Many Workers Being Priced Out Of Cities

[Guest danax]

Dec. 18, 2004, 9:37PM

Many workers find they're priced out

Study focuses on affordability in biggest cities

By SANDRA FLEISHMAN

Washington Post

WASHINGTON - Plenty of people talk about the growing shortage of housing that essential workers such as teachers, nurses and police officers can afford.

But the National Association of Home Builders has done more than talk. Actually, it has drawn a series of stark pictures for the top 25 metropolitan areas in the nation.

The conclusion, from a survey released recently at an affordable housing conference in Washington: In most metro areas, "people holding three of the important community infrastructure jobs — police officers, teachers, nurses — can afford homes in less than one-half the census tracts."

Retail clerks are priced out of 97 percent of the tracts.

The study assumed a single income in the family rather than two wage earners.

Bleak outlook

Bobby Rayburn, president of the home builders group, and other national and local builders at the conference warned that the situation is likely to worsen. They called on federal and local officials to remove regulatory and land-use barriers to high-density development and to support homeownership tax and down-payment incentives. The group also supports outreach to combat the "not-in-my-back-yard" reaction to development, particularly toward lower-cost housing.

The group's focus is on building for-sale houses, but Rayburn said rents also are becoming too high. Low-income housing advocates, such as the National Low Income Housing Coalition, are concentrating their efforts on defending and resurrecting federal and local rental assistance help for the most at-risk families, which increasingly include working families. As rents and home prices go up, the concerns of the builders and the advocates are overlapping more.

Barbara Lipman, research director at the Center for Housing Policy, a Washington-based research group, told the conference that between 1997 and 2003, the number of families with critical housing needs, defined as those paying at least half their income for housing or living in substandard conditions, rose by 67 percent. About 25 percent were working families with at least one full-time wage earner. A sizable percentage of those with critical housing needs are immigrants, according to census data.

Doughnut hole

Rayburn, a house and apartment builder from Mississippi, said, "Despite today's positive housing market conditions, millions of working families — teachers, police officers, firefighters and other moderate-income workers who are the heartbeat of any community — are finding it increasingly difficult to purchase or rent a decent home in, or close to, the communities where they work."

He said, "In many markets, the gap between those who can afford a home and those who can't is widening at an alarming rate, and the availability of affordable rental housing is in short supply."

David Crowe, NAHB's senior vice president for federal regulatory and housing policy, said the affordability maps for the top 25 metro areas look very similar, like a doughnut. Affordable areas are in the center of the metro area and on the urban fringe, far from many employment centers.

Around the doughnut hole "is a large ring that contains housing that is not affordable to low- and moderate-income families," said Crowe.

Workers who have longer and longer commutes are rethinking their career choices or moving to other jurisdictions, panelists warned. To keep employees, 180 private employers in Silicon Valley have united to create a housing trust to help more than 1,260 families buy their first homes and to support affordable rental projects, said Carl Guardino, president and chief executive of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group.

Similar employer-assisted efforts are under way across the country, with support from Freddie Mac and others.

This study was done by home-builders and used only single-income household numbers (didn't the stay-at-home, middle class Mom household end in the 70s?) so it is a little biased. So, the doughnut hole is closing and the doughnut itself is growing. Why is this such a problem?

Also, it mentions that "a sizable percentage of those with critical housing needs are immigrants, according to census data". Aren't they talking about illegal aliens? Why are we catering to these people? How many legal immigrants are there these days anyway, unless they're from India or Asia and have engineering degrees and will be able to afford the Metro areas? I don't know, I'm just asking.

I say let the free market decide who lives where. I have faith in our ability to solve problems without "crisis intervention" by self-interested builders and affordable housing organizations, who just want to the opportunity to throw up some quick-buck, lowest quality, high-density apartments or condos. They are masking their selfish desires in a fragrant cover-up of concern for the little people.

The guy who is the president of the group that did this study is an apartment builder. I think it's safe to assume that his type is always looking for the chance to infiltrate and be able to build in places like Midtown. The free market will keep the cheaper complexes at a distance unless rent control type laws are implented to appease groups other than the residents. Our city is particularly vulnerable to this kind of development, compared to most cities, due to lack of zoning. Our only real protection is in neighborhood-based deed restrictions and opposition to "affordable housing solutions".

By the way, there is still much affordable housing inside the loop in the form of older houses but I see a lot of potential home owners squandering their money on new vehicles in an attempt to impress others (my neighbor lives in a garage apt. but has a 30K truck) where they could be taking advantage of low interest, 100% financing and be owning a house.

