DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET #4
A. SUBMARKET DESCRIPTION
1. LOCATION
The Heights Submarket is located in Harris County in the northwestern portion
of the Houston and is defined by the following boundaries: Interstate 610 to the
north, Interstate 45 to the east, Washington Avenue to the south, and North
Shepherd Drive to the west. The Heights Submarket was determined through
interviews with area leasing and real estate agents, government officials,
economic development representatives, and the personal observations of our
analysts. The personal observations of our analysts include physical and/or
socioeconomic differences in the market and a demographic analysis of the
area households and population.
2. COUNTY SEAT
Houston
III-121
3. LOCAL GOVERNMENT
The Heights Submarket is located within the Houston jurisdiction. Houston is
a home-rule city with nine city council districts and five at-large council
positions, which represent the entire city. Each council position and the city
controller position are non-partisan. Each position has a three-term limit; each
term is two years.
4. AREA
Area: 7.0 square miles
2005 Population: 38,644
2005 Households: 15,737
5. COMMUNITY SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
A map illustrating the location of community services is on the following page.
III-122
E 32nd St
Heights: Community Services No Cap
Yale St
ell St
S
nton Blvd
astman St
ay St
St
C
vernus St
ogers St
nsmere St
tridge Rd St rth
t
a St
Pai
vd
ccomb St
W 31st
E 31st
261 Fw Reid St
Exit 16 I-610 North Loop E
I 45
y
Robertson St
W 30th St E 30th St I 610 I 610
610 610
Exit 10m E 29 Kelley St
th St
Leon St
N
State Hwy 261
Fulton St
Princeton St
I 610 610 North Loop E 28th St
th Loop W Eleanor St
Grinnell
W 28th St
I 45
Avenue of Oaks St
Baylor St
Sylvester Rd
Driveway E 27th St X
Helmers St
Enid St
X W 27th St Woodard St
Cornell St
90
S
E 26th St Samuel St Eichwurzel Ln
Brinkman St
Fairbanks St
Lawrence St
W 26th St Danna Ln
Gostic St
Aurora St Service St
Beall St
Gibbs St Robert Lee Rd Milwaukee St
W 25th St E 25th St Lenard St
Airline Dr
Ih 45
Munford St Graceland St Gri 610
Northwood St
Norhill Blvd
Ashland St
W 24th St E 24th St English St
Nicholson St Link Rd
Rutland St
Tabor St
Hov Fw
E 23rd St Sue St
Carter St
W 23rd St H
v
Michaux St
Wynne St Joyce St
Singleton St
Oxford St
E 22nd St Adele St
Columbia St
Arlington St
Y TX
W 22nd St Louise St Gale St
Gostick St
Yale St
y
Tarver St Ga
HOUSTON
W 21st St X Canadian St X
-
HOUSTON TX
Robbie St
Bristol St
Fisk St
Irvington Blvd
Edison St
Moore St
Billingsley St
X
Averill St
Beggs St
Moody St
K VILLAG TX
Hain St
E 20th St W Cavalcade St
Airline Dr
W 20th St 45
Elser St
Sheldon
45
w
59
E 19th St Kern St Posey St Cavalcade St
N
W 19th St Pettit St
Ev
Ma
Idylwild St
Exit 50b
E 18th E 18th St Mathis St
in
W 18th St St
W 18th St
y St Frawley S
Siegel St
St
Beck
Vincent St
St
Cordell St
610
Archer St
E 17th St Winston
X Pittman St
N Durham Dr
W 17th St Amundsen St Connecting Rd
Walling St
X E 16th St Coronado St Weiss
Harris Ct
W 16th St Clio St
ie St v
Freemont St
Walton St
Pedd Cody St Ma WEST UNIVERSITY PLAC TX
W 15th 1/2 St Le Green St WP
Ra
atton Patton St
SOUTHSIDE PLACE TX
Eg
Beverly St
E 15th St
mp
W 15th St St BELLAIRE TX
St
N Shepherd Dr
F
Edsee St
Laird St
Algregg St Heslep St
X
ian
De George St
W 14th 1/2 St Erin S
X
Fu
Ke 0 2 4 6
Jul
E 14th St Gardner St nn
lto
W 14th St Ca Wee
Studewood St
W Gardner St on Sh
Timbergrove Ln
Blair St
n
E 13th 1/2 St N Fugate St le m
W Fugate St Miles
Alb
St
M nd s St
Dian St
Oak Ridge St
ain
E 13th St X ar St
Cortlandt St
e
Ln W Melwood St
X
Moss St Bruce St
W 13th St Melwood St
rS
Reagan St
St St
E 12th 1/2 St Pizer St
t
X W Temple St Temple St Searle Dr Collingsworth St Colli
v vE 12th St Map layers
Irvington Blvd
W 12th St W Cottage St Cottage St Bo
E 11th 1/2 St v
C
Key St Dell Ct Bigelow S Submarket
Peco Railey St
Je
r
I 45 N
te
re M
st
11th St E 11th St
in
icha Pecore St Ba
er
W 11th St Je
y Fire Department
M
State Hwy 261
ux ss
B
Bay Oaks Rd
E 10th 1/2 St M
lv
W 10th 1/2 St Redan St am Hays
X t ari
d
Prince St
go Lil ine
Nashua St
aS
ransto W 10th St E 10th St Driveway
X Merrill St rm ld a c S t C Police
Florence St
No
Morrison St
n Ct
Beauchamp St
Helen St
Omar St E St St Halpern St
oydon X Airport/Airfield
I4
Reynolds St
Ct Highland St St
Studewood St
Ma S
Park
Atlantic St
Heights Blvd
Watson St
Gentry St
E 9th St
Alexander St
5
Lawrence St
W 9th St Glen
Bayland Ave Luzon St
\
Allston St
Ra
inf
m E 8th 1/2 St
College/Univ
ord
p Woodland St
w
Hospital
Northwood St
E 8th St Euclid St
St
X North St
Herkimer St
Ashland St
Tulane St
Drivew Glen Oaks St
Dorothy St
Nicholson St
Byrne St Payne St Boundary St
ay
X E 7th 1/2 St
T
Oilfield
Rutland St
K ee
Parkview St
Teetshorn St l St
v
Ide
W 7th StE 7th St C ar St
Moy St
Ful
v
ne
v
Norhill Blvd
Park
Com berry
Ridge St
Tac St
Waverly St
Egbert St St ris
Leafton Ln
al S
E 6th 1/2 St
ton
Sage Mor
S
Wendel St
ka
t
ansas St
Michaux St
Roy Cir k Dr
mo
Che
ve
Y Religious Site
t
Sledge St ite Oa
Rutland Pl
Kiam St W 6th St W 6th St
Eve reem
Wh
ton A
nS t
Usener St Wrightwood St
stn
r
Petty St Usener St
X School
kD
Roy St
rett
X
NM
t
t
n S St
ut S
E 5th 1/2 St
S
F
Forester
t ma i e
Hous
Darling St
Oa
W 5th St E 5th St 45
Qui Winn
ain
St
v ud St 0 .2 .4 .6
t
Larkin St
e
St
Oxford St
hit
t t t
v Ma v
ry S rie S es S
St
Ho
an
Raiff St
on t
Cornish St
Columbia St
W
Arlington St
H e n Ma t Jam an S
X
Johnson St
St
W 4th StE 4th St g
Reinerman St
t
Gar gan S Miles
em
0E
I 10 W Kolb St Weber St Exit 76
8 all S hop S
ch Bis
Katy Fwy Pas Ho
d
HOUSTON v
Detering St
Silver St
Stu
Chester St Exit 766 I 10 E Alamo St S 1:30,269
Nolda St
w n ey
y
Sandman St
Herd 10 Ovid St nck
Inker St Marina St Pi
r St
Hemphill St
Lewtcher
t o
Fle
Spencer St ring
Sou ser Dr
Spring St
T C Jester Blvd
Durham Dr
Eigel St Har
Gla
lo
i s S St
Shearn St
Fowler St
oks
Tay
Thompson St
th S
Koehler St E 2nd St
Ex
Maxie St Starkey St Connecting Rd Bro
t
it
Patterson St
Crockett St
Allen Eli St X
t
t
net
00
Yale St
St
Colorado St
Oliver St
Court St
Summer St Bur
Givens St
Schuler St High St
Bonner St
Pl
St
Diesel
East St
Winter St
Studer St
m
Nett St
mont
tha
Hicks St Bingham St 10 Daly Pl
Shepherd Dr
Center St X X
Sawyer St
en
Edwards St
X
Parker St
Harvard St
Washington Ave
Stude
Tr
Washington
Holly St
I1 E
Ramp
Garvin Ct Dart St lor
Hickory St
Lillian St
X
Goliad St
I1
Ave
Nay
Brashear St
0
Abbott St
Center St
y
0
W
Rose St
Sachs St
Epstein Ct
Lakin St Wagner
Barnes St
N
Waugh Dr
Weens
S Heights Blvd
Comira
Co
I 45
Floyd St
X
Ih
llin Sh
Snover St
Mellus St Blossom St Union St Washington Av sP
45
e l
Gibson St Avie St Decatur St Pre
Ho
Sta
Travis St
Bismark sto Stea
Riesner St
Reinicke
Henderso
n
d
Kane St
v
Feagan St
v
te Bet
Driv St
Olive St
Bl v
45
Park Tr
C
Fw
X
Sabine
Dickson St
White
Lubbock St
Trinity
ewa
Hw
X
ain St
y
y
hts
to St
Frank
Ida
y2
Butler St State St
Arn
Pr lin St
Sc X e
Ja
eig
C
6
6. DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS
a. POPULATION TRENDS
The Heights Submarket population base has decreased by 871 between
1990 and 2000. This represents a 2.2% decrease from the 1990 total
population, or an annual rate of 0.2%. The submarket population bases for
1990, 2000, 2005 (estimated), and 2010 (projected) are summarized as
follows:
YEAR
1990 2000 2005 2010
(CENSUS) (CENSUS) (ESTIMATED) (PROJECTED)
POPULATION 40,424 39,553 38,644 38,156
POPULATION CHANGE - -871 -909 -488
PERCENT CHANGE - -2.2% -2.3% -1.3%
Source: 2000 Census; Claritas; Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC
It is projected that the total population will decrease by 488 people, or
1.3%, between 2005 and 2010.
