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
Heights: Community Services
E 31st S
261
St W 31st W 30th St
Pai
E 32nd St
610
No
Grinnell
I 610 th Loop W W 28th St
610
E 30th St E 29 Exit 10m th St North Loop Driveway E 27th St E 26th St Aurora St E 25th St Munford St E 24th St E 23rd St E 22nd St
E 20th St
Exit 16 I 610
Princeton St
X
W 27th St
X
W 26th St
Airline Dr
W 25th St
W 24th St
Gibbs St
W 23rd St
W 22nd St
W 21st St
v
Adele St
Airline Dr
X
Elser St
W 20th St
X
Robbie St
W 19th St W 18th St
N Durham Dr
w
W 18th St
I-610 I 610 Kelley St E 28th St Eleanor St Avenue of Oaks St Sylvester Rd Woodard St Samuel St Eichwurzel Ln Fairbanks St Danna Ln Service St Milwaukee St Robert Lee Rd Lenard St Graceland St Gri English St Link Rd Sue St H Joyce St Wynne St Gale St Louise St Tarver St Ga Canadian St Moody St 45 W Cavalcade St
I 45
610
rth
Cap
Reid St
Yale St
Robertson St ell St
nton Blvd a St ogers St
astman St
ay St
St
C
vernus St
Freemont St
W 16th St W 15th 1/2 St W 15th St
Harris Ct Jul ian St Edsee St
Timbergrove Ln
Dian St
Ln
Bay Oaks Rd
W 11th St
W 9th St
Ashland St
Tulane St
E 9th St
E 8th St
Drivew Glen Oaks St ay
Moy St
hts Waugh Dr Bl v d
ain St
Sc
eig
X
Butler St
Pr e
Frank lin St C
to St
X
v
Riesner St
Egbert St ansas St Roy Cir W 6th St W 6th St Kiam St Petty St Darling St W 5th St E 5th St Larkin St Cornish St W 4th StE 4th St I 10 W Kolb St 0E Katy Fwy Chester St I 10 E Exit 766 Nolda St Herd 10 Inker St Marina St Spencer St Eigel St E 2nd St Koehler St Maxie St Starkey St Connecting Rd Eli St Allen St High St Schuler St Nett St Hicks St Center St Washington Ave Washington Lillian St Ave Rose St Barnes St Weens Floyd St Blossom St Mellus St Gibson St Avie St Feagan St Dickson St
v
X
Waverly St
X
W 7th StE 7th St
Michaux St
Hous ton A ve
Oa kD
Highland St Bayland Ave 1/2 St E 8th Woodland St Euclid St Byrne St E 7th 1/2 St Teetshorn St Ridge St E 6th 1/2 St Wendel St Sledge St Usener St Usener St E 5th 1/2 St
Atlantic St
Reynolds St
ransto n Ct oydon Ct Ra m p
W 10th St
Nicholson St Herkimer St Lawrence St Leafton Ln Alexander St Dorothy St
11th St E 11th St E 10th 1/2 St W 10th 1/2 St E 10th St Omar St
I 45 N
M in te r
r
St
W hit
e
em on t
Stu d
Silver St
r St
Tay lo
Studer St
St
Sachs St Stude
X
X
I 45
y
X
N
Center St
Bingham St Edwards St Garvin Ct Dart St
X
X
Goliad St Hickory St
10
Tr en tha m
mont
Pl
nsmere St
tridge Rd
Brinkman St
t
State Hwy 261
vd
ccomb St
Fw y
North Loop E
Leon St
N
Fulton St
S I 45 Enid St
Baylor St
Helmers St
Cornell St
90
Lawrence St
Gostic St
Beall St
C
T C Jester Blvd
y Hov Fw Ih 45
610
Tabor St Northwood St
Norhill Blvd
Ashland St
Nicholson St
Rutland St
Sheldon Carter St Singleton St Gostick St
Michaux St
Oxford St
Columbia St
Arlington St
Y TX
HOUSTON
Yale St
X
HOUSTON TX
Fisk St Bristol St
Moore St Irvington Blvd
Billingsley St Edison St Averill St Hain St Beggs St Siegel St
K VILLAG TX
45 59
E 19th St
Kern St
E 18th St
E 18th St
W 17th St
E 17th St
X
X
y St Winston
St
Posey St Idylwild St
Pettit St
Mathis St
Cavalcade St
N
E 16th St
Beck Walling St
Clio St WP atton
Ev Frawley S
in Ma
Exit 50b
Vincent St Archer St Cordell St
St
Pittman St
Pedd
ie St
Beverly St
E 15th St
E 14th St E 13th St
Le Green St
v
St
Amundsen St Coronado St
Connecting Rd Weiss
Patton St
Ma Eg F Erin S Sh
610
Walton St
Cody St
WEST UNIVERSITY PLAC TX SOUTHSIDE PLACE TX BELLAIRE TX
mp Ra
N Shepherd Dr Laird St
W 14th 1/2 St W 14th St
X
Cortlandt St
Algregg St
E 13th 1/2 St
W 13th St
X
E 12th 1/2 St E 11th 1/2 St
W 12th St
State Hwy 261 Nashua St Prince St
X
v
vE 12th St
W Gardner St W Fugate St W Melwood St Pizer St W Temple St
X
M ain St
Heslep St
Moss St Bruce St Reagan St De George St
n lto Fu
Gardner St
N
Fugate St
Melwood St
X
Temple St
Ca Wee le m nd s ar St St
Ke
nn on
0
2 Miles
4
6
