The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutExhibit AThe City of Miami Affordable Housing Master Plan Needs Assessment & Technical Compendium May 2019 FlU Metropolitan Center FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY © 2019 Florida International University Metropolitan Center All rights reserved. NO PART OF THE REPORT MAY BE REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM, WITHOUT PERMISSION IN WRITING FROM THE FIU METROPOLITAN CENTER Metropolitan Center FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY The Florida International University Metropolitan Center is Florida's leading urban policy think tank and solutions center. Established in 1997, the Center provides economic development, strategic planning, community revitalization, and performance improvement services to public, private and non-profit organizations in South Florida. Its staff and senior researchers are leaders in their respective fields, and bring extensive research, practical, and professional experience to each project. The Center's research has catalyzed major policy initiatives and projects in housing, economic redevelopment, transportation, social services, and health services throughout South Florida. Study Team Edward Murray, Ph.D., AICP Associate Director, FIU Metropolitan Center Kevin T. Greiner, MUP, JD Senior Fellow, FIU Metropolitan Center Maria Ilcheva, Ph.D. Assistant Director of Planning and Operations, FIU Metropolitan Center Nika Langevin Research Specialist, FIU Metropolitan Center Table of Contents Introduction 1 Defining Affordable Housing and Measuring Affordability 1 Methodology and Scope of Study 4 The State of Affordable Housing In Miami 4 The City of Miami Affordable Housing Master Plan 6 Goal Statement 6 Guiding Principles 6 Housing Supply Analysis 7 Housing Inventory 7 Tightening of Vacancy Rates and Changing Vacancy Structure 11 Competing in a Global Residential Real Estate Market 11 Construction Costs 13 Rapidly Rising Home Values, Sale Prices, and Rents 14 An Aging Housing Stock 16 Rapid Decline in the Supply of Mid and Low -Price Housing Units 17 Land and Redevelopment Capacity 19 Major Planned Public Housing Projects 24 Demand Analysis 2.c Population Growth and Household Formation 27 Employment Base 28 Job Growth 30 City Resident Occupations 31 Earnings 32 Household Incomes and Income Disparity 34 Changes in Housing Preference 38 Miami's Affordable Housing Gap 39 Measuring the City's Affordability Gap 39 Housing Price / Income Multiplier 39 Housing and Transportation Costs 40 Cost Burden 42 Affordable Housing Demand -Supply Analysis 45 Targeting Affordable Housing Development Opportunity 62 The Geography of Affordable Housing Opportunity 62 Introduction The City of Miami Affordable Housing Needs Assessment provides a current market perspective on the key demand and supply factors impacting the production and availability of affordable housing in the City of Miami. In the post -recession economic recovery period since 2012, significant changes have occurred in the City and Miami- Dade County's housing market that have impacted housing supply and demand and overall affordability. The contributing factors and conditions include a trend toward high -end, multi -family housing development, a lack of affordable housing production, low vacancy rates and stagnant wages and household incomes. In particular, affordable rental housing production has not kept pace with increasing affordable rental housing demand. Further, escalating rent prices fueled by a rental housing shortage are significantly impacting Miami's working families and households. The vast preponderance of City workers earn wages in service sector occupations, including retail trade, leisure and hospitality, and educational and health services. The household incomes of these service sector workers limit housing choices to affordable rental housing opportunities, where available. A basic premise of all housing markets is the need to create and maintain a "spectrum" of housing choice and opportunity for local residents. This axiom establishes that housing choice and needs differ in most communities due to a variety of factors including household income, population age, proximity of employment and mere preference. A spectrum of owner and rental housing choice and opportunity is particularly important in supporting the range of income groups that reside in the City. An adequate supply of affordable owner and rental housing provides choice and opportunity for service sector working individuals and families who comprise the majority of the City's workforce. An understanding of the shifting demands for housing is critical for the creation of effective housing policies and strategies. The increasing demand for worker housing documented in prior housing studies has magnified the importance of providing a wide spectrum of owner and renter choice and opportunity with respect to affordability, location and access to jobs. Defining Affordable Housing and Measuring Affordability Housing affordability is generally defined as the capacity of households to consume housing services and, specifically, the relationship between household incomes and prevailing housing prices and rents. The standard most used by various units of government is that households should spend no more than 30 percent of their income on housing. Families who pay more than 30 percent of their income for housing are considered cost -burdened and may have difficulty affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care. This is also the standard definition for housing programs administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and most state programs, including various housing programs administered through the State of Florida's Housing Finance Corporation (FHFC) and Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO). 1 Affordability Indices One measure of housing affordability is the cost of homeownership, commonly conveyed through housing affordability indices. These indices generally indicate that affordability increased substantially toward the end of the last decade, primarily as a result of lower interest rates during that period. A housing affordability index for an area brings together the price and the income elements that contribute to housing affordability. The following describes the most recognized affordability indices: National Association of Realtors (NAR) Index The most common index is that produced by the National Association of Realtors (NAR). The affordability index measures whether or not a typical family could qualify for a mortgage loan on a typical home. A typical home is defined as the national median -priced, existing single- family home as calculated by NAR. The typical family is defined as one earning the median family income as reported by the U.S. Bureau of the Census. The prevailing mortgage interest rate is the effective rate on loans closed on existing homes from the Federal Housing Finance Board and HSH Associates, Butler, N.J. These components are used to determine if the median income family can qualify for a mortgage on a typical home. To interpret the indices, a value of 100 means that a family with the median income has exactly enough income to qualify for a mortgage on a median- priced home. An index above 100 signifies that family earning the median income has more than enough income to qualify for a mortgage loan on a median -priced home, assuming a 20 percent down payment. For example, a composite Housing Affordability Index (HAI) of 120.0 means a family earning the median family income has 120 percent of the income necessary to qualify for a conventional loan covering 80 percent of a median -priced existing single-family home. An increase in the HAI, then, shows that this family is more able to afford the median priced home. The calculation assumes a down payment of 20 percent of the home price and it assumes a qualifying ratio of 25 percent. That means the monthly principal and interest (P&I) payment cannot exceed 25 percent of the median family monthly income. Housing Opportunity Index The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) has developed a Housing Opportunity Index, which is defined as the share of homes affordable for median household incomes for each metropolitan statistical area (MSA). The NAHB Index has certain intuitive limitations as housing affordability scores are generally more favorable in metropolitan areas that are rated as "least desirable places to live" according to Places Rated Almanac (Brookings Institution, 2002). The "median house price -income ratio" used by the National Association of Realtors and other housing analysts is a key economic indicator in assessing local market trends and vitality. During the height of the "housing bubble", the median house price -to -income ratio more than tripled in many high-priced metropolitan markets such as New York City, Boston and Los Angeles. In Miami, the median house price -to -income ratio rose from 4:1 to 7:1 during this period. 2 Housing and Transportation Affordability Index As noted above, housing affordability is generally defined as the capacity of households to consume housing services and, specifically, the relationship between household incomes and prevailing housing prices and rents. The standard HUD definition that households should spend no more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs is most frequently used by various units of government. However, a number of housing studies in recent years have shown a clear correlation between workforce housing demand and transportation costs. The critical link between housing and transportation costs has significant implications with respect to housing choice and affordability. Housing and transportation costs can severely limit a working household's choice both in terms of housing and job location. Rising gas and overall transportation costs have significant impacts on both homeowners and renters. The location of affordable rental housing is particularly relevant as proximity to job centers and access to transit is vital to a renter dominated workforce principally comprised of low- and moderate -income households. The Housing and Transportation Affordability Index (H+T Index) developed by the Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT) demonstrates the inadequacy of traditional measures of housing cost burden. To calculate the H in the H+T Index, housing costs are derived from nationally available datasets. Median selected monthly owner costs for owners with a mortgage and median gross rent, both are averaged and weighted by the ratio of owner- to renter -occupied housing units from the tenure variable for every block group. Transportation costs, the T in the H+T Index, are modeled based on three components of transportation behavior —auto ownership, auto use, and transit use —which are combined to estimate the cost of transportation. While housing alone is traditionally considered affordable when consuming no more than 30 percent of income, the H+T Index limits the combined costs of transportation and housing consuming to no more than 45 percent of household income. Why does this matter? According to CNT, a typical household's transportation costs can range from 12 percent of household income in communities with compact development and access to transit options, to more than 32 percent in the far exurbs. 