b. HOUSEHOLD TRENDS
While the population within the Heights Submarket decreased from 1990
to 2000, the total number of households has increased by 428 (2.7%)
between 1990 and 2000. Household trends within the Heights Submarket
are summarized as follows:
YEAR
1990 2000 2005 2010
(CENSUS) (CENSUS) (ESTIMATED) (PROJECTED)
HOUSEHOLDS 15,606 16,034 15,737 15,665
HOUSEHOLD CHANGE - 428 -297 -72
PERCENT CHANGE - 2.7% -1.9% -0.5%
HOUSEHOLD SIZE 2.6 2.5 2.5 2.4
Source: 2000 Census; Claritas; Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC
Total household growth has been positive between 1990 and 2000, but is
projected to decrease when there will be a total of 15,665 households in
2010. This is a decrease of approximately 37 households annually.
III-124
The submarket household bases by age are summarized as follows:
HOUSEHOLDS 2005 (ESTIMATED) 2010 (PROJECTED) CHANGE 2005-2010
BY AGE NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT
UNDER 25 761 4.8% 823 5.3% 62 8.1%
25 - 34 3,354 21.3% 2,635 16.8% -719 -21.4%
35 - 44 3,829 24.3% 3,683 23.5% -146 -3.8%
45 - 54 3,358 21.3% 3,455 22.1% 97 2.9%
55 - 64 2,070 13.2% 2,497 15.9% 427 20.6%
65 - 74 1,149 7.3% 1,397 8.9% 248 21.6%
75 - 84 815 5.2% 782 5.0% -33 -4.0%
85 & HIGHER 401 2.5% 394 2.5% -7 -1.7%
TOTAL 15,737 100.0% 15,666 100.0% -71 -0.5%
Source: 2000 Census; Claritas; Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC
Between 2005 and 2010, the greatest growth among household age groups
is expected to be among households between the ages of 55 and 74.
Households by tenure are distributed as follows:
2000 (CENSUS) 2005 (ESTIMATED)
TENURE HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT
OWNER-OCCUPIED 7,876 49.1% 7,690 48.9%
RENTER-OCCUPIED 8,158 50.9% 8,047 51.1%
TOTAL 16,034 100.0% 15,737 100.0%
Source: 2000 Census; Claritas; Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC
Renter-occupied households, as evidenced by the fact that nearly 51% of
all occupied housing units are renter-occupied, dominate the market.
The household size within the submarket, based on the 2000 Census, is
distributed as follows:
PERSONS PER 2000 (CENSUS) 2005 (ESTIMATED) CHANGE 2000-2005
HOUSEHOLD HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT
1 PERSON 5,984 37.3% 5,989 38.1% 5 0.1%
2 PERSONS 4,604 28.7% 4,459 28.3% -145 -3.1%
3 PERSONS 2,042 12.7% 1,998 12.7% -44 -2.2%
4 PERSONS 1,531 9.5% 1,470 9.3% -61 -4.0%
5 PERSONS 894 5.6% 861 5.5% -33 -3.7%
6+ PERSONS 979 6.1% 961 6.1% -18 -1.8%
TOTAL 16,034 100.0% 15,738 100.0% -296 -1.8%
Source: 2000 Census; Claritas; Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC
III-125
Based on the 2000 Census, the following is a distribution of housing units
in the submarket by year of construction.
HOUSING UNITS
YEAR OWNER PERCENT RENTER PERCENT
1999 TO MARCH 2000 92 1.2% 8 0.1%
1995 TO 1998 187 2.4% 128 1.6%
1990 TO 1994 97 1.2% 82 1.0%
1980 TO 1989 482 6.1% 567 7.0%
1970 TO 1979 223 2.8% 807 9.9%
1960 TO 1969 324 4.1% 1,253 15.4%
1940 TO 1959 1,633 20.7% 2,665 32.7%
1939 OR EARLIER 4,838 61.4% 2,648 32.5%
TOTAL 7,876 100.0% 8,158 100.0%
Approximately 4.8% of the owner-occupied homes in the submarket were
built since 1990. From 1995 through March 2000, the market absorbed
279 new owner-occupied homes, translating into nearly five homes per
month over this period.
HOUSING UNIT BUILDING PERMITS FOR
HARRIS COUNTY, TX
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
UNITS IN SINGLE-FAMILY STRUCTURES 16,055 18,244 20,122 23,052 26,450 28,020
UNITS IN 2-UNIT MULTIFAMILY
STRUCTURES 82 22 18 144 92 212
UNITS IN 3- AND 4-UNIT MULTIFAMILY
STRUCTURES 644 96 394 811 71 63
UNITS IN 5+ UNIT MULTIFAMILY
STRUCTURES 9,081 6,203 5,885 10,332 14,370 8,100
UNITS IN ALL MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURES 9,807 6,321 6,297 11,287 14,533 8,375
TOTAL UNITS 25,862 24,565 26,419 34,339 40,983 36,395
Source: SOCDS
SUBSTANDARD UNITS 2000 CENSUS
LACKING
TOTAL COMPLETE COMPLETE
HOUSING PLUMBING PLUMBING PERCENT
TENURE UNITS PERCENT FACILITIES FACILITIES SUBSTANDARD
OWNER-
OCCUPIED 7,876 49.1% 7,836 40 0.5%
RENTER-
OCCUPIED 8,158 50.9% 8,063 95 1.2%
TOTAL 16,034 100.0% 15,899 135 0.8%
Source: 2000 Census
III-126
POVERTY STATUS 2000 CENSUS
POPULATION NOT LIVING IN 31,840 80.5%
POVERTY
POPULATION LIVING IN 7,713 19.5%
POVERTY
TOTAL* 39,553 100.0%
Source: Summary File 3, Census of Population and Housing, U.S. Bureau of
the Census, 2000
* Population for whom poverty status is determined
TURNOVER RATE
HOUSTON MSA 64.4%
Source: 2003 IREM Income/Expense Analysis for Conventional Apartments
PERCENTAGE OF RENT-OVERBURDENED
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET 19.8%
Source: 2000 Census, Claritas
7. INCOME TRENDS
The distribution of households by income within the Heights Submarket is
summarized as follows:
HOUSEHOLD 2000 (CENSUS) 2005 (ESTIMATED) 2010 (PROJECTED)
INCOME NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT
LESS THAN $10,000 1,975 12.3% 1,617 10.3% 1,375 8.8%
$10,000 - $19,999 2,178 13.6% 1,622 10.3% 1,343 8.6%
$20,000 - $29,999 2,180 13.6% 1,788 11.4% 1,483 9.5%
$30,000 - $39,999 1,994 12.4% 1,806 11.5% 1,533 9.8%
$40,000 - $49,999 1,537 9.6% 1,558 9.9% 1,471 9.4%
$50,000 - $59,999 1,247 7.8% 1,250 7.9% 1,302 8.3%
$60,000 - $74,999 1,654 10.3% 1,499 9.5% 1,506 9.6%
$75,000 - $99,999 1,412 8.8% 1,834 11.7% 1,829 11.7%
$100,000 & HIGHER 1,857 11.6% 2,763 17.6% 3,823 24.4%
TOTAL 16,034 100.0% 15,737 100.0% 15,665 100.0%
MEDIAN INCOME $38,440 $46,642 $54,821
Source: 2000 Census; Claritas; Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC
In 2000, the median household income was $38,440. This increased 21.3% to
$46,642 in 2005. By 2010, it is estimated the median household income will
be $54,821, an increase of 17.5% over 2005.
Between 2000 and 2005, most of the household growth was among
households with incomes of $75,000 and higher.
