markets, where interest rates are at historic lows. “With interest rates so low, this has got to be the best time from a break-even point of view, from a societal point of view,” Ross told Yahoo! Finance.

In addition, companies would be allowed to receive revenue—in the form of tolls or fees from users of this infrastructure—in order to offset their costs and generate profits.

An overpass project on Interstate 595 in Florida

FormulaNone via flickrJosh Lintz”An overpass project on Interstate 595 in Florida

The Trump plan hopes to pay for the financial burden of those government tax credits in two ways: First, through the increased tax revenue that would come from the wage income of construction workers and others building the projects; and second, from the taxes that would be paid on the increased revenues of the companies contracted to do the work. In other words, the income tax of workers and the profits made from fees collected from users of the infrastructure would offset the lost tax revenue from government tax credits.

Creating a deficit-neutral infrastructure plan is nothing new. In 2015, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) championed a bill calling for a $478 billion investment over six years without increasing the deficit. Funding relied on closing corporate tax breaks that allow corporations to stash money overseas. That bill was blocked by the Republican Senate.

Public-private partnerships are common in complex infrastructure projects, but what’s unusual about Trump’s plan is the extent to which private companies would take over the entirety of projects. Private entities, which are beholden to corporate revenue requirements, would be put in charge of public sphere entities. Navarro, responding to that potential criticism, said in an interviewwith Yahoo! Finance that Trump’s “form of financing doesn’t rule out the government managing the whole thing after it’s built. This is not like the prison thing.” (Stock prices of for-profit prison companies, meanwhile, are on the rise with Trump’s win.)

A sewer project in Baltimore

Elvert Barnes via flickrA sewer project in Baltimore

How important is it to close the infrastructure investment gap? The ASCE’s 2013 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure gave the country a D+ grade. The next report card is being prepped for release in March 2017. “From ACSE’s perspective, clearly there’s a role for the private sector in infrastructure development, and it’s already been involved for a long time,” says Brian T. Pallasch, managing director of Government Relations and Infrastructure Initiatives at the society. “We still have a bit of uncertainty as to what [private investment] means in the Trump administration’s proposed perspective. They clearly want private investment in infrastructure. When you get the private sector involved in infrastructure, there is going to need to be a rate of return for them to make money. Historically, municipal infrastructure hasn’t had private investors because there hasn’t been a rate of return. How does that solve itself?”

How, for example, might you make the business case for a profit-driven private company to invest in the municipal water supply in Flint, Mich.? The answer may lie in increased fees for users of that service. “We feel very strongly that users of infrastructure should pay for it. That principal is one we support,” Pallasch says. That said, he notes the need to be realistic about the financial burden certain fees could cause. “The idea of raising water rates is a struggle for many municipalities where you have low-income households. We’ve been talking to colleagues in the water world about how do you set up programs where you raise rates and it allows subsidization of lower income residents?”

As for water, the Trump plan suggests tripling funding for state revolving loan fund programs, which supply low cost financing to municipalities, but it does not identify where those increased funds would come from.

Trains in Des Moines, Iowa

Phil Roeder via flickrTrains in Des Moines, Iowa

Critics of revenue-neutral plans such as these say that what would be saved on the front end will get paid for on the back end in the form of tolls and increased fees for users. In general, “revenue neutral tax proposals by definition create winners and losers,” economist Thomas L. Hungerford wrote last year in an op-ed. “The winners would pay less in taxes and the losers would pay more in taxes. The losers tend to be highly concentrated in certain income groups and business sectors, essentially becoming special interests.”

Some economists believe the Trump plan to use tax revenues to offset costs is overly ambitious. It assumes that the income tax revenue generated from construction and other contract workers on these projects will be in addition to existing tax revenue. As Alan Cole, an economist at the independent Tax Foundation, told the Washington Post, the plan overinflates the potential revenue because it assumes workers on these projects were previously unemployed or not already contributing to income tax revenue. (This plan also means that income tax revenue would be diverted from other funding needs to underwrite infrastructure.)

Cole noted, too, that Americans would ultimately foot the bill for these new projects, not only in user fees. “Maintenance and new construction would only occur in communities where it is urgently needed if private investors were convinced users could afford to pay,” he told The Washington Post. And if, as Navarro proposed in his Yahoo! Finance interview, the government takes over the projects once built, then the government would be on the hook for long-term care and maintenance.

Indeed, having so much private investment could weight projects to wealthier demographics. “Under Trump’s plan, poorer communities that need the new projects and repairs the most would get the least attention,” writes Jeff Spross, business and economic correspondent for The Week.