3 Methodology and Scope of Study The methodology used by the FIU Metropolitan Center in the research and preparation of the City of Miami Affordable Housing Needs Assessment was to assess current market data and conditions to determine changes in existing and future housing demand. The housing demand and supply assessment examines the existing and future housing needs of the City's resident worker population and provides several layers of affordability gap analysis based on prevailing wages, household incomes, and housing values. The study includes the following elements: • Housing Supply Analysis: This section provides a detailed analysis of the City's and District's housing inventory/supply based on housing type, tenure, development activity and housing values; • Housing Demand Analysis: This section provides a detailed analysis of the City's and District's current housing demand (need) based on an economic base analysis of the City and its impact on owner and renter households; • Existing Affordable Housing Supply/Demand Analysis: This section provides a baseline housing affordability calculation for owner and renter units by household income category at the City and District levels. The State of Affordable Housing In Miami The City of Miami has experienced a steady resurgence since the Great Recession marked by significant population gain and upswing in commercial and residential real estate development. The City's population has increased by 25.8 percent (90,943 persons) since 2007. However, the City's housing tenure has undergone a significant change during this period. Since 2007, renters have increased by 33 percent, while owners have decreased by 17 percent. Miami's homeownership rate has dipped to only 30 percent. Significantly, the City's comeback has been geographically uneven. While some districts and neighborhoods have benefited financially from recent growth and development, others have been experiencing rising rents and home prices and unprecedented gentrification that has threatened longtime residents and businesses with displacement. Upward housing price trends typically move much faster than wages and income. Historically, housing prices and rents in the City have demonstrated considerable rates of increase over short time periods. Conversely, the City would need to undergo a monumental change in its industrial and occupation structure that creates higher wages and income to significantly impact its affordability indicators (affordable housing cost and income gaps). Historically, the local economy has shown that it can shed high -wage jobs very quickly, but has shown resistance to adding new high -skill, high -paying jobs. Housing affordability problems in the City of Miami has been a longer -term trend that became evident during the previous decade. The cost -burdened share of renters in the City grew from 48.7 percent (42,551 renters) in 2000 to 64.3 percent (62,935 renters) in 2010 as rents and household incomes steadily diverged This became most evident with the onset of Housing Bubble in 2004 and the subsequent Great Recession in 2008. Adjusting for inflation, the median rent gross rent increased by 15 percent annually between 2012-2017, while the median renter income grew by less than 1 percent. 4 As the nation's most unaffordable urban housing market, solving housing affordability is one of the City's most pressing problems. Left unchecked, the rising share of housing as a percentage of household costs poses a serious threat to the viability of the City's economy. Specifically, the City's perspective needs to expand, embracing affordable housing as a key investment in its economic competitiveness. The strategic advantages of a more affordable City housing market include: • Housing affordability can be a potent tool for improving economic performance, driving employment growth, productivity, wages, business development, and retaining high -skilled, educated workers; • Housing affordability promotes inclusive economic growth where families at the bottom and middle share in expanding regional economic opportunity. In fact, it doubtful that the City can create significant upward economic mobility without the wealth and asset building effects of affordable home ownership; • Raising the income and net wealth of even a small percentage of the City's households up to the Area Median Income results in broad -based economic growth, high -wage job creation, increased tax revenue, and lower public costs for health, human services and policing. The cumulative economic impacts of greater, more widespread housing affordability would be a major boost to developing a more diversified, higher income City economy; • Housing affordability also plays a major role in developing, re -developing and diversifying neighborhoods without the negative impacts of rapid gentrification. Miami has numerous core neighborhoods suffering from the impacts of long-term, persistent poverty. Focused investment strategies to improve housing affordability would improve these communities and benefit the entire City economy Policy Direction The complexity of the "post -bubble" housing market places significant responsibilities on local governments and agencies. Affordable and accessible housing for working families and households is vital to the local economy and contributes greatly to community attachment and well-being. The provision of affordable and accessible housing for working families and households can be effectively accomplished through coordinated and integrated policies at the local level. The policy underpinnings for a more aggressive local housing delivery system include the following: • Each municipality has a "resident workforce" composed of working families and households whose mobility is integral to the economic strength and character of each community; • Elected and appointed municipal officials are in need of new and innovative solutions to their local housing needs during a "new normal" where federal and state housing funds have become increasingly scarce and insufficient; • An effective and sustainable response to worker housing needs requires policies developed and implemented at the municipal and county levels of local government; and • Local affordable housing policies and programs must be performance -driven. 5 The City of Miami Affordable Housing Master Plan The City of Miami is one of the most culturally diverse cities in the U.S. composed of vibrant neighborhoods including Allapattah, Coconut Grove, Edison, Little Havana, Model City, Overtown and Wynwood. Recognizing the need to maintain and enhance its cultural diversity, the City of Miami Affordable Housing Master Plan will help ensure the values that are central to the City and its neighborhoods — diversity, inclusivity, sustainability — are supported by a spectrum of housing choice and opportunity. Without a sufficient supply of housing affordable to lower -wage workers, it will become increasingly difficult for the City to attract and retain a diverse workforce and grow vibrant and sustainable neighborhood economies. As such, the City of Miami Affordable Housing Master Plan will provide the analytical and policy framework to advance a bold action agenda to address the City's current and future supply and demand of affordable housing. Goal Statement The goal of the City of Miami Affordable Housing Master Plan is to increase the quantity and quality of affordable owner and rental housing to all who want to live in the City of Miami by promoting the development of new units, the preservation of existing units and the enhancement of Miami's neighborhoods. Guiding Principles Guiding Principles of the City of Miami Affordable Housing Master Plan: • The Plan will provide expanded housing opportunities at a cost Miami's low- and moderate - income households can afford without compromising essential needs; • New housing development will enhance economic opportunity and community well-being, while ensuring resiliency in Miami's coastal environment; • The Plan will produce a high -quality living environment and promote the preservation of stable residential neighborhoods; • The Plan will develop a variety of affordable housing types and designs to give Miami owners and renters a wide spectrum of housing choice and opportunity; • The Plan will integrate affordable housing development with land use and transportation The Goal Statement and Guiding Principles of the City of Miami Affordable Housing Master Plan offer a vision for the City of Miami that is inclusive, equitable and provides economic opportunity for current and future residents of the City. Equitable development is a positive development strategy that ensures everyone participates in and benefits from the region's economic transformation —especially low-income residents, communities of color, immigrants, and others at risk of being left behind. It requires an intentional focus on eliminating racial inequities and barriers, and making accountable and catalytic investments to assure that lower -wealth residents live in healthy, safe, opportunity -rich neighborhoods that reflect their culture connect (and are not displaced from them) to economic and housing opportunities. 6 Housing Supply Analysis Housing affordability is a balance between local incomes and local real estate prices. The dynamics, and market conditions of affordability are driven by 1) demand factors including population growth, household lifestyle preferences, local and non -regional housing purchasers and renters, 2) the supply, condition and development of housing unit stock over time, and 3) economic dynamics including job creation, occupational structure, and household earnings. A detailed review of Miami's housing market and economic characteristics reveals that it has, and continues to undergo significant change since 2000, and in particular, since the recession. The City's population has increased by 25.8 percent since 2007 following a surge in commercial and residential development. During this growth period, the City's housing market has undergone significant changes marked by escalating housing prices, dramatic shifts in tenure and heightened levels of cost -burdened renters and owners. The housing supply analysis section of the housing needs assessment quantifies the extent to which the housing market is impacting the City of Miami's affordable housing supply. In order to develop an understanding of the City's overall housing supply conditions, it is important to assess the existing housing inventory, including changes in occupancy status, vacancies, development trends, and sales and rental activity. Housing Inventory From 2013 to 2017 the City's housing inventory grew by 8,680 units, and average of 1,736 units per year. During the last 5 years, the City's housing stock has continued to undergo three important shifts: • A shift from single family to multi -family housing: The number of single-family units in the City declined by 876 units, while multi -family units grew by over 8,900 units. The largest increase has been in units in buildings of 50 units or more; • Greatest growth in small units: Units of 2 bedrooms or less continue to make up over 76 percent of the City's housing stock, and zero -bedroom units (studio units) provided the bulk of the growth in the City's housing inventory (3,113 units); and • A City of renters: Miami has a particularly high proportion of rental housing. 70 percent of its occupied housing is rental housing, continuing its upward trend over the last 5 years — up from 67 percent in 2013. The City added over 13,000 rental units from 2013 to 2017. The city's high rate of rental housing in comparison to its cohort cities is most likely a function of the City rising housing prices, low relative incomes, shifts in demand (preference), and tighter debt financing. 7 Housing Units by Type, 2013-2017 60,000 Single Family Detached ■ 2013 ■ 2017 Total Units Added: 8,680 1 Attached • I • I 2 Units 3 or 4 Units 5to 9 Units 1 0 to 1 9 Units 20 to 49 Units 50 or more Mobile home Boat, RV, van, Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Units etc. Housing Units by Bedrooms, 2013-2017 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 No bedroom ■ 2013 ■ 2017 • 1 bedroom 2 bedrooms 3 bedrooms 4 bedrooms Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 8 5 or more bedrooms Percent Renter Households, 2017 0°%o 5% 10°%o 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% Miami Orlando Boston San Francisco Oakland Buffalo Cleveland Atlanta Honolulu Austin Seattle Minneapolis Baltimore Memphis Pittsburgh Detroit Tampa Denver Las Vegas Raleigh Charlotte Portland Kansas City Jacksonville Albuquerque Source: 2073-2077 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 9 Owner -Occupied Units (%) Flagami es Flagl r Allapa ah ittle Havana oral-W North Cocodut,Grove Sou h Coconut Grove Upper Eastside Little Haiti Renter -Occupied Units (%) n1111111:• 1 1 OX.,C `,1 ittOitte Islands Islands Islands Tightening of Vacancy Rates and Changing Vacancy Structure Since 2013 ]Miami has experienced a continued tightening of its available housing supply. Despite an over 9 percent increase in supply, the absolute number of vacant units declined from 2013 to 2017. Every category of vacancy recorded by the US Census experienced supply declines of 14 to 47 percent. Units intended for sale or rent decreased from 9 percent to 6 percent of total inventory. Units kept off the market for personal use (rented, not occupied, sold not occupied, and seasonal units) represent the single largest share of vacancies, at 10 percent of total inventory. At least 15,591 units are currently kept off the market for local renters and buyers. Vacancy Statu Miami 2013 Total Housing Units Total Vacant Housing Units For rent Rented, not occupied For sale only Sold, not occupied For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use For migrant workers Other vacant 150,974 36,964 10,337 2,576 2,919 1,246 12,440 27 