Teardown Communities In Connecticut
Redevelopment within established communities, also known as infill development, is gaining momentum throughout the U.S. and is considered by many as a “Smart Growth” housing trend. Building a new home in such a community usually requires a demolition permit for the removal of the old house in order to clear the construction site. The infill trend can be accurately analyzed through demolition permits that are issued by municipalities before any new construction starts.
One of the active infill redevelopment states is the state of Connecticut. The state keeps good track of demolition activity by collecting and aggregating the data from each of 186 towns in its jurisdiction. The chart below depicts such statewide activity since 1999.
Even from a brief look at the chart, one can notice an upward trend in infill construction of 1-unit buildings or single family residences (SFR) with a downward trend of the other housing types. The share of SFR’s grew from 38% in 1999 to almost 70% (in 2006) of total infill construction in the state. That makes me believe that SFR infill will remain the most resilient sector in the current housing turmoil.
The unique characteristic of the “teardown” communities is that they are specifically clustered. More than half of SFR redevelopment in the state is occurring in the below nine communities (out of 118 that reported at least 1 demolition):
|
City |
median |
2006 |
2005 |
2004 |
2003 |
2002 |
2001 |
2000 |
1999 |
|
Greenwich |
$1,267,500 |
166 |
166 |
153 |
105 |
97 |
70 |
77 |
56 |
|
Westport |
$902,500 |
94 |
112 |
112 |
73 |
76 |
60 |
65 |
73 |
|
New Canaan |
$1,087,500 |
50 |
70 |
81 |
57 |
51 |
38 |
36 |
40 |
|
Fairfield |
$737,738 |
61 |
65 |
61 |
38 |
34 |
35 |
17 |
12 |
|
Darien |
$890,000 |
41 |
41 |
43 |
26 |
30 |
31 |
29 |
25 |
|
Stamford |
$825,000 |
39 |
69 |
42 |
24 |
8 |
5 |
7 |
4 |
|
Wilton |
$799,000 |
20 |
25 |
28 |
26 |
16 |
11 |
13 |
13 |
|
Ridgefield |
$735,000 |
32 |
16 |
23 |
13 |
18 |
9 |
7 |
3 |
|
Trumbull |
$737,738 |
22 |
12 |
14 |
9 |
5 |
11 |
3 |
3 |
All of these communities have common characteristics; established, mature, close-in community (i),  convenient access to NYC (ii), good schools (iii), low crime (iv), redevelopment friendly municipality (v), and high-value real estate (vi). All of them are contributing factors to the exponential growth - it is flight to quality.
Â
 Now I know where I’d be looking to buy/build if I was moving to the Big Apple.  
Popularity: 22% [?]
Rate this post - click a star; 5 being the best.
(8 votes, average: 5 out of 5)
Loading ...You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 8th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
I’m not surprised that Ridgefield has experienced so many teardowns as much of the current housing stock is located on prime building lots where the existing house is obsolete in terms of efficiency as well as what buyers what these days.
Mostly all of the lots have already been built leading us to look to re-development as a means to meet the demand for new homes.
February 9th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Ridgefield is definitely an area to watch - builder opinion tells us that there is a desire for vacant land and teardowns there. We’re starting to get more requests!
February 13th, 2008 at 10:32 am
We’re seeing the same here (Chicago suburbs); when a community becomes to expensive, people move to a “better value” usually adjacent community.