Lents Town Center project in Portland, Ore.

Twelvizm via flickrLents Town Center project in Portland, Ore.

There’s also concern that Trump’s infrastructure plan doesn’t work in tandem with his other proposed policy changes, such as tax cuts for the wealthy. “He’s right that borrowing to invest in infrastructure makes sense in times like these when interest rates are low,” the editors of The New York Times write. “But combined with his other plans, Mr. Trump’s proposed borrowing would do severe fiscal damage.”

Once financed by private enterprise and tax incentives, infrastructure projects under Trump’s plan would speed through the “boondoggle” of “red tape” via a proposed streamlined approval process. Projects would “put American steel made by American workers into the backbone of America’s infrastructure,” according to the vision statement, co-authored in part by Ross. A billionaire investor, he specializes in bankruptcies and has “parlayed a series of ballsy political and financial gambles on left-for-dead assets—midwestern steel mills, southern textile mills, and Appalachian coal mines—into an empire.” It’s unclear how Trump’s administration would dictate that private companies use only American steel when Trump himself relied on cheaper Chinese steelin his own real estate development projects. The Trump vision also touts an increase in private sector investment to “better connect American coal and shale energy production with markets and consumers.” Notably absent is any mention of investment in renewable energy infrastructure.

Overall, the current Trump plan strongly focuses on traditional “horizontal” infrastructure needs—surface roads, pipelines, water distribution. Besides a call to modernize America’s airports, the infrastructure of buildings and other public spaces isn’t explicitly mentioned. The ACSE, meanwhile, categorizes schools, public parks, and recreation among the critical infrastructure needs in its report card.

Fort Irwin hospital project in California

US Army Corps of Engineers via flickrFort Irwin hospital project in California

The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has consistently lobbied the government to expand its view of infrastructure. “One of the things that we’ve communicated to presidential transition teams in the past, and will continue to do, is to remember that infrastructure is more than roads and bridges; it’s also schools and libraries and buildings,” says Andrew Goldberg, Assoc. AIA, the Institute’s managing director of government relations and advocacy. “It’s not just the infrastructure that moves people and things, it’s also what happens once you get there. Infrastructure was the first policy related item that Trump mentioned in his victory speech, and I think that there is a strong opportunity coming into next year for some serious work. It will be important to speak to the importance of the built environment and the community assets in addition to ‘traditional’ infrastructure.”

 

read more…

 

http://www.ecobuildingpulse.com/news/trumps-plan-to-fix-the-nations-infrastructure_s?utm_source=newsletter&utm_content=Article&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBP_111516%20(1)&he=bd1fdc24fd8e2adb3989dffba484790dcdb46483

Share of Past Due Mortgages Drop Significantly | Bedford Hills Real Estate

Information released by the Mortgage Bankers’ Association (MBA) indicates that the share of all 1-4 family mortgage loans past due has returned to a level of normality. According to the MBA’s National Delinquency Survey, the share of all 1-4 family mortgages considered past due fell by 14 basis points to 4.52 percent. One year ago 4.99 percent of loans were considered past due.

The current share of loans past due has fallen significantly from its recession-related peak of 10.1 percent in 2010. Moreover, the current share of past due mortgages is below the average percentage between 1980, the beginning of the series, and 2006, 4.8 percent. Additionally, the average between 1987 and 2006 was 4.6 percent.

presentation1

Deeper analysis finds that the underlying composition of mortgages past due has improved, but has not fully recovered. Mortgages considered past due include those that are 30-59 days past due, 60-89 days late, and 90 or more days delinquent. It excludes mortgages that have entered foreclosure.

The figure below presents the distribution of mortgages past due by the 3 categories of lateness. Currently, about half of past due mortgages, 52 percent, are 30-59 days past due, 17 percent are 60-89 days past due, while 31 percent are 90 or more days delinquent. The present composition is better than the distribution at the peak in 2010, when mortgages 90 or more days past due accounted for half, 50 percent, of all past due mortgages.

However, the composition of past due mortgages on average between 1980 and 2006 was even more concentrated in the 30-59 day late category. On average, over the 1980-2006 period, mortgages 30-59 days past due accounted 67 percent of all past due mortgages while mortgages 90 or more days past due represented 16 percent. Also at 16 percent, the share of mortgages 60-89 days past due between 1980 and 2006 is similar to its current percentage of 17 percent.

presentation2

 

 

read more…

 

http://eyeonhousing.org/2016/11/share-of-past-due-mortgages-reaches-post-recession-low/