7,419 2017 % 2013-2017 164,734 24% 31,884 19% 7% 8,440 5% 2% 1,377 1% 2% 1,666 1% 1% 1,019 1% 8% 13,195 8% 0% 16 0% 5% 6,171 4% Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Competing in a Global Residential Real Estate Market 9% -14% -18% -47% -43% -18% 6% -41% -17% Miami's reputation as a destination for international investor -buyers has played a large part in driving demand for owner -occupied home sales, particularly for condominiums. Demand from buyers outside the region and the demand for vacation and investor units is a mixed blessing. First, this demand drives one of the world's largest and most sophisticated real estate development industries, employing thousands and bringing Billions into the local economy. Second, however, local resident home buyers increasingly compete in an international real estate market against better funded buyers. Third, Miami's overwhelming international demand drives housing prices that are out of touch with local incomes. Lastly, Additionally, as noted, the volume of international and out-of-town sales are most likely driving the growing inventory of units being taken off the market completely. A 2013 study by Miami -Dade County's Regulatory & Economic Resources Department noted "a widening gap between the volume of sales to domestic first-time homebuyers and sales to mainly foreign investors," and that domestic home buyers are at a competitive disadvantage with international buyers, particularly because cash buyers can offer much greater speed to closing and in many cases are more willing to sweeten an offer by waiving a pre -closing inspection. [Miami -Dade County Regulatory & Economic Resources Department] 82 percent of foreign buyers purchase homes in Miami -Dade in all -cash transactions, by mid-2013 cash sales of condos peaked at 78 percent (more than double the national average), and has declined to near 65 percent of all condominium sales. 11 Analysis of the Miami -Dade County Assessor's files indicates that a significant portion of the County and City's residential housing stock is owned as investor units, rather than as primary domiciles. The County's Homestead property tax exception which reduces the assessed value of a residential property, is only available to homeowners who live in their homes as their primary residence, and serves as the best single measure of the proportion of homes owned as investor units. Our analysis, shown below, indicates that 47 percent of all single family and condominium units are owned as non - primary units across the County as a whole, and that same number is over 62 percent in the City of Miami. Homestead vs. Non -Homestead Exempted Properties Miami -Dade County Single Family Properties Homestead Exempted Non -Homestead Exempted 316,894 237,333 75% 79,561 25% Condominium Properties 310,877 Homestead Exempted 98,174 32% Non -Homestead Exempted 212,703 68% TOTAL 627,771 Homestead Exempted 335,507 53% Non -Homestead Exempted 292,264 47% City of Miami Single Family Properties Homestead Exempted Non -Homestead Exempted Condominium Properties Homestead Exempted Non -Homestead Exempted 33,657 22,568 67% 11,089 33% 63,775 14,413 23% 49,362 77% TOTAL 97,432 Homestead Exempted 36,981 38% Non -Homestead Exempted 60,451 62% Source: Miami -Dade County Assessor Database, March 2019 Analysis by FIU Metroppolitan Center 12 Construction Costs Construction costs in Miami have increased over 7 percent since 2010. However, Miami, construction costs across most building types in Miami and South Florida have historically been lower than the rest of the US. The current gap between overall construction prices in Miami and the US average, at 23 percent, is larger than it has been in 20 years. Consistently lower construction costs in Miami should be an advantage for developing affordable housing. However, this advantage may be offset by higher land costs in Miami, pushing total project costs may be closer to, or above the US average. Final development costs for affordable housing in Miami will be very sensitive to variable land costs, based on location and demand. RS Means Construction Cost Index ■ Miami -Dade 200 ■ us 150 1001111111111111111111 50 0 �00 00\ O01, �O3 OAR o�5 �0( 001 �0'6 �0° �10 011 �1 L �1b �1R �15 �1(0 �11 �1`6 ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti Source: RS Means Inc. 13 Rapidly Rising Home Values, Sale Prices, and Rents Miami's December 2018 median home sale price (all unit types), at $350,000, is near the middle of the benchmark cohort cities. Miami condominium sale prices since 2013 have actually run below prices across the rest of the US and Miami -Dade County. However, the City's median condominium sale prince has increased 59 percent since 2013, more than double the rate of increase for the County. Unlike condo prices, median single-family home sale prices in the City are higher than the US and the County, and from 2013 to 2019 have also increased considerably faster. Miami's median single- family home price has increased over 83 percent since 2013, compared to 79 and 50 percent for the County and the US over the same period. Miami apartment rents have followed a different pattern. Miami multi -family rents have consistently been higher than the County and the US, by as much as 20 and 44 percent, respectively. However, due to declining median rents from 2016 through 2018, the City's overall rate of increase has been less than the County and Nation. Rents for new construction consistently run considerably higher than for existing units. fvedian Home Sale Price, December 2018 San Francisco Oakland Seattl e Boston Honolulu Portland Denver Austin Miami Atlanta Las Vegas Raleigh Minneapolis Orlando Charlotte Tampa Kansas City Jacksonville Pittsburgh Baltimore Buffalo Cleveland Memphis Detroit $0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 — • Data provided by Redfin, a national real estate brokerage, 2019 14 Benchmark Median Vedian Condo Sale Price, 2013-2019 Price Increase US: 55% Miami-Dade:26% Miami : 59% $280,000 — US — Miami-Dade County — Miami Sao,000 - 2/1/13 2/1/14 2/1/15 2/1/16 2/1/17 2/1/18 2/1/15 Data provided by Redfin, a national real estate brokerage, 2019 lvedian Single Family Sale Price, 2013-2019 $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 —Miami-Dade —Miami US Price Increase US: 50% N is i1 i-Dade : 79% MLmi:83% Feb-13 Feb-14 Feb-15 Feb-16 Feb-17 Feb-18 Feb-19 Data provided by Redfin, a national real estate brokerage, 2079 15 Median Multifamily Rent, 2013-2019 $2.200 $2,000 $1,800 $1,600 $1,400 $1,200 $1,000 2013-01 2014-01 2015-01 Data provided by Zillow. com, 2019 An Aging Housing Stock 2016-01 2017-01 — US — Miami-Dade —Miami 2018-01 2019-01 Miami has a significantly aging housing stock. 62 percent of the City's housing units were built before 1980. The bulk of the City's oldest housing units are single-family homes. 16 Housing Units by Year Built Built Before 1980: 20% Miami - 62% Miami -Dade - 56% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 1939 or 1940 to 1950 to 1960 to 1970 to 1980 to 1990 to 2000 to 2010 to 2014 or earlier 1949 1959 1969 1979 1989 1999 2009 2013 later Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates ■ Miami • Miami -Dade County Rapid Decline in the Supply of Mid and Low -Price Housing Units As housing prices and rents have increased in Miami, the supply of affordable existing and new housing units has dropped precipitously. In particular, both owner and renter units at the middle and bottom of the price scale has been hollowed out over the last 5 years. Nationally, the affordable home price for a household at the median income is $139,438. In Miami, the affordable purchase price for a household earning the City median income $109,465. For a household earning 81 to 120 percent of the City's median income, a rent between $807 and $1,209 per month is affordable under HUD guidelines. However, the supply of both owner and renter units affordable to households earning as much as 200 percent of the City's median income has declined rapidly in both absolute numbers and as a percentage of total housing supply. In particular, the number of owner units priced under $250,000 and rental units priced at $800 per month have been decimated since 2013. Over the same period the numbers and relative portion of units priced over $250,000 and $900 per month has increased rapidly. Owner Occupied Unit Supply Change by Value Miami -Dade County, 2013-2017 $1,000,000 or more $750,000 to $99 9,999 $500,000 to $749,999 $400,000 to $49 9,999 $300,000 to $399,999 $250,000 to $29 9,999 $200,000 to $249,999 $175,000to $199,999 $150,000 to $174,999 $125,000 to $149,999 $100,000 to $124,999 $90,000to $99,999 $80,000 to $89,999 $70,000 to $79, 99 9 $60,000to $69,999 $50,000to $59,999 $40,000 to $49, 99 9 $35,000to $39,999 $30,000to $34,999 $25,000to $29,999 $20,000 to $24,999 $15,000 to $19, 99 9 $10,000to $14,999 Less than $10,000 • • (12,000) (10.000) (8000) (6000) (4000) (2,000) 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 17 Owner Occupied Unit Supply Change by Value City of Maimi, 2013-2017 $750,000 to $999,999 $400,000 to $499,999 $250,000 to $299,999 $175,000 to $199,999 $125,000 to $149,999 $90,000 to $99,999 $70,000 to $79,999 $50,000 to $59,999 $35,000 to $39,999 $25,000 to $29,999 $15,000 to $19,999 Less than $10,000 • • Net Units Lost $15,000 - $249,000: 7,439 -1,600 -1,200 -800 -400 0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 Rental Unit Supply Change by Unit Value City of Miami 2013-2017 $2,000 or more $1,500to $1,999 $1,250 to $1,499 $1,000to $1,249 $900 to $999 $800 to $899 ■ $750 to $799 $700 to $749 $650 to $699 $600 to $649 ■ $550 to $599 $500 to $549 $450 to $499 ■ $400 to $449 • $350 to $399 $300 to $349 $250 to $299 $200 to $249 $150 to $199 $100 to $149 Less than $100 Net Units Lost Less Than $1,000 per Month: 3,405 (1,100)(600) (100) 400 900 1,400 1,900 2,400 2,900 3,400 3,900 4,400 4,900 5,400 Source: 2009-2013, 207 3-207 7 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 18 Land and Redevelopment Capacity Increasing the City's supply of affordable housing will require a combination of 1) new ground up development, 2) preservation of existing affordable units, and 3) redevelopment and expansion of the City's existing public housing. The availability of land and units for redevelopment will be a crucial factor in building the City's affordable housing inventory. Vacant Property An analysis of vacant property using the Miami -Dade County Assessor's property database indicates that vacant properties available and suitable for development for new housing are in short supply within the City. After removing properties not zoned or suitable for residential development and utility easements, the Center's analysis indicates that out of a total of 167 Million square feet of vacant property in the City, only 29.3 Million square feet can potentially be redeveloped for residential uses. Of this inventory, only 3.5 Million square feet of vacant property zoned and suitable for residential development are owned by public entities and institutions. If this total inventory is actually developable for residential use, at the maximum zoning density allowed under Miami 21, it could support the development of up to 70,000 units on privately owned properties, and 10,000 units on publicly owned properties. However, this estimate may be significantly optimistic, as the bulk of vacant properties within this inventory are characterized by 1) a significant inventory of vacant land that is already committed to existing commercial development and/or market rate residential development; 2) parcels, both large and small which are scattered and cannot be assembled into larger parcels, and 3) properties that although either zoned for residential development or currently have older housing units on them, are no longer suitable housing locations. Vacant Property Summary Vacant Parcels Total SQ.FT. City Total (exluding Industrial) Vacant Land for Multi Family Development Total Parcels in T-5 and T-6 (>5,000 sq.ft.) Total Public Parcels in T-5 and T-6 (> 5,000 sq.ft.) Vacant Land for Small Building Apartments Total Parcels in T-4 (5,000>20,000 sq.ft) Total Public Parcels in T-4 (5,000>20,000 sq.ft) Vacant Land for Single and Two -Family Development Total Parcels in T-3 (5,000> sq.ft) Total Public Parcels in T-3 (5,000> sq.ft) 5, 466 167, 042, 357 1,447 19,131,191 154 2,973,919 279 2, 099, 723 30 225, 539 927 8,095,597 42 399,376 Total for Potential Residential Development 2,653 29,326,511 Total for Potential Residential Development (Public Land) 226 3,598,834 Vacant Parcels - High Density Multifamily Development Q Qualified Opportunity Zones Extremely Cost -burdened Renters Q 0% - 30% Q 31% - 50% Q 51% - 100% Land Use Q Vacant Residential 0 Vacant Commercial Q Vacant Insitutional: Parking Lot Q Vacant Insitutional: Land Vacant Govt.: Municipal ® Vacant Govt.: Dade County ® Vacant Govt.: School Board Q Vacant Govt.: Parking Lot Vacant Govt.: Land Vacant Govt.: Federal Q Vacant Govt.: State 'Flagami West Flagler Model City Allapattah • •.Little Havana .r. 3 4 Coral Way North,Coconut Grove r• eeti Downtown •• e South Coconut Grove I l Islands Islands Vacant Parcels - Low Density Multifamily Development 0 Qualified Opportunity Zones Extremely Cost -burdened Renters Q 0% - 30% Q 31% - 500/0 - 51% - 1000/0 Land Use Q Vacant Residential Vacant Commercial Q Vacant Insitutional: Parking Lot Q Vacant Insitutional: Land Vacant Govt.: Municipal Vacant Govt.: Dade County Vacant Govt.: School Board Q Vacant Govt.: Parking Lot Q Vacant Govt.: Land C. Vacant Govt.: Federal Q Vacant Govt.: State Flagami West Flagler Model.C,ty Upper Eastside —Little Haiti i Overtown Little Havana.,, . 