Each quarter, HSH.com publishes a report that looks at the annual income required to quality for a residential mortgage in the 50 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. To do this, they look at the median home price for each city and then apply a 28% debt-to-income ratio (principal and interest payments divided by before tax salary). They also assume a 20% down payment and a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. In their latest report, that comes with an interest rate of 3.15%.

Below is a chart showing what they consider to be the 10 most affordable and the 10 least affordable metros (chart via the New York Times). I don't think the cities on this list will necessarily surprise many of you (though I didn't think Pittsburgh was this affordable), but it is interesting to see it all quantified. It's also worth thinking about what might happen to these figures as that 3.15% number comes down. Shockingly, the price of highly-levered assets tends to be correlated with financing costs.

If you check out the “What I read” page that I recently added to Architect This City, you might notice a blog by Charlie Gardner called the Old Urbanist. I discovered it a few months ago (when he added ATC to his blog roll) and it’s good stuff.

Last week he posted this interesting piece comparing homeownership rates and house sizes in both Mexico and the US. His finding is that there’s a fundamental mismatch in America in terms of the size of housing and the size of households. One and two person households now represent more than half of the market, and are on the rise, and yet 40% of houses in the US have 3 bedrooms.

Because of this mismatch, he’s arguing that households are being poorly served by the US housing market and that it’s driving down homeownership levels. It currently sits around 65%, which is a drop from over 69% during the mid 2000s. Contrast this to Mexico, where there’s a greater number of one and two person households and the homeownership rate is 80%! Oh, and where only

Each quarter, HSH.com publishes a report that looks at the annual income required to quality for a residential mortgage in the 50 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. To do this, they look at the median home price for each city and then apply a 28% debt-to-income ratio (principal and interest payments divided by before tax salary). They also assume a 20% down payment and a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. In their latest report, that comes with an interest rate of 3.15%.

Below is a chart showing what they consider to be the 10 most affordable and the 10 least affordable metros (chart via the New York Times). I don't think the cities on this list will necessarily surprise many of you (though I didn't think Pittsburgh was this affordable), but it is interesting to see it all quantified. It's also worth thinking about what might happen to these figures as that 3.15% number comes down. Shockingly, the price of highly-levered assets tends to be correlated with financing costs.

If you check out the “What I read” page that I recently added to Architect This City, you might notice a blog by Charlie Gardner called the Old Urbanist. I discovered it a few months ago (when he added ATC to his blog roll) and it’s good stuff.

Last week he posted this interesting piece comparing homeownership rates and house sizes in both Mexico and the US. His finding is that there’s a fundamental mismatch in America in terms of the size of housing and the size of households. One and two person households now represent more than half of the market, and are on the rise, and yet 40% of houses in the US have 3 bedrooms.

Because of this mismatch, he’s arguing that households are being poorly served by the US housing market and that it’s driving down homeownership levels. It currently sits around 65%, which is a drop from over 69% during the mid 2000s. Contrast this to Mexico, where there’s a greater number of one and two person households and the homeownership rate is 80%! Oh, and where only