Trends in Somerville: Housing Technical Report September 2009
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone City of Somerville Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Table of Contents Technical Report #4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction Page 4-ii
Housing Stock Page 4-1
Housing Tenure and Occupancy Page 4-16
Housing Prices Page 4-30
Housing Pressures Page 4-42
Public Support for Housing Page 4-58
______
September 2009 Page 4-i Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Report Introduction Technical Report #4
REPORT INTRODUCTION Somerville has not experienced a surge in homeownership during the last twenty years. Somerville’s housing stock is constantly changing. While the City’s • Since 2000, Somerville has experienced far greater rates of residential neighborhoods were largely built out by 1920, condominium activity (conversion of rental apartments to redevelopment of commercial, industrial and institutional lands has ownership condominiums, along with new construction of created new housing opportunities and challenges for the condo projects) than neighboring cities have. community. Even in Somerville’s established neighborhoods, • Like the rest of the metropolitan region, Somerville has profound shifts in household and family composition have occurred, experienced dramatic increases to housing prices since 2000. altering historical patterns of occupancy within residential units. Interestingly, the current recession has affected Somerville in Certain housing trends mirror changes observed at the national, state different ways than neighboring cities. and regional scales, while in other aspects Somerville has changed in • To date, the national foreclosure crisis has not impacted ways that are different even from immediate neighbors such as Somerville as acutely as many neighboring communities. Boston and Cambridge. However, foreclosures are on the rise, and mortgage lending data suggest that hundreds of Somerville households could be This report was prepared by the Mayor’s Office of Strategic Planning at-risk in coming years. and Community Development (OSPCD) in order to establish a solid • foundation of data from which to inform future policy decisions. While Somerville’s chronically homeless population appears Additionally, with the 2010 federal Census approaching, an to have decreased in recent years, the frequency of family understanding of previous housing trends will be critical to ensure an homelessness is increasing. accurate count of Somerville’s residents. Key findings of the report • Public support for housing in Somerville is strong, and the include the following: City has a large and diverse inventory of subsidized housing. Even so, demand for affordable housing continues to exceed • Two-thirds of Somerville’s housing units are located in small supply, challenging the City and its partners in the private, multifamily dwellings (two-, three- and four-family); no other public and nonprofit sectors. community in the region is so heavily weighted toward small multifamily structures. The Housing Trends report is divided into five subject sections. • Consistent with national and state trends, household and They are: family sizes have decreased significantly since 1950. This
trend suggests that Somerville’s housing stock is being 1. Housing Stock occupied by fewer residents than in previous generations. 2. Housing Tenure and Occupancy • Like most other urban communities, Somerville is a city of 3. Housing Prices renters, with approximately two-thirds of housing units 4. Housing Pressures renter-occupied. Unlike many urban communities, 5. Public Support for Housing ______
September 2009 Page 4-ii Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Report Introduction Technical Report #4
Data Sources and Methodology: Where time-series data is presented in this report, rigorous quality- assurance work has been conducted to standardize data. A primary data source for this report is the US Census. Census data allow consistent analyses of housing trends in Somerville as far back • All historical monetary values have been adjusted for inflation as 1880 (the date of the first decennial Census following Somerville’s to 2009 US dollars. incorporation as a city in 1872). The 2000 Census provides housing • Real estate sales data have been cleaned to eliminate “non- data that are extremely rich in detail; however, significant limitations arms-length deals” and emphasize fair market transactions. must be acknowledged:
1. The most complete Census data currently available was collected in 2000, and may not accurately reflect conditions Comparison with Other Jurisdictions: on the ground in 2009. 2. Annual estimates published by the Census Bureau since 2000 To provide context for Somerville’s housing changes, this report uses (the “American Community Survey”) offer significantly less a number of comparable statistics, including data at the national, detail and less accuracy than the decennial Census. The state, metropolitan and local scales. Most analyses provide data for margin of error for many of these datasets is very high. cities and towns that border Somerville, as well as several other 3. The Census is prone to undercounting specific groups of communities in the immediate vicinity whose historical development persons: low-income persons, young adults, non-English patterns and demographic profiles are relatively comparable to speakers, recent immigrants, and persons “doubled up” in Somerville’s: housing units. • Arlington A second major data source is the Somerville Assessing Department. • Boston Assessor’s data provide detailed information on real property, • Cambridge including structure type and condition, construction and • Chelsea rehabilitation activity, ownership characteristics, and property sales. • Everett Additional sources include federal and state agencies, primarily the • Malden US Department of Housing & Urban Development; and the • Medford Massachusetts Department of Housing & Community Development. The Greater Boston Housing Report Card (an annually-published collaboration between Northeastern University and the Boston Foundation) provides excellent real estate data for neighboring cities and towns. Data collected and published by local entities in the nonprofit, academic and private sectors are also included.