Oak Ridge St Studewood St
Blair St
e Alb
Searle Dr
St
St
Peco re M
Key St
icha ux
X
Driveway
X
W Cottage St Railey St Pecore St Redan St Merrill St
Morrison St Beauchamp St Florence St
Cottage St Dell Ct
Collingsworth St Colli Bo Bigelow S
rS t
v
Map layers
Submarket
Irvington Blvd
Je B er st d lv
Detering St Reinicke Heights Blvd
Allston St
X
Je ss M am t ari go Lil ine aS rm ld a c S t No St E St St Park Glen
St ord inf Ma S 5 I4
Ba Hays
y Fire Department C Police
Airport/Airfield College/Univ Hospital Oilfield Park Y Religious Site X School 0 .2 .4 .6
Helen St
Halpern St
Gentry St
Luzon St
Studewood St
Watson St
North St Payne St Parkview St
St Sage k Dr ite Oa Wh
v
45
Boundary St l St C ar St ris Mor
\ w T v
Northwood St
Rutland Pl Rutland St
K ee S ne
Ide
t nS t mo S Com berry ka Tac St ton t Ful ut S stn St St Che rett an Eve reem F St ain NM
Norhill Blvd
t al S
t
Wrightwood St
Roy St
v HOUSTON
Hemphill St
v ud St Ma
v Ho
Weber St Alamo St Ovid St Spring St Shearn St
Colorado St
Exit 76 8
t n S St t ma i e Qui Winn t t ry S rie S H e n Ma t t all S hop S ch Bis Pas
X
Forester
Oxford St
X
v
w
y
Crockett St Summer St Winter St
Sawyer St
X
t es S Jam an S g Gar gan S Ho S n ey nck Pi o t ring Har oks Bro t net Bur
Raiff St
Columbia St
Arlington St
Johnson St
Reinerman St
Miles 1:30,269
Durham Dr Sandman St
t i s S St Lewtcher Fle t th S Sou ser Dr Gla
Fowler St
Thompson St
it Ex
Patterson St
00
Yale St
Oliver St
Court St Park Tr East St Lakin St Wagner Abbott St Harvard St S Heights Blvd Ramp
Diesel Givens St
Bonner St
Daly Pl
lor Nay
Co llin Sh sP l
Stea
Shepherd Dr
Parker St
Holly St
W 0 I1 E 0 I1
Brashear St
Epstein Ct Comira
Ih
Snover St
Union St Decatur St Kane St Lubbock St State St
Washington Av e Bismark
Sabine White
v Ho 45
Pre
Sta
Travis St y Fw
X
C
sto n Driv St ewa y
Henderso
6 y2 Hw te Bet
Olive St
45
Trinity
Ida Arn
Ja
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 (CENSUS) 40,424 2000 (CENSUS) 39,553 -871 -2.2% 2005 2010 (ESTIMATED) (PROJECTED) 38,644 38,156 -909 -488 -2.3% -1.3%
POPULATION POPULATION CHANGE PERCENT CHANGE
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 (CENSUS) 15,606 2.6 2000 (CENSUS) 16,034 428 2.7% 2.5 2005 2010 (ESTIMATED) (PROJECTED) 15,737 15,665 -297 -72 -1.9% -0.5% 2.5 2.4
HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLD CHANGE PERCENT CHANGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE
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 BY AGE UNDER 25 25 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 75 - 84 85 & HIGHER TOTAL 2005 (ESTIMATED) NUMBER PERCENT 761 4.8% 3,354 21.3% 3,829 24.3% 3,358 21.3% 2,070 13.2% 1,149 7.3% 815 5.2% 401 2.5% 15,737 100.0% 2010 (PROJECTED) NUMBER PERCENT 823 5.3% 2,635 16.8% 3,683 23.5% 3,455 22.1% 2,497 15.9% 1,397 8.9% 782 5.0% 394 2.5% 15,666 100.0% CHANGE 2005-2010 NUMBER PERCENT 62 8.1% -719 -21.4% -146 -3.8% 97 2.9% 427 20.6% 248 21.6% -33 -4.0% -7 -1.7% -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:
TENURE OWNER-OCCUPIED RENTER-OCCUPIED TOTAL 2000 (CENSUS) HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT 7,876 49.1% 8,158 50.9% 16,034 100.0% 2005 (ESTIMATED) HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT 7,690 48.9% 8,047 51.1% 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 HOUSEHOLD 1 PERSON 2 PERSONS 3 PERSONS 4 PERSONS 5 PERSONS 6+ PERSONS TOTAL 2000 (CENSUS) HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT 5,984 37.3% 4,604 28.7% 2,042 12.7% 1,531 9.5% 894 5.6% 979 6.1% 16,034 100.0% 2005 (ESTIMATED) HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT 5,989 38.1% 4,459 28.3% 1,998 12.7% 1,470 9.3% 861 5.5% 961 6.1% 15,738 100.0% CHANGE 2000-2005 HOUSEHOLDS PERCENT 5 0.1% -145 -3.1% -44 -2.2% -61 -4.0% -33 -3.7% -18 -1.8% -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.