III-127
The following tables illustrate renter household income by household size for
2000, 2005 (estimated), 2006 (projected), 2007 (projected), 2008 (projected),
and 2009 (projected) for the submarket:
RENTER 2000 CENSUS
HOUSEHOLDS 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 828 254 108 55 93 1,338
$10,000 - $20,000 745 264 251 112 173 1,545
$20,000 - $30,000 521 281 160 199 272 1,434
$30,000 - $40,000 490 272 132 158 135 1,187
$40,000 - $50,000 330 188 93 88 100 799
$50,000 - $60,000 158 164 69 73 41 505
$60,000+ 305 525 187 123 210 1,350
TOTAL 3,378 1,948 1,001 808 1,023 8,158
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER 2005 ESTIMATED
HOUSEHOLDS 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 744 205 92 46 72 1,160
$10,000 - $20,000 646 204 181 68 113 1,213
$20,000 - $30,000 478 225 126 165 213 1,207
$30,000 - $40,000 482 245 119 135 131 1,111
$40,000 - $50,000 424 186 103 81 133 927
$50,000 - $60,000 184 164 70 61 43 521
$60,000+ 504 696 256 163 288 1,907
TOTAL 3,462 1,925 947 719 994 8,047
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER 2006 PROJECTED
HOUSEHOLDS 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 736 196 88 45 69 1,135
$10,000 - $20,000 635 195 173 65 106 1,174
$20,000 - $30,000 470 218 121 158 202 1,169
$30,000 - $40,000 467 237 116 132 131 1,083
$40,000 - $50,000 424 183 102 79 131 919
$50,000 - $60,000 190 166 73 63 46 537
$60,000+ 548 730 272 172 309 2,030
TOTAL 3,471 1,927 944 714 993 8,049
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER 2007 PROJECTED
HOUSEHOLDS 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 729 187 85 44 66 1,110
$10,000 - $20,000 624 186 165 61 99 1,135
$20,000 - $30,000 463 212 115 152 190 1,131
$30,000 - $40,000 453 230 112 128 131 1,055
$40,000 - $50,000 424 181 100 78 129 911
$50,000 - $60,000 197 169 76 64 49 554
$60,000+ 593 764 288 182 329 2,155
TOTAL 3,481 1,928 941 709 992 8,050
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
III-128
RENTER 2008 PROJECTED
HOUSEHOLDS 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 721 178 81 42 62 1,084
$10,000 - $20,000 612 177 157 58 92 1,095
$20,000 - $30,000 455 205 110 145 178 1,093
$30,000 - $40,000 439 223 109 124 131 1,026
$40,000 - $50,000 424 178 99 76 127 903
$50,000 - $60,000 203 171 78 66 51 570
$60,000+ 637 798 304 192 349 2,280
TOTAL 3,491 1,929 937 703 991 8,052
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER 2009 PROJECTED
HOUSEHOLDS 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 713 169 77 41 59 1,059
$10,000 - $20,000 601 168 148 54 85 1,056
$20,000 - $30,000 447 198 104 138 166 1,054
$30,000 - $40,000 424 215 106 121 131 997
$40,000 - $50,000 424 175 97 74 125 895
$50,000 - $60,000 210 173 81 68 54 587
$60,000+ 683 833 320 201 370 2,406
TOTAL 3,501 1,931 934 698 990 8,053
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
The following tables illustrate renter household income by household size
(55+) for 2000, 2005 (estimated), 2006 (projected), 2007 (projected), 2008
(projected), and 2009 (projected) for the submarket:
RENTER 2000 CENSUS
HOUSEHOLDS 55+ 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 533 63 8 6 0 611
$10,000 - $20,000 273 67 23 0 9 372
$20,000 - $30,000 82 69 36 9 0 197
$30,000 - $40,000 44 23 6 0 9 81
$40,000 - $50,000 66 21 0 11 9 107
$50,000 - $60,000 18 13 0 8 13 52
$60,000+ 23 27 20 0 6 76
TOTAL 1,039 282 93 35 47 1,496
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER 2005 ESTIMATED
HOUSEHOLDS 55+ 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 466 53 8 4 0 532
$10,000 - $20,000 280 68 29 0 12 389
$20,000 - $30,000 125 80 44 15 2 265
$30,000 - $40,000 58 29 13 1 32 133
$40,000 - $50,000 71 20 2 9 21 123
$50,000 - $60,000 22 14 0 12 27 75
$60,000+ 42 49 35 1 13 140
TOTAL 1,065 312 131 42 107 1,656
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
III-129
RENTER 2006 PROJECTED
HOUSEHOLDS 55+ 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 463 51 7 5 0 527
$10,000 - $20,000 284 66 30 0 12 392
$20,000 - $30,000 124 82 43 14 2 265
$30,000 - $40,000 59 29 13 1 34 136
$40,000 - $50,000 74 24 3 9 21 131
$50,000 - $60,000 22 15 1 13 29 78
$60,000+ 47 56 40 2 18 162
TOTAL 1,074 323 137 44 115 1,692
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER 2007 PROJECTED
HOUSEHOLDS 55+ 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 460 49 7 5 0 522
$10,000 - $20,000 288 65 31 0 11 395
$20,000 - $30,000 124 84 42 14 2 266
$30,000 - $40,000 60 29 14 1 36 139
$40,000 - $50,000 77 28 3 10 21 139
$50,000 - $60,000 21 15 1 13 31 82
$60,000+ 51 63 46 2 22 185
TOTAL 1,082 334 143 46 122 1,727
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER 2008 PROJECTED
HOUSEHOLDS 55+ 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 457 48 6 6 0 517
$10,000 - $20,000 293 63 32 0 11 398
$20,000 - $30,000 124 86 41 14 2 266
$30,000 - $40,000 61 28 14 1 38 142
$40,000 - $50,000 80 33 3 11 21 147
$50,000 - $60,000 21 16 2 13 33 85
$60,000+ 56 71 51 3 26 207
TOTAL 1,091 344 150 48 130 1,763
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER 2009 PROJECTED
HOUSEHOLDS 55+ 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON TOTAL
$0 - $10,000 454 46 6 6 0 512
$10,000 - $20,000 297 61 33 0 10 401
$20,000 - $30,000 123 88 40 14 2 267
$30,000 - $40,000 62 28 14 1 40 145
$40,000 - $50,000 83 37 4 12 21 156
$50,000 - $60,000 20 17 2 13 35 88
$60,000+ 61 78 57 4 30 230
TOTAL 1,100 355 156 50 138 1,798
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
Data from the preceding tables is used in our demand estimates.
III-130
8. LOCAL ECONOMIC PROFILE AND ANALYSIS
a. LABOR FORCE PROFILE
Services and Retail Trade comprise a little more than 67% of the
submarket labor force.
Employment within the Heights Submarket as of 2005 is distributed as
follows:
SIC GROUP ESTABLISHMENTS PERCENT EMPLOYEES PERCENT
AGRICULTURE & NATURAL
RESOURCES 22 1.1% 163 0.8%
MINING 8 0.4% 48 0.2%
CONSTRUCTION 114 5.5% 1,105 5.4%
MANUFACTURING 141 6.7% 2,567 12.5%
TRANSPORTATION & UTILITIES 62 3.0% 770 3.8%
WHOLESALE TRADE 142 6.8% 2,920 14.3%
RETAIL TRADE 506 24.2% 3,947 19.3%
F.I.R.E. 146 7.0% 1,135 5.5%
SERVICES 909 43.5% 7,114 34.7%
GOVERNMENT 18 0.9% 602 2.9%
NON-CLASSIFIABLE 22 1.1% 109 0.5%
TOTAL 2,090 100.0% 20,480 100.0%
Source: 2000 Census; Claritas; Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC
Note: Due to the fact that this survey is conducted of establishments and not of residents, some employees may not live
within the submarket. However, these employees are included in our labor force calculations because their places of
employment are located within the submarket.
According to the Greater Houston Partnership, the 10 largest private
employers within the Houston area comprise a total of 124,118 employees.
These employers are summarized as follows:
TOTAL
INDUSTRY BUSINESS TYPE EMPLOYED
MEMORIAL HERMANN HEALTH CARE HEALTHCARE 16,300
CONTINENTAL AIRLINES TRANSPORTATION 16,000
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS –
MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER HEALTHCARE 16,000
HALLIBURTON OIL REFINING 14,000
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS
MEDICAL BRANCH AT GALVESTON HEALTHCARE 12,318
KROGER GROCERY 12,000
ARAMARK FOOD SERVICES 10,000
RELIANT ENERGY ELECTRIC SUPPLIER 9,500
HCA HEALTHCARE 9,000
HEWLETT PACKARD COMPUTER/ELECTRONICS 9,000
TOTAL 124,118
III-131
b. EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
The employment base has increased by 5.3% over the past five years in
Harris County, less than the Texas state average of 6.4%.
Unemployment rates for Harris County and Texas are illustrated as
follows:
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
YEAR HARRIS COUNTY TEXAS
1996 5.6% 5.8%
1997 5.2% 5.4%
1998 4.4% 4.9%
1999 4.8% 4.7%
2000 4.4% 4.4%
2001 4.8% 5.0%
2002 6.2% 6.3%
2003 6.9% 6.7%
2004 6.4% 6.1%
2005 5.8% 5.6%
The unemployment rate in Harris County has remained between 4.4% and
6.9%, constant with the state average since 1996.
III-132
RENTAL HOUSING ANALYSIS (SUPPLY) – HEIGHTS
SUBMARKET #4
A. OVERVIEW OF RENTAL HOUSING
Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC identified and personally surveyed one Tax
Credit/market-rate property and four market-rate developments in the Heights
Submarket. There is only one Tax Credit property in the market, Jefferson
Davis Lofts, a 34-unit mixed income property that is currently under
construction. This property will contain studio, one-, two, and three-bedroom
units available to households earning at or below 30%, 40%, 50%, and 60%
AMHI. There will also be units available at market-rate. At the time of this
report, all units are under construction with none pre-leased.
The surveyed market-rate developments have a combined occupancy rate of
96.4%. According to the on-line property inventory list of Tax Credit
allocations provided by the Texas Department of Housing and Community
Affairs (TDHCA), there are no other Tax Credit properties in the Heights
Submarket.
This survey was conducted to establish the overall strength of the rental
submarket, establish and confirm vacancy and rent levels, and gather
information on the current rental housing situation resulting from hurricanes
Katrina and Rita.
Following is the list of market-rate properties surveyed, both in person and by
telephone:
MARKET-RATE
MAP YEAR BUILT/ TARGET
I.D. PROJECT NAME RENOVATED TOTAL UNITS MARKET
2 SKYLINE 1960/2005 76 FAMILY
3 SHADOW OAKS 1962 23 FAMILY
4 OAKWOOD MANOR 1972/2005 96 FAMILY
5 WOODLAND GREEN 1960 30 FAMILY
The following table summarizes the overall market-rate rental market:
GROSS RENT
BEDROOMS UNITS DISTRIBUTION VACANT PERCENT RANGE
STUDIO 39 17.3% 4 10.3% $423-$535
ONE-BEDROOM 104 46.2% 2 1.9% $560-$746
TWO-BEDROOM 82 36.4% 2 2.4% $639-$882
TOTAL 225 100.0% 8 3.6%
Note the above chart includes market-rate units at market-rate properties and
market-rate units at mixed-income properties (Tax Credit/market-rate).