______
September 2009 Page 4-iii Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Report Introduction Technical Report #4
A Note on Demographic Mapping: To enhance the readability of the Block Group maps, reference points such as streets and squares are not shown. Please see Reference Map 1 on the following page for an overlay of Block The US Census Bureau collects demographic data by household, but Group boundaries with the city’s street grid and major commercial aggregates the data to larger units before publication in order to squares. maintain respondents’ privacy. The most detailed data are generally published by “Block Group” (clusters of city blocks, generally containing roughly 1,000 residents). In 2000, the Census Bureau divided Somerville into 67 Block Groups, with total Block Group populations ranging from 425 residents to over 2,700.
Block Group boundaries change from Census to Census. For example, the 1990 federal Census divided Somerville into 76 Block Groups. These administrative changes reflect the Census Bureau’s best understanding of conditions on the ground, and are often informed by recommendations from local governments. A critical finding of this report is that Census Block Group “3501001” (Assembly Square and The States neighborhood of East Somerville) should be subdivided into two new Block Groups for the 2010 Census. The Assembly Square portion of Block Group 3501001 (north of Interstate 93) currently has no residential land uses, while The States neighborhood is one of the city’s oldest and most densely populated residential and mixed-use districts.
All of the maps included in this report show Block Group 3501001 divided along Interstate 93. The demographic information recorded by the Census Bureau for the Block Group is attributed to the southern portion to enhance its accuracy. This reallocation of data is critical to prevent any skewing of the demographic profile for these two neighborhoods. Futhermore, as the City implements its redevelopmment plans for Assembly Square, an accurate record of base conditions will be essential going forward.
______
September 2009 Page 4-iv )" Reference Map 1: Census Block Groups (2000) Medford Square Source = US Census Block Group Boundaries *Assembly Square Streets Block Group split for spatial accuracy Assembly Square Block Group ¯
M E D F O R D
t
S E V E R E T T h
t
r o s t i c R i N y v N M e r O P o w T d e r H G o u s e B N l v d Ball
I Teele Square I t L n
Square )" M J a S t R " E ) )" a y D F O Magoun q u e
B r o a d w R e e A D s r S l v Assembly v Square t s p t A A H a Square
o e )" m g t l e w e e l a l l o T n o l 9 d C l 3 S i M t e C W d A f o M )" r d N t B r B H i o a d w g S S a h l y O t
R a t M Davis n d t l A S I T v S D l t Square s c )" e S S G E l s P e o l a G t w a r E l n m O S t r r i Sullivan S o l S t C r B t L H k r n i g h )" a Square l a n n a e d A a v t r d C Gilman h Porter )" e F Square St C n S u m to Square m e r t ng S t S i I sh t a n H u W n n l i e a g r
W S o m h B e r v i l l e A v w e l )" a t t y S R ton ing Union d sh Wa Square B e a c Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone o n Lechmere S " Office of Strategic Planning t G E ) Harvard B R I D and Community Development C A M Square )" Inman Page v )" Square Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
HOUSING STOCK An aging housing stock has characteristics both positive and negative for a city. Older houses require more upkeep. Their utility and water 1. The majority of housing stock in Somerville was built in the systems are generally less efficient than the systems in newer units, early 20th century, and the number of housing units has and structural damage is more difficult and expensive to repair. On remained essentially constant since 1940. At its peak the other hand, many of the materials used in turn of the century population, Somerville housed over 100,000 residents in more construction are of higher quality than those used today. Most or less the same housing stock that it has today. significantly, the architecture and design of older homes offers more character and a historical feel that is valuable both to the owner, the The US Census Bureau defines a housing unit as “a house, an neighborhood and the City as a whole. apartment, a mobile home or trailer, a group of rooms, or a single room that is