UCLA Real Estate Wire

KCRW: "How a city-funded homeless housing project became a sink hole for public money"

"'I'm just sort of stunned at how thin it is in terms of supporting this $30 million valuation that seems to be almost pulled out of the ether,' said Eric Sussman, who teaches real estate and accounting at UCLA’s Anderson School of Management. He noted a lack of relevant comparable sales or financial analysis in the appraisal, but also pointed to the building photos. 'There are no amenities, no common areas. It looks like a very rundown motel. It doesn't even pass the smell test at a very superficial level.'”

[KCRW: 12/10/2020]

The Real Deal: "CA’s plan to put homeless in hotels is met with skepticism"

"'There are so many practical impediments that this seems like a pipe dream to me,' said Eric Sussman, a real estate professor at UCLA.

Those impediments include the state ordering not just hotels to go along with the plan but those hotels’ insurers. 'The insurance companies could just say ‘no,’' Sussman speculated. 'Is the hotel also supposed to provide mental health services? Drug counseling services?'

The professors’ concern that the plan would be more a compliance issue for hotels than actual benefit for the homeless was shared by homeless advocates."

[TRD: 3/20/2020]

Urban Land Institute: "Land-Use Solutions to L.A.’s Homeless Crisis"

"Tim Kawahara, Executive Director, UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate, introduced this panel with an anecdote about demonstrating how difficult it is to get “buy-in” for increased density from neighborhood groups: The Westside Pavilion is becoming a huge Google job center. It is two blocks from the Expo Line. “This is the exact area that should be upzoned,” he said."

[ULI: 3/11/2020]

Los Angeles Times: "These six developers say they can build housing for homeless people faster and cheaper"

"All HHH projects leverage the city money with other sources of local, state and federal funds in complex packages that stretch out the development time. Most of the innovation proposals had simpler financing plans, some of which target non-public sources...

"Daylight Community Development, meanwhile, said it would replace part of the HHH money it would receive with a bank loan after three years based on a commitment for rental subsidies from the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services...

"Daylight Community Development would receive $23.8 million to build 132 supportive units in shipping containers. A portion of the HHH funds would be repaid after three years with private financing."

[LAT: 8/24/2019]

The Sun: "How one program brought a boy from almost homeless to homeowner"

"A recent affordable housing brief published by the UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate reports the high cost of housing across California and beyond is a major concern for low-income families. According to the Ziman Center’s research, half of U.S. residents are rent-burdened, spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing. The report also concluded that high housing costs often force families to make difficult decisions, including a move to “neighborhoods with higher crime rates or lower-performing schools.”

[S: 11/26/17]

Moving Forward: Can We Solve L.A.’s Housing Affordability Problem?

Left to right: Paul Ong, UCLA Luskin Professor of Urban Planning, Social Welfare and Asian American Studies; Ann Sewill, Vice President, Housing and Economic Opportunity, California Community Foundation; Doug Shoemaker, president, Mercy Housing California.

By Carolyn Gray Anderson

Last March, Los Angeles voters rejected proposed limits on the construction of large-scale buildings, limits that included a two-year moratorium on development of dense, high-rise residential properties. In a city where working-class and middle-income households are increasingly forced to prioritize housing costs over medical care, food and even transportation, it was a decisive defeat for ballot Measure S. But will augmenting the pace and quantity of available dwellings really make living here more affordable for anyone but the super-rich?

The UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate, formed in 2001 as a joint center of UCLA Anderson School of Management and UCLA School of Law, studies the problem of housing affordability as it reaches crisis levels in California. The constraints are especially acute locally because although there is an immense amount of wealth concentrated in L.A. and land values are extremely high, ours is a very expensive city with no real wage growth within the working class. Among Ziman’s objectives is to create meaningful forums for business leaders, entrepreneurs, industry professionals and public policymakers to examine precisely this kind of crisis in conversation together — and to produce research that helps them arrive at collaborative solutions.

Ziman as a center of excellence is either undertaking or sponsoring research that explores: local-level regulatory constraints that result in housing scarcity; new mortgage designs to enhance affordability; the efficacy of low-income housing tax credits; and the policies that have led to crisis-level unaffordability. Ziman partners annually with the nonprofit Mercy Housing California to organize a symposium on topics germane to professionals in real estate, government and industry — but with a crucial public education component consistent with the mission of Ziman’s Howard and Irene Levine Program in Housing and Social Responsibility to promote the kind of dialogue that improves society in all economic sectors.

Mercy Housing is a national nonprofit organization that provides affordable housing and supportive programs to improve the economic status of residents, revitalize neighborhoods and stabilize lives. Mercy’s work spans 41 states, with its largest regional division in California. The organization serves a variety of populations that include low-income families, seniors and people with special needs, and acquires and renovates existing housing, as well as develops new affordable rental properties.

