
Affordable Housing Gap Widens
July 2007; As originally appeared in
Mortgage Banking by Kim Fernansez
It’s
getting harder to build and manage truly affordable rental
housing. Lenders are struggling to figure out what deals
to approve as market conditions grow more challenging.
The housing boom that swept the country over the last few
years has been great news for many people. Existing homeowners
saw their property values skyrocket. Millions took advantage
of low interest rates and creative financing deals either
to enter homeownership for the first time, refinance heir
homes, or upgrade to bigger houses or better neighborhoods.
Where land was at a premium, builders went skyward, and condos
saw unprecedented popularity.
The apartment industry saw some benefit from the boom
as well; as property and for-sale housing doubled
in value in
many markets, rents went up, too. Condo converters took
some existing apartment stock off the rental market,
thus diminishing
supply and helping rental rates to rise. Suddenly, class-A
rental units were leasing at monthly rates equal to or
more than comparable mortgage payments, and B- and
C-class rents
crept upward as those apartments became more attractive
options for people shut out of the luxury rental
or for-sale markets.
While things have cooled on the homeownership side
in many areas and whispers of overbuilding are starting
to be heard
in that crazy condo market, apartments keep on renting.
Getting a mortgage isn’t quite as simple as it was
two or three years ago, and more families find themselves
looking for
apartments to rent instead of property to buy.
Shut out in all of this, however, have been families—especially
large ones—that the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) says have “worst-case housing needs.” Defined
as households that either pay 50 percent or more of their
monthly income on housing or who live in substandard housing,
their numbers are increasing exponentially.
HUD says that in 2005, the latest year for which numbers
are available, 5.99 million U.S. households fell into the
worst-case housing needs category—up 16 percent from
two years before. Just about everyone, from HUD to nonprofit
housing providers, says there isn’t nearly enough
truly affordable rental housing to begin to cover the need.
The obvious answer—build or convert more low-income
rental housing—isn’t as simple as it might
seem. For one thing, land prices are far too high in and
around
most cities for developers to begin to cover the costs
of building new apartments and charging federally defined
affordable
rents for them. And, developers say, federal guidelines
that govern subsidy programs are too complicated and restrictive
for most to even think about using them.
And then there’s the issue of supply vs. demand—and
a free market. Simply put, most people would prefer to
spend as little on rent as they realistically can. In practice,
that means some renters who technically could afford market-rate
or work-force-rate rental housing instead hunker down in
apartments originally meant for the worst-case rental needs
market, taking those units out of the pool.
But experts say there are creative ways for lenders and
developers to work together to provide more affordable
rental housing
for the lowest end of the spectrum. The answers, they say,
are creativity and due diligence.
Facing a shortage
According to HUD, in 2005, there were 77 available affordable
units for every 100 very low-income renter households (defined
as those earning no more than 50 percent of area median
income). In contrast, there were 81 units available for
every 100
very low-income households in 2003.
But that’s not the worst of it. Extremely low-income
renter households, defined as those earning not more than
30 percent of area median income, only had 40 units available
for every 100 households in 2005.
“
Three things are going on,” says Peter Coccaro, director
of product management at Fannie Mae. “Housing is getting
more expensive, there’s not as much available at affordable
rents and there’s a decline in the amount that’s
being built new,” he says.
And with land costs skyrocketing and subsidies declining,
he says, even nonprofit groups that have traditionally
found creative ways to build affordable rental properties
are throwing
up their hands in frustration.
“
In parts of the country where jobs are being created, there’s
a need for more housing,” says Kim Griffith, vice
president of multifamily affordable housing at Freddie
Mac. “Where
there’s a need for more housing, there’s definitely
a need for more affordable housing. But where jobs are
not being created or are being lost, there’s [also]
a need for some replacement housing. And that housing becomes
obsolete
and run down, and is ultimately lost.”
He points
out, however, that in areas with job growth, housing costs
go
up and construction costs go up, making it more difficult
to build or reconfigure housing that’s affordable
to lower-income households.
And while the federal Low-Income
Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program provides subsidies
to owners of truly affordable housing, many developers
shy
away
from it because of its layers of complication. To use
them, tax credit property owners must restrict rent so
that either
20 percent of the units are available to households
whose income is at or below 50 percent of area median (AMI),
or 40 percent of the units are affordable and occupied
by households
at or below 6o percent of AMI.
To qualify for the LIHTC
program. owners must also commit the properties to these
restrictions
for at least 30 years.