YEAR 1999 TO MARCH 2000 1995 TO 1998 1990 TO 1994 1980 TO 1989 1970 TO 1979 1960 TO 1969 1940 TO 1959 1939 OR EARLIER TOTAL OWNER 92 187 97 482 223 324 1,633 4,838 7,876 HOUSING UNITS PERCENT RENTER 1.2% 8 2.4% 128 1.2% 82 6.1% 567 2.8% 807 4.1% 1,253 20.7% 2,665 61.4% 2,648 100.0% 8,158 PERCENT 0.1% 1.6% 1.0% 7.0% 9.9% 15.4% 32.7% 32.5% 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 UNITS IN SINGLE-FAMILY STRUCTURES 16,055 18,244 20,122 UNITS IN 2-UNIT MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURES 82 22 18 UNITS IN 3- AND 4-UNIT MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURES 644 96 394 UNITS IN 5+ UNIT MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURES 9,081 6,203 5,885 UNITS IN ALL MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURES 9,807 6,321 6,297 TOTAL UNITS 25,862 24,565 26,419
Source: SOCDS
2002 23,052 144 811 10,332 11,287 34,339
2003 26,450 92 71 14,370 14,533 40,983
2004 28,020 212 63 8,100 8,375 36,395
TENURE OWNEROCCUPIED RENTEROCCUPIED TOTAL
TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 7,876 8,158 16,034
SUBSTANDARD UNITS 2000 CENSUS LACKING COMPLETE COMPLETE PLUMBING PLUMBING PERCENT FACILITIES FACILITIES 49.1% 50.9% 100.0% 7,836 8,063 15,899 40 95 135
PERCENT SUBSTANDARD 0.5% 1.2% 0.8%
Source: 2000 Census
III-126
POVERTY STATUS 2000 CENSUS POPULATION NOT LIVING IN 31,840 POVERTY POPULATION LIVING IN 7,713 POVERTY TOTAL* 39,553
80.5% 19.5% 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 INCOME LESS THAN $10,000 $10,000 - $19,999 $20,000 - $29,999 $30,000 - $39,999 $40,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $59,999 $60,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 & HIGHER TOTAL MEDIAN INCOME 2000 (CENSUS) 2005 (ESTIMATED) 2010 (PROJECTED) NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT NUMBER PERCENT 1,975 12.3% 1,617 10.3% 1,375 8.8% 2,178 13.6% 1,622 10.3% 1,343 8.6% 2,180 13.6% 1,788 11.4% 1,483 9.5% 1,994 12.4% 1,806 11.5% 1,533 9.8% 1,537 9.6% 1,558 9.9% 1,471 9.4% 1,247 7.8% 1,250 7.9% 1,302 8.3% 1,654 10.3% 1,499 9.5% 1,506 9.6% 1,412 8.8% 1,834 11.7% 1,829 11.7% 1,857 11.6% 2,763 17.6% 3,823 24.4% 16,034 100.0% 15,737 100.0% 15,665 100.0% $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 HOUSEHOLDS $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL 1-PERSON 828 745 521 490 330 158 305 3,378 2-PERSON 254 264 281 272 188 164 525 1,948 2000 CENSUS 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 108 55 251 112 160 199 132 158 93 88 69 73 187 123 1,001 808 5+-PERSON 93 173 272 135 100 41 210 1,023 TOTAL 1,338 1,545 1,434 1,187 799 505 1,350 8,158
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 744 646 478 482 424 184 504 3,462
2-PERSON 205 204 225 245 186 164 696 1,925
2005 ESTIMATED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 92 46 181 68 126 165 119 135 103 81 70 61 256 163 947 719
5+-PERSON 72 113 213 131 133 43 288 994
TOTAL 1,160 1,213 1,207 1,111 927 521 1,907 8,047
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 736 635 470 467 424 190 548 3,471
2-PERSON 196 195 218 237 183 166 730 1,927
2006 PROJECTED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 88 45 173 65 121 158 116 132 102 79 73 63 272 172 944 714
5+-PERSON 69 106 202 131 131 46 309 993
TOTAL 1,135 1,174 1,169 1,083 919 537 2,030 8,049
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 729 624 463 453 424 197 593 3,481
2-PERSON 187 186 212 230 181 169 764 1,928
2007 PROJECTED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 85 44 165 61 115 152 112 128 100 78 76 64 288 182 941 709
5+-PERSON 66 99 190 131 129 49 329 992
TOTAL 1,110 1,135 1,131 1,055 911 554 2,155 8,050
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
III-128
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 721 612 455 439 424 203 637 3,491
2-PERSON 178 177 205 223 178 171 798 1,929
2008 PROJECTED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 81 42 157 58 110 145 109 124 99 76 78 66 304 192 937 703
5+-PERSON 62 92 178 131 127 51 349 991
TOTAL 1,084 1,095 1,093 1,026 903 570 2,280 8,052
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 713 601 447 424 424 210 683 3,501
2-PERSON 169 168 198 215 175 173 833 1,931
2009 PROJECTED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 77 41 148 54 104 138 106 121 97 74 81 68 320 201 934 698
5+-PERSON 59 85 166 131 125 54 370 990
TOTAL 1,059 1,056 1,054 997 895 587 2,406 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 HOUSEHOLDS 55+ $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL 1-PERSON 533 273 82 44 66 18 23 1,039 2-PERSON 63 67 69 23 21 13 27 282 2000 CENSUS 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 8 6 23 0 36 9 6 0 0 11 0 8 20 0 93 35 5+-PERSON 0 9 0 9 9 13 6 47 TOTAL 611 372 197 81 107 52 76 1,496
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 55+ $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 466 280 125 58 71 22 42 1,065
2-PERSON 53 68 80 29 20 14 49 312
2005 ESTIMATED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 8 4 29 0 44 15 13 1 2 9 0 12 35 1 131 42
5+-PERSON 0 12 2 32 21 27 13 107
TOTAL 532 389 265 133 123 75 140 1,656
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
III-129
