The shortage of affordable housing for low- and middle-income families continues to weigh heavily on U.S. renters, even as federal programs receive new funding meant to address the gap. A massive finance and tax package passed earlier this year bolstered support for initiatives such as the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program and Opportunity Zones, but the effectiveness of those measures depends largely on local market dynamics.
According to a report from Yardi Matrix, the difficulty is that in certain markets, affordable housing and conventional market-rate properties often compete too directly for the same pool of tenants. When advertised market rents fall close to, or even undercut, affordable rents, the advantage that subsidized households are meant to receive can evaporate. The report notes that competition between the two segments varies widely—by city, by metro and even by neighborhood.
Yardi Matrix analyzed 120,000 multifamily properties nationwide, including 26,000 classified as fully affordable. In total, the study encompassed 23 million rental units, 3.5 million of which were considered affordable. The firm found that competitiveness between conventional and affordable housing depends on several factors, including the cost of market-rate rents, the availability of supply, the age of a city’s housing stock and household income levels in submarkets.
The report outlined three primary conclusions. First, some metro areas show striking overlap between affordable and conventional rents. Among the nation’s 30 largest metros, a third were deemed highly competitive, with anywhere from 50% to nearly 90% of market-rate units priced in line with affordable housing. These metros included Kansas City, Minneapolis–St. Paul, Raleigh, Austin, Dallas, Columbus, Indianapolis, Baltimore, Detroit and Houston.
Another ten metros were identified as moderately competitive, with 25% to just under 50% of market-rate units priced near affordable housing levels. Those markets included Washington, D.C., Portland, Seattle, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Denver, Nashville, Atlanta, Charlotte and Chicago.
In the remaining third of major metros, affordable housing was not seen as competing directly with conventional units, with overlap ranging from 0% to just under 25%. These included Philadelphia, Orlando, New York, Boston, Los Angeles, Miami, Northern New Jersey, San Diego, San Francisco and Tampa.
The second conclusion underscored the disparities within metro areas, where competitiveness can swing significantly depending on location. Boston exemplifies this range: in the urban core and inner-ring suburbs such as Cambridge and Somerville, advertised market rents exceeding $3,000 tower over the $1,819 average for affordable units. By contrast, farther from the center, the gaps narrow.
Finally, the firm stressed that when affordable and market-rate properties overlap too closely, they end up targeting the same renters, effectively diluting the benefits that affordable housing programs are intended to deliver.
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.