occupied or intended for occupancy as a separate living Of the 32,000 housing units reported by the 2000 US Census, 64% quarters”. The 2000 Census reported that Somerville had 32,477 (20,744 units) were constructed prior to 1940. The discrepancy total housing units. As illustrated in Figure 1, the City’s last major between that number and the 27,331 units reported by the 1940 spike in housing growth occurred between 1910 and 1920, when a Census reflects demolition of older homes through the years, construction boom resulted in a net change of 10,514 units (87%). particularly during construction of Interstate 93 (1967) and the proposed (but never constructed) Inner Belt Expressway (1950). Figure 1: Somerville Housing Stock Change, 1880-2000
40,000 Figure 2: Somerville Housing Units by Year Built, 2000 35,000 1939 and earlier 1940-59 1960-69 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 30,000 32,477 30,942 31,786 25,000 28,892 29,219 29,757 27,331 20,774 5,756 2,102 1,932 1,474 469 25,442 20,000 Source: US Census 22,653 15,000 10,000 Total HousingTotal Units 4,106 12,139 5,000 10,762 Figure 3: Somerville Housing Units by Year Built, 2000 6,542 0 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 1940-1959 Source: US Census 18% Remarkably, it took eighty years for Somerville to gain its next 10,000 6% 1960-1969 housing units. Since 1940, Somerville’s housing stock has exhibited 1939 and earlier slow and consistent growth. The overall change from 1940 to 2000 6% was only 5,146 units (+19%). During this period, Somerville’s 64% 1970-1979 population decreased from 102,177 (1940) to 77,478 (2000), 5% 1980-1989 suggesting that the number of residents per housing unit has also 1% decreased. (For a detailed discussion of household size and 1990-1999 occupancy data, see Section 2 of this report). Source: US Census ______
September 2009 Page 4-1 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
Somerville’s high proportion of older housing units is unique among 2. Central and West Somerville have the City’s greatest neighboring cities and towns. No other community in the urban core concentration of residential structures built before 1940. had greater than 60% of its housing stock built prior to 1940. According to 2000 Census data, Everett (59%) and Medford (58%) Although Somerville’s residential neighborhoods were largely built were the most comparable to Somerville. As illustrated in Figure 5, out by 1940, certain neighborhoods are characterized by particularly the housing stock in Arlington (49%) and Chelsea (42%) were the high concentrations of older housing stock. Whereas 64% of least comparable among Somerville’s neighbors. Somerville’s residential structures were built prior to 1940, more than 75% of the housing stock was built prior to 1940 in large areas of Figure 4: Housing Units in Structures Built Prior to 1940 Central and West Somerville. Number of Units Percent of Total Units Boston 134,707 53% As illustrated in Map 1, only two Census Block Groups in East Cambridge 25,115 56% Somerville exceeds the 75% threshold. The Block Group containing Somerville 20,774 64% The States neighborhood (north of Broadway, east of the McGrath Highway and west of Lincoln Street) had the City’s highest Medford 13,141 58% concentration of housing units located in structures built prior to Malden 12,174 56% 1940 (92%). It should be noted that this neighborhood experienced Arlington 9,554 49% demolition of numerous homes during the construction of Interstate Everett 9,322 59% 93. This suggests that the neighborhood could have been even more Chelsea 5,216 42% heavily weighted toward older housing stock. Source: US Census
Neighborhoods with particularly low frequencies of older housing Figure 5: Housing Units in Structures Built Prior to 1940 stock tend to contain large apartment complexes built in the postwar Somerville era. Census Block Groups in Clarendon Hill (14%) and Cobble
Everett Hill/Brickbottom (16%) have a disproportionate number of units located in the Clarendon Hill Towers and Cobble Hill Apartments, Medford respectively, skewing their percentages. Neighborhoods such as Ten Cambridge Hills/Mystic Avenue (340 units built prior to 1940, or 37% of all Malden units) and Prospect Hill (367 units, or 45%) include large apartment
Boston complexes, but also include large areas of older housing stock.
