My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE - WS-1 OPPOSITION
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2018
>
02/06/2018
>
CORRESPONDENCE - WS-1 OPPOSITION
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/8/2018 8:34:51 AM
Creation date
2/6/2018 8:53:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda
Agency
Clerk of the Council
Item #
WS-1
Date
2/6/2018
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
233
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
cent in 2001 to 76 percent in 2015 as institutional investors gained <br />a foothold in the market. But this decline in individual ownership <br />likely overstates institutional investment in single-family rentals. <br />Indeed, real estate corporations and investment trusts owned only <br />250,000 single-family rentals in 2015. In addition, many individual <br />investors reportedly transferred ownership of their properties to <br />LLCs in recent decades to protect against legal problems and to take <br />advantage of tax benefits. <br />Along with shifting patterns of ownership, motivations for acquir- <br />ing single-family rental units may have also changed. While there <br />is little research available on this topic, one study suggests that <br />prior to the housing market crash, the two major reasons that <br />owners bought single-family rentals were as primary residences, <br />which they then decided to rent, or as income -generating invest- <br />ments. However, the housing boom and bust encouraged more <br />speculation in the single-family rental market, including by mom- <br />and-pop owners, which may mark a shift in their expectations. <br />Institutional owners also jumped into the single-family rental <br />market after the bust, but their longer-term presence in the mar- <br />ket is unclear. <br />Understanding the evolving nature and financial motivations of <br />rental property owners is important for designing policies that <br />protect naturally occurring affordable units that may be at risk <br />of either under -investment and deterioration or of upgrading and <br />gentrification. In both cases, these units would be lost from the <br />low-cost stock. <br />DUILDING AGE AND ACCESSIBILITY <br />The median age of occupied rental units in 2015 was 42 years— <br />somewhat higher than the median of 37 years for owner -occupied <br />homes. The age gap between owned and rented units has been <br />growing since 1985, when both types of units had an average age of <br />23 years. This disparity reflects the slowdown in rental construction <br />in the 1990s following the booms of the 1970s and 1980s, as well <br />as significant construction of owner -occupied housing in the early <br />2000s. In addition, a minor but still sizable share (8 percent) of rental <br />housing was built before 1920. With the recent uptick in multifamily <br />construction since 2015, however, the age gap between owned and <br />rental units may be narrowing. <br />Today, the oldest units in the occupied rental stock are apartments <br />in multifamily buildings with 2-4 units (median age of 51 years) and <br />detached single-family homes (median age of 49 years). The typical <br />renter -occupied single-family home is 10 years older than the typical <br />owner -occupied home. Meanwhile, apartments in buildings with 20 <br />or more units had a median age of 38 years in 2015, and the typical <br />mobile home rental had the lowest median age of 29 years. <br />Older rental housing is more likely than newer housing to have qual- <br />ity and safety issues that may jeopardize the health of occupants. <br />Under HUD definitions, 13 percent of occupied rental units built <br />before 1940 have physical inadequacies, compared with 6 percent <br />of units built in 1990 or later. Although overall inadequacy rates for <br />renter -occupied housing are low (9 percent), they are still more than <br />double those for owner -occupied homes (4 percent). <br />Larger Multifamily Properties Attract a Significant Share of Older Renters <br />Share of Renters Urercentl <br />50 <br />45 <br />40 <br />35 <br />30 <br />25 <br />20 <br />15 <br />10 <br />5 <br />0 <br />Undor25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75orBy., <br />Age of Household Bead <br />Strurlure Type MSingle-pamilyHome 11 Multdamilywith 2-4Unds ■ Multifamily with 3- 19 N Multifamily with 20 or More Units <br />Note, Single-family homes include detached and attached units, mobile homes, and other units such as RVs and boats. <br />Source, Ji tabulations of US Census Bureau, 2016 Amehean Community Survey 1 -Year Estimates. <br />15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.