Vestcor planning infill project in Brooklyn

[fieldafm]

I figure someone has to work in all these bars, retail stores, markets, restaurants, hotels, etc. that everyone wants to see open in downtown. Those workers won't be able to afford luxury apartment rental rates and condo prices. Overall, given the struggle in some cities in regards to out-of-control housing prices, I think accommodating Vestcor's affordable housing projects into the downtown development mix is one of the better things the DIA has done recently.

To add to this... the core's 'affordable housing' stock was brazenly and unapologetically torn down (LaVilla in the 90's and Brooklyn throughout the 80's and 90's) decades ago. Vestcor's affordable/workforce housing multifamily developments are the first of their kind that can actually help re-populate the urban core with housing stock suitable for a variety of income levels... which was a critical lynchpin during downtown's boom years.

The reason cities like Seattle, San Francisco, etc are requiring developers to set aside a portion of their market rate developments for affordable housing... is because 98% of their multifamily new starts are 100% market rate rentals- meaning people not earning well above the area's median income are being squeezed out of the cities they want to live in. There are real affordability issues at play in those cities. The Starbucks barista working at the Twitter headquarters in SoMa is likely living well north of I-580 in Oakland, and likely rooming with three other people in a 2 bedroom apartment... and probably waiting tables at night to help pay for the rent.

Of the seven multifamily developments that have broken ground on the Southbank and Northbank since 2014, all but two have been a dedicated affordable housing project or have had a portion of their units dedicated to workforce housing.

Frankly, the DIA and Vestcor deserve praise in these efforts.

Or tell Vestcore that 25% of their housing can't have income restrictions.

Under that scenario, Vestcor would not qualify for the federal subsidy programs that allow them to build these projects. Affordable housing isn't necessarily affordable to build. Federal and State subsidies are needed to fill in the financial gaps that allow these projects to come to market.

[vicupstate]

The problem in urban cores is the middle market never has anywhere to go. There are projects like Vestcor's that fill the affordable niche to some degree and the high priced places are built by the market. The people that make between $50-100K don't have many options especially once an area starts to heat up.     

[thelakelander]

I don't know if that's Vesctor's problem but anyone bringing home $50 to $100k a year in Jax shouldn't worry about being priced out here.

[Kerry]

Relying on government subsidies for maintenance has never worked.  Not for roads, not for bridges, not for waste water treatment plants, and sure not for housing.  I know these aren't low income housing but the fact is maintenance costs the same be it workforce housing or luxury housing and if these properties can't generate their own maintence income all we are doing is having the private sector build the same failed public housing that has failed repeatedly.

[vicupstate]

I don't know if that's Vesctor's problem but anyone bringing home $50 to $100k a year in Jax shouldn't worry about being priced out here.

The city as a whole sure. But there isn't much in the DT area that serves that price range. In cities where the DT urban core is even further along, such a person would be completed priced out of the market.   

[thelakelander]

Assuming the individual's rent isn't exceeding 25% of their monthly gross income, that puts this rent range anywhere from $1,042 to $2,083 per month. Someone at 50k may find it difficult for luxury living but at $100k, you can afford most of what DT Jax has to offer. At $50k, you're better off searching for missing middle housing, which will put you in the surrounding neighborhoods or in Vestcor's workforce housing category.

[acme54321]

The problem in urban cores is the middle market never has anywhere to go. There are projects like Vestcor's that fill the affordable niche to some degree and the high priced places are built by the market. The people that make between $50-100K don't have many options especially once an area starts to heat up.   

Huh?  Kid in my office making like $40k lives in the Carling.  Doesn't seem to be an issue for finding housing DT if you make $50-100k.  In fact I bet anyone in that income bracket could get something anywhere DT.

[jagsonville]

Vestcor is a pioneer in Brooklyn and I anticipate market rate apartments coming next with perhaps a mixed use element. Now if we can get the city to issue rfp's for all their dormant properties we will really see some movement.

[Kerry]

If you earn $50k you make too much to live any of Vestcor's properties.

[Kerry]

Aren't 220 Riverside and Brooklyn Riverside income restricted? Either you make enough to afford them or you won't be approved to live in them. Also, the Vestcor projects are being made feasible through a federal program that incentives the construction of affordable housing. The city has no real say over changing the parameters of that program's requirements.

If it was up to me 10% of 220 Riverside would be set aside for workforce housing also.  I don't know how other cities are doing it but they are.

[thelakelander]

If you earn $50k you make too much to live any of Vestcor's properties.

The cap at Vestcor's proposed Brooklyn project is $69k. I believe the Lofts at Jefferson Station also include a percentage of workforce housing units. You can also earn $50k and stay at the Carling and 11 East.  The only two projects where the cap is well below $50k is Lofts at LaVilla and Lofts at Monroe.