The bottom line, experts say,
is that multifamily owners and their lenders must be extremely
well-versed
in tax credit restrictions and regulations to make their
projects work—after all, they still have to cover
land, construction and maintenance costs over the life
of the property,
tax credit rent or not.
“ Initially, anyone in this
business has a hard time,” says Matt Wanderer,
principal with Alterra Capital Group, Miami. Alterra
specializes
in purchasing distressed properties, renovating them
and operating
them as affordable rental housing.
“ There’s
a lot of paperwork where you’re constantly showing
your track record,” says Wanderer. “All of
our properties have some subsidies.”
That said,
Alterra generally prefers to have 10 percent to 20 percent
of a
property subsidized,
and turn to private financing to work out the rest of
the deal.
“ We’ve tried to do fully subsidized
deals, and there’s too much red tape and too many
complications,” says
Wanderer. “There’s a lot of government oversight
on expenses and the way you manage and run the property.
It gets in the way of a business plan and makes it tough
to be successful.”
Others say Alterra’s preference
isn’t unusual.
“If you are accustomed to
dealing only with conventional multifamily financing,
the different
aspects of an affordable deal are very complicated and
difficult to sort through,” says Griffith.
That
can spell headaches for lenders that work with housing
developers to supplement tax credits with other financing
options to boost the nuniber of affordable units in a building
or on a property.
“
It’s not necessarily that
it’s complicated, but it is layered,” says Fannie
Mae’s Coccaro. “You can’t just go out and
get one conventional loan. You have to find additional financing.
And that’s where it’s drying up. Federal subsidies
are drying up; the funds just aren’t available, and
it’s getting harder and harder to find them.’ Joan
Carty, chief executive officer of the Housing Development
Fund (HDF), Stamford, Connecticut, knows this firsthand.
The nonprofit HDF has pulled together 18 lenders and corporations
to provide funding for affordable-housing deals.
“On
the rental side, [funding for affordable housing] is still
a challenge,” Carty says. “There are a number
of financial assistance tools that have been developed on
the homeownership side. But on the rental side, because it’s
a more transient use of housing, I don’t know of any
specific programs.”
Lending 101
The market for financing
affordable rental housing is huge, as more developers embrace
mixed-use developments in and around large metro areas to
incorporate subsidized affordable housing units into projects
that are otherwise market-rate, and sometimes very high-end.
By blending in a certain percentage of affordable units into
a building with market-rate apartments and, sometimes, retail
or offices, developers can qualify for tax credits and breaks
that they otherwise wouldn’t have. By doing so they
also help fill the affordable-housing gap, which also builds
corporate goodwill for the project and those involved with
it.
But often it can mean more homework for lenders.
“We have
to think about land use differently,” says Carty. “We
have to think about where the economics will make the most
sense. Lenders have to be very aware of trends and operating
expenses, property taxes, insurance costs, energy costs.
Those are all huge drivers on the operating side. And it’s
good to project those out correctly.”
Carty says she
and other lenders have had to educate themselves on the ins
and outs of including affordable units in larger projects,
particularly in neighborhoods that wouldn’t have been
considered for affordable housing several years ago.
“
It’s
back on the radar screen full-force,” she says. “It’s
become a more middle-class issue. It’s harder for kids
coming out of college to get a foothold on their own, and
the cost of land has impacted the cost of housing itself.”
But
just tossing a few lower-rent apartments into a larger building
won’t fully address the problem, she says. And it also
likely won’t be enough for developers to qualify for
tax credits
and other state-allocated subsidies that could boost the
potential for long-term successful financing on a deal.
“
Inclusionary
zoning means that affordable housing can be delivered as
part of a larger market-rate complex, but there’s no
magic bullet—there’s not one way to do it,” Carty
Says. “There are a variety of creative ways that have
been proven.”
“
It would be great to be able to
build a 100 percent affordable- housing project in the
middle of New York City or Los Angeles or wherever,” says
Coccaro. “You can pick any urban area. But the reality
is that you can’t get it to work. There is not
enough income when it comes to buying the land and building
the building. So we’re seeing more deals where it’s
20 percent of the units for 60 percent AMI renters, or some
other percentage. I think that’s going to be the trend.
There’s no other way to do it.”
That said, Coccaro
advises both developers and lenders to take a hard look at
neighborhoods before committing to a percentage of units
for subsidized renters. And, he says, take a good, hard look
at the local government and any restrictions or perceptions
about this kind of housing.
“
It’s harder to build.