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 55+ $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 463 284 124 59 74 22 47 1,074
2-PERSON 51 66 82 29 24 15 56 323
2006 PROJECTED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 7 5 30 0 43 14 13 1 3 9 1 13 40 2 137 44
5+-PERSON 0 12 2 34 21 29 18 115
TOTAL 527 392 265 136 131 78 162 1,692
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 55+ $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 460 288 124 60 77 21 51 1,082
2-PERSON 49 65 84 29 28 15 63 334
2007 PROJECTED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 7 5 31 0 42 14 14 1 3 10 1 13 46 2 143 46
5+-PERSON 0 11 2 36 21 31 22 122
TOTAL 522 395 266 139 139 82 185 1,727
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 55+ $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 457 293 124 61 80 21 56 1,091
2-PERSON 48 63 86 28 33 16 71 344
2008 PROJECTED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 6 6 32 0 41 14 14 1 3 11 2 13 51 3 150 48
5+-PERSON 0 11 2 38 21 33 26 130
TOTAL 517 398 266 142 147 85 207 1,763
Source: Ribbon Demographics, Claritas
RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 55+ $0 - $10,000 $10,000 - $20,000 $20,000 - $30,000 $30,000 - $40,000 $40,000 - $50,000 $50,000 - $60,000 $60,000+ TOTAL
1-PERSON 454 297 123 62 83 20 61 1,100
2-PERSON 46 61 88 28 37 17 78 355
2009 PROJECTED 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 6 6 33 0 40 14 14 1 4 12 2 13 57 4 156 50
5+-PERSON 0 10 2 40 21 35 30 138
TOTAL 512 401 267 145 156 88 230 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 AGRICULTURE & NATURAL RESOURCES 22 1.1% MINING 8 0.4% CONSTRUCTION 114 5.5% MANUFACTURING 141 6.7% TRANSPORTATION & UTILITIES 62 3.0% WHOLESALE TRADE 142 6.8% RETAIL TRADE 506 24.2% F.I.R.E. 146 7.0% SERVICES 909 43.5% GOVERNMENT 18 0.9% NON-CLASSIFIABLE 22 1.1% TOTAL 2,090 100.0% EMPLOYEES 163 48 1,105 2,567 770 2,920 3,947 1,135 7,114 602 109 20,480 PERCENT 0.8% 0.2% 5.4% 12.5% 3.8% 14.3% 19.3% 5.5% 34.7% 2.9% 0.5% 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:
INDUSTRY MEMORIAL HERMANN HEALTH CARE CONTINENTAL AIRLINES UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS – MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER HALLIBURTON UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH AT GALVESTON KROGER ARAMARK RELIANT ENERGY HCA HEWLETT PACKARD BUSINESS TYPE HEALTHCARE TRANSPORTATION HEALTHCARE OIL REFINING HEALTHCARE GROCERY FOOD SERVICES ELECTRIC SUPPLIER HEALTHCARE COMPUTER/ELECTRONICS TOTAL TOTAL EMPLOYED 16,300 16,000 16,000 14,000 12,318 12,000 10,000 9,500 9,000 9,000 124,118
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:
YEAR 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 UNEMPLOYMENT RATE HARRIS COUNTY TEXAS 5.6% 5.8% 5.2% 5.4% 4.4% 4.9% 4.8% 4.7% 4.4% 4.4% 4.8% 5.0% 6.2% 6.3% 6.9% 6.7% 6.4% 6.1% 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:
MAP I.D. 2 3 4 5 MARKET-RATE YEAR BUILT/ PROJECT NAME RENOVATED SKYLINE 1960/2005 SHADOW OAKS 1962 OAKWOOD MANOR 1972/2005 WOODLAND GREEN 1960 TARGET MARKET FAMILY FAMILY FAMILY FAMILY
TOTAL UNITS 76 23 96 30
The following table summarizes the overall market-rate rental market:
BEDROOMS UNITS STUDIO 39 ONE-BEDROOM 104 TWO-BEDROOM 82 TOTAL 225 DISTRIBUTION 17.3% 46.2% 36.4% 100.0% VACANT 4 2 2 8 PERCENT 10.3% 1.9% 2.4% 3.6% GROSS RENT RANGE $423-$535 $560-$746 $639-$882
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 twobedroom 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 BNA TOTAL UNITS 96 129 PERCENT 42.7% 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:
APPLIANCE RANGE REFRIGERATOR DISHWASHER DISPOSAL APPLIANCES PROJECTS PERCENT 5 100.0% 5 100.0% 3 60.0% 3 60.0% UNITS 225 225 119 119
AMENITY AC – CENTRAL AC – WINDOW FLOOR COVERING PATIO/BALCONY CEILING FAN WINDOW TREATMENTS
UNIT AMENITIES PROJECTS PERCENT 4 80.0% 1 20.0% 5 100.0% 2 40.0% 4 80.0% 5 100.0%
UNITS 149 76 225 106 129 225
III-134
AMENITY ON-SITE MANAGEMENT LAUNDRY SECURITY GATE PICNIC AREA
PROJECT AMENITIES PROJECTS PERCENT 3 5 2 1 60.0% 100.0% 40.0% 20.0%
UNITS 202 225 30 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
E 31st S
261
St W 31st W 30th St
Mcc
Pai
E 32nd St
E 30th St
Cortlandt St
610
No
rth
Caplin S
Fw y
610
Yale St
ell St
nton Blvd a St ogers St
astman St
St
C
1
vernus St
Grinnell
th Loop W W 28th St
Brinkman St
Airline Dr
W 19th St W 18th St
N Durham Dr
E 19th St
W 18th St
E 18th St
E 18th St
W 17th St
W 16th St W 15th 1/2 St W 15th St
W 14th 1/2 St W 14th St
E 17th St
E 16th St
3 ! E 15th St
Kern St Dunbar St Jerome St Beck Winston St Walling St
Harris Ct
Clio St
4 ! Pettit St
Elser St
Timbergrove Ln
Dian St
Ln
Bay Oaks Rd
W 11th St
Herkimer St Lawrence St Leafton Ln Alexander St Dorothy St
11th St E 11th St
W 10th 1/2 St E 10th St
Cortlandt St
E 10th 1/2 St Omar St
icha ux
Atlantic St
Driveway
W 9th St
E 9th St
E 8th 1/2 St
Nicholson St
Glen Oaks St
Egbert St ansas St Roy Cir Kiam St Petty St Darling St Larkin St Cornish St
E 8th St
E 7th 1/2 St
E 6th 1/2 St
Woodland St Euclid St Byrne St
Norhill Blvd
W 7th StE 7th St
Michaux St
Teetshorn St Ridge St Usener St
Payne St Parkview St
W 6th St
W 6th St
E 5th 1/2 St
Columbia St
Usener St
Th el m
em ont St
W 5th St E 5th St
2 !