The most recent event in the Ziman-Mercy partnership brought together academics, public servants, business leaders and real estate developers for a half-day symposium titled Moving Forward: Building Housing for L.A.’S Working Class and Middle Income Residents. Keynote speaker Ben Metcalf, director of California’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), unveiled the Statewide 2025 Housing Assessment, the first such report to summarize California housing development projections since 2000’s Raising the Roof. The report reveals, among other things, that overall homeownership rates are at their lowest since the 1940s, while at least 30 percent of all California renters are housing constrained, or “rent burdened,” as the report calls it. This means they spend minimum one third of their income on rent every month. With land prices alone exceeding what average Angelenos can afford, low- and middle-income housing is built only with large public subsidies.

Ziman board member Kevin Ratner, president of Forest City Residential West, is a for-profit developer who leverages incentives like density bonuses to encourage affordable housing developments. Participating in the recent panel, Ratner said the biggest conundrum is in a luxury-level housing market whereby people who can’t afford rents and mortgages face no choice but to earn more and more money, endure distant commutes or leave altogether. “If you cater only to the top of the market,” he said, “affordability cannot be designed into your plan.”

How can cities be intentional about preserving access among existing stakeholders and carve out pockets of affordability in gentrifying neighborhoods?

This is where UCLA’s collaborative research comes in. Professor of Urban Planning, Social Welfare and Asian American Studies Paul Ong brought to the Moving Forward conversation his expertise in the areas of gentrification and displacement. Ong is director of the Center for Neighborhood Knowledge, which focuses on translating socioeconomic research into actionable neighborhood-related policies and programs. “The extreme ends of the spectrum are increasing at the expense of the middle in terms of household median income, and L.A. is the most expensive city relative to income,” said Ong. The foreclosure crisis that drove the recession alienated first-time home buyers and pushed property owners back into the rental market. With this, Ong said, came a noticeable shift to more expensive homes being built.

Because for developers and builders, cost is cost, irrespective of what buyers or renters can afford to pay. And no panelist disagreed that L.A.’s regulatory environment is restrictive to an extremely counterproductive extent. “We have the longest gestation period between getting a permit and starting new construction,” Ong said.

“We need to spine up,” said panelist Ann Sewill, referring to leadership — developers as well as policy makers. Sewill is VP of housing and economic opportunity at the California Community Foundation. She was introduced as “everyone’s favorite housing advocate.” She said production is the key to addressing housing affordability and it needs to be less impeded. Streamlining city permitting by reducing the process from four to two years would revolutionize local development, panelists agreed.

Rick Jacobus, a consultant at Street Level Advisors, which helps design or implement inclusionary housing policies, said, “The affordable housing problem is perennial; the middle income housing crisis is a market failure, which is about volume.” He observed that the housing market is segmented. “They behave differently,” he said. “Prices don’t come down evenly across segments. Luxury prices drop as demand goes down, but the middle doesn’t.”

But he also stressed that just building more and more isn’t any more sustainable than subsidizing more and more. “People understand that building empty cities won’t happen in America; who will finance empty skyscrapers?”

Sewill pointed out that new construction can cost $500,000 per unit in the densest areas of L.A. “Cost is what it is irrespective of intention or mandate to provide affordable housing. Nonprofit or for-profit, builders are builders. We need intentional targeted production that takes into account underreported income disparities.”

But are tiny units with no parking viable solutions?

Building smaller units is one solution, said Ratner. But many pre-fab and multi-family enterprises have been spectacular failures because even heavily subsidized projects can’t keep production costs low enough to meet working-class and middle-income thresholds of affordability. He said cities like San Francisco may put housing preservation dollars toward affordable dwellings, but if they are housed in buildings for which the mandate expires, developers can then take the once-affordable units to market for the highest price.

Experts and public alike are still trying to determine the best post-redevelopment models for subsidized housing. Mercy Housing California’s president, Doug Shoemaker, said, “We try to spend our affordable housing funding to solve multiple problems. We need a move to acquisitions and rehabs.” California is also revisiting ordinances for “non-conforming” apartments and what are classed as accessory dwelling units (“backyard homes” or “granny flats”), broadening regulations and defining them as priced below market for the areas they rent in.

Ben Besley, vice president of development at City Ventures and board chair at the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, believes the solution lies in 3–4 bedroom town homes that cost around $70 per square foot to build and are priced at $350,000–$375,000, yielding a profit margin of a quarter million dollars. “This building typology is the way to get density at the highest residual land value,” he said, advocating bringing buyers into the political process and involving the private sector.

But density and transportation infrastructure cannot be factored out of the equation. Ziman Center Executive Director Tim Kawahara and others believe that L.A. needs more “upzoning” in appropriate locations tied to public transit and areas that promote walkability. “L.A. is updating its badly outdated planning system and 35 community plans that guide neighborhood-level development across the city,” he says. “This process will shape how L.A. will look for at least a generation.” The hope is that the city’s efforts lead to a more thoughtfully planned metropolis with equitable housing options for all residents.

There’s no question that affordable housing is a growth industry — transformative developments like those Mercy manages are proof. But growing income and wealth inequality is affecting the whole country, and in the current regulatory environment developers stand to make the best and easiest money in the luxury housing market.