It’s harder to lease. It’s harder to permit,” Coccaro
says. “And for all the mixed-use stuff you see when
you come into an urban area, there’s a lot of NIMBY
[not-in-my-backyard] stuff.”
Coccaro
points to a new rental property being built in tony Bethesda,
Maryland, one of the country’s wealthiest
ZIP codes, just a few miles outside of Washington. D.C.,
that was originally slated to have a percentage of affordable
housing. A previous phase of the development had similar
plans that flopped, thanks to local outcry.
“
That deal
took 10 years to build, and they never did do apartments
because of all the outcry,” he says. “The new
part was slated to have a certain percentage be affordable,
and now it’s just going to be four stories of market-rate
rentals.”
Even states with their own incentives for
builders that include affordable units can be tricky, Coccaro
says.
“ People just don’t want that sort of affordable
housing,” says Sarah Garland, national director of
multifamily affordable housing at Fannie Mae. “They
have a vision of old HUD concrete. That’s not where
we are today but people still visualize that. The projects
we participate with, you can’t tell the difference
between the affordable units and the market-rate units. In
fact, that’s against the law—you have to
mix them in; you can’t congregate them.”
Being
aware of all these types of regulations and others can make
or break the long-term success of a subsidized deal. When
considering whether to finance a deal that’s partially
based on tax credits or other government programs, lenders
would do well to completely familiarize themselves with both
the regulations and the potential property owner’s
familiarity with them.
“
Compliance [in terms of] affordability
is an ongoing thing,” says Coccaro. “The
risk of not being in compliance—of losing your
tax credit—is
a big risk. If a property owner doesn’t know how
to manage that component of it, you could be at risk.”
Knowledge
of the local market is also important, says Freddie Mac’s
Griffith. “If a property has restrictions associated
with it, like if it’s for [those] age 55 and above,
you need to be sure that the market to be served has
a sufficient market within that group of people to fill
up your building
and keep filling it up,” he says.
“ You do
all kinds of studies looking at potential tenants and
whether
they’re going to qualify. And you do the same thing
with any affordable deal, you want to be sure that there’s
a demand within that group of tenants. Look at the market
rents on comparable properties. Look at it both as a
developer and as a lender, and look to see that there’s
a rent advantage to living in this restricted-income
property as
compared to a market-rate property in the same area.”
Non-subsidized
housing
Tax credit properties aren’t the only ones
hoping to reinvigorate the affordable-housing market.
Developers across the
country are investing in so-called work-force housing.
That is the term being used for rental housing that’s technically
market value but is rented for lower amounts so that blue-collar
and service workers can afford to live near where they work.
“
If
affordable housing is at or below 6o percent of AMI,
work-force housing, depending on location, can be anywhere
from 80 [percent] to 120 percent of AMI,” says
Griffith. “Work-force
housing was a phrase that, at one time, was substituted
for affordable housing. It’s evolved a notch or
two in terms of income [level].”
The advantage
to that, he says, is that it helps soften a neighborhood’s
potential resistance to the apartments. Work-force housing
is often
associated with teachers, police officers, firefighters
and other community servants, and doesn’t generally
get the same negative reaction as pure subsidized low-income
housing, especially in more upper-income areas.
Much
of what
Alterra rehabs falls into the work-force housing category. “The
properties we buy almost always need significant investment
to make them safe again,” says Wanderer. “In
order to do that without raising rents, we have to buy
correctly. They’re usually about 50 percent occupied,
and we’re
buying them out of foreclosure or from a bank.
Because
such properties aren’t subject to the same reporting
requirements as traditionally subsidized housing, Wanderer
finds this
kind of housing easier to finance and manage properly.
“ The
markets are liquid both in debt and equity markets,” he
says. “We’re able to find money pretty easily.
The hard part is getting deals—people are used
to a crazy bull market where prices are going up by 15
percent
a year.”
Even here, though, builders and owners
struggle to find ways to cut costs and keep maintenance
on the lower
side so rents don’t have to go up. And Coccaro
says that challenge may stymie some of the appeal of
today’s
affordable and work-force housing in the long run.
“
Developers
are cutting costs by building smarter,” he says. “They’re
buying stuff in bulk. They’re subcontracting everything
instead of having a lot of crews. They’re doing
all those kinds of things. But part of the thing that
suffers
becomes the expense of doing affordable housing—the
community center is smaller; the pool is smaller, or
there isn’t a pool. Right now, you’d be hard-pressed
to tell the difference between an affordable complex
on one side of the street and a market-rate on the other.
In the
future, you may see more of a distinction, That’s
definitely not the goal,” he adds.
|