St Sage k Dr ite Oa Wh Wh ite Wrightwood St a Oa Dr kD r 45
Depelchin St Weber St Alamo St Ovid St
Ho Exit 76 8 v
Stu d
xit 765b
Detering St
Studer St
Bace Ct
Center St
Bingham St
10
Tr en tha m
Schuler St
Lester St
mont
W 4th StE 4th St Kolb St I 10 E Katy Fwy I 10 W Exit 766 Nolda St Herd 10 Inker St Marina St Spencer St Eigel St Conne cting R E 2nd St Koehler St d Maxie St Starkey St Eli St Allen S High St t Nett St Hicks St
HOUSTON
r St Tay lo
Spring St
Shearn St
Colorado St
Crockett St Summer St Winter St
Edwards St
St
Boundary St St rris Mo n ma t lS Quit C ar ry H en N St nie t Win all S St Pasch t rie es S Ma Jam an S t g pS Gar isho B St S an ey Hog ckn Pin o t ring Har sS ook Br t net Bur
Reynolds St
ransto n Ct oydon Ct Ra m p
W 10th St
Houston Ave
Sachs St Stude
ston A ve Riesner St
Gibson St Feagan St Dickson St
Avie St
Lacy St
Oreilly St
Ra
p m
Butler St
Decatur St Kane St Lubbock St State St
Pre
I 45
Blossom St
Washington Av e Bismark
sto n Driv St ewa y
Girar d
Travis
45
M
Pr e
Frank lin St C
ain St N Main St nto St Vine S
Weens
Reinicke St
S
Washington Ave Washington Lillian St Ave Rose St Floyd St
Snover St
Pl
I 45
Girard S t
N
nsmere St Beall St
W 23rd St
W 22nd St
W 21st St
W 20th St
W 12th St
tridge Rd
W 27th St
W 26th St W 25th St
W 24th St
W 13th St
t
610
line Dr
s St
St
Exit 10m
North Loop
I 610 E 29th St
Reid St Exit 17 Loop E North
E 28th St
Kelley St
I 610
I-610
Helmers St
Princeton St
Robertson St
p Ram
Driveway
E 27th St E 26th St Aurora St E 25th St Munford St E 24th St E 23rd St E 22nd St
Yale St
E 20th St
Eleanor St Sylvester Rd
I 45
Gib
St bs
Samuel St Service St Lenard St
Eichwurzel Ln Danna Ln Robert Lee Rd
Link Rd
Wynne St
Adele St
Louise St
Cordell St Enid St Walton St Tabor St Northwood St Driveway
St Armstead Emir
W Cavalcade St
Robbie St
Tarver St
45
Canadian St Moody St Cavalcade St
Sharman St
Avenue of Oaks St Woodard St Fairbanks St Milwaukee St Graceland St Gri English St Sue St H Joyce St Gale St Ga
Baylor St
t Sheldon St Cornell St ain S NM Singleton St Gostick St
90
S
Lawrence St
Blair St
Gostic St
y Hov Fw Ih 45
610
Nicholson St
Ashland St
Rutland St
Norhill Blvd
Michaux St
Oxford St
Columbia St
Arlington St
Y TX
HOUSTON
HOUSTON TX
Fisk St Bristol St
Moore St Irvington Blvd
Billingsley St Edison St Averill St Hain St Beggs St Siegel St
K VILLAG TX
45 59
Mathis St
Ev Frawley S
Amu Weiss
Pittman St
Exit 50b
610
Fulton St
Edsee St
Pedd
ie St
Beverly St
Coronado St
Irvington Blvd
Le Green St
Jewett St
Algregg St
E 14th St
Fenwick St
W Patton St
Cody St
Patton St
Ke
Heslep St
E 13th 1/2 St
E 13th St
E 12th 1/2 St
W Gardner St W Fugate St N M ain
Moss St
W Temple St
Julian St
Pizer St
Gardner St
Fugate St
St
Melwood St
E 12th St
E 11th 1/2 St
Peco re M
Collingsworth St Colli Connecting Rd Bo Key St amp Bigelow S R Railey St 5 ! Ba Pecore St Je ss Quinn St M am Hays ar Redan St in ig N Merrill St ol Lila e S M d cS t ai n St Halpern St t St r Highland St St nde Park Bayland Ave Olea Glen Luzon St
Karnes St Emerald Ct Opal Ct y North Fw
Temple St
Ca Wee le m nd s ar St St
nn on
Ma Eg F Erin S Sh
e Alb
WEST UNIVERSITY PLAC TX SOUTHSIDE PLACE TX BELLAIRE TX
N Shepherd Dr Laird St
State Hwy 261
n lto Fu
0
2 Miles
4
6
Studewood St
St
St
I 45 N
Heights Blvd
Harvard St
rS t
Searle Dr
W Cottage St
Cottage St
Map layers
Submarket Interstate Hwys US Hwys State Hwys ! Market Rate ! Market Rate/Tax Credit 0 .2 .4 .6 Miles 1:30,269
C
Je B er st d lv
Nashua St Prince St
Reagan St
Gentry St
Studewood St
Allston St
n Eu
or d inf Ma St i ce
Florence St
Ashland St
Tulane St
Helen St
St
Rutland Pl Rutland St
al S I de
Fre
t ut S stn Che St rett Eve n St a em
Moy St
Waverly St
t
St af nle ee tson St Gr Wa
Roy St
St as t om Th outh S S
Forester
Co
Raiff St
Arlington St
Oxford St
Reinerman St
Goliad St
St ne Kee r St che
Flet
Durham Dr Sandman St
0W I1 0E I1 Holly St
ser Gla
Thompson St
Yale St
Oliver St
Court St Park Tr East St Lakin St Wagner S Abbott St Harvard St S Heights Blvd Heights Blvd Waugh Dr
Diesel Givens St
Bonner St
T C Jester Blvd
Dr
Parker St
Johnson St
Daly Pl
lor Nay
Shepherd Dr
Center St
Garvin Ct Dart St
Hemphill St
Hickory St
Ih
Sawyer St Keyser Pl
45
Olive St
Patterson St
Epstein Ct Comira
Ho
Fowler St
Hartman St
1 !
vF wy
Sta 6 y2 Hw te Bet
Henderso
Trinity S
Sabine
White
Silver
Ida Arn
Ja
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 150unit 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.