III-133
Most of the units in the market are smaller unit types (studio, one- and two-
bedroom units). Most of the vacant units are occurring in the studio units
with 10.3% vacant. The Tax Credit property currently under construction will
be the only multifamily development in the submarket to offer larger units
types (three-bedroom units).
We rated each property surveyed on a scale of A through E. All properties
were rated based on quality and overall appearance (i.e., aesthetic appeal,
building appearance, landscaping, and grounds appearance).
Of the market-rate properties that were surveyed by Vogt Williams & Bowen
in person, 42.7% have a quality rating of B-; the remaining 57.3% were
surveyed by telephone and therefore were not given a quality rating.
QUALITY RATING TOTAL UNITS PERCENT
B- 96 42.7%
NA 129 57.3%
The following tables summarize the range and median size of the surveyed
units by property type and bedroom type:
MARKET-RATE – NET SQUARE FEET
UNIT TYPE MINIMUM MAXIMUM MEDIAN
STUDIO 375 550 550
ONE-BEDROOM 600 982 650
TWO-BEDROOM 700 1,003 900
The following tables summarize the distribution of appliances and unit
amenities among all non-subsidized surveyed properties:
APPLIANCES
APPLIANCE PROJECTS PERCENT UNITS
RANGE 5 100.0% 225
REFRIGERATOR 5 100.0% 225
DISHWASHER 3 60.0% 119
DISPOSAL 3 60.0% 119
UNIT AMENITIES
AMENITY PROJECTS PERCENT UNITS
AC – CENTRAL 4 80.0% 149
AC – WINDOW 1 20.0% 76
FLOOR COVERING 5 100.0% 225
PATIO/BALCONY 2 40.0% 106
CEILING FAN 4 80.0% 129
WINDOW
TREATMENTS 5 100.0% 225
III-134
PROJECT AMENITIES
AMENITY PROJECTS PERCENT UNITS
ON-SITE
MANAGEMENT 3 60.0% 202
LAUNDRY 5 100.0% 225
SECURITY GATE 2 40.0% 30
PICNIC AREA 1 20.0% 23
B. PLANNED MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT
Based on the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs allocation
list of affordable multifamily housing projects, there are no Tax Credit
developments that have been allocated but not built in the submarket.
C. HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER HOLDERS
According to the Housing Authority of the City of Houston (HACH), there are
approximately 14,095 Housing Choice Vouchers currently allocated, with
approximately 8,000 people on the waiting list. According to the Housing
Authority, approximately 7% to 10% of the Vouchers turnover per month.
Below are the current Payment Standards for Housing Choice Vouchers
issued by HACH.
PAYMENT STANDARDS
STUDIO UNIT $551
ONE-BEDROOM UNIT $612
TWO-BEDROOM UNIT $743
THREE-BEDROOM UNIT $990
FOUR-BEDROOM UNIT $1,245
According to the Harris County Housing Authority, there are approximately
1,840 Housing Choice Vouchers issued throughout the county, with an
additional 500 vouchers issued to hurricane evacuees. Housing authority
representatives stated that there are approximately 598 people currently on the
waiting list for additional Vouchers, which is closed. The payment standards
for Harris County are equal to the current Fair Market Rents (FMR).
D. HURRICANE IMPACT ON THE RENTAL HOUSING MARKET
None of the six surveyed properties reported housing hurricane evacuees.
A map indicating the location of apartments surveyed is on the following on
page.
III-135
Heights: Apartment Locations No
E 32nd St Caplin S
Yale St
ell St
S
nton Blvd
astman St
St
C
1
vernus St
ogers St
Mcc
nsmere St
tridge Rd St rth
t
line Dr
a St
Pai
s St
W 31st
St
E 31st
261 Fw Reid St
I-610
Helmers St
W 30th St E 30th St I 610 y Exit 17 I 610
Princeton St
Robertson St
610 610 North Loop E
Exit 10m E 29th St Kelley St
Ram
Cortlandt St
610 North Loop E 28th St
th Loop W Eleanor St
Grinnell
W 28th St
I 45
Avenue of Oaks St
Baylor St
p
Driveway E 27th St Sylvester Rd
W 27th St Woodard St
Cornell St
90
S
E 26th St Samuel St Eichwurzel Ln
Brinkman St
Fairbanks St
Lawrence St
Danna Ln
Gostic St
W 26th St Aurora St Service St Robert Lee Rd Milwaukee St
W 25th St E 25th St Lenard St
Airline Dr
Ih 45
Munford St Graceland St Gri
NM
610
St
Nicholson St
Ashland St
W 24th St E 24th St bs English St
Gib Link Rd
Rutland St
ain S
Norhill Blvd
Hov Fw
Sue St
Singleton St
W 23rd St E 23rd St H
Michaux St
Wynne St Joyce St
Oxford St
t
E 22nd St Adele St
Columbia St
Arlington St
Y TX
W 22nd St Louise St Gale St
Gostick St
y
Tarver St Canadian St Ga
HOUSTON
W 21st St
Yale St
-
HOUSTON TX
Robbie St
Cordell St
Bristol St
Fisk St
Irvington Blvd
Edison St
Moore St
Averill St
Beggs St
Billingsley St
Moody St
K VILLAG TX
W Cavalcade
Hain St
Armstead
E 20th St
Emir
W 20th St St 45
Elser St
!
4
Sheldon St
45
E 19th St Kern St Cavalcade St 59
W 19th St Pettit St
Enid St
Dunbar St Ev
Exit 50b
E 18th
Walton St
Sharman St
E 18th St Mathis St
Tabor St
W 18th St W 18th St St Jerome St Frawley S
Siegel St
Beall St
St
Winston St Beck 610
E 17th St Pittman St
Fulton St
N Durham Dr
W 17th St Walling St Amu
Northwood St
Edsee St
E 16th St Coronado St Weiss
Harris Ct
W 16th St Clio St
ie St
Irvington Blvd
Pedd Jewett St Ma WEST UNIVERSITY PLAC TX
W 15th 1/2 St !
3
Le Green St Cody St SOUTHSIDE PLACE TX
W Patton St Patton St Eg
Beverly St
W 15th St E 15th St
Fenwick St
BELLAIRE TX
N Shepherd Dr
Driveway
F
Laird St
Algregg St Heslep St
W 14th 1/2 St Erin S
Fu
Ke 0 2 4 6
E 14th St Gardner St nn
lto
W 14th St Ca Wee
Studewood St
W Gardner St on Sh
Timbergrove Ln
Blair St
n
E 13th 1/2 St
W Fugate St N M Fugate St le m Miles
Alb
St
nd s St
I 45 N
Dian St
ain ar St
Heights Blvd
E 13th St
e
Moss St
Harvard St
Ln W 13th St
rS
Melwood St
Julian St
St St
E 12th 1/2 St Pizer St
t
Temple St
Collingsworth St
Karnes St
W Temple St Colli Searle Dr
State Hwy 261
E 12th St Map layers
Opal Ct
W 12th St W Cottage St Connecting Rd Bo
Cottage St
Emerald Ct
E 11th 1/2 St
C
Peco Key St R amp Bigelow S Submarket
Je
Railey St
Houston Ave
re M
st
W 11th St 11th St E 11th St icha Pecore St !
5 Ba
er
ux Je
North Fw
Quinn St ss Interstate Hwys
B
Bay Oaks Rd
E 10th 1/2 St M
lv
W 10th 1/2 St ar am Hays
d
Redan St
Prince St
in
Nashua St
Reagan St
N ig
ransto E 10th St Merrill St M ol Lila e S US Hwys
Herkimer St
W 10th St ai d cS t
n Ct n St
Omar St t Halpern St
y
oydon St State Hwys
r
Reynolds St
Ct Highland St
nde Park
St
Atlantic St
Gentry St
E 9th St
Cortlandt St
Bayland Ave Olea
Alexander St
W 9th St
Lawrence St
Glen
Studewood St
Driveway Luzon St
Allston St
Ra
Eu
Ma
m E 8th 1/2 St
! Market Rate
n
Woodland St
inf
p
Florence St
i ce
Dorothy St
Nicholson St
or d
E 8th St Euclid St ! Market Rate/Tax Credit
St
Ashland St
Tulane St
Glen Oaks St
Helen St
Boundary St
St
E 7th 1/2 St Byrne St Payne St
0 .2 .4 .6
Rutland St
St
Norhill Blvd
Parkview St rris
I de
Fre
Mo
Eve n St
W 7th StE 7th St Teetshorn St
Moy St
n
al S
em
ma
Che St
Egbert St
Waverly St
St
Leafton Ln
Ridge St t
Quit
rett
E 6th 1/2 St Sage lS Miles
C ar
a
ansas St
t
Michaux St
Roy Cir Th
stn
k Dr
Gr Wa
el ite Oa Wh ry
H en
Rutland Pl
Kiam St W 6th St W 6th St
ee
Wh 1:30,269
ut S
Usener St m ite Wrightwood St
a
nle
Petty St Usener St Dr Oa
Roy St
kD St N
t
E 5th 1/2 St
af
Th outh S
nie
Forester
Darling St r Win
t
all S
! 45
tson St
W 5th St E 5th St
St
2
Co
om
S
St Pasch
St
Larkin St t
rie
as
v es S
Ho Ma
ont
Raiff St
Cornish St
Columbia St
Arlington St
Jam an S
St
Oxford St
Depelchin St t
W 4th StE 4th St pS g
em
Reinerman St
Kolb St Exit 76 isho Gar
t
xit 765b I 10 E Weber St 8 B
Katy Fwy
d
I 10 W St
HOUSTON
Stu
Exit 766 Alamo St an S
Nolda St Hog ey
Herd 10 ckn
Goliad St
Ovid St
Inker St Marina St
Kee
Pin
r St
Detering St
t o
Flet
Spencer St Spring St ring
Durham Dr
ne
Eigel St Conne Har
lo
Sandman St
cting R Shearn St I1 0E
che
Tay
Koehler St E 2nd St sS
St
Maxie St d
I1
0W
ook
Gla
Holly St
Starkey St Br
Thompson St
Crockett St
r St
Eli St t
net
Yale St
ser
Colorado St
Oliver St
Court St
Allen S Summer St Bur
Givens St
Schuler St High St
Bonner St
Pl
t
T C Jester Blvd
St
Diesel
Dr
Bace Ct
East St
Parker St
Winter St
Studer St
m
Nett St
Johnson St
Heights Blvd
mont
tha
Hicks St Bingham St 10 Daly Pl
Shepherd Dr
Center St
en
Edwards St
Lester St
Harvard St
Washington Ave
Stude
Tr
Washington Garvin Ct Dart St lor
Hickory St
Ih
Keyser Pl
Lillian St Ave
Nay
Sawyer St
Center St
Snover St
45
N
Olive St
Rose St Girard S
Sachs St
Patterson St
Epstein Ct
Waugh Dr
Lakin St
Hemphill St
t
I 45
Ho
Weens
S Heights Blvd
Fowler St
Comira
Hartman St
Floyd St !