3 4 ° Coral Way North Coconut Grove Sou h Coconut Grove Islands Islands Vacant Parcels - Single & Two-family Development 0 Qualified Opportunity Zones Extremely Cost -burdened Renters Q 0% -30% Q 31% - 500/0 Q 51% - 100% Land Use Q Vacant Residential IM Vacant Commercial Q Vacant Insitutional: Parking Lot Q Vacant Insitutional: Land Vacant Govt.: Municipal Vacant Govt.: Dade County Q Vacant Govt.: School Board Q Vacant Govt.: Parking Lot Vacant Govt.: Land Vacant Govt.: Federal Q Vacant Govt.: State Upper Eastside Little Haiti Mbdel.City Allapattah . Flagami West Flagler . �.Y • Wyn woad Overtown Little Havana 4 Coral Way - North CoconutGrove • Sou kh @oconutlGrove 3 Downtown Islands 2 Islands Economically Underperforming Non -Vacant Properties Targeting existing housing for redevelopment and/or conversion to affordable housing can be the fastest and most cost-efficient means of building an affordable housing inventory. Economically underperforming properties are undervalued relative to the rest of the market, usually due to disrepair, foreclosure, extended vacancy, or a homeowner falling behind on maintenance. Economically underperforming residential properties are those whose per -square -foot value is less than 1/5 the median value for all other properties in its land -use class. Based on an analysis of the County Assessor's database, 9,861 non -vacant properties out of the City's over 155,000 total residential properties are economically underperforming (9 percent of all residential properties). This inventory represents over 52 Million square feet of land area, over 27.5 Million square feet of building, and over 23,000 living units. Economically Underperforming Non -Vacant Property Summary Land Use Total Properties Median Under Value Per performing Land Area (SF) SF Properties Building Area Existing (SF) Living Units 0101 - RESIDENTIAL -SINGLE FAMILY:1 UNIT 0102 - RESIDENTIAL -SINGLE FAMILY:ADDITIONAL LIVING QUARTERS 0104 - RESIDENTIAL -SINGLE FAMILY: RESIDENTIAL- TOTALVALUE 0105- RESIDENTIAL -SINGLE FAMILY: CLUSTER HOME 0303 - MULTIFAM ILY 10 UNITS PLUS : MULTIFAM ILY 3 OR MORE UNITS 0317- MULTIFAM ILY 10 UNITS PLUS:COMMERCIAL-TOTALVALUE 0407- RESIDENTIAL -TOTAL VALUE :CONDOMINIUM - RESIDENTIAL 0410 - RESIDENTIAL- TOTALVALUE :TOWNHOUSE 0423 - RESIDENTIAL -TOTAL VALUE :CONDOMINIUM -TIMESHARING 0508 - COOPERATIVE - RESIDENTIAL: COOPERATIVE - RESIDENTIAL 0802- MULTIFAMILY2-9 UNITS:2 LIVING UNITS 0803 - MULTIFAM ILY 2-9 UNITS : MULTIFAMILY 3 OR MORE UNITS 8601- COUNTY:RESIDENTIAL-SINGLEFAMILY Source: Miami -Dade County Assessor Database, March 2019 Analysis by FIU Metroppolitan Center 33,560 $1 55.72. 1,538 43,1 51,141 2,486,421 3,470 39 $244.14 6 48,271 13,997 11 25 $330.66 - - 76 $196.52 10 14,829 16,108 10 1,269 $122.99 128 5,278,559 15,544,1 66 11,288 1 $137.24 - - - - 62,965 $260.23 7,442 - 7,912,672 6,704 420 $224.34 94 187,663 115,873 94 229 $371.53 1 - 12,999 1 580 $33.24 30 - - 30 12,017 $128.52 484 2,658,004 980,077 964 4,052 $128.83 127 758,229 428,661 599 44 $1 62.39 1 5,300 1,074 1 115,277 9,861 52,101,996 27,512,048 23,172 23 Major Planned Public Housing Projects Miami -Dade County Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) Program Miami -Dade County's Public Housing and Community Development (PHCD) Division oversees approximately 9,000 public housing units, of which over 6,800, in 72 different developments, are located within the City. This inventory is a significant chunk of the City's affordable housing, and may be increased under the US Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Rental Assistance Demonstration Program (RAD) program. Public housing across the US has been faced with increasing costs for rehabilitation, maintenance and development, and at the same time, shrinking Federal and State funding to maintain, develop, and operate traditional public housing projects. The RAD program allows local Public Housing Authorities (PHA) to shift the ownership and operation of Public Housing developments to third- party owners and operators. PHCD plans to convert 6,426 units of County Public housing to third -party ownership and operation as quickly as it can. The PHCD plans to sell or transfer housing developments to for -profit or non- profit third -party owners. The new owners then finance improvements and maintain the housing for families in need. Critically, in order for new owners to make a profit, typically new ownership has the option of increasing the density of the existing development, adding both more below -market and market -rate units to the community. The RAD program is designed to re -structure old public housing into mixed -use, mixed -income communities. The RAD Program could affect the entire stock of public housing in the City, converting them to mixed -income, mixed -use neighborhoods. 14 of the County's planned projects are in Miami. Given the density bonuses in the City's zoning code available at these locations, RAD conversion could result in the addition of 5,433 new mixed -income affordable housing units. The PHCD communities planned for RAD redevelopment are: • Claude Pepper • Culmer Gardens • Edison Plaza • Gwen Cherry 23 • Haley Sofge Phase 1 & 2 • Helen Sawyer • Joe Moretti Phase 2B • Little Havana Homes • Rainbow Village • Robert King High • Victory Homes 24 Demand Analysis Population Growth and Household Formation Miami continues to be a popular destination for new residents from the US and abroad. Miami's 9 percent population growth from 2013 to 2017 was nearly 2.5 times the national average. The City's population growth ranked sixth among its benchmark cohort cities. If growth continues at its 5-year annual average (2.11 percent), the City's population will grow to 512,700. Population Growth, 2013-2017 -5°%° -4°%° -3°%° -2°%° -1 °%° 0°%° 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10°%° Seattle Orlando Austin Denver Charlotte Miami Raleigh Atlanta Tampa Boston Portland Minneapolis San Francisco Oakland Las Vegas Jacksonville Kansas City Honolulu Albuquerque Mem phis Baltimore Pittsburgh Buffalo Cleveland Detroit Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 25 Household Formation Miami is currently almost evenly split between family and non -family households, at 55 and 45 percent, respectively. Among the benchmark cities, Miami still has a relatively high proportion of family households. However, since 2013 the rate of growth of non -family households has doubled family households. Percent Family Households, 2017 0% Las Vegas Jacksonville Charlotte Honolulu Albuquerque Memphis Raleigh Oakland Detroit Miami Tampa Kansas City Orlando Austin Portland Baltimore Buffalo Cleveland Denver Boston San Francisco Seattle Minneapolis Pittsburgh Atlanta 10% 20% 30% Source: 2009-2013, 2073-2077 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 40% 50% 60% 70% Miami Growth Rates: Non -Family Households: 12% Family Households: 6% — Median Miami has a relatively large average household size compared to its competitors. Yet the City's average household size has been shrinking since 2013. 1-person households are the largest and fastest growing category of households in Miami. 1-and-2-person households have grown from 66 to 68 percent of all households. 26 Average Household Size, 2017 Las Vegas Miami Honolulu Jacksonville Detroit Oakland Charlotte Memphis Albuquerque Baltimore Austin Orlando Raleigh Tampa Boston San Francisco Portland Kansas City Denver Minneapolis Buffalo Atlanta Cleveland Seattle Pittsburgh 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Source: 2009-2073, 2073-2077 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates — Median Household Size Distribution City of Miami 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 1 person 2 person 1 ■ 2013 ■ 2017 1 1 1 3 person 4 person or more Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 27 Employment Base Miami's economy is a balance between high -wage, high -skilled industries, and its tourism, visitation, and hospitality sectors. 25 sectors accounting for 56 percent of all jobs in the City: Leading Industries NAICS Industry 2018 Jobs Current Wages, Salaries, & Proprietor Earnings 9036 Education and Hospitals (Local Government) 7225 Restaurants and Other Eating Places 6221 General Medical and Surgical Hospitals 4811 Scheduled Air Transportation 9026 Education and Hospitals (State Government) 5616 Investigation and Security Services 5411 Legal Services 9039 Local Government, Excluding Education and Hospitals 4831 Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation 6211 Offices of Physicians 7211 Traveler Accommodation 5313 Activities Related to Real Estate 6113 Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools 4451 Grocery Stores 7223 Special Food Services 5416 Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services 6214 Outpatient Care Centers 5613 Employment Services 5413 Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services 9011 Federal Government, Civilian 5242 Agencies, Brokerages, and Other Insurance Related Activities 5415 Computer Systems Design and Related Services 5221 Depository Credit Intermediation 6216 Home Health Care Services 6111 Elementary and Secondary Schools Source: EMSI Inc. 41,203 19,882 16,323 11,383 10,386 8,341 8,085 7,316 6,347 5,929 5,427 5,405 5,019 4,822 4,575 4,318 4,179 4,008 3,663 3,587 3,535 3,485 3,415 3,375 2 72 197,380 $50,135 $24,859 $66,756 $88,824 $38,147 $26,488 $102,049 $70,929 $101,122 $73,809 $37,528 $50,575 $56,296 $23,913 $24,803 $69,642 $52,588 $35,554 $71,638 $87,200 $68,596 $87,902 $90,852 $33,670 39 621 28 Miami's Competitive Advantage Job growth is typically led by industries that have a local competitive advantage, compared to companies in the same industry elsewhere in the US. Industry Location Quotient is a measure of the relative proportion of jobs in an industry compared to the total number of jobs. An industry location quotient more than 1 means that an area has a greater percentage of jobs in that industry than the rest of the US. A location quotient of 1.5 or more indicates that an industry has a significant local competitive advantage over other locations. Miami's most competitive industries are shown in the table below. Miami's Most Competitve Industries Industry 2018 Location 2018 Jobs Quotient 4831 Deep Sea, Coastal, and Great Lakes Water Transportation 4883 Support Activities for Water Transportation 4811 Scheduled Air Transportation 5152 Cable and Other Subscription Programming 5615 Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services 4872 Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Water 4812 Nonscheduled Air Transportation 4853 Taxi and Limousine Service 5616 Investigation and Security Services 8132 Grantmaking and Giving Services 4879 Scenic and Sightseeing Transportation, Other 5122 Sound Recording Industries 7112 Spectator Sports 6222 Psychiatric and Substance Abuse Hospitals 5321 Automotive Equipment Rental and Leasing 4512 Book Stores and News Dealers 5313 Activities Related to Real Estate 5411 Legal Services 7132 Gambling Industries 4885 Freight Transportation Arrangement 8114 Personal and Household Goods Repair and Maintenance 7113 Promoters of Performing Arts, Sports, and Similar Events 7223 Special Food Services 7121 Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions 5174 Satellite Telecommunications 4239 Miscellaneous Durable Goods Merchant Wholesalers 8112 Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance 4243 Apparel, Piece Goods, and Notions Merchant Wholesalers 4881 Support Activities for Air Transportation 6114 Business Schools and Computer and Management Training 9036 Education and Hospitals (Local Government) 6223 Specialty (except Psychiatric and