HOUSEHOLD SIZE TARGETED AMHI 30% 40% 50% 60% 80% 100% 30% 40% 50% 60% 80% 100% 30% 40% 50% 60% 80% 100% 30% 40% 50% 60% 80% 100% 30% 40% 50% 60% 80% 100% MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE INCOME $12,810 $17,080 $21,350 $25,620 $34,150 $42,700 $14,640 $19,520 $24,400 $29,280 $39,050 $48,800 $16,470 $21,960 $27,450 $32,940 $43,900 $54,900 $18,300 $24,400 $30,500 $36,600 $48,800 $61,000 $19,770 $26,360 $32,950 $39,540 $52,700 $65,900
ONE-PERSON
TWO-PERSON
THREE-PERSON
FOUR-PERSON
FIVE-PERSON
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 APPROPRIATE INCOME RANGE BY TARGETED AMHI 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON BASELINE TOTAL RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (HISTA DATA) TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1-PERSON 2-PERSON 3-PERSON 4-PERSON 5+-PERSON = BASELINE TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 0%-30%
($0-$12,810) ($0-$14,640) ($0-$16,470) ($0-$18,300) ($0-$19,770)
31% - 40%
($12,810-$17,080) ($14,640-$19,520) ($16,470-$21,960) ($18,300-$24,400) ($19,770-$26,360)
TARGETED AMHI 41% - 50% 51% - 60%
($17,080-$21,350) ($19,520-$24,400) ($21,960-$27,450) ($24,400-$30,500) ($26,360-$32,950) ($21,350-$25,620) ($24,400-$29,280) ($27,450-$32,940) ($30,500-$36,600) ($32,950-$39,540)
61% - 80%
($25,620-$34,150) ($29,280-$39,050) ($32,940-$43,900) ($36,600-$48,800) ($39,540-$52,700)
81% - 100%
($34,150-$42,700 ($39,050-$48,800) ($43,900-$54,900) ($48,000-$60,100) ($52,700-$65,900)
8,047 925 300 209 102 182 1,718 925
8,047 276 100 89 84 138 687 276
8,047 253 109 69 99 116 646 253
8,047 204 110 67 82 86 549 204
8,047 409 238 124 117 151 1,039 409
8,047 396 187 97 77 59 816 396
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. 67% 25% 8% 35% 46% 15% 16% 55% 22% 11% 45% 36% 10% 42% 31% 4-BR. 4% 7% 8% 17%
1-PERSON HH 2-PERSON HH 3-PERSON HH 4-PERSON HH 5+-PERSON HH
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. 0%-30% 620 231 74 0 31%-40% 185 69 22 0 1-PERSON 41%-50% 170 63 20 0 HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 137 51 16 0 61%-80% 274 102 33 0 81%-100% 265 99 32 0 0%-30% 105 138 45 12 31%-40% 35 46 15 4 41%-50% 38 50 16 4 2-PERSON HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 39 51 17 4 61%-80% 83 109 36 10 81%-100% 65 86 28 7 0%-30% 33 115 46 15 31%-40% 14 49 20 6 41%-50% 11 38 15 5 3-PERSON HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 11 37 15 5 61%-80% 20 68 27 9 81%-100% 16 53 21 7 0%-30% 11 46 37 8 31%-40% 9 38 30 7 41%-50% 11 45 36 8 4-PERSON HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 9 37 30 7 61%-80% 13 53 42 9 81%-100% 8 35 28 6 0%-30% 18 76 56 31 31%-40% 14 58 43 23 41%-50% 12 49 36 20 5+-PERSON HOUSEHOLD 51%-60% 9 36 27 15 61%-80% 15 63 47 26 81%-100% 6 25 18 10 0%-30% 787 (46%) 606 (35%) 258 (15%) 66 (4%) 31%-40% 257 (37%) 260 (38%) 130 (19%) 40 (6%) 41%-50% 242 (37%) 245 (38%) 123 (19%) 37 (6%) 51%-60% 205 (37%) 212 (38%) 105 (19%) 31 (6%) 61%-80% 405 (39%) 395 (38%) 185 (18%) 54 (5%) TOTAL (%) 81%-100% 360 (44%) 298 (37%) 127 (16%) 30 (4%) 2,256 2,016 928 258 OVERALL TOTALS *Due to rounding, some of the above percentages may not total 100%
TOTAL 925 276 253 204 409 396 300 100 108 111 238 186 209 89 69 68 124 97 102 84 100 83 117 77 181 138 117 87 151 59 1,717 687 647 553 1,039 815
III-144
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET 2006 DEMAND
I. GROWTH DEMAND HOUSEHOLD-BASED: 2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 2006 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1YEAR) II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET 2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) (+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR) (=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2006 TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2006 (+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* (+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION PERIOD** (=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET (-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT (+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** (=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR) STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR)**** 2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR)**** 3-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR)**** 4-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR)**** 0%-30% ($0-$20,100) 31% - 40% ($13,000-$26,700) 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100% ($17,300-$33,400) ($21,700-$40,100) ($26,000-$53,500) ($34,700-$66,900)
1,718 1,696 -22 -22 1,718 -22 1,696 1,786 1,696 0 (0%) 5 1,701 1,786 1,701 78 163 75 58 24
687 673 -14 -14 687 -14 673 708 673 0 (0%) 3 676 708 676 31 64 24 24 12
646 629 -18 -18 646 -18 629 662 629 23 (3.6%) 5 657 662 657 29 35 13 13 7
549 547 -2 -2 549 -2 547 576 547 20 (3.6%) 14 581 576 581 25 20 7 8 4
1,039 1,018 -21 -21 1,039 -21 1,018 1,072 1,018 37 (3.6%) 0 1,055 1,072 1,055 0 17 7 6 3
816 815 -1 -1 816 -1 815 858 815 29 (3.6%) 0 844 858 844 0 14 6 5 2
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 HOUSEHOLD-BASED: 2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 2007 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET 2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) (+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) (=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2007 TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2007 (+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* (+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION PERIOD** (=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET (-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT (+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** (=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS)**** 2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS)**** 3-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS)**** 4-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS)**** 0%-30% ($0-$20,400) 31% - 40% ($13,200-$27,100) 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100% ($17,600-$33,900) ($22,000-$40,700) ($26,400-$54,300) ($35,200-$67,900)