vF
1
St
Reinicke St
S
Blossom St Washington Av
wy
nto St Vine S
Abbott St
N Main
e
I 45
Gibson St Avie St Decatur St Pre Girar
Sta
Bismark sto d
Feagan St
Wagner S
Riesner St
Henderso
Kane St n
te Bet
ve
Driv St
Trinity S
45
Park Tr
Sabine
Dickson St
White
Silver
Lubbock St
Travis
ewa
Hw
ston A
p
ain St
m y Frank
Ra
Ida
y2
Oreilly St Butler St State St
Arn
Pr lin St
Lacy St e
Ja
M C
6
DEMAND ANALYSIS – HEIGHTS SUBMARKET #4
A. DEMAND FOR TAX CREDIT HOUSING
There are no clear or concise methodologies to forecast the need for Tax
Credit housing. This is because housing markets are static with households
often entering and exiting by tenure and economic profile. This position
statement will discuss the potential pitfalls and limitations of various
methodologies and present a recommended solution.
There appear to be only two sources of demand for new Tax Credit housing.
This is represented by a positive increase in income-qualified households
and replacement of functionally obsolete product. The first source of
demand is generally easily quantifiable but presents challenges to accurately
forecast. This is especially true as we get further from the 2000 Census and
development expands into previously undeveloped areas. The problem is
further compounded by the fact that housing market analysts often fail to
analyze income-appropriate household growth by household size.
Projections based only on income often include estimates of smaller
households even though they are over income-qualified due to their
household size limitation (i.e. income analysis based on a five-person limit
set at $46,000 includes two-person households with incomes above their
maximum but below $46,000, thus overstating the number who are
qualified). Therefore, caution should be exercised when considering income
household growth alone.
1. Overstatement of demand
A much larger challenge, and one that creates greater demand for Tax
Credit housing, is replacement of functionally obsolete product.
Unfortunately, measurement of this is very subjective and imprecise.
However, in most inner-city locations or non-growth areas, this is the
only need for Tax Credit units.
The approval of Tax Credit units in these areas has created, in some
instances, an overbuilt market that is characterized by high vacancy rates
and low rents. However, this overbuilding only occurs when there is no
corresponding decline in the existing housing stock. This decline could
occur through demolition or replacement of functionally obsolete
product.
III-137
It is easy to illustrate how a market can be impacted if rental household
growth is minimal. Hypothetically, consider a market that has 1,000
income-appropriate rental housing units (under Tax Credit guidelines)
with a current vacancy rate of 4% (or 40 vacant units). Assume a 150-
unit Tax Credit property of new construction is approved and built. This
market then goes from a 1,000-unit market to a 1,150-unit market.
Without any corresponding increase in income-qualified households or
reduction in the existing supply by demolitions, condominium
conversions, or some other use, the area vacancy rate goes from 4% to
16.5% (40+150/1,150).
This is a very simplistic example but does illustrate the ease at which a
market can get out of balance if it does not experience positive
household growth. In the current environment, this has been
compounded by the fact that some income-qualified households have
left the rental housing market in favor of home ownership, a decline in
younger, first-time renters due to profound demographic shifts, and, in
some markets, a “doubling-up” of households to save on housing costs.
This is particularly true in some inner-city markets where there has been
a decline in the Housing Choice Voucher supply.
This illustration also assumes an isolated market. Households,
particularly rental households, are constantly on the move in response to
jobs, educational opportunities, crime, quality of life, families, church,
and a whole host of other factors. Thus, in the previous market
illustration, this new 150-unit project would likely attract new
households from outside the market as well as households improving
their current housing. This creates vacancies in units with the lowest
quality or in units with the lowest perception of value (i.e. properties
priced well above the market).
If, however, this hypothetical market approved 150-units to either
replace or renovate an existing project (or projects), the market would
remain in balance. The problem for analysts is establishing the
appropriate number of units that should be replaced or renovated.
Projecting too many units yields high penetration rates (the aggregate
number of Tax Credit units compared to the number of income-qualified
households) and precludes reasonable absorption and occupancy levels.
If too few affordable units are developed, the market remains stagnant
and tenants remain underserved.
III-138
2. Methodologies used to date
A variety of methodologies have attempted to tackle this issue.
Substandard units reported in the Census are one source. This is
typically a very small number and does not accurately reflect functional
obsolescence. The number of households who are rent overburdened is
a second factor often considered. However, the Census makes no
distinction for those households who have elected to be rent
overburdened or those who are already housed in Tax Credit properties.
Frankly, a sizeable share of tenants in Tax Credit properties are rent
overburdened since the program does not specify the share of income
used for rent.
We have also reviewed methodologies that use turnover as a measure of
demand. This methodology does nothing to address the issue of a
balanced market. (Turnover is a good tool to forecast absorption of a
project since it considers the number of renters in the market at one time
considering a move).
3. Methodology based on replacement and growth
It is our opinion that the only accurate macro approach to forecasting
Tax Credit demand is to consider both new household growth of
income-qualified households and replacement of functionally obsolete
product. As discussed, household growth is generally easier to forecast
than the number of functionally obsolete units. We propose to forecast
functionally obsolete product by taking a share of the existing rental
product over 35 years old (built in 1970 or older) and in need of
replacement on an annual basis. Considering that the useful life of most
residential product is 40 years, rental product built prior to 1970 can be
considered as being functionally obsolete. The share of the product
functionally obsolete is the issue. It is our opinion that approximately
2.5% (1/40) of the existing rental product that meets this criteria could
be designated as functionally obsolete. This would essentially upgrade
or replace 25% of this older housing stock over a decade, a reasonable
time period.
There are, like all methodologies, some obvious shortcomings. Without
a complete field survey, it is impossible to establish whom this obsolete
product is serving. Given its age, it is most likely serving tenants paying
rents at the lowest third of the rent spectrum. This is likely at rent levels
just below Tax Credit program rents. We argue that for practical
reasons, all of these units would be appropriate to upgrade. Naturally, it
is critical to preserve many of these older units with Rental Assistance.
III-139
Another shortcoming is that this methodology generally precludes older
areas from experiencing new product since household growth is minimal
or nonexistent. We recommend that if a developer builds new product,
there must be a demonstration that a similar number of rental units have
been taken out of the rental base through demolition or conversion to
another use. It is our opinion that there is no benefit to only allow
rehabilitations in older, inner-city areas without a corresponding
decrease in the rental stock. Current new designs are more energy
efficient, are innovative, often incorporate more appropriate allocations
of space, and the use of more desirable unit and project amenities.
4. Conclusions
There have been a wide variety of methodologies employed to address
the component of replacement support for slow or no-growth markets.
Most of these methodologies have used Census data to approximate
demand. Unfortunately, while the methodologies have generated
support numbers that appear reasonable, in practice they have
contributed to overbuilding. The methodology proposed here only uses
two components of demand: new income-appropriate household growth
and replacement or renovation of existing product. We believe this will
provide a more accurate guideline for establishing demand.
It is important to note that any estimate of demand must be verified with
a market study. Further, a development that proposes replacement
support must demonstrate through the market study or other verification
that there has been a corresponding decline in the existing rental base.
There may be problems reconciling applications responding to new
household growth and those that respond to replacement. Subsequent
“tie-breaker” criteria could be considered to address this issue.
B. DETERMINATION OF INCOME ELIGIBILITY
To determine demand from income-eligible households, we must first
establish the income range required to qualify for residency in Low-Income
Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) units for the Heights Submarket.
1. Maximum Income Limits
Under the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, household
eligibility is based on household income not exceeding the targeted
percentage of Area Median Household Income (AMHI), depending
upon household size.
