My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Ordinance 4101-25
>
Ordinances
>
Ordinance 4101-25
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/24/2025 3:28:15 PM
Creation date
6/24/2025 3:16:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Ordinances
Ordinance Number
4101-25
Date
6/18/2025
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
429
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Download electronic document
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />Category 2: For official use only / disclosure permissible by law. <br /> <br />Sources: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 15C) & US HUD, 2015-2019 <br />Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 14B) <br />Chart 4A (2015-2019) shows a mismatch between who lives—and who needs homes—in Everett and the <br />supply of rental units priced to match those household incomes. By income band it shows: <br />• Lowest-income renters (<30 % AMI) face the worst squeeze. There are roughly 7,135 renter <br />households earning under 30 % of Area Median Income, but only 3,170 rental units affordable at <br />that level. That’s a shortiall of 3,965 homes, meaning many of those lowest-income families <br />must pay far more than they can afford or live out of reach of the city. <br />• Moderate-income renters (30–50 % AMI) actually enjoy a small surplus: about 5,590 households <br />versus 10,625 units priced for that bracket, leaving 4,660 extra homes. This suggests that <br />moderate-income supply outpaces local demand, possibly because some of those units are <br />newly built workforce apartments or smaller market-rate complexes. <br />• Middle-income renters (50–80 % AMI) also see a surplus—3,730 households against 8,390 <br />affordable units, a 4,660-unit cushion—indicatfng strong development at this price point. <br />• Higher-income renters (>80 % AMI) swing back into shortage territory: 6,340 renter households <br />versus only 1,555 lower-burden units, a 4,785-unit deficit. In other words, there simply aren’t <br />enough “market-rate” rentals under 80 % of income for tenants who earn the most. <br /> <br />Overall, Chart 4 underscores a classic “hourglass” affordability profile where the lowest-income <br />households and the relatfvely aftfuent both struggle to find units at their price point, while the mid- <br />7,135 <br />5,590 <br />3,730 <br />6,340 <br />3,170 <br />10,625 <br />8,390 <br />1,555 <br />0 <br />2,000 <br />4,000 <br />6,000 <br />8,000 <br />10,000 <br />12,000 <br /><30% AMI 30-50% AMI 50-80% AMI >80% AMI <br />Ho <br />u <br />s <br />i <br />n <br />g <br /> <br />U <br />n <br />i <br />t <br />s <br />Chart 4A: Renter households by income compared to rental <br />units by affordability, 5-Year Average (2015-2019) <br />Households at Income Level Rental Housing Units Affordable to Income Level <br />Shortfall: <br />-3,965 units <br />Shortfall: <br />-4,785 units <br />Surplus: <br />4,660 units <br />Surplus: <br />5,035 units
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.