[thelakelander]

Aren't 220 Riverside and Brooklyn Riverside income restricted? Either you make enough to afford them or you won't be approved to live in them. Also, the Vestcor projects are being made feasible through a federal program that incentives the construction of affordable housing. The city has no real say over changing the parameters of that program's requirements.

If it was up to me 10% of 220 Riverside would be set aside for workforce housing also.  I don't know how other cities are doing it but they are.

Jax has been doing it too recently. In addition to Vestcor's latest two developments, the project behind Tidbits also includes a percentage of workforce housing units.

[fieldafm]

Aren't 220 Riverside and Brooklyn Riverside income restricted? Either you make enough to afford them or you won't be approved to live in them. Also, the Vestcor projects are being made feasible through a federal program that incentives the construction of affordable housing. The city has no real say over changing the parameters of that program's requirements.

If it was up to me 10% of 220 Riverside would be set aside for workforce housing also.  I don't know how other cities are doing it but they are.

If the developer was required to do that, then your rent inside 220 Riverside would likely increase by 30-35%. I can't see how those apartments would be desirable at that price point.

I think people have a fundamental misunderstanding of how expensive it has gotten to build multifamily developments in today's market.  Just a few years ago, construction costs locally of $225-$250/square foot would have been considered high. It's not uncommon now to see construction costs locally eclipsing $300/square foot. An ever-tightening labor market along with rising costs of construction materials (particularly exacerbated by Trump's tariffs on Candadian lumber) has made affordable housing extremely unaffordable to build. Carving out a portion of a market-rate apartment building to include workforce housing without subsidies would simply not work. In a city like San Francisco, the developer can make it work because they can easily increase the rents across the entire project to make up for the lost rent from the workforce units as elasticity of housing prices are so out of whack... however recent new starts in places like Houston and Seattle are starting to struggle to lease up their buildings. Housing affordability issues are really starting to rear an ugly head, and a day of reckoning is coming soon.

[Gators312]

Aren't 220 Riverside and Brooklyn Riverside income restricted? Either you make enough to afford them or you won't be approved to live in them. Also, the Vestcor projects are being made feasible through a federal program that incentives the construction of affordable housing. The city has no real say over changing the parameters of that program's requirements.

If it was up to me 10% of 220 Riverside would be set aside for workforce housing also.  I don't know how other cities are doing it but they are.

If the developer was required to do that, then your rent inside 220 Riverside would likely increase by 30-35%. I can't see how those apartments would be desirable at that price point.

I think people have a fundamental misunderstanding of how expensive it has gotten to build multifamily developments in today's market.  Just a few years ago, construction costs locally of $225-$250/square foot would have been considered high. It's not uncommon now to see construction costs locally eclipsing $300/square foot. An ever-tightening labor market along with rising costs of construction materials (particularly exacerbated by Trump's tariffs on Candadian lumber) has made affordable housing extremely unaffordable to build. Carving out a portion of a market-rate apartment building to include workforce housing without subsidies would simply not work. In a city like San Francisco, the developer can make it work because they can easily increase the rents across the entire project to make up for the lost rent from the workforce units as elasticity of housing prices are so out of whack... however recent new starts in places like Houston and Seattle are starting to struggle to lease up their buildings. Housing affordability issues are really starting to rear an ugly head, and a day of reckoning is coming soon.

Vestcor doesn't really need a pat on the back for doing these developments.  The Federal Tax credits make these projects well worth the efforts.  Additionally, it seems that Vestcor is winning most of the competitive 9% credits (any developer can get 4% LIHTC for building affordable units) from the Florida Housing Finance Corp for our area.  Some believe that the FHFC process is rigged, and Vestcor's recent wins will fuel that chatter.  Regardless they are good projects for our city.

Major cities like NY and DC have Inclusionary Zoning programs, which are zoning laws that require any new development or major rehab to set aside a % of units for affordable tenants.  These affordable housing programs help augment Federal efforts without cost to taxpayers.  This doesn't solve the dearth of affordable housing in those cities, but it is a good piece to solving the entire puzzle.

Mike - why are these new starts struggling to lease up?  Bad proforma from the developers?  If the rent is "too damn high" for anyone to afford why would they build it?   

[MusicMan]

"The cap at Vestcor's proposed Brooklyn project is $69k. I believe the Lofts at Jefferson Station also include a percentage of workforce housing units. You can also earn $50k and stay at the Carling and 11 East.  The only two projects where the cap is well below $50k is Lofts at LaVilla and Lofts at Monroe."

Are they asking for your tax returns with each application?  How are they verifying your income?

Also, $300 per square foot to build multi family? Does that include the cost of the real estate? It must.  A very experienced local builder I spoke with recently said he can build a nice single family home for $80 per square foot. HIS COSTS.  How can multi family be so much more expensive, don't economies of scale kick in at some point?