III-140
The Heights Submarket has a median household income of $61,000 for
2005 (Harris County). We have analyzed affordable housing demand
for the following income cohorts: 0% to 30% AMHI, 31% to 40%
AMHI, 41% to 50% AMHI, 51% to 60% AMHI, 61% to 80% AMHI,
and 81% to 100% AMHI. The following table summarizes the
maximum allowable income by household size for the Heights
Submarket at 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 80%, and 100% of AMHI.
TARGETED MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE
HOUSEHOLD SIZE AMHI INCOME
30% $12,810
40% $17,080
50% $21,350
ONE-PERSON
60% $25,620
80% $34,150
100% $42,700
30% $14,640
40% $19,520
50% $24,400
TWO-PERSON
60% $29,280
80% $39,050
100% $48,800
30% $16,470
40% $21,960
50% $27,450
THREE-PERSON
60% $32,940
80% $43,900
100% $54,900
30% $18,300
40% $24,400
50% $30,500
FOUR-PERSON
60% $36,600
80% $48,800
100% $61,000
30% $19,770
40% $26,360
50% $32,950
FIVE-PERSON
60% $39,540
80% $52,700
100% $65,900
The calculations presented in the report are based on a five-person
household for the general population (family) and a two-person
household for seniors age 55 and older.
III-141
2. Income-Appropriate Range
Leasing industry standards typically require households to have rent to
income ratios of 27% to 40%. Generally, market-rate properties require
a lower rent to income ratio, while an acceptable rent to income ratio for
low-income units is typically around 35%.
However, to avoid overstating demand at any of the income levels, the
minimum income is calculated as the maximum income of the previous
band, with the exception of the 0% to 30% income band, which has a
minimum income of $0.
C. DEMAND CALCULATIONS
The following tables summarize projected demand for affordable housing
for all renter households from 2006 through 2009. Note the 2005 Baseline
Total Renter Households includes all renter households, while the demand
analysis only considers households earning up to 100% AMHI ($65,900).
Therefore, the total Baseline Targeted Income-Qualified Renter Households
for each income band will not total all renter households. For example,
there were a total of 8,047 renter households in the Heights Submarket in
2005; out of this total, 5,455 were income-qualified renter households. This
results in 2,592 renter households earning above $65,900.
III-142
2005 BASELINE DEMAND – HEIGHTS SUBMARKET BY GENERAL OCCUPANCY
TARGETED AMHI
APPROPRIATE INCOME RANGE BY TARGETED AMHI 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
1-PERSON ($0-$12,810) ($12,810-$17,080) ($17,080-$21,350) ($21,350-$25,620) ($25,620-$34,150) ($34,150-$42,700
2-PERSON ($0-$14,640) ($14,640-$19,520) ($19,520-$24,400) ($24,400-$29,280) ($29,280-$39,050) ($39,050-$48,800)
3-PERSON ($0-$16,470) ($16,470-$21,960) ($21,960-$27,450) ($27,450-$32,940) ($32,940-$43,900) ($43,900-$54,900)
4-PERSON ($0-$18,300) ($18,300-$24,400) ($24,400-$30,500) ($30,500-$36,600) ($36,600-$48,800) ($48,000-$60,100)
5+-PERSON ($0-$19,770) ($19,770-$26,360) ($26,360-$32,950) ($32,950-$39,540) ($39,540-$52,700) ($52,700-$65,900)
BASELINE TOTAL RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (HISTA DATA) 8,047 8,047 8,047 8,047 8,047 8,047
TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 925 276 253 204 409 396
1-PERSON 300 100 109 110 238 187
2-PERSON 209 89 69 67 124 97
3-PERSON 102 84 99 82 117 77
4-PERSON 182 138 116 86 151 59
5+-PERSON 1,718 687 646 549 1,039 816
= BASELINE TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 925 276 253 204 409 396
Based on the American Housing Survey, the estimated share of demand by bedroom type and household size in the Houston
MSA is distributed as follows:
DEMAND BY BEDROOM AND HOUSEHOLD SIZE
STUDIO / 1-BR. 2-BR. 3-BR. 4-BR.
1-PERSON HH 67% 25% 8% -
2-PERSON HH 35% 46% 15% 4%
3-PERSON HH 16% 55% 22% 7%
4-PERSON HH 11% 45% 36% 8%
5+-PERSON HH 10% 42% 31% 17%
Source: American Housing Survey (Houston MSA, 1998)
HH-Household
III-143
These percentages, applied to the number of income-qualified renter
households in this submarket, are as follows:
DEMAND BY BEDROOM TYPE AND HOUSEHOLD SIZE
STUDIO /
1-BR. 2-BR. 3-BR. 4-BR. TOTAL
0%-30% 620 231 74 0 925
31%-40% 185 69 22 0 276
1-PERSON 41%-50% 170 63 20 0 253
HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 137 51 16 0 204
61%-80% 274 102 33 0 409
81%-100% 265 99 32 0 396
0%-30% 105 138 45 12 300
31%-40% 35 46 15 4 100
2-PERSON 41%-50% 38 50 16 4 108
HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 39 51 17 4 111
61%-80% 83 109 36 10 238
81%-100% 65 86 28 7 186
0%-30% 33 115 46 15 209
31%-40% 14 49 20 6 89
3-PERSON 41%-50% 11 38 15 5 69
HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 11 37 15 5 68
61%-80% 20 68 27 9 124
81%-100% 16 53 21 7 97
0%-30% 11 46 37 8 102
31%-40% 9 38 30 7 84
4-PERSON 41%-50% 11 45 36 8 100
HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 9 37 30 7 83
61%-80% 13 53 42 9 117
81%-100% 8 35 28 6 77
0%-30% 18 76 56 31 181
31%-40% 14 58 43 23 138
5+-PERSON 41%-50% 12 49 36 20 117
HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 9 36 27 15 87
61%-80% 15 63 47 26 151
81%-100% 6 25 18 10 59
0%-30% 787 (46%) 606 (35%) 258 (15%) 66 (4%) 1,717
31%-40% 257 (37%) 260 (38%) 130 (19%) 40 (6%) 687
41%-50% 242 (37%) 245 (38%) 123 (19%) 37 (6%) 647
51%-60% 205 (37%) 212 (38%) 105 (19%) 31 (6%) 553
61%-80% 405 (39%) 395 (38%) 185 (18%) 54 (5%) 1,039
TOTAL (%) 81%-100% 360 (44%) 298 (37%) 127 (16%) 30 (4%) 815
OVERALL TOTALS 2,256 2,016 928 258
*Due to rounding, some of the above percentages may not total 100%
III-144
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
2006 DEMAND
I. GROWTH DEMAND 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
HOUSEHOLD-BASED: ($0-$20,100) ($13,000-$26,700) ($17,300-$33,400) ($21,700-$40,100) ($26,000-$53,500) ($34,700-$66,900)
2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1,718 687 646 549 1,039 816
2006 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1,696 673 629 547 1,018 815
ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH -22 -14 -18 -2 -21 -1
NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (1YEAR) -22 -14 -18 -2 -21 -1
II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET
2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) 1,718 687 646 549 1,039 816
(+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR) -22 -14 -18 -2 -21 -1
(=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2006 1,696 673 629 547 1,018 815
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 1,786 708 662 576 1,072 858
III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT
TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2006 1,696 673 629 547 1,018 815
(+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 23 (3.6%) 20 (3.6%) 37 (3.6%) 29 (3.6%)
(+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION
PERIOD** 5 3 5 14 0 0
(=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 1,701 676 657 581 1,055 844
IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 1,786 708 662 576 1,072 858
(-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 1,701 676 657 581 1,055 844
(+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** 78 31 29 25 0 0
(=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(1 YEAR) 163 64 35 20 17 14
STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(1 YEAR)**** 75 24 13 7 7 6
2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(1 YEAR)**** 58 24 13 8 6 5
3-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(1 YEAR)**** 24 12 7 4 3 2
4-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(1 YEAR)**** 6 4 2 1 1 0
Note: 2005 income-qualified households based on 2005 income limits. 2006-2009 income limits projected based on historical increase (2000-2005).
* Units at 0% to 30% and 31% to 40% are assumed to be 100% occupied. There are no Tax Credit properties located in this submarket; therefore the submarket market-rate vacancy rate has been
applied to units at 41% to 50% and 51% to 60%.
**Based on information obtained from TDHCA and local planning officials. Some unit mixes may be estimated. Units under construction at the date of this report were included in the above table.
***Estimated based on share of income-qualified renter households up to 60% AMHI.
****Based on share of demand by bedroom type calculated.
III-145
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
2007 DEMAND
I. GROWTH DEMAND 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
HOUSEHOLD-BASED: ($0-$20,400) ($13,200-$27,100) ($17,600-$33,900) ($22,000-$40,700) ($26,400-$54,300) ($35,200-$67,900)
2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1,718 687 646 549 1,039 816
2007 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1,675 659 611 545 998 814
ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH -22 -14 -18 -2 -21 -1
NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) -44 -29 -35 -5 -42 -3
II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET
2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) 1,718 687 646 549 1,039 816
(+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) -44 -29 -35 -5 -42 -3
(=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2007 1,675 659 611 545 998 814
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 1,763 693 643 573 1,050 856
III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT
TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2007 1,675 659 611 545 998 814
(+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 22 (3.6%) 20 (3.6%) 36 (3.6%) 29 (3.6%)
(+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION
PERIOD** 5 3 5 14 0 0
(=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 1,680 662 638 579 1,033 843
IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 1,763 693 643 573 1,050 856
(-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 1,680 662 638 579 1,033 843
(+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** 157 63 59 50 0 0
(=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(2 YEARS) 240 94 64 45 17 14
STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(2 YEARS)**** 110 35 24 16 6 6
2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(2 YEARS)**** 85 36 24 17 7 5
3-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(2 YEARS)**** 36 18 12 9 3 2
4-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(2 YEARS)**** 9 5 4 3 1 0
Note: 2005 income-qualified households based on 2005 income limits. 2006-2009 income limits projected based on historical increase (2000-2005).