Arlington
Chelsea
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Percent of Housing Units Built in 1939 or Earlier Source: US Census ______
September 2009 Page 4-2 Map 1: Housing Units Built Prior to 1940
< 30% of units Source = US Census
30% - 45% of units Data presented by Block Group 45% - 60% of units Labels indicate 339 60% - 75% of units absolute unit count >75% of units *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
183 179 347
361 269 353 337 95 356 340 192 300 0 288 421 382 253 450 264 390
490 556 283 216 301 317 413 191 202 232 437 426 369 306 339 194 269 142 307 213 392 478 243 206 322 244 416 257 626 638 373 164 173 238 367 234 Citywide average = 64% 220 built prior to 1940 (20,774 units) 143 177 511 57 Range = 14% to 92% 137 330 435 447
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 303 311 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-3 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
3. Between 1990 and 2000, Somerville’s housing growth was Figure 7: Change in Housing Stock, 1990-2000 consistent with the regional growth rate, but significantly lower than growth rates for several neighboring cities. Chelsea
During the 1990’s, Somerville experienced a net gain of 691 housing Cambridge units (2.2%). This rate of change was consistent with the regional Everett average for the same period (2.5%), but lagged far behind the statewide average (6%). Somerville’s neighboring cities exhibited of Somerville wide range of housing growth during that period. Malden
As illustrated in Figure 6, Cambridge, Boston and Chelsea all Boston experienced greater absolute growth in their housing stock than Medford Somerville did. In terms of percentage growth, the clear leaders in were Chelsea and Cambridge. Chelsea added 763 units of housing Arlington during the 1990’s (6.6%), while Cambridge added 2,746 units (6.5%). -1%0%1%2%3%4%5%6%7% Growth rates for Everett (3.2%) and Malden (1.8%) were most Percent Change in Total Housing Units, 1990-2000 comparable to Somerville’s. Since Boston’s housing stock is so large Source: US Census to begin with, the addition of 1,072 units yields a modest 0.2% increase for the decade. Medford experienced slow growth, whether Since 2000, infill and redevelopment projects have continued to add measured by absolute change (37 units) or percentage change (0.2%). to Somerville’s housing stock. Construction records maintained by Arlington experienced a net loss of housing units during the 1990's. the City’s Inspection Services Division indicate that approximately 588 residential units have been constructed since 2000. As illustrated Figure 6: Change in Housing Stock, 1990-2000 in Figure 8, this new construction represents an increase of 2.6% from 2000. Large projects during this period include the Visiting Absolute Change Percent Change Nurse Association developments at Capen Court (99 units) and Cambridge 2,746 6.5% Lowell Street (97 units), the Union Place condominiums (97 units) Boston 1,072 0.4% and the Somerville Community Corporation developments at St. Chelsea 763 6.6% Polycarp’s (64 units) and Linden Street (42 units). Somerville 691 2.2% Everett 492 3.2% Figure 8: Change in Housing Stock, 2000-2009 Malden 407 1.8% Absolute Change Percent Change Medford 37 0.2% Somerville 854 2.6% Arlington (10) (0.1%) Source: City of Somerville Source: US Census ______
September 2009 Page 4-4 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
4. The number of housing units per acre of land in Somerville is Figure 10: Housing Unit per Gross Land Area, 2000 among the highest in the urban core. Somerville With 32,477 housing units occupying a gross land area of only 4.1 square miles (2,649 acres), Somerville’s overall housing density is Cambridge calculated at 7,921 units per square mile (12.3 units per acre). As Chelsea illustrated in Figure 9, data from the 2000 US Census show that Somerville had the highest overall housing density (total housing Boston units divided by gross land area) among communities in the Malden metropolitan core. Everett Figure 9: Housing Units per Gross Land Area, 2000 Arlington Housing Land Area, Land Area, Units per Medford Units, 2000 Square Miles Acres Acre Somerville 32,477 4.1 2,649 12.3 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Housing Units per