Volume 19, Issue 4
Affordable Housing in New Urbanist Communities: A Survey of Developers
Comment: McIlwain
Comment: Dietz
Prepayment Penalties in Residential Mortgage Contracts: A Cost-Benefit Analysis
Mobility and Exit from Homeownership: Implications for Community Reinvestment Lending
Fostering Low-Income Homeownership through Individual Development Accounts: A Longitudinal, Randomized Experiment
State Innovations in Affordable Housing Policy: Lessons from California and New Jersey
Volume 19, Issue 3
Volume 19, Issue 2
Volume 19, Issue 1
Volume 18, Issue 4
Volume 18, Issue 3
Volume 18, Issue 2
Volume 18, Issue 1
Volume 17, Issue 4
Volume 17, Issue 3
Volume 17, Issue 2
Volume 17, Issue 1
Volume 16, Issues 3 and 4
Volume 16, Issue 2
Volume 16, Issue 1
Volume 15, Issue 4
Volume 15, Issue 3
Volume 15, Issue 2
Volume 15, Issue 1
Volume 14, Issue 4
Volume 14, Issue 3
Volume 14, Issues 1 and 2
Volume 13, Issue 4
Volume 13, Issue 3
Volume 13, Issue 2
Volume 13, Issue 1
Volume 12, Issue 4
Volume 12, Issue 3
Volume 12, Issue 2
Volume 12, Issue 1
Volume 11, Issue 4
Volume 11, Issue 3
Volume 11, Issue 2
Volume 11, Issue 1
Volume 10, Issue 4
Volume 10, Issue 3
Volume 10, Issue 2
Volume 10, Issue 1
Volume 9, Issue 4
Volume 9, Issue 3
Volume 9, Issue 2
Volume 9, Issue 1
Volume 8, Issue 4
Volume 8, Issue 3
Volume 8, Issue 2
Volume 8, Issue 1
Volume 7, Issue 4
Volume 7, Issue 3
Volume 7, Issue 2
Volume 7, Issue 1
Volume 6, Issue 4
Volume 6, Issue 3
Volume 6, Issue 2
Volume 6, Issue 1
Volume 5, Issue 4
Volume 5, Issue 3
Volume 5, Issue 2
Volume 5, Issue 1
Volume 4, Issue 4
Volume 4, Issue 3
Volume 4, issue 2
Volume 4, Issue 1
Volume 3, Issue 4
Volume 3, Issue 3
Volume 3, Issue 2
Volume 3, Issue 1
Volume 2, Issue 4
Volume 2, Issue 3
Volume 2, Issue 2
Volume 2 Issue 1
Volume 1, Issue 1

Search:
All of MI
Housing Policy Debate

Metropolitan Institute
1021 Prince St, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
703-706-8100 tel
703-518-8009 fax
mivt@vt.edu


mi email
 
Sign up today and recieve email notification of new postings to the MI site.
First Name: *
Last Name:*
Company or  Affiliation:*
Email:*


* Required Field


Comment: McIlwain
Volume 19, Issue 4
2008
 
John K. McIlwain
 
A long-time criticism of New Urbanism has been that the housing it provides is affordable only to middle- and upper-income families. Johnson and Talen’s survey of New Urbanist developers and developments is intended to see whether this criticism is justified. Although the methodology is limited, the results of this survey would seem to indicate that it is.

Because Johnson and Talen’s survey is restricted to New Urbanist developments, it is not possible to compare the results with those for other, more conventional developments to see whether New Urbanist developments may actually contain more affordable units than comparable conventional projects. Also, limiting the definition of affordability to the cost of housing alone prevents the authors from seeing whether the housing New Urbanist communities provide would be considered less expensive if housing and transportation costs were combined.
 
© Copyright 2009 Metropolitan Institute. All Rights Reserved. Designed by DC Web Designers