* Units at 0% to 30% and 31% to 40% are assumed to be 100% occupied. There are no Tax Credit properties located in this submarket; therefore the submarket market-rate vacancy rate has been
applied to units at 41% to 50% and 51% to 60%.
**Based on information obtained from TDHCA and local planning officials. Some unit mixes may be estimated. Units under construction at the date of this report were included in the above table.
***Estimated based on share of income-qualified renter households up to 60% AMHI.
****Based on share of demand by bedroom type calculated.
III-146
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
2008 DEMAND
I. GROWTH DEMAND 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
HOUSEHOLD-BASED: ($0-$20,700) ($13,400-$27,500) ($17,800-$34,400) ($22,300-$41,300) ($26,800-$55,100) ($35,700-$68,900)
2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1,718 687 646 549 1,039 816
2008 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1,653 644 594 542 977 812
ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH -22 -14 -18 -2 -21 -1
NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) -65 -43 -53 -7 -62 -4
II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET
2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) 1,718 687 646 549 1,039 816
(+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) -65 -43 -53 -7 -62 -4
(=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2008 1,653 644 594 542 977 812
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 1,740 678 625 571 1,028 855
III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT
TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2008 1,653 644 594 542 977 812
(+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 21 (3.6%) 20 (3.6%) 35 (3.6%) 29 (3.6%)
(+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION
PERIOD** 5 3 5 14 0 0
(=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 1,658 647 620 576 1,012 841
IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 1,740 678 625 571 1,028 855
(-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 1,658 647 620 576 1,012 841
(+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** 235 94 88 75 0 0
(=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(3 YEARS) 317 125 93 70 16 14
STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(3 YEARS)**** 145 47 35 26 6 6
2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(3 YEARS)**** 112 47 35 27 6 5
3-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(3 YEARS)**** 48 24 18 13 3 2
4-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(3 YEARS)**** 12 7 5 4 1 0
Note: 2005 income-qualified households based on 2005 income limits. 2006-2009 income limits projected based on historical increase (2000-2005).
* Units at 0% to 30% and 31% to 40% are assumed to be 100% occupied. There are no Tax Credit properties located in this submarket; therefore the submarket market-rate vacancy rate has been
applied to units at 41% to 50% and 51% to 60%.
**Based on information obtained from TDHCA and local planning officials. Some unit mixes may be estimated. Units under construction at the date of this report were included in the above table.
***Estimated based on share of income-qualified renter households up to 60% AMHI.
****Based on share of demand by bedroom type calculated.
III-147
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
2009 DEMAND
I. GROWTH DEMAND 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
HOUSEHOLD-BASED: ($0-$21,000) ($13,600-$27,900) ($18,100-$34,900) ($22,600-$41,900) ($27,200-$55,900) ($36,200-$69,900)
2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1,718 687 646 549 1,039 816
2009 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1,631 630 576 540 956 811
ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH -22 -14 -18 -2 -21 -1
NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) -87 -57 -70 -9 -83 -5
II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET
2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) 1,718 687 646 549 1,039 816
(+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) -87 -57 -70 -9 -83 -5
(=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2009 1,631 630 576 540 956 811
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 1,717 663 606 568 1,006 854
III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT
TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2009 1,631 630 576 540 956 811
(+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 21 (3.6%) 19 (3.6%) 34 (3.6%) 29 (3.6%)
(+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION
PERIOD** 5 3 5 14 0 0
(=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 1,636 633 602 573 990 840
IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 1,717 663 606 568 1,006 854
(-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 1,636 633 602 573 990 840
(+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** 313 125 118 100 0 0
(=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(4 YEARS) 394 155 122 95 16 13
STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(4 YEARS)**** 181 58 46 36 6 6
2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(4 YEARS)**** 139 59 46 36 6 5
3-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(4 YEARS)**** 59 29 23 18 3 2
4-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(4 YEARS)**** 15 9 7 5 1 0
Note: 2005 income-qualified households based on 2005 income limits. 2006-2009 income limits projected based on historical increase (2000-2005).
* Units at 0% to 30% and 31% to 40% are assumed to be 100% occupied. There are no Tax Credit properties located in this submarket; therefore the submarket market-rate vacancy rate has been
applied to units at 41% to 50% and 51% to 60%.
**Based on information obtained from TDHCA and local planning officials. Some unit mixes may be estimated. Units under construction at the date of this report were included in the above table.
***Estimated based on share of income-qualified renter households up to 60% AMHI.
****Based on share of demand by bedroom type calculated.
III-148
The following tables summarize projected demand for affordable housing for senior households (55+) from 2006 through
2009.
2005 BASELINE DEMAND – HEIGHTS SUBMARKET BY SENIOR (55+) OCCUPANCY
TARGETED AMHI
APPROPRIATE INCOME RANGE BY TARGETED AMHI 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
1-PERSON ($0-$12,810) ($12,810-$17,080) ($17,080-$21,350) ($21,350-$25,620 ($25,620-$34,150) ($34,150-$42,700)
2-PERSON ($0-$14,640) ($14,640-$19,520) ($19,520-$24,400) ($24,400-$29,280) ($29,280-$39,050) ($39,050-$48,800
BASELINE TOTAL RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (HISTA DATA) 1,656 1,656 1,656 1,656 1,656 1,656
TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS
1-PERSON 545 120 99 53 79 53
2-PERSON 85 33 38 39 32 20
= BASELINE TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 630 153 137 92 111 73
Based on the American Housing Survey, the estimated share of demand by bedroom type and household size in the Houston
MSA is distributed as follows:
DEMAND BY BEDROOM AND HOUSEHOLD SIZE
STUDIO / 1-BR. 2-BR.
1-PERSON HH 67% 25%
2-PERSON HH 35% 46%
Source: American Housing Survey (Houston MSA, 1998)
HH-Households
III-149
These percentages, as applied to the number of income-qualified renter
households age 55+ in this submarket, are as follows:
DEMAND BY BEDROOM TYPE AND HOUSEHOLD SIZE
STUDIO /
1-BR. 2-BR. TOTAL
0%-30% 365 136 501
31%-40% 80 30 110
41%-50% 66 25 91
1-PERSON HH
51%-60% 36 13 49
61%-80% 53 20 73
81%-100% 36 13 49
0%-30% 30 39 69
31%-40% 12 15 27
41%-50% 13 17 30
2-PERSON HH
51%-60% 14 18 32
61%-80% 11 15 26
81%-100% 7 9 16
0%-30% 395 (69%) 175 (31%) 570
31%-40% 92 (67%) 45 (33%) 137
41%-50% 79 (65%) 42 (35%) 121
TOTAL (%)
51%-60% 50 (62%) 31 (38%) 81
61%-80% 64 (65%) 35 (35%) 99
81%-100% 43 (66%) 22 (34%) 65
OVERALL TOTALS 723 350
III-150
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
2006 DEMAND (55+)
I. GROWTH DEMAND 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
HOUSEHOLD-BASED: ($0-$14,900) ($13,000-$19,800) ($17,300-$24,800) ($21,700-$29,700) ($26,000-$39,600) ($34,700-$49,500)
2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 630 153 137 92 111 73
2006 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 633 157 136 93 109 80
ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH 3 4 -1 1 -2 7
NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (1YEAR) 3 4 -1 1 -2 7
II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET
2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) 630 153 137 92 111 73
(+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR) 3 4 -1 1 -2 7
(=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2006 633 157 136 93 109 80
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 666 165 143 98 115 84
III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT
TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2006 633 157 136 93 109 80
(+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (3.6%) 3 (3.6%) 4 (3.6%) 3 (3.6%)
(+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION
PERIOD** 0 0 0 0 0 0
(=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 633 157 141 96 113 83
IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 666 165 143 98 115 84
(-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 633 157 141 96 113 83
(+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** 19 25 22 15 0 0
(=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(1 YEAR) 52 33 24 16 2 1
STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(1 YEAR)**** 36 22 16 10 1 1
2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(1 YEAR)**** 16 11 8 6 1 0
Note: 2005 income-qualified households based on 2005 income limits. 2006-2009 income limits projected based on historical increase (2000-2005).
* Units at 0% to 30% and 31% to 40% are assumed to be 100% occupied. There are no Tax Credit properties located in this submarket; therefore the submarket market-rate vacancy rate has been
applied to units at 41% to 50% and 51% to 60%.
**Based on information obtained from TDHCA and local planning officials. Some unit mixes may be estimated. Units under construction at the date of this report were included in the above table.
***Estimated based on share of income-qualified renter households up to 60% AMHI. Further estimated by percentage of renters 55+.
****Based on share of demand by bedroom type calculated.
III-151
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
2007 DEMAND (55+)
I. GROWTH DEMAND 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
HOUSEHOLD-BASED: ($0-$15,100) ($13,200-$20,100) ($17,600-$25,100) ($22,000-$30,100) ($26,400-$40,200) ($35,200-$50,200)
2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 630 153 137 92 111 73
2007 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 636 161 136 94 107 88
ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH 3 4 -1 1 -2 7
NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) 6 8 -2 2 -4 15
II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET
2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) 630 153 137 92 111 73
(+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) 6 8 -2 2 -4 15
(=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2007 636 161 136 94 107 88
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 669 169 143 99 113 92
III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT
TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2007 636 161 136 94 107 88
(+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (3.6%) 3 (3.6%) 4 (3.6%) 3 (3.6%)
(+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION
PERIOD** 0 0 0 0 0 0
(=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 636 161 141 97 111 91
IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 669 169 143 99 113 92
(-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 636 161 141 97 111 91
(+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** 37 50 44 30 0 0
(=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(2 YEARS) 71 58 47 31 2 1
STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(2 YEARS)**** 49 39 31 19 1 1
2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(2 YEARS)**** 22 19 16 12 1 0
Note: 2005 income-qualified households based on 2005 income limits. 2006-2009 income limits projected based on historical increase (2000-2005).