Gross Acre of Land Area Source: US Census Cambridge 44,725 7.2 4,587 9.8 Chelsea 12,337 2.2 1,394 8.9 A more nuanced understanding of residential development can be Boston 251,935 48.1 30,788 8.2 gained by analyzing the number of housing units occupying a Malden 23,634 5.1 3,247 7.3 community’s residential land area. This metric can eliminate biases Everett 15,908 3.4 2,205 7.2 created by the presence of large areas of non-residential land use, Arlington 19,411 5.4 3,481 5.6 such as transportation infrastructure, industrial parks, institutional Medford 22,687 8.5 5,426 4.2 campuses and open space. Source: US Census According to data published by the Massachusetts Office of Among neighboring cities and towns, only Cambridge (9.8 units per Geographic and Environmental Information (MassGIS), Somerville gross acre of land area) approaches Somerville’s value. By this had approximately 1,573 acres of residential land in 2000. This value metric, Chelsea (8.9 units per acre) and Boston (8.2 units per acre) yields a calculation of 20.7 housing units per acre of residential land. have slightly lower values. Malden (7.3 units per acre) and Everett (7.2 units per acre) are very similar, while values for Arlington (5.6 By this metric, Cambridge (26.3) and Chelsea (23.4) exhibited higher units per acre) and Medford (4.2 units per acre) are substantially density values than Somerville (Figure 11). Boston was most lower. comparable to Somerville, with 19.7 housing units per residential acre
of land area, while Medford (9.5 units per residential acre) and
______
September 2009 Page 4-5 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
Arlington (9.5 units per residential acre) still trailed the other 5. In Somerville’s neighborhoods, housing units per gross land communities. area generally ranges between 10 and 25 units per acre. Housing units per residential acre of land generally range Figure 11: Housing Units Per Residential Land Area, 2000 between 20 and 50 units per acre.
Housing Residential Units per According to data from the 2000 US Census, Somerville has an Units, 2000 Acres, 2000 Residential Acre average of roughly 12 housing units per gross acre of land area. An Cambridge 44,725 1,698 26.3 analysis of Census Block Group data shows that this density is not Chelsea 12,337 527 23.4 equally distributed around the City. Somerville’s most intensely Somerville 32,477 1,573 20.7 developed residential areas include the Clarendon Hill Towers (43 Boston 251,935 12,821 19.7 units per gross acre), Inman Square along Beacon Street (24 units per Everett 15,908 1,019 15.6 gross acre) and East Somerville east of Florence Street between Malden 23,634 1,950 12.1 Perkins Street and Washington Street (23 units per gross acre). As Medford 22,687 2,395 9.5 illustrated in Map 2, other Somerville neighborhoods with values Arlington 19,411 2,445 7.9 above 20 units per gross acre include Winter Hill north of Broadway, Source: US Census, MassGIS Spring Hill around Cedar Street, and Gilman Square.
Map 3 illustrates the number of housing units per residential acre of Figure 12: Housing Units per Residential Land Area, 2000 land area. This analysis provides a more detailed representation of Cambridge the relative intensity of residential development in Somerville’s neighborhoods. Whereas citywide, there are roughly 21 housing units Chelsea per residential acre of land area, most Census Block Groups have Somerville between 20 and 50 units per residential acre. The Clarendon Hill Towers (60 units per residential acre) and Inman Square (43 units per Boston residential acre) remain the clear leaders. Everett Obvious differences between the two metrics are visible along Malden Somerville Avenue west of Union Square, in Spring Hill and around
Medford Teele Square. As illustrated in Map 2, three Block Groups along Somerville Avenue have fewer than 15 units per gross acre of land, Arlington but Map 3 indicates that these Block Groups have between 30 and 40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 units per residential acre of land. The opposite trend can be seen in Housing Units per Residential Acre of Land Area Spring Hill and around Teele Square, where Block Groups that Source: US Census, MassGIS appear to have higher values in Map 2 have lower values in Map 3.