Substance Abuse) Hospitals 8129 Other Personal Services 2379 Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction 5414 Specialised Design Services Percent of Total Jobs 73.45 15.97 11.47 7.49 6.06 4.43 4.19 4.16 3.97 3.76 3.51 3.47 3.07 3.07 3.07 2.98 2.91 2.77 2.71 2.70 2.68 2.56 2.54 2.50 2.37 2.34 2.33 2.29 2.25 2.23 2.20 2.18 2.12 2.08 2.04 6,347 3,291 11,383 887 3,251 181 436 2,306 8,341 1,208 26 221 1,300 816 1,459 551 5,405 8,085 756 1,469 922 922 4,575 935 46 1,628 649 788 1,094 362 41,203 1,096 2,070 581 1 289 115,878 33% Job Growth The City's economy has steadily added jobs each year since the bottom of the recession, growing jobs at an annual average rate of 2% from 2010 to 2918. Total Employment, City of Maimi 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 11111111111111111111111 O\ QQti 45 Qc)A Q05 Q00 QQ'1 Q00 QQ� QUO O11 Q�`L Q�3 QUA �<0 �0 �I �0 �� Q0,0 O�1 Q0,`L 00,3 QUA ti 535353ti 535353535353535 ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti Source. EMS/Inc. The City will continue to add jobs through 2024, but at less than half the annual average than the past 5 years (1 percent per year). The 25 industries providing 69% of all new jobs in the City through 2024 include: Leading Growth Industries NAICS Industry 2018 2024 Job Jobs Jobs Growth Current Wages, Salaries, & Proprietor Earnings 9026 Education and Hospitals (State Government) 7225 Restaurants and Other Eating Places 6221 General Medical and Surgical Hospitals 5313 Activities Related to Real Estate 6113 Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools 2371 Utility System Construction 4811 Scheduled Air Transportation 6216 Home Health Care Services 6211 Offices of Physicians 5416 Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services 6214 Outpatient Care Centers 6111 Elementary and Secondary Schools 4853 Taxi and Limousine Service 7223 Special Food Services 5415 Computer Systems Design and Related Services 4541 Electronic Shopping and Mail -Order Houses 2361 Residential Building Construction 4883 Sup portActivities for Water Transportation 5413 Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services 8129 Other Personal Services 5411 Legal Services 4411 Automobile Dealers 5617 Services to Buildings and Dwellings 4244 Grocery and Related Prod uct Merchant Wholesalers 8132 Grantmaking and Giving Services 30 10,386 15,019 4,633 19,882 21,655 1,773 16,323 17,665 1,342 5,405 6,728 1,323 5,019 5,997 978 1,457 2,389 932 11,383 12,243 860 3,375 4,158 783 5,929 6,692 763 4,318 5,045 727 4,179 4,840 661 3,372 3,986 614 2,306 2,865 559 4,575 5,120 545 3,485 3,978 493 1,091 1,551 460 2,676 3,056 380 3,291 3,665 374 3,663 4,025 362 2,070 2,416 346 8,085 8,421 336 2,795 3,103 308 2,989 3,285 296 2,931 3,226 295 1,208 1,486 278 $38,147 $24,859 $66,756 $ 50, 57 5 $ 56,296 $63,464 $88,824 $33,670 $73,809 $69,642 $ 52, 588 $39,621 $21,538 $24,803 $87,902 $33,935 $44,695 $40,243 $71,638 $22,610 $102,049 $ 58,294 $20,834 $53,738 $51,885 City Resident Occupations While jobs created in the City are balanced between high and low skill and income industries, City residents largely work in lower income, lower -skilled occupations. The leading occupations for City workers , representing 37 percent of all resident workers are: Miami's Top Resident Occupations SOC Description 2018 Resident Workers Median Annual Earnings 41-2031 Retail Salespersons 43-9061 Office Clerks, General 35-3031 Wafters and Waitresses 43-4051 Customer Service Representatives 41-2011 Cashiers 35-3021 Combined Food Preparation and Serving Workers, Including Fast Food 43-6014 Secretaries and Administrative Assistants, Except Legal, Medical, and Executive 37-2011 Janitors and Cleaners, Except Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners 37-2012 Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners 29-1141 Registered Nurses 53-7062 Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers, Hand 33-9032 Security Guards 43-5081 Stock Clerks and Order Fillers 35-2014 Cooks, Restaurant 53-3032 Heavy and Tractor -Trailer Truck Drivers 41-4012 Sales Representatives, Wholesale and Manufacturing, Except Technical and Scientific Products 23-1011 Lawyers 43-3031 Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks 13-2011 Accountants and Auditors 11-1021 General and Operations Managers 43-1011 First -Line Supervisors of Office and Administrative Support Workers 49-9071 Maintenance and Repair Workers, General 47-2061 Construction Laborers Percent of All Resident Workers 7,787 5,115 5,040 5,001 4,747 4,545 4,366 4,108 4,102 3,948 3,917 3,613 3,281 2,910 2,786 2,754 2,542 2,484 2,480 2,437 2,423 2,393 ^ 368 37% $21,326.46 $28,196.06 $21,787.75 $30,248.85 $19,409.84 $19,202.09 $34,093.14 $21,109.92 $22,225.66 $64,261.42 $27,773.96 $22,150.07 $23,170.68 $27,152.88 $36,150.77 $45,748.10 $100, 908.10 $37,416.99 $61,469.82 $102,150.96 $51,901.94 $32,720.90 $25 961 96 Miami's Largest Forecasted Occupation Gains SOC Description 2018 2018 2024 Net Median Jobs Jobs Change Annual Earnings 25-1099 Postsecondary Teachers 29-1141 Registered Nurses 53-3041 Taxi Drivers and Chauffeurs 35-3031 Waiters and Waitresses 47-2061 Construction Laborers 53-7062 Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers, Hand 35-2014 Cooks, Restaurant 31-9092 Medical Assistants 35-3021 Combined Food Preparation and Serving Workers, Including Fast Food 49-9071 Maintenance and Repair Workers, General 53-2031 Flight Attendants 39-9021 Personal Care Aides 31-1011 Home Health Aides 37-2012 Maids and Housekeeping Cleaners 1 1-1021 General and Operations Managers 41-9022 Real Estate Sales Agents 41-2031 Retail Salespersons 1 1-9199 Managers, All Other 31-1014 Nursing Assistants 13-2011 Accountants and Auditors 53-3032 Heavy and Tractor -Trailer Truck Drivers 15-1132 Software Developers, Applications 13-1111 Management Analysts 13-1199 Business Operations Specialists, All Other 11-9141 Property, Real Estate, and Community Association Managers Source: EMS! Inc. 5,759 9,083 2,440 5,759 2,575 5,849 3,361 2,130 6,315 3,691 3,091 1,198 1,390 4,149 3,382 2,011 8,078 1,997 3,427 3,573 3,059 966 1,763 2,646 1,463 7,846 10,201 3,006 6,296 3,029 6,268 3,737 2,490 6,666 4,023 3,422 1,528 1,691 4,445 3,666 2,287 8,336 2,252 3,664 3,804 3,287 1,190 1,979 2,861 1,674 2,087 1,118 566 538 454 420 376 361 351 333 330 330 301 296 284 276 258 255 236 231 228 224 216 215 211 $67,102.78 $64,261.42 $22,178.46 $21,787.75 $25,961.96 $27,773.96 $27,152.88 $30,791.36 $19,202.09 $32,720.90 $33,654.56 $22,945.34 $23,235.40 $22,225.66 $102,150.96 $37,113.20 $21,326.46 $39,224.32 $24,234.94 $61,469.82 $36,150.77 $76,812.20 $56,778.98 $63,612.22 $40,650.42 31 Earnings The City's occupational structure results in wages for residents that are considerably lower than its benchmark counterparts cities. Adjusted for inflation, wages since 2013 have grown 11 percent since 2013. However, with annual median resident worker earnings at $24,931, Miami ranks 3rd last among the benchmark cohort. Additionally, the City creates higher paying jobs at a much slower rate than comparable cities. It's 75/50 ratio — the ratio of workers earning $75,000 or more per year versus those earning less than $50,00 per year — is near the bottom of the benchmark cohort. 72 percent of the City's resident workers earn less than $75,00 per year. 52 percent of City residents work in occupations with median annual earnings less than $350,000. 45 percent of the jobs created in the City from now through 2024 will be in occupations with a median annual income less than $35,000 per year. The percentage of City residents working in occupations earning less than $35,000 per year will remain the same. Median Full -Time Resident Worker Earnings, 2017 10,000 San Francisco Seattle Denver Atlanta Boston Honolulu Austin Oakland Raleigh Charlotte Baltimore Portland Minneapolis Kansas City Tampa Las Vegas Jacksonvi Ile Albuquerque Orlando Pittsbu rgh Memph is Buffalo Miami Cleveland Detroit 20,000 Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 30,000 40,000 50,000 32 Change in Real Median Resident Worker Earnings, 2013-2017 -5% Seattle San Francisco Austin Denver Miami Atlanta Boston Pittsburgh Raleigh Oakland Honolulu Portland Charlotte Balti more Orlando Buffalo Detroit Minneapolis Tampa Kansas City Cleveland Las Vegas Memphis Jacksonville Albuquerque 0% 5% 10% ■ ■ Source: 2009-2073, 2073-2077 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates —Median 15% 75/50 Ratio, 2017 -0.2 San Francisco Seattle Boston Oakland Atlanta Portland Denver Minneapolis Austin Charlotte Raleigh Tampa Baltimore Honolulu Pittsburgh Albuquerque Kansas City Las Vegas Orlando Jacksonville Buffalo Miami Memphis Cleveland Detroit 0.3 0.8 1.3 Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Media 1.8 33 Household Incomes and Income Disparity At $33,999, Miami's median household income is only 59 percent of the US median income, and only 73 percent of Miami-Dade's median household income. Adjusted for inflation, the City's median household income has grown by just over 6 percent. Miami has one of the highest income gaps between households at the top and bottom of all cities in the US. The mean income of households in the top 5 percent of income in the City is more than 52 times the mean income of households in the lowest 20 percent of income. 53 percent of Miami's households earn less than $50,000. The City's poverty rate, hovering between 22 and 26 percent over the last decade, is also one of the highest among comparable cities in the US. 0 San Francisco Seattle Honolulu Austin Oakland Boston Portland Raleigh Denver Charlotte Minneapolis Las Vegas Atlanta Jacksonville Kansas City Albuquerque Tampa Baltimore Orlando Pittsburgh Memphis Buffalo Miami Cleveland Detroit 20,000 40,000 60,000 Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates All Dollar values are in CPI adjusted 2017 Dollars 80,000 100,000 34 Households by Income 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 ■ 2013 ■ 2017 $0- $25,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000- $200,000+ $25,000 $50,000 $75,000 $100,000 $200,000 Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Real Median Household Income Change, 2013 - 2017 San Francisco Seattle Oakland Denver Austin Portland Boston Raleigh Baltimore Pittsburgh Miami Minneapolis Tampa Charlotte Atlanta Buffalo Kansas City Honolulu Orlando Jacksonville Cleveland Detroit Las Vegas Albuquerque Memphis -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates All Dollar values are in CPI adjusted 2017 Dollars —Medi n 35 95/20 Ratio, 2017 Atlanta Boston Miami San Francisco Tampa Baltimore Pittsburgh Memphis Cleveland Detroit Minneapolis Oakland Buffalo Denver Seattle Charlotte Portland Austin Orlando Kansas City Honolulu Las Vegas Jacksonville Albuquerque Raleigh 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Source: 2073-2077 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates —Median Poverty Rate, 2017 Detroit Cleveland Buffalo Memphis Miami Baltimore Atlanta Pittsburgh Minneapolis Boston Tampa Orlando Oakland Albuquerque Kansas City Jacksonville Portland Las Vegas Austin Denver Charlotte Raleigh Seattle San Francisco Honolulu 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Source: 2009-2073, 2073-2077 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates All Dollar values are in CPI adjusted 2077 Dollars 36 --Median Area Median Income (AMI) West Flagler South GoconutGrove Allapat ah Wynwoo Overtown Downtown TIP Islands Islands Changes in Housing Preference In addition to economics and the tightening of credit for home mortgages, the region's shift from owner occupancy to renting has been driven by demographic and lifestyle preference shifts among older (55 years and up) and millennial (ages 17 to 35) households. Millennials and downsizing empty nesters are driving demand for different types and locations of housing. Both 55 plus and millennial households are seeking: • Rental, rather than owner housing, and smaller size units, even for single family homes; • Neighborhoods in close proximity to shopping, conveniences, recreation and entertainment; • Locations requiring less drive time to work, and in proximity (less than 1/2 mile) to mass transit, and a mix of alternative transportation modes, including bicycles and walking. Millennials are the first generation since the invention of the automobile to drive less miles than their parents, and this trend is accelerating; and • More outdoor amenities, including garden plots, walking/jogging trails, parks, outdoor pools, and local drug/convenience stores, and 68 percent of those aged 55-64 and 69 percent of those 65+ want a single -story dwelling. 