1,718 1,675 -22 -44 1,718 -44 1,675 1,763 1,675 0 (0%) 5 1,680 1,763 1,680 157 240 110 85 36
687 659 -14 -29 687 -29 659 693 659 0 (0%) 3 662 693 662 63 94 35 36 18
646 611 -18 -35 646 -35 611 643 611 22 (3.6%) 5 638 643 638 59 64 24 24 12
549 545 -2 -5 549 -5 545 573 545 20 (3.6%) 14 579 573 579 50 45 16 17 9
1,039 998 -21 -42 1,039 -42 998 1,050 998 36 (3.6%) 0 1,033 1,050 1,033 0 17 6 7 3
816 814 -1 -3 816 -3 814 856 814 29 (3.6%) 0 843 856 843 0 14 6 5 2
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 HOUSEHOLD-BASED: 2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 2008 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET 2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) (+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) (=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2008 TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2008 (+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* (+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION PERIOD** (=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET (-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT (+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** (=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS)**** 2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS)**** 3-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS)**** 4-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS)**** 0%-30% ($0-$20,700) 31% - 40% ($13,400-$27,500) 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100% ($17,800-$34,400) ($22,300-$41,300) ($26,800-$55,100) ($35,700-$68,900)
1,718 1,653 -22 -65 1,718 -65 1,653 1,740 1,653 0 (0%) 5 1,658 1,740 1,658 235 317 145 112 48
687 644 -14 -43 687 -43 644 678 644 0 (0%) 3 647 678 647 94 125 47 47 24
646 594 -18 -53 646 -53 594 625 594 21 (3.6%) 5 620 625 620 88 93 35 35 18
549 542 -2 -7 549 -7 542 571 542 20 (3.6%) 14 576 571 576 75 70 26 27 13
1,039 977 -21 -62 1,039 -62 977 1,028 977 35 (3.6%) 0 1,012 1,028 1,012 0 16 6 6 3
816 812 -1 -4 816 -4 812 855 812 29 (3.6%) 0 841 855 841 0 14 6 5 2
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 HOUSEHOLD-BASED: 2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 2009 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET 2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) (+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) (=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2009 TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2009 (+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* (+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION PERIOD** (=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET (-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT (+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** (=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS)**** 2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS)**** 3-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS)**** 4-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS)**** 0%-30% ($0-$21,000) 31% - 40% ($13,600-$27,900) 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100% ($18,100-$34,900) ($22,600-$41,900) ($27,200-$55,900) ($36,200-$69,900)
1,718 1,631 -22 -87 1,718 -87 1,631 1,717 1,631 0 (0%) 5 1,636 1,717 1,636 313 394 181 139 59
687 630 -14 -57 687 -57 630 663 630 0 (0%) 3 633 663 633 125 155 58 59 29
646 576 -18 -70 646 -70 576 606 576 21 (3.6%) 5 602 606 602 118 122 46 46 23
549 540 -2 -9 549 -9 540 568 540 19 (3.6%) 14 573 568 573 100 95 36 36 18
1,039 956 -21 -83 1,039 -83 956 1,006 956 34 (3.6%) 0 990 1,006 990 0 16 6 6 3
816 811 -1 -5 816 -5 811 854 811 29 (3.6%) 0 840 854 840 0 13 6 5 2
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 APPROPRIATE INCOME RANGE BY TARGETED AMHI 1-PERSON 2-PERSON BASELINE TOTAL RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (HISTA DATA) TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 1-PERSON 2-PERSON = BASELINE TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 0%-30%
($0-$12,810) ($0-$14,640)
31% - 40%
TARGETED AMHI 41% - 50% 51% - 60%
61% - 80%
81% - 100%
($12,810-$17,080) ($17,080-$21,350) ($21,350-$25,620 ($25,620-$34,150) ($34,150-$42,700) ($14,640-$19,520) ($19,520-$24,400) ($24,400-$29,280) ($29,280-$39,050) ($39,050-$48,800
1,656 545 85 630
1,656 120 33 153
1,656 99 38 137
1,656 53 39 92
1,656 79 32 111
1,656 53 20 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%) 65 723 350 OVERALL TOTALS
III-150
HEIGHTS SUBMARKET 2006 DEMAND (55+)
I. GROWTH DEMAND HOUSEHOLD-BASED: 2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 2006 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1YEAR) II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET 2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) (+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR) (=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2006 TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2006 (+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* (+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION PERIOD** (=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET (-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT (+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** (=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR) STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR)**** 2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (1 YEAR)**** 0%-30% ($0-$14,900) 31% - 40% ($13,000-$19,800) 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100% ($17,300-$24,800) ($21,700-$29,700) ($26,000-$39,600) ($34,700-$49,500)
630 633 3 3 630 3 633 666 633 0 (0%) 0 633 666 633 19 52 36
153 157 4 4 153 4 157 165 157 0 (0%) 0 157 165 157 25 33 22
137 136 -1 -1 137 -1 136 143 136 5 (3.6%) 0 141 143 141 22 24 16
92 93 1 1 92 1 93 98 93 3 (3.6%) 0 96 98 96 15 16 10
111 109 -2 -2 111 -2 109 115 109 4 (3.6%) 0 113 115 113 0 2 1
73 80 7 7 73 7 80 84 80 3 (3.6%) 0 83 84 83 0 1 1