______
September 2009 Page 4-6 Map 2: Housing Units Per Gross Acre of Land, 2000
< 10 units per gross acre of land area Source = US Census
10 - 15 units per gross acre of land area Data presented by Block Group 15 - 20 units per gross acre of land area Labels indicate 455 20 - 25 units per gross acre of land area absolute unit count > 25 units per acre of gross land area *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
394 237 463
468 387 489 539 664 466 915 404 377 0 382 756 452 376 578 363 772
714 626 473 332 437 422 449 281 290 364 660 590 519 472 574 254 345 230 431 386 539 771 436 402 511 511 534 532 868 889 579 262 295 374 819 357 Citywide = 12.4 units per 351 gross acre of land area 327 239 742 336 Range = 0 to 43 units per acre 303 479 636 615
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 512 472 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-7 Map 3: Housing Units per Residential Acre of Land, 2000
< 20 units per residential acre of land area Source = US Census, MassGIS 20 - 30 units per residential acre of land area Data presented 30 - 40 units per residential acre of land area by Block Group 40 - 50 units per residential acre of land area Labels indicate 455 absolute unit count
> 50 units per residential acre of land area *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
394 237 463
468 387 489 539 664 466 915 404 377 0 382 756 452 376 578 363 772
714 626 473 332 437 422 449 281 290 364 660 590 519 472 574 254 345 230 431 386 539 771 436 402 511 511 534 532 868 889 579 262 295 374 819 357 Citywide = 20.7 units per 351 residential acre of land area 327 239 742 336 Range = 6 to 60 units per acre 303 479 636 615
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 512 472 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-8 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
6. Somerville’s housing stock is heavily weighted towards small Somerville’s proportion of small multifamily housing structures multifamily structures, and has a higher percentage of units is higher than all neighboring communities. According to the 2000 located in 2-4 family structures than neighboring cities have. Census, Cambridge (35%), Boston (41%), and Medford (44%) all had much lower frequencies of units in two-, three- and four- According to the 2000 Census, nearly two-thirds of Somerville’s family structures. Only Everett (61%) and Chelsea (55%) housing units were located in structures with between two and four approached Somerville’s percentage of units in small multifamily units. As illustrated in Figure 13, over 11,000 units were located in structures. two family structures, and over 9,000 units were located in three- and four-family structures. Together, these small multifamily structures account for approximately 64% of Somerville’s total housing stock. Figure 15: Housing Units by Structure Type, 2000
Figure 13: Somerville Housing Units by Structure Type, 2000 1 Unit 2 Units 3-4 Units 5-9 Units 10+ Units 1 Unit 2 Units 3-4 Units 5-9 Units 10-19 Units 20+ Units Somerville 12% 35% 29% 9% 16% 3,867 11,248 9,362 2,816 1,589 3,590 Medford 38% 35% 9% 2% 16% Source: US Census Everett 22% 34% 28% 4% 12% Arlington 43% 30% 5% 3% 19% Malden 31% 26% 13% 5% 26% Figure 14: Somerville Housing Units by Structure Type, 2000 Chelsea 12% 22% 33% 15% 23% 2 units Boston 17% 15% 26% 12% 31% Cambridge 15% 15% 20% 12% 38% 1-unit attached Source: US Census 3% 35% As illustrated in Figures 16-19, Somerville’s profile of residential 1-unit detached structure types is unique among urban core communities. Somerville 9% has an exceptionally small percentage of housing units that are in single-family structures (12%, see Figure 16), and in large apartment 11% buildings (16%, see Figure 19). None of Somerville’s neighboring 20+ units 29% 3-4 units communities share both of these characteristics. Medford exhibits a similarly low percentage of units in large apartment buildings (16%), 5% but has a much higher frequency of single-family structures (38%). 9% 10-19 units Chelsea shares a particularly low percentage of single-family structures (12%), but is more heavily weighted towards large 5-9 units Source: US Census apartment buildings (23%). ______