* Units at 0% to 30% and 31% to 40% are assumed to be 100% occupied There are no Tax Credit properties located in this submarket; therefore the submarket market-rate vacancy rate has been
applied to units at 41% to 50% and 51% to 60%.
**Based on information obtained from TDHCA and local planning officials. Some unit mixes may be estimated. Units under construction at the date of this report were included in the above table.
***Estimated based on share of income-qualified renter households up to 60% AMHI. Further estimated by percentage of renters 55+.
****Based on share of demand by bedroom type calculated.
III-152
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
2008 DEMAND (55+)
I. GROWTH DEMAND 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
HOUSEHOLD-BASED: ($0-$15,300) ($13,400-$20,400) ($17,800-$25,500) ($22,300-$30,600) ($26,800-$40,800) ($35,700-$51,000)
2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 630 153 137 92 111 73
2008 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 638 164 135 95 105 95
ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH 3 4 -1 1 -2 7
NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) 8 11 -2 3 -6 22
II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET
2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) 630 153 137 92 111 73
(+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) 8 11 -2 3 -6 22
(=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2008 638 164 135 95 105 95
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 672 173 142 100 111 100
III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT
TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2008 638 164 135 95 105 95
(+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (3.6%) 3 (3.6%) 3 (3.6%) 3 (3.6%)
(+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION
PERIOD** 0 0 0 0 0 0
(=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 638 164 140 98 109 98
IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 672 173 142 100 111 100
(-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 638 164 140 98 109 98
(+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** 56 74 67 45 0 0
(=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(3 YEARS) 90 83 69 46 2 2
STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(3 YEARS)**** 62 56 45 29 1 1
2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(3 YEARS)**** 28 27 24 18 1 1
Note: 2005 income-qualified households based on 2005 income limits. 2006-2009 income limits projected based on historical increase (2000-2005).
* Units at 0% to 30% and 31% to 40% are assumed to be 100% occupied. There are no Tax Credit properties located in this submarket; therefore the submarket market-rate vacancy rate has been
applied to units at 41% to 50% and 51% to 60%.
**Based on information obtained from TDHCA and local planning officials. Some unit mixes may be estimated. Units under construction at the date of this report were included in the above table.
***Estimated based on share of income-qualified renter households up to 60% AMHI. Further estimated by percentage of renters 55+.
****Based on share of demand by bedroom type calculated.
III-153
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
2009 DEMAND (55+)
I. GROWTH DEMAND 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
HOUSEHOLD-BASED: ($0-$15,500) ($13,600-$20,700) ($18,100-$25,900) ($22,600-$31,000) ($27,200-$41,400) ($36,200-$51,700)
2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 630 153 137 92 111 73
2009 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 641 168 134 96 103 102
ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH 3 4 -1 1 -2 7
NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) 11 15 -3 4 -8 29
II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET
2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) 630 153 137 92 111 73
(+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER
PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) 11 15 -3 4 -8 29
(=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2009 641 168 134 96 103 102
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 675 177 141 101 108 107
III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT
TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2009 641 168 134 96 103 102
(+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (3.6%) 3 (3.6%) 4 (3.6%) 4 (3.6%)
(+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION
PERIOD** 0 0 0 0 0 0
(=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 641 168 139 99 107 106
IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND
TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95%
OCCUPIED) MARKET 675 177 141 101 108 107
(-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT 641 168 139 99 107 106
(+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** 75 99 89 60 0 0
(=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(4 YEARS) 108 108 91 61 2 2
STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(4 YEARS)**** 75 73 59 38 1 1
2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD
(4 YEARS)**** 33 35 32 23 1 1
Note: 2005 income-qualified households based on 2005 income limits. 2006-2009 income limits projected based on historical increase (2000-2005).
* Units at 0% to 30% and 31% to 40% are assumed to be 100% occupied. There are no Tax Credit properties located in this submarket; therefore the submarket market-rate vacancy rate has been
applied to units at 41% to 50% and 51% to 60%.
**Based on information obtained from TDHCA and local planning officials. Some unit mixes may be estimated. Units under construction at the date of this report were included in the above table.
***Estimated based on share of income-qualified renter households up to 60% AMHI. Further estimated by percentage of renters 55+.
****Based on share of demand by bedroom type calculated.
III-154
D. TAX CREDIT DEMAND SUMMARY
The table below summarizes the preceding demand analysis. Note the net
demand for senior units is included in the total net demand for all Tax Credit
units. For example, out of a total demand of 281 units in 2006, there is a
demand for 126 units age-restricted to households 55 and older.
TAX CREDIT (0%-60%) DEMAND SUMMARY
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
2006-2009
2006 2007 2008 2009
TOTAL NET DEMAND FOR TAX CREDIT UNITS 0%-40% AMHI 226 334 442 442
TOTAL NET DEMAND FOR TAX CREDIT UNITS 41%-60% AMHI 55 109 163 163
TOTAL NET DEMAND FOR TAX CREDIT UNITS AGE-RESTRICTED
TO 55 AND OLDER (0%-40% AMHI) 85 129 173 216
TOTAL NET DEMAND FOR TAX CREDIT UNITS AGE-RESTRICTED
TO 55 AND OLDER (41%-60% AMHI) 41 78 115 152
It is important to note that most of the allocated units are serving households
at 50% and 60% AMHI. There continues to be a need in the submarket for
affordable units targeting households at up to 40% AMHI.
E. SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSEHOLDS
Persons with special needs, as defined by HUD, include persons with
disabilities, persons with HIV/AIDS, elderly persons, frail elderly persons,
persons with alcohol and/or drug addictions, victims of domestic violence,
and public housing residents.
Demand from elderly households was described in the previous section.
Information on persons with HIV/AIDS, alcohol and/or drug addictions, and
victims of domestic violence is typically difficult to obtain. Census data is
available to estimate the number of persons with other types of disabilities.
Based on 2000 Census data, it is estimated those persons age 16+ with a
sensory or physical disability within the Heights Submarket are as follows:
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET
NUMBER PERCENTAGE
TOTAL CIVILIAN NONINSTITUTIONALIZED PERSONS 16 YEARS OR OLDER 30,893 100%
SENSORY DISABILITY (BLINDNESS, DEAFNESS, VISION OR HEARING) 1,148 4%
PHYSICAL DISABILITY 2,689 9%
TOTAL PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES 3,837 13%
Source: 2000 Census; Claritas; Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC
III-155
Note there may be some overlap in the above categories of disability,
causing the total number to appear higher. We have not included mentally
disabled residents since this group does not require a specific housing
product.
According to the 2000 Census, there are 3,837 persons aged 16 and older
with either a sensory or physical disability. It is reasonable to assume
caregivers and/or family members are providing services to these people and
are therefore not in one-person households. According to Claritas,
approximately 51.1% of all occupied housing units are renter-occupied.
Applying this renter percentage to the number of persons with disabilities
results in approximately 1,961 persons with disabilities living in renter-
occupied households. Based on the above analysis, in 2005, approximately
67.8% of all renter households (5,455 income-qualified renter households /
8,047 total renter households) are income-qualified renter households.
Applying 67.8% to the number of persons with disabilities living in renter
households results in 1,330 income-qualified persons with a disability living
in a renter-occupied household. This analysis is summarized below:
TOTAL PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES 3,837
(X) RENTER PERCENTAGE 51.1%
(=) RENTER HOUSEHOLDS WITH DISABLED RESIDENT 1,961
(X) BASELINE TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (%) 67.8%
(=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES 1,330
APPROPRIATE INCOME RANGE BY
TARGETED AMHI 0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100%
% BASELINE TARGETED INCOME-
QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 31.5% 12.6% 11.8% 10.1% 19.0% 15.0%
X 1,330 1,330 1,330 1,330 1,330 1,330
TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER
HOUSEHOLDS WITH DISABLED RESIDENT 419 167 158 134 253 199
The above analysis assumes persons with disabilities have incomes
reflective of the general population. In reality, it is more likely persons with
disabilities will have lower incomes than the general population; therefore,
the above analysis understates the housing required to serve this component
at lower incomes. If units were developed to 100% of the above level, a
large number of vacancies would occur in the market since so many people
are cared for in conventional units.
We recommend a development target no more than 2% of total demand for
special needs households. Due to the limitations of accurate information
available pertaining to special needs households, we strongly recommend
any planned project conduct extensive interviews with appropriate local
service providers, caregivers, medical facilities, etc., to help determine the
demand of special needs households within that market and the type or
characteristics of the housing required.
III-156
At this time, there are six Tax Credit units planned for the disabled. Note
2% of 1,330 equals to 27 units.
F. HURRICANE IMPACT ON SUBMARKET HOUSING DEMAND
One major factor impacting the Houston MSA rental housing market at this
time is the evacuees from hurricanes Katrina and Rita. However, based on
interviews with local property managers and city officials, it does not appear
that the Heights Submarket has been significantly impacted. The five
properties surveyed indicated they have not received any hurricane
evacuees.
III-157