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 HOUSEHOLD-BASED: 2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 2007 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET 2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) (+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) (=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2007 TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2007 (+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* (+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION PERIOD** (=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET (-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT (+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** (=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS) STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS)**** 2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (2 YEARS)**** 0%-30% ($0-$15,100) 31% - 40% ($13,200-$20,100) 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100% ($17,600-$25,100) ($22,000-$30,100) ($26,400-$40,200) ($35,200-$50,200)
630 636 3 6 630 6 636 669 636 0 (0%) 0 636 669 636 37 71 49
153 161 4 8 153 8 161 169 161 0 (0%) 0 161 169 161 50 58 39
137 136 -1 -2 137 -2 136 143 136 5 (3.6%) 0 141 143 141 44 47 31
92 94 1 2 92 2 94 99 94 3 (3.6%) 0 97 99 97 30 31 19
111 107 -2 -4 111 -4 107 113 107 4 (3.6%) 0 111 113 111 0 2 1
73 88 7 15 73 15 88 92 88 3 (3.6%) 0 91 92 91 0 1 1
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 HOUSEHOLD-BASED: 2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 2008 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET 2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) (+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) (=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2008 TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2008 (+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* (+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION PERIOD** (=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET (-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT (+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** (=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS) STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS)**** 2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (3 YEARS)**** 0%-30% ($0-$15,300) 31% - 40% ($13,400-$20,400) 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100% ($17,800-$25,500) ($22,300-$30,600) ($26,800-$40,800) ($35,700-$51,000)
630 638 3 8 630 8 638 672 638 0 (0%) 0 638 672 638 56 90 62
153 164 4 11 153 11 164 173 164 0 (0%) 0 164 173 164 74 83 56
137 135 -1 -2 137 -2 135 142 135 5 (3.6%) 0 140 142 140 67 69 45
92 95 1 3 92 3 95 100 95 3 (3.6%) 0 98 100 98 45 46 29
111 105 -2 -6 111 -6 105 111 105 3 (3.6%) 0 109 111 109 0 2 1
73 95 7 22 73 22 95 100 95 3 (3.6%) 0 98 100 98 0 2 1
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 HOUSEHOLD-BASED: 2005 TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 2009 TOTAL ESTIMATED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS ESTIMATED ANNUAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) II. TOTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95.0% OCCUPIED) MARKET 2005 INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (OCCUPIED UNITS) (+) NEW INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLD GROWTH OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) (=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS IN 2009 TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET III. EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT TOTAL OCCUPIED TARGETED RENTAL UNITS 2009 (+) ESTIMATED # OF VACANT UNITS (VACANCY %)* (+) PLANNED AND PROPOSED TARGETED UNITS DURING PROJECTION PERIOD** (=) NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT IV. TOTAL SUPPLY AND DEMAND TOTAL TARGETED RENTAL UNITS NEEDED FOR BALANCED (95% OCCUPIED) MARKET (-) TOTAL NET EXISTING TARGETED RENTAL PRODUCT (+) 2.5% OF EXISTING RENTAL PRODUCT BUILT PRIOR TO 1970*** (=) TOTAL TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS) STUDIO/1-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS)**** 2-BR. TARGETED UNITS NEEDED OVER PROJECTION PERIOD (4 YEARS)**** 0%-30% ($0-$15,500) 31% - 40% ($13,600-$20,700) 41% - 50% 51% - 60% 61% - 80% 81% - 100% ($18,100-$25,900) ($22,600-$31,000) ($27,200-$41,400) ($36,200-$51,700)
630 641 3 11 630 11 641 675 641 0 (0%) 0 641 675 641 75 108 75
153 168 4 15 153 15 168 177 168 0 (0%) 0 168 177 168 99 108 73
137 134 -1 -3 137 -3 134 141 134 5 (3.6%) 0 139 141 139 89 91 59
92 96 1 4 92 4 96 101 96 3 (3.6%) 0 99 101 99 60 61 38
111 103 -2 -8 111 -8 103 108 103 4 (3.6%) 0 107 108 107 0 2 1
73 102 7 29 73 29 102 107 102 4 (3.6%) 0 106 107 106 0 2 1
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 TOTAL NET DEMAND FOR TAX CREDIT UNITS 0%-40% AMHI 226 TOTAL NET DEMAND FOR TAX CREDIT UNITS 41%-60% AMHI 55 TOTAL NET DEMAND FOR TAX CREDIT UNITS AGE-RESTRICTED TO 55 AND OLDER (0%-40% AMHI) TOTAL NET DEMAND FOR TAX CREDIT UNITS AGE-RESTRICTED TO 55 AND OLDER (41%-60% AMHI) 85 41
2007 334 109 129 78
2008 442 163 173 115
2009 442 163 216 152
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 TOTAL CIVILIAN NONINSTITUTIONALIZED PERSONS 16 YEARS OR OLDER SENSORY DISABILITY (BLINDNESS, DEAFNESS, VISION OR HEARING) PHYSICAL DISABILITY TOTAL PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
Source: 2000 Census; Claritas; Vogt Williams & Bowen, LLC
NUMBER 30,893 1,148 2,689 3,837
PERCENTAGE 100% 4% 9% 13%
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 renteroccupied 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 (X) RENTER PERCENTAGE (=) RENTER HOUSEHOLDS WITH DISABLED RESIDENT (X) BASELINE TARGETED INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS (%) (=) TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES APPROPRIATE INCOME RANGE BY TARGETED AMHI % BASELINE TARGETED INCOMEQUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS X TOTAL INCOME-QUALIFIED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS WITH DISABLED RESIDENT 3,837 51.1% 1,961 67.8% 1,330
0%-30% 31% - 40% 41% - 50% 31.5% 1,330 419 12.6% 1,330 167 11.8% 1,330 158
51% - 60% 10.1% 1,330 134
61% - 80% 19.0% 1,330 253
81% - 100% 15.0% 1,330 199
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