September 2009 Page 4-9 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
Figure 16: Housing Units in Single-Family Structures, 2000 Figure 18: Housing Units in Small Apartment Buildings, 2000
Arlington Chelsea
Medford Cambridge
Malden Boston
Everett Somerville
Boston Malden
Cambridge Everett
Chelsea Arlington
Somerville Medford
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% Percent of Housing Units in Structures with 1 Unit Percent of Housing Units in Structures with 5-9 Units Source: US Census Source: US Census
Figure 17: Housing Units in Small Multifamily Structures, 2000 Figure 19: Housing Units in Large Apartment Buildings, 2000
Somerville Cambridge Everett Boston Chelsea Malden Medford Chelsea Boston Arlington Malden Somerville Cambridge Medford Arlington Everett
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Percent of Housing Units in Structures with 2-4 Units 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Source: US Census Percent of Housing Units in Structures with 10+ Units Source: US Census ______
September 2009 Page 4-10 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
7. West Somerville has the City’s greatest concentration of two-, three- and four-family structures.
Census data at the Block Group level indicate that the frequency of small multifamily housing structures varies from neighborhood to neighborhood. West Somerville neighborhoods around Ball Square, Teele Square and Tufts University have particularly high frequencies of two-, three- and four-family structures (>80% of all housing units). As illustrated in Map 4, other Census Block Groups above the 80% threshold are scattered throughout East Somerville, Spring Hill, Ten Hills, and Inman Square.
The highest concentration of housing units in 2-4 family structures (99%) was in the West Somerville Block Group bordered by College Avenue to the east, Broadway to the south, and Packard Avenue to the west. In East Somerville, the Block Group comprising The States neighborhood was also characterized by an exceptionally high frequency of units in small multi-family housing structures (98%).
Block Groups that do not follow this trend were composed of units other than 2-4 family structures and tended to feature large apartment complexes. The statistical area comprising Inner Belt, Cobble Hill and Brickbottom had 0% of units in small multi-family structures, while the Block Group containing the Clarendon Hill Towers featured only 18% of units in 2-4 family structures. In the Ten Hills/Mystic Avenue neighborhood, the Block Group containing the Mystic Apartments had 30% of all units in small multi-family buildings.
______
September 2009 Page 4-11 Map 4: Housing Units in Two-, Three- and Four-Family Structures, 2000
0% - 20% of housing units Source = US Census
20% - 40% of housing units Data presented by Block Group 40% - 60% of housing units Labels indicate 386 60% - 80% of housing units absolute unit count 80% - 100% of housing units *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
185 218 410
416 322 478 451 118 387 268 296 315 0 317 310 375 197 525 227 541
489 469 204 244 346 228 421 177 241 289 272 401 346 311 466 152 236 172 315 231 482 354 140 329 299 285 263 221 635 375 220 179 266 181 323 186 Citywide average = 64% in small 242 126 523 multifamily structures (20,610 units) 152 0 Range = 0% to 99% 178 302 412 545
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 299 341 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-12 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
8. Similar to most neighboring communities, Somerville’s Similar to neighboring communities, Somerville’s housing stock is housing stock is heavily weighted towards one-and two heavily weighted towards one- and two-bedroom units (Figure 22). bedroom units. This trend was most pronounced in Cambridge, where 66% of all units had one or two bedrooms, although Somerville, Boston and According to the 2000 US Census, 62% of Somerville’s housing units Chelsea all exceeded the 60% threshold (Figure 23). Unlike Boston had one or two bedrooms. As illustrated in Figure 21, the percentage and Cambridge, Somerville does not have a significant number of of units with additional bedrooms was much lower. Three-bedroom studio apartments (units with zero bedrooms). units only represented 21% of the City’s housing stock, while only 14% of units had four or more bedrooms. Figure 22: Housing Units by Bedroom Count, 2000