38 vliami's Affordable Housing Gap Measuring the City's Affordability Gap Determining the City's need for affordable housing can be accomplished combing three methods: 1) assessing the general gap between incomes and housing prices relative to other markets, 2) the number of households spending higher percentages of their income on housing costs relative to other markets, and 3) an evaluation of the demand and supply for housing affordable to households at various income levels. Housing Price / Income Multiplier The ratio of median housed income to median home sale price is a general indicator of the scale of housing un-affordability. In Miami, the median home sale price is 9.1 times the median household income. This ratio is not only almost double the median for its benchmark competitors, and despite the fact that is median sale price is '/2 that of Oakland and Boston, and 1/3rd of San Francisco, has the fourth highest cost -to -income ratio of similar cities. Because of Miami's lower incomes and earnings, combined with its rapid rates of sale and rent price increases, the median home sale price for all unit types in Miami is unaffordable to 90% of all workers in the County, and 81 % of all Households in the City. Home Sale Price Multiplier Ratio of Median Sale Price to Median Income, 2019 San Francisco Oakland Boston Miami Seattle Honolulu Portland Denver Austin Atlanta Orlando Cleveland Las Vegas Tampa Minneapolis Detroit Raleigh Buffalo Charlotte Kansas City Jacksonville Pittsburgh Baltimore Memphis 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 Source: 2009-2013, 2073-2077 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Sales data provided by Redfin, a national real estate brokerage, 2019 Benchmark Median 39 Housing and Transportation Costs Transportation costs can be a significant additional household expense, and impacts lower -income households most. According to the Center for Neighborhood Technology's national Housing & Transportation Cost Index, average transportation cost for households in Miami is 20 percent of household income. The city's residents have lower transportation costs than the rest of the County, but this additional 20 percent or more is significant. Households in a large swath of the City at its western edges, spend an average of 36 to 54 percent of income on transportation. Access to existing and planned transit, including the County's proposed expansion of light -rail transit incorporated in the SMART plan, can be a significant component in the success of affordable housing. In addition, investment in Transit Oriented Development mixed -use projects is currently one of the highest -demanded products from institutional investors, and is generating the highest return among all real estate investment vehicles. Mass Transportation Access • Metrorail Station (1/2 mile radius) Metromover Station Bus Routes West Flagler 40 Coral Way North Coconut Grove Coconut Grove Islands Islands Strategic Miami Area Rapid Transit (SMART) Plan' TPF� 1441r4-nl-an414 Tnnn•narinnnn Homing 412nrsnMa rJ�,! C VJ1 r/)rQItW rR I,YNZ frIgNYAII �e5 Y as L a • # • M 1 k Lrrker • r.r as Dotr51 I en T ' I i ! 3 Ysr k.: EAS TEST 1 ENPALL CORRIDOR jr 1 Li LI 41.1.1111. 6 •W" 1 CrJkrday vim{{ � _ f J:r rrJaa yJ�V � ▪ f .Fforamiid �~ ry FTdutida Crty 5 r ■ L P L Y L i L I CarA+ e s i •J 6 1 rl'JIB EFC.1'1 Miami GardeRr aft. 1rGI..I .IJI. 1JIJ lYd4, 41. EACH Q[ I70Ii, 1 111 WPJELIWIt L G ND $wr.11 RV GRIMM 001LW0F6. ..tl.vrel.. I,c.rloy Nrov,'9J LIKh Carbar neaa1 WKII INFIAcr HAP. LAnrg P.Jl Pr. ek entlml UNun Confer ® X.11144JLOarbu 94.4tl.6a414lrenb err — — RlBi RIL194RA1. 11MINAI I 1 p111 XITW Ii "....r.14I 14w. 4.141.4 • FIWYaTrJpL.[¢Jr1LLd•. 44411144aJ Nsr • 3.!1,t.69r4`A1 rwv„ • he. 2"ma Sari. 'Lm!ed FeFF4slry R1' 4I Cost Burden The fundamental measuring stick of housing affordability is the percentage of income a household pays for housing costs, or housing cost burden. As developed by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the accepted guideline is that a household should spend 30 percent or less of its total income on all housing costs (rent, mortgage, maintenance, etc.). Households that pay more than 30 percent of their income on total housing costs are defined as Cost -Burdened, while households spending more than 50 percent of household income on housing expenses are defined as Severely Cost -Burdened. First, Miami is distinguished from the rest of the US in three ways: 1) its excessively high composition of cost -burdened households, 2) its rising composition of cost -burdened renter households, and 3) its rising portion of "severely" cost -burdened households. With 57 percent of its households cost burdened, Miami may be the most unaffordable City in the US. 94,638 Miami households are cost -burdened — 74,753 renter households, and 19,885 owner households — representing 65 percent of renters and 40 percent of all owners. The percentage of cost burdened households increases with decreasing household income. By comparison, 32 percent of all US households are cost burdened. The median measure for the study's benchmark cities is 39 percent. This means that to reach a nationally comparative level of total cost burdened households, through a variety and programs and policy, the City needs to move between 30,000 and 41,000 households out of cost burdened status. Percent Cost Burdened Households, 2017 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% Miami Oakland Boston Orlando Honolulu Detroit Baltimore Portland Memphis Tampa Cleveland Atlanta Las Vegas Austin Buffalo San Francisco Denver Seattle Minneapolis Jacksonville Albuquerque Pittsburgh Charlotte Kansas City Raleigh Source: 2009-2013, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 42 Percent Cost Burdened Renter Households, 2017 Miami Honolulu Detroit Orlando Oakland Tampa Boston Memphis Portland Baltimore Buffalo Las Vegas Albuquerque Cleveland Jacksonville Denver Austin Atlanta Minneapolis Seattle Raleigh Pittsburgh Charlotte Kansas City San Francisco 0% 5i 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% Source: 2009-2073, 2073-2077 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates —M than Percent Cost Burdened Owner Households, 2017 Miami Oakland Boston Honolulu Portland San Francisco Baltimore Detroit Orlando Las Vegas Memphis Cleveland Seattle Tampa Atlanta Jacksonville Denver Austin Albuquerque Minneapolis Charlotte Kansas City Buffalo Pitts burg h Raleigh 0 a 5 a 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65% Source: 2009-207 3, 207 3-207 7 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Mkdian 43 (A I Extremely Cost -Burdened Owners oeLGity5 1111.1 l. NM 111111Altike mbe .ud 1111"Pl v....abko town LAIriri WEN rigmemi HI'!U 1111111•14111- sta intt,ce W 'orthCoce Gro ve WNW Solu C t,Grove ) Islands Affordable Housing Demand -Supply Analysis City -Wide Housing affordability in Miami -Dade cuts across a wide range of households. The needs of households on different rungs of the income ladder differ considerably, and is made even more complex by changing age, household formation, family size and composition, and housing preferences. HUD's basic classification system pegs affordable housing needs to how much money a household earns relative to the Area Median Income (AMI), or median household income of the County or metropolitan region. HUD classifies households into four categories relative to AMI: • Extremely Low Income (ELI): Households with income at or below the Poverty Guideline or 30% of AMI, whichever is higher; • Very Low Income (VLI): Households with income between 31 % and 50% of AMI; • Low Income (LI): Households with income between 51 % and 80% of AMI Middle Income (MI): Households with income between 81 % and 100% of AMI; and • Moderate Income: Households with incomes from 80% to 120% of AMI. The Center completed an analysis of housing supply and demand, at each HUD defined income level. The analysis looks at the number of households at each income level, the rent and purchase price affordable to each income level, and the City's supply of housing units at those rents/prices. The Center's affordable housing supply/demand analysis indicates the City has a shortage of 69,464 affordable housing units. City -Wide Affordable Housing Demand /Supply Analysis Owner Housing Analysis HH Income Category Total Households (Demand) Number of Owner Units Surplus/Gap Home Purchase at Affordable Price Within within Levels Affordable Affordable Price Range Price Range ^1y) Low Income 31-50%Median 31%Median 50% Median 31-50%Median S20,1 63 - $32,261 25,814 $61,701 $96,783 1,729 6.7% 24,084 Moderate Income 81 -120% Median 51%Median 80% Median 51-80%Median S32,262 - $48,392 23,964 $96,786 $145,1 76 2,749 11 .4% 21,215 Number of Renter Housing —Income Renter Affordable Rent Levels Analysis Category Households II(Demand) Number of Renter Units rplus/Gap Within within Affordable ffordable Price Range rice Range (Supply) J1Extremey Lowlncome0-30%M;I___ 0%Median 30%Median 0-30%Median $0-$12,098 22,680 $0 $302 7,077 31.2% 15,603 Very Low Income 31-50%Median 31%Median 50%Median 31-50%Median — MI2,099-$20,163 7,764 $303 $504 3,698 47.6% 4,066 Low Income 51-80%Median 51%Median 80%Median 51-80%Median S20,164-$32,261 19,067 $505 8806 14,571 76.4% 4,496 Moderate Income 81-120%Median 81 %Median 20%Median 81-120%Median_ S32262-$48392 19003 $807 $1209 37720 198% 18716 45 Commission District Profiles District 1 Analysis Housing and Economic Characteristics There are 30,524 housing units in District 1, of which, 35.8 percent are in multi -family structures of 20 units or more. Single-family structures comprise 24.8 percent of units in the District. An estimated 54 percent of units (16,485 units) are in structures 50 years of age or older. The 73,575 residents of District 1 are primarily renters (76.2 percent/21,573 households) with a median household income of $22,760, compared to $28,650 for City renters, as a whole. With nearly 9 in 10 apartments unaffordable to District 1 residents, an estimated 67 percent of renters are cost -burdened and 37 percent "severely" cost -burdened. In the Allapattah neighborhood, the average rent for a two -bedroom apartment has increased by 25 percent in the last three years. Educational attainment in District 1 is the lowest in the City. Only 12.8 percent of the population age 25 years and older have a bachelor's degree or higher and 32.6 percent do not have a high school diploma. By comparison, 26.4 of the City's population age 25 years and over have a bachelor's degree or higher and 24.4 percent are without a high school diploma. The poverty rate in District 1 for families with children is 38 percent, compared to 31.8 percent for the City of Miami, as a whole. The labor force participation rate of 56.8 percent is the lowest among all City Districts. Most workers are employed in low -wage service sector occupations with average annual earnings of $21,600 to $32,400. 