I'm sorry, but I don't feel sorry for these people when, in a few years as prices continue to rise around here, they end up living in an apartment with 3 kids in Pasadena.

[bachanon]

uhhhh, a couple things.

"stay-at-home-moms" are still out there. in fact, their numbers may be growing.

also, the "free market" you like is responsible for, or consists of, persons like the apartment builder you criticize. if a builder can "afford" (profit from) building moderate to low income apartments, then so be it. there are wonderful, well kept complexes all over the country. unfortunately, we in houston think a project like these will be another allen parkway village and that is not necessarily so.

i can't be critical of a person who chooses a nice vehicle over home ownership. it's a personal preference that may not be profitable, but it is still a personal preference. your statement suggests that anyone who chooses not to own is unwise or shallow.

great article though, thanks.

[Guest danax]

uhhhh, a couple things.

"stay-at-home-moms" are still out there.  in fact, their numbers may be growing.

also, the "free market" you like is responsible for, or consists of, persons like the apartment builder you criticize.  if a builder can "afford" (profit from) building moderate to low income apartments, then so be it.  there are wonderful, well kept complexes all over the country.  unfortunately, we in houston think a project like these will be another allen parkway village and that is not necessarily so.

i can't be critical of a person who chooses a nice vehicle over home ownership.  it's a personal preference that may not be profitable, but it is still a personal preference.  your statement suggests that anyone who chooses not to own is unwise or shallow.

great article though, thanks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know there are single income households out there and I think that is great and is good for our society. I grew up in that situation, but I was just trying to point out that the guy was using only those cases for his study, which, I'm assuming, are the minority of potential home buyers.

The apartments are definitely part of a free market but I'm against laws trying to alter the market so that lower income people can "afford" to live in areas that the market would keep them out of. And yes, I think apartment complexes and renters in general, especially lower income ones, bring the neighborhood down.

If the guy next door wants a beautiful truck, it doesn't bother me at all, it's his choice. But when homes are no longer affordable to him, please don't expect me to like the idea of an apartment complex in my neighborhood with subsidies or rent control to help him stay because he missed the boat and now someone thinks it only fair to buy him a ticket and helicopter him and all his buddies onto the poop deck of the ship at everyone else's expense.

I'm not angry nor am I elitist and I help people when I can, I just wouldn't expect someone to pay for me to live somewhere that I couldn't afford to.

Call me old-fashioned, but I think eliminating the need to struggle helps no one and short-circuits human ingenuity and creativity.

[bachanon]

i see. i too am opposed to "hand outs" in order for people to have affordable living. however, i believe it's possible to profit and create affordable housing. one problem is that financiers require a certain profit margin before giving money to a builder. it is unfortunate, but that's the world that we live in.

maybe when the light rail is extended out to more affordable locales it will become easier for low-moderate income workers to have access to downtown jobs and activities.

[tw2ntyse7en]

...

[Lowbrow]

I want a shirt that says "Light Rail Will Fix All" or maybe a bumper sticker. I bet that would be even funnier to read on the back of my car while stuck in traffic! 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Perhaps "I'd Rather be on Light Rail" or "My other car is Light Rail"....

[tw2ntyse7en]

...

[The New Juniper]

i see. i too am opposed to "hand outs" in order for people to have affordable living. however, i believe it's possible to profit and create affordable housing. one problem is that financiers require a certain profit margin before giving money to a builder. it is unfortunate, but that's the world that we live in.

If it were possible to provide affordable housing downtown, we would have already done it. Simple fact is that affordable housing would sell much better. Problem is land prices are through the roof and that is the single most important factor when deciding whether to build.

Secondly, financiers requiring a certain profit margin speaks directly to risk. I imagine if you eliminated the risk, "financiers" would require much less of a return.

It's a quandry that is too often answered with government subsidies which inevitably get abused.

Your guess is as good as mine.

I want a shirt that says "Light Rail Will Fix All" or maybe a bumper sticker. I bet that would be even funnier to read on the back of my car while stuck in traffic! 

I agree with this completely. I love the idea that Light Rail will work. You want something that will really succeed downtown, I think you have to provide housing with ample parking that is also near the rail. This way, you get the buyers that believe there is value in resale by being near the rail, but still are able to park two cars for a 1,000 sq. ft. condo....

Happy New Year.

TNJ

[tw2ntyse7en]

...