So why should an MBA — let alone an established business mogul — about to embark on a career in lucrative real estate transactions care about middle-income affordability when incentive is greater to encourage luxury housing and commercial starts?

Kawahara says that new constraints on the middle-income tier have far-reaching implications for the economy as a whole. “On a practical level,” he says, “it’s harder for businesses large and small to attract talent for hire if housing is too expensive. Entire companies will decamp to other states as their ability to turn a profit in California declines.” With more accessible housing will come better, higher-paying jobs in real estate acquisitions and property management that require the business acumen of an MBA.

Universities should care, too, Kawahara says: “The current market alienates higher education faculty who can live more affordably elsewhere — even in towns with prestigious private colleges. This hurts rankings of California universities.”

There are health implications, as well, says Professor of Finance Stuart Gabriel, Ziman Center Director and UCLA Anderson Arden Realty Chair. People trying to afford housing in neighborhoods close to their workplaces or to decent schools must often accept environmental dis-amenities like adjacency to major freeways, which has proved hazardous. Ironically, some developers believe building close to freeways will increase use of public transportation options; but meanwhile, dangerous particulate matter from traffic congestion shows no sign of abating.

Gabriel’s latest research investigates the broad economic effects of the 2009 California Foreclosure Prevention Act and other crisis-period foreclosure prevention laws that attenuated the decline of the California housing market. The annual Mercy collaborations are meant to spark new thinking around widespread access to housing in expensive markets like L.A. Ziman produces research that can inform policy and industry alike. As Gabriel says, “State agencies and nonprofits have neither the staffing nor the resources to undertake fundamental assessment of the causes and broader consequences of the lack of housing affordability.”

==================

On June 13, 2017, Stuart Gabriel, economists at the UCLA Anderson Forecast and a panel of invited experts examine The New Los Angeles Urban Landscape and the High Price of Housing.

Wall Street Journal: "Los Angeles Builders Say New Affordable-Housing Rules Will Stifle Construction"

“It’s already a lot of brain damage and work for a project to go through in L.A.,” said Paul Habibi, a professor at UCLA’s Anderson School of Management who also develops and invests in apartments in the city. “It’s really only going to stifle the number of housing units built.”

[WSJ 11/17/16]

UCLA Neighborhood Integrity Initiative Forum: Never Let a Good Crisis Go to Waste

  

The proposed Neighborhood Integrity Initiative, which has potentially sweeping implications for large-scale development in the City of Los Angeles, is being targeted for the March 2017 Los Angeles City election.  The April 27th forum, a partnership of the UCLA Ziman Center for Real estate and the Los Angeles District Council of the Urban Land Institute, brought together a panel of experts to discuss the Initiative’s potential impact.  Key stakeholders included private developers, affordable housing developers, neighborhood associations, labor, transit-oriented development advocates, elected officials, planning professionals, and urban designers.  The forum will focus heavily on the underlying issues raised by the Initiative, for example the state of the planning process in the City of Los Angeles, and on creating a viable path forward.  The forum will also explore related topics such as the Build Better LA affordable housing ballot measure, and the recent call by Mayor Eric Garcetti and several council members to have the City’s 35 “community plans” revised by 2026, which would set the allowable size and density of development projects in neighborhoods throughout the City.

SPEAKERS

• David Abel (MODERATOR) Publisher & Editor-In-Chief, The Planning Report
• Dana Cuff, Director, cityLAB & Professor, UCLA AUD and UCLA Luskin School, Urban Planning
• Gail Goldberg, Executive Director, ULI Los Angeles
• Rusty Hicks, Executive Secretary-Treasurer, LA County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO
• Mott Smith, Co-founder & Principal, Civic Enterprise
• Jill Stewart, Campaign Director, Coalition to Preserve LA
• Zev Yaroslavsky, Director, LA Initiative, UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs
• Jonathan M. Zasloff, Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law

 
VIEW THE FLICKR PHOTO GALLERY

 

WATCH THE FORUM VIDEOS

 

 

Exclusively Sponsored By

Bisnow: "3 Biggest Ways To Boost Affordable Housing In LA"

"LA, like much of the nation, is struggling with affordable housing. To afford the purchase of a median-priced home in LA, the average household would require a 53% raise, according to Paul Habibi, a professor at UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate, who says this situation threatens the economic vitality of the entire state. Here are three ways he says we can help..."

[Bisnow 8/13/15]

LA Times Op-Ed: "Easing LA's Housing Crunch"

"Los Angeles is stuck in a housing crisis with little hope for an easy escape. The standard definition of “affordable” is shelter that costs no more than 30% of a household's gross income; anything higher cuts severely into other types of consumption. Using that metric, to afford the median-priced home, the median household would require a staggering 52% raise, to $96,000 a year from $63,000. A more modest 14% raise would enable that family to rent the median-priced apartment. With housing costs rising faster than incomes, we are likely to retain our title as the least affordable city in the United States for years to come..."

[LA Times Opinion/Op-Ed 8/10/15]