4,500 _`1TAL LRITTS A: .EEOEO TO MEET THE OEMA247 DE LOW & MODERATE &IOOMAE RENTERS NEARLY 9in10 RENTAL LrOTS ARE W FORlETDLOW re R MODERATE acme RENTERS NEARLY 8in10 t.i. HOMES ARE EINAFFORO/H-E TO LON R MODERATE INCOME CAVNERs NEARLY 41200 NOFIES ARE NEEDED TD MEET THE DEMAND OF LOW & MODERATE T3 M€OWNERS 7 in 10**** RENTERS II DIsTRNCT t ARE COST•BURDETNED itoNtERS c1q% AFFORDABLE HOUSING CHALLENGES 0WNER5 f26°1° 37% 11 LI;-t iSPEND MORE THAN $WTL THEIR INCOME ON MUSING 41} 23°Io OF OVI1 TICS SP®@ MORE THAN 3911THEIR INCOME ON HOUSING AA! A 5 in 10 ***it* HOME OWNERS IN DISTRICT L ARE COST•EURDENED Extremely Cost -Burdened Renters 6,0 aK. Liemorwphics TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTS: 85,146 HEWN POVERTY LEVEL: CHILDREN: WORKFORCE. SENIORS 40% 26% 383/ A TYPICAL RESIDENT IS EMPLOYED IN 9ERVIC . SALE a OFFICE INDUSTRIES WITH AVERAGE ANNUAL EARNINGS RJINGING FROM $21,600 • $32,400 s�Rv Eliq+rr.r+.urdfurg Mrd.a+r Ate 14.e.tr. t♦Imi.p3.1 Nap ■+—r �u 47 Existing Housing Demand and Supply The majority (60.8 percent/13,113 households) of District 1 renters fall within the "Extremely -Low" to "Moderate" household income categories. The "Existing Housing Demand and Supply Analysis" below shows a significant supply gap of 7,827 affordable units for renters in the four household income categories. District 1: Existing Renter Housing Demand and Supply Analysis HH Incom Category " • e Renter Households (Demand) fordable Rent Levels 30% Median Number of Renter Units Within Affordable Price •(Supply) 0-30% Median Surplus/Gap within Affordable Price Range Extremely Low Income 0-30% Median 0% Median $0 - $6,828 2,737 $0 $171 479 2,258 Very Low Income 31-50% Median $6829 - $11,380 3,192 31% Median $171 50% Median $285 31-50% Median 2,184 1,008 Low Income Renters 51-80% Median $11,380 - $18,208 3,654 51% Median $285 80% Median $455 51-80% Median 886 2,768 Moderate Income Renters 81-120% Median $18,209 - $27,312 3,530 81% Median $455 120% Median $683 81-120% Median 1,736 1,793 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey; table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. An Existing Owner Housing Demand and Supply Analysis for District 1 shows a supply gap of 543 units in the "Low" household income category and a small surplus of 31 units in the "moderate" household income category. However, when combined with potential buyers in the "Moderate" renter household category, there exists a gap of 3,650 units affordable owner units in District 1. District 1: Existing Owner Housing Demand and Supply Analysis H Income • • r Total ouseholds (Demand) ome Purchase • ' at Affordabl- 80% Median mber of Owner 'Surplus/Gap-m Units Within Affordable Price Ran • e (Su • • ) 51-80% Median within Affordable Price Range 51% Median Low Income Owners 51-80% Median $13,627 - $21,376 764 $40,882 $64,128 221 543 Moderate Income Owners 81-120% Median $21,377 - $32,064 893 81% Median $64,129 120% Median $96,192 81-120% Median 924 31 Moderate Income Owners and Renters 81-120% Median 81% Median 120% Median 81-120% Median $21,377 - $32,064 4,573 $64,129 $96,192 924 3,650 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey; table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. District 1 - Vacant Parcels for Potential High Density Multifamily Development Qualified Opportunity Zones Extremely Cost -burdened Renters 0% - 30% 31% - 50% 51% - 100% Land Use Vacant Residential Vacant Commercial Vacant Insitutional: Parking Lot Vacant Insitutional: Land Vacant Govt.: Municipal Vacant Govt.: Dade County Vacant Govt.: School Board Vacant Govt.: Parking Lot Vacant Govt.: Land Vacant Govt.: Federal Vacant Govt.: State 49 District 2 Analysis Housing and Economic Characteristics There are 53,580 housing units in District 2, of which, 72 percent are in multi -family structures of 20 units or more. Single-family structures comprise 24.8 percent of units in the District. An estimated 47.2 percent of units (25,291 units) in the District have been built since 2000. District 2 has the highest vacancy rate in the City (29.2 percent/15,742 units). The high vacancy rate is mainly attributed to the large share (61.2 percent/9,638 units) of "seasonal" vacancies The 81,355 residents of District 2 are primarily renters (63.1 percent/23,514 households) with a median household income of $61,850 compared to $28,650 for City renters, as a whole. An estimated 50 percent of District 2 renters are cost -burdened and 26 percent "severely" cost - burdened. Educational attainment in District 2 is the highest in the City with 57.9 percent of the population 25 years and older with a bachelor's degree or higher. By comparison, 26.4 of the City's population age 25 years and over have a bachelor's degree or higher. The labor force participation rate in District 2 is 71.0 percent, compared to 61.8 percent for the City, as a whole. Workers are employed in a variety of industries and occupations including Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services; educational services and healthcare; and finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing. Average annual earnings range from $24,500 in low wage service occupations to $121,600 in professional and management occupations. `IEARLr S f000 RENTAL UNITS ARE 1.4EEDED ID MEET THE DEMAH:i OF RENTERS OF ALL ]NDDME LEVELS (EF.7RElELY LOW - LOW INCDlS} NEARLY 21n 10 RE 1T%L LNTfSARE UN ffORDA& E TO LOW LNCOME RENTERS (r NEARLY 2in10 HOME. ARE UN.FFORDAILE TO LOW A MODERATE WEAVE OWNERS Lk NEWLY 610. ARE NEEDED TO FEET THE DEMAND OF LOW A MATE INCOME OWNERS NEARLY ** 5 in 1O*** RENTERS IN DISTRICT 2 ARE COST -BURDENED �yrERS (6390 AFFORDABLE ROUSING CHALLENGES 0 NERs (.31*1 NEARLY 3 in 1O*** HOME OWNERS EN DISTRICT 2 ARE COST-EAJRDBIEET 26% OF RENTERS SPEND MORE THAN 50 4 THELR INCOME ON HOUSING )) 18% OF OWNERS SPEND MORE THAN SOK, THEIR INCOME ON HOUSING 50 Extremely Cost -Burdened Renters Demographic* TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTS: 81,335 BELOW POVERTY LEVEL A TYPICAL RBI ENT LS EMPLOYED IN MANAGEMENT, SALE & O LDREN_ % OFFICE 1NOIriFRIFS WITH AVERAGE ANNUAL EARNINGS RANGING FROM WORKFORCE- 13% SENIORS: 18% $24,500, $121,600 ■ MW rwy lammelte ifsCLAN !Ma liorimilai Isom ok. Ira pbaa ■,rs.= naw erur. Pimp Existing Housing Demand and Supply The majority (60.8 percent/14,125 households) of District 2 renters fall within the "Extremely -Low" to "Moderate" household income categories. The "Existing Housing Demand and Supply Analysis" below shows a significant supply gap of 5,021 affordable renter units for households within the "Extremely -Low." "Very Low" and "Low" household income categories and substantial surplus in the "Moderate" household income category. District 2: Existing Renter Housing Demand and Suy Analysis HH Incom _= Category Number of Renter Househol (Demand) Affordable Rent Level Number of Renter Units ithin Affordable Price Range (Supply) Surplus/Ga -. within Affordable Price Range Extremely Low Income 0-30% Median 0% Median 30% Median 0-30% Median $0 - $18,855 3,658 $0 $464 713 2,945 Very Low Income 31-50% Median $18,556 - $30,925 2,859 31% Median $465 50% Median $773 31-50% Median 1,288 1,571 Low Income Renters 51-80% Median $30,926 - $49,480 3,483 51% Median $773 80% Median $1,237 51-80% Median 2,978 505 Moderate Income Renters 81-120% Median $49,480 - $74,220 4,125 81% Median $1,237 120% Median $1,856 81-120% Median 7,518 3,393 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey; table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. District 2 has relatively smaller owner affordable housing gaps in the "Low" and "Moderate" household income categories. The gap in these household income categories totals 612 units. However, when combined with potential buyers in the "Moderate" renter household category, there exists a gap of 4,319 affordable owner units in District 2. District 2: Existing Owner Housing Demand and Supply Analysis H Income Category I Total Householdbs (Demand) Home Purchase at Affordable Price Levels Number of Owner Units Within Affordable Price Ranee Su' 'I Surplus/Gap within Affordable Price Ran • e Low Income Owners Moderate Income Owners Moderate Income Owners and Renters 51-80% Median $38,084 - $59,740 81-120% Median $59,741 - $89,610 1,276 1,780 51% Median $114,253 81% Median $179,221 80% Median $179,220 120% Median $268,830 51-80% Median 889 81-120% Median 1,553 81-120% Median 81% Median 120% Median $59,741 - $89,610 5,872 $179,221 $268,830 81-120% Median 1,553 386 226 4,319 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey; table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. 51 District 2 - Vacant Parcels for Potential High Density Multifamily Development Qualified Opportunity Zones Extremely Cost -burdened Renters 0% - 30% 31% - 50% 51% - 100% Land Use 52 Vacant Residential Vacant Commercial Vacant Insitutional: Parking Lot Vacant Insitutional: Land Vacant Govt.: Municipal Vacant Govt.: Dade County Vacant Govt.: School Board Vacant Govt.: Parking Lot Vacant Govt.: Land Vacant Govt.: Federal Vacant Govt.: State District 3 Analysis Housing and Economic Characteristics There are 34,420 housing units in District 3, of which, 47.6 percent are in multi -family structures of 10 or more units. Single-family structures comprise 24.8 percent of units in the District. An estimated 60.6 percent of units (20,854 units) are in structures 50 years of age or older. The 81,002 residents of District 3 are primarily renters (83.9 percent/25,351 households) with a median household income of $22,760, compared to $28,650 for City renters, as a whole. With nearly 6 in 10 apartments unaffordable to District 3 residents, an estimated 70 percent of renters are cost -burdened and 38 percent "severely" cost -burdened. . Educational attainment in District 3 is among the lowest in the City with only 17.0 percent of the population age 25 years and older with a bachelor's degree or higher. An estimated 33.5 percent of the District's population are without a high school diploma. By comparison, 26.4 of the City's population age 25 years and over have a bachelor's degree or higher and 24.4 percent are without a high school diploma. The poverty rate in District 3 for families with children is 36 percent, compared to 31.8 percent for the City of Miami, as a whole. The labor force participation rate of 60.7 percent is among the lowest of City Districts. Most workers are employed in low -wage service sector occupations with average annual earnings of $21,600 to $32,400. 81400 NTALOUTS AR[ NEEDED TO MEET TIE DEMUR] OF RENTERS OF ALL 1NOSME LEVELS (EXTREMELY LOW • MODERATE ENCDM6) {6 in 10 REMAL (RIFTS ARE IJNAFFORW6LE TO LOW k MODERATE ENCORE RENTERS NEARLY 5 in 10 J A, Lt �•.'•A Ya MODERATE LNCC} E O NER_5 Cr rr NEARMw 600 HOMES ARE NEEDED TO MEET THE DEMAND OF LOW 11 MODERATE INCOME OWNERS 7in10AA 1 RENTERS IN DISTRICT 7 ARE COST -BURDENED 38% 11 AFFORDABLE HOUSING CHALLENGES OF RENTERS STENO MORE TIA SSV"I TIDA 1SCGME ON HOUSING 210/0 „4:NERs 9PB1D MORE TURN 5014 TWIR IPCOW ON HOUSING 4 in 10***** NOME Owr;-- E COST -BURDENED Extremely Cost -Burdened Renters Demographics TOTAL NUMER OF RESIDENTS 81,002 ME.CW POVERTY LEVEL: CHILDREN: WORKFORCE SEN1ORSI 36% 22% 38% A TYPICAL RSIOE1f7 IS EMPLOYED IN SERVICE, SALE S OFFICE ININISTRIES WIT)k AVFIiif !.,' 1 U4L EFStNINGS RANGING FROM $21,600 $32,400 I111.mt .1r 53 Existing Housing Demand and Supply The majority (57.7 percent/14,632 households) of District 3 renters fall within the "Extremely -Low" to "Moderate" household income categories. The "Existing Housing Demand and Supply Analysis" below shows a significant supply gap of 8,482 affordable units for renters in the four household income categories. District 3: Existing Renter Housing Demand and Supply Analysis HH Income Category Number of Renter Households Affordable Rent Levels 30% Median Number of Renter Units ithin Affordable Price Range (Supply) 0-30% Median Surplus/Gap within Affordable price Range Extremely Low Income 0-30% Median 0% Median $0 - $6,895 2,644 $0 $172 385 2,260 Very Low Income 31-50% Median $6,896 - $11,492 3,422 31% Median $172 50% Median $287 31-50% Median 2,115 1,307 Low Income Renters 51-80% Median $11,493 - $18,387 4,324 51% Median $287 80% Median $460 51-80% Median 1,183 3,141 Moderate Income Renters 81-120% Median $18,387 - $27,581 4,242 81% Median $460 120% Median $690 81-120% Median 2,468 1,774 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey; table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. In District 3, 5 in 10 owner properties are unaffordable to resident homebuyers. An estimated 40 percent of owners are cost -burdened and 21 percent "severely" cost- burdened." There exists a supply gap of 573 owner units for "Low" and "Moderate" income owner households. However, when combined with potential buyers in the "Moderate" renter household category, there exists a gap of 4,4,00 affordable owner units in District 3. District 3: Existing Owner Housing Demand and Supply Analysis HH Income Category Total dm .Househol (Demand) ome Purchase at Affordable Price Levels Number of Owner Units Within Affordable Price Ranee Su •I Surplus/Gap within Affordable Price Ran • e Low Income Owners Moderate Income Owners Moderate Income Owners and Renters 51-80% Median $13,009 - $20,406 81-120% Median $20,407 - $30,608 508 565 51% Median $39,026 81% Median $61,218 80% Median $61,217 120% Median $91,825 51-80% Median 204 81-120% Median 297 81-120% Median 81% Median 120% Median $20,407 - $30,608 4,717 $61,218 $91,825 81-120% Median 297 304 269 4,420 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey; table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. District 3 - Vacant Parcels for Potential High Density Multifamily Development Qualified Opportunity Zones Extremely Cost -burdened Renters 0% - 30% 31 % - 50% 51% - 100% Land Use Vacant Residential Vacant Commercial Vacant Insitutional: Parking Lot Vacant Insitutional: Land Vacant Govt.: Municipal Vacant Govt.: Dade County Vacant Govt.: School Board Vacant Govt.: Parking Lot Vacant Govt.: Land Vacant Govt.: Federal Vacant Govt.: State r • �� ti r7 T.� • l a155 f, ■ 5,1 MI V 0 1 .' 5i5 OM a aII NM . e *1 5 5' 55 District 4 Analysis Housing and Economic Characteristics There are 38,769 housing units in District 4, of which, 66.0 percent are single-family attached and detached structures. An estimated 66 percent of units (26,363 units) are in structures 50 years of age or older. The 104,688 residents of District 4 are primarily renters (53.0 percent/21,573 households) with a median household income of $31.828, compared to $28,650 for City renters, as a whole. With nearly 9 in 10 apartments unaffordable to District 4 residents, an estimated 67 percent of renters are cost -burdened and 38 percent "severely" cost -burdened. Educational attainment in District 3 is relatively low with 22.5 percent of the population age 25 years and older with a bachelor's degree or higher. An estimated 23.2 percent of the District's population are without a high school diploma. By comparison, 26.4 of the City's population age 25 years and over have a bachelor's degree or higher and 24.4 percent are without a high school diploma. The labor force participation rate in District 4 is 60.5 percent, compared to 61.8 percent for the City, as a whole. Workers are employed in a variety of industries and occupations including educational services and healthcare, retail and accommodation and food services. Average annual earnings range from $21,600 in low wage occupations to $101,000 in professional and management occupations. NEARLY Sr 500 RENTAL LNITS ARE NEEDED TO MEET THE FEMME, OF MITERS CF ALL INCOME LEVELS (E?'TREI-ELY LOW - MODERATE NICIOMES) 4in10 rr RENTAL UNITS. ARE UNAFFORDABLE TO L9N & MODERATE INCOME RENTERS re NEARLY 7in10 t HOMES ARE UNAFFORDABLE TO LOAN & MDDEFATE INCCFE OWNERS NEARLY 3,20O HOMES ARE NEEDED TO FEET THE DEMAND OF LOW & MODERATE INCOME OWNERS NEARLY 6in1O*CAI A RENTERS IN D[STRDCT 4 ARE COST -BURDENED SIERS (539 AFFORDABLE HOUSING CHALLENGES 0WyER5 (A10°l NEARLY 38% OF RENTERS SPEND MORE THAN SL�k THEIR INCOME ON HOUSING )) 22% OF OWNERS SPEND MORE THAN 5c' THEIR INCOME ON HOUSING 4 in 10***** HOME OWNERS IN DISTRICT 4 ARE COST -BURDENED 56 Extremely Cost -Burdened Renters llkniogrnplri w Tom_ weal OF RINI/MIS 11111 BELOW POVERTY LEVEL: CHILDREN: WORKFORCE: SENIOR.S_ A TYPICAL RESIDENT TS EMPLOYED jr MANAGEMENT. SALE & righ OFFICE 1147L5TRIE'S WITH AVERAGE ANNUAL EARNINGS RANGING FROM 17% 72% $21,600,0 $101,000 rVar Existing Housing Demand and Supply The majority (37.1 percent/7,496 households) of District 4 renters fall within the "Extremely -Low" to "Moderate" household income categories. The "Existing Housing Demand and Supply Analysis" below shows a significant supply gap of 5,856 affordable renter units for households in the "Extremely Low, "Very Low" and "Low" household income categories and a smaller gap of 246 units in the "Moderate" household income category. District 4: Existing Renter Housing Demand and Supply Analysis H Income Catego i Affordable Rent Levels 30% Median $239 Number of Renter Units ithin Affordable Price Range (Supply) 0-30% Median 385 Surplus/Gap within ffordable ice Range 1,703 ®um . er o Renter Households (Demand) Extremely Low Income 0-30% Median $0 - $9,548 2,088 0% Median $0 Very Low Income 31-50% Median 31% Median 50% Median 31-50% Median $9,549 - $15,914 2,196 $239 $398 445 1,750 Low Income Renters 51-80% Median 51% Median 80% Median 51-80% Median $15,915 - $25,462 3,212 $398 $637 809 2,403 Moderate Income Renters 81-120% Median $25,463 - $38,194 3,789 81% Median $637 120% Median $955 81-120% Median 4,035 246 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey, table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. An Existing Owner Housing Demand and Supply Analysis for District 4 shows a supply gap of 3,244 units in the "Low" and "Moderate" household income categories. When combined with potential buyers in the "Moderate" renter household category, there exists a gap of 5,056 affordable owner units in District 4. District 4: Existing Owner Housing Demand and Supply Analysis HH Incom = Category Total lumber of Owner Surplus/Gap Households (Demand) Home Purchase Price 51% Median $56,143 at Affordable Levels 80% Median $88,068 Units Within Affordable Price Ran • e (Su . s ) 51-80% Median 356 within Affordable Price Range 2,078 Low Income Owners 51-80% Median $18,714 - $29,356 2,434 Moderate Income Owners 81-120% Median 81% Median 120% Median 81-120% Median $29,356 - $44,034 2,124 $88,069 $132,102 958 1,166 Moderate Income Owners and Renters 81-120% Median 81% Median 120% Median 81-120% Median $29,356 - $44,034 6,014 $88,069 $132,102 958 5,056 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey; table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. J7 District 4 - Vacant Parcels for Potential High Density Multifamily Development 58 Qualified Opportunity Zones Extremely Cost -burdened Renters O% - 30% 31% - 50% I— 1 51% - 100% Land Use Vacant Residential Vacant Commercial Vacant Insitutional: Parking Lot 11 Vacant Insitutional: Land Vacant Govt.: Municipal Vacant Govt.: Dade County Vacant Govt.: School Board Vacant Govt.: Parking Lot Vacant Govt.: Land Vacant Govt.: Federal Vacant Govt.: State District 5 Analysis Housing and Economic Characteristics There are 41,525 housing units in District 5, of which, single-family detached/attached structures comprise 39.1 percent of all units in the District. An estimated 33.4 percent of units are in multi -family structures of 10 or more units. An estimated 60.6 percent of units (20,854 units) are in structures 50 years of age or older. The 89,862 residents of District 5 are primarily renters (74.4 percent/26,850 households) with a median household income of $22,760, compared to $28,650 for City renters, as a whole. With nearly 5 in 10 apartments unaffordable to District 3 residents, an estimated 60 percent of renters are cost -burdened and 34 percent "severely" cost -burdened. . Educational attainment in District 5 is among the lowest in the City with only 16.9 percent of the population age 25 years and older with a bachelor's degree or higher. An estimated 27.5 percent of the District's population are without a high school diploma. By comparison, 26.4 of the City's population age 25 years and over have a bachelor's degree or higher and 24.4 percent are without a high school diploma. The poverty rate in District 5 for families with children is 49 percent, compared to 31.8 percent for the City of Miami, as a whole. The labor force participation rate of 58.8 percent compared to 61.8 percent for the City, as a whole. Most workers are employed in low -wage service sector occupations with average annual earnings of $21,600 to $32,400. YEARLY $11Q141RENTAL UNITS ME NEEDED TO MEET THE CEMAM OF RBVTERS OF ALL ]NAME LEVELS (EaREMELY LOW - 'MODERATE INCOME) NEARLY 5 in 10 RENTAL [FLITS. ARE UNWTORDABLE TO LE/VP MECERATE INCOME RENTERS NEA31iY fin 10& HOMES ARE UPMFfoRD.AT]LE TO LOW INCOME OWNERS NEARL'+ ■ 6 in 1O**** RENTERS ]N DLS[WSCT 5 ARE COST-9URCENED s .WERS (7696) NEARLY 121 HOMES ARE NEEDED TO MEET THE DAD OF LOV! INCOME OWNER,` AFFORDABLE HOUSING CHALLENGES °WNER5 (.ZA NEARLY 2in1Ow ** 34' Io OF RENTERS SPEND MORE THAN 5VY T#1E[R ]NCOINE ON HOUSING )) 10% OF CMNERS 9P91D MORE THAN 50% THEIR ]NCOME ON HOUSING HOME OWNERS IN DNS[R]CT 5 ARE LOST-91R09]EO Extremely Cost -Burdened Renters Demographic* TOTAL NUMBER OF RESILIENfis. 89,R62 IIELDW POVERTY LEVEL. CHILDREN: WORKFORCE. SENIORS: 49% 31% 36D/ A TYPL &. RESIDENT IS EMPLOYED IN SERVICE, SALE a OFFICE IIPC}IISTRIES WITH AVERAGE ANNUAL EARNINGS RANGING FROM $21,600„ $32,400 OWN.. LEI+ I1 59 Existing Housing Demand and Supply An estimated 48.9 percent (13,141 households) of District 5 renters fall within the "Extremely -Low" to "Moderate" household income categories. The "Existing Housing Demand and Supply Analysis" below shows a significant supply gap of 8,100 affordable units for renters in the four household income categories. District 5: Existing Renter Housing Demand and Supply Analysis HH Income Catego _,.. Renter Households (Demand) ffordable Rent Levels Number of Renter Units ithin Affordable Price Range (Supply) Surplus/Gap within Affordable Price Range Extremely Low Income 0-30% Median $0 - $5,790 3,346 0% Median $0 30% Median $145 0-30% Median 435 2,911 Very Low Income 31-50% Median 31% Median 50% Median 31-50% Median $5,791 - $9,650 3,025 $145 $241 1,173 1,852 Low Income Renters 51-80% Median 51% Median 80% Median 51-80% Median $9,651 - $15,440 3,321 $241 $386 1,234 2,087 Moderate Income Renters 81-120% Median $15,441 - $23,160 3,449 81% Median $386 120% Median $579 81-120% Median 2,199 1,250 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey; table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. District 5 has a relatively smaller affordability need for owners. Only 1 in 10 owner properties are unaffordable to resident homebuyers. An estimated 20 percent of owners are cost -burdened and 10 percent "severely" cost -burdened." There exists a supply gap of 121 owner units in the "Low" household income category and a small surplus of 233 units in the "Moderate" household income category. However, when combined with potential buyers in the "Moderate" renter household category, there exists a gap of 3,512 affordable owner units in District 5. District 5: Existing Owner Housing Demand and Supply Analysis HH Income Category Total Households (Demand) 1 Number of Owner Home Purchase at Affordable Units Within price Levels j Affordable Price I. Range (Supply) Surplus/Gap within Affordable Price Range Low Income Owners 51-80% Median 51% Median 80% Median 51-80% Median $18,588 - $29,158 1,102 $55,765 $87,475 981 121 Moderate Income Owners 81-120% Median $29,159 - $43,738 1,059 81% Median $87,476 120% Median $131,213 81-120% Median 1,292 233 Moderate Income Owners and Renters 81-120% Median 81% Median 120% Median 81-120% Median $29,159 - $43,738 4,804 $87,476 $131,213 1,292 3,512 Source: 2013-2017 American Community Survey; table and calculations by the FIU Metropolitan Center. District 5 - Vacant Parcels for Potential High Density Multifamily Development Qualified Opportunity Zones Extremely Cost -burdened Renters 0% - 30% 31% - 50% 51% - 100% Land Use Vacant Residential Vacant Commercial Vacant Insitutional: Parking Lot Vacant Insitutional: Land Vacant Govt.: Municipal Vacant Govt.: Dade County Vacant Govt.: School Board Vacant Govt.: Parking Lot Vacant Govt.: Land Vacant Govt.: Federal Vacant Govt.: State 61 Targeting Affordable Housing Development Opportunity The Geography of Affordable Housing Opportunity Geographically targeting the City's future affordable housing development efforts will be crucial to its success. The conclusion from decades of affordable housing investment and development experience across the US is that geographically concentrating affordable housing investment 1) creates the highest level of impact, and leverages public dollars by generating spin-off investment and development resulting from improved housing, 2) insures greater project success, as an increasing density of improved housing conditions improves market conditions for successive projects, 3) is the only way to truly transform neighborhoods, and 4) is the best defense against large-scale gentrification and displacement. Selecting the geographic targets for future affordable housing preservation and development balances need with opportunity. Clearly, the City's greatest need is to rapidly increase its supply of multi -family rental units, balanced with creating opportunities for access to home -ownership. Both needs will require redevelopment and improvement, preservation, and development of new housing units. Taking into consideration the City's demand, supply, and policy framework, the factors considers to develop a short list of priority neighborhoods for affordable housing development efforts include: • Need, most specifically neighborhoods where incomes are lowest, cost burden is highest, and the threat of gentrification and displacement is highest; • Properties and neighborhoods both suitable for, and already zoned for residential development, especially high -density development zoning with density and parking bonuses available under the City's zoning code; • The availability of low-cost land, both with structures and vacant parcels. Specifically, neighborhoods where the inventory of available affordable housing units, and economically underperforming properties is highest, and coincides with need; • Proximity to existing County public housing projects targeted for redevelopment and expansion under the Federal Rental Assistance (RAD) program; • Proximity to existing and planned public transit, ideally within 1/2 mile of existing and future transit corridors; • The availability of larger vacant property parcels suitable for the development of affordable multi -family developments; and • Neighborhoods either already in economic development zones that include financial and development incentives, including Federal Opportunity Zones, and Census tracts qualified for the use of Federal and State tax credits, including New Markets Tax Credits. 62 to