0 Bed 1 Bed 2 Bed 3 Bed 4+ Bed Figure 20: Somerville Housing Units by Bedroom Count, 2000 Cambridge 7% 30% 36% 17% 9% O Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4+ Bedroom Boston 8% 28% 32% 21% 10% 906 8,119 9,362 6,825 4,481 Chelsea 3% 27% 35% 23% 12% Source: US Census Somerville 3% 25% 37% 21% 14% Malden 5% 25% 33% 24% 13% Figure 21: Somerville Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms, 2000 Everett 2% 22% 41% 25% 11% Arlington 2% 17% 34% 31% 16% Medford 1% 14% 37% 32% 17% 1 bedroom Source: US Census
25% 2 bedrooms Many communities in the urban core are characterized by a relative 37% lack of housing units with three or more bedrooms. As illustrated in Figure 24, this lack of larger units is particularly notable in Boston 0 bedrooms/ 3% and Cambridge. The 2000 US Census reported that 35% of studio Somerville’s housing units have 3 or more bedrooms, compared with 14% 32% for Boston and 26% for Cambridge. Medford (49%) and Arlington (47%) have a much higher frequency of units with three or 4+ bedrooms 21% more bedrooms than the other communities. It is notable that Somerville has a higher share of units with four or more bedrooms (14%) than all other communities except for Medford (17%) and 3 bedrooms Source: US Census Arlington 16%).
______
September 2009 Page 4-13 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Stock Technical Report #4
Figure 23: Housing Units with 1-2 Bedrooms, 2000 9. Central Somerville has the City’s greatest concentration of one- and two-bedroom units, while East Somerville and West Cambridge Somerville neighborhoods tend to have lower concentrations. Everett Census data at the Block Group level indicate that the frequency of Somerville small residential units varies from neighborhood to neighborhood. Chelsea While 62% of housing units citywide had one or two bedrooms as of
Boston the 2000 Census, several Somerville neighborhoods had frequencies above 80%. The single highest frequency of one- and two-bedroom Malden units (90%) occurred in the West Somerville Block Group containing Arlington the Clarendon Hill Towers.
Medford As illustrated in Map 5, there were additional concentrations of one- 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% and two-bedroom units in Cobble Hill/Brickbottom, East Somerville Percent of Housing Units with 1-2 Bedrooms Source: US Census and Spring Hill. In Cobble Hill/Bickbottom, the concentration is attributable to the presence of large apartment and condominium
complexes dominated by one- and two-bedroom units.
Figure 24: Housing Units with 3+ Bedrooms, 2000 Secondary concentrations of units with fewer bedrooms (70%-80%)
Medford were visible along Alewife Brook Parkway, in Gilman Square, and along Broadway east of Central Street. Arlington Malden Several Census Block Groups in West Somerville are notable for
Everett their low concentration of one- and two-bedroom units. One- and two-bedroom units represent less than 50% of all housing units in Chelsea three Block Groups adjacent to Powder House Circle and College Somerville Avenue. In East Somerville, Block Groups below the 50% threshold can be seen north of Gilman Square, and along McGrath Highway Boston north of Washington Street. Cambridge
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Percent of Housing Units with 3 or More Bedrooms Source: US Census
______
September 2009 Page 4-14 Map 5: Housing Units with 1-2 Bedrooms, 2000
< 50% of all units Source = US Census
50% - 60% of all units Data presented by Block Group 60% - 70% of all units Labels indicate 331 70% - 80% of all units absolute unit count 80% - 90% of all units *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
314 101 285
270 191 255 298 598 186 574 317 153 0 221 538 247 185 395 235 446
439 313 343 199 292 258 306 152 179 253 392 340 238 388 143 414 224 85 215 209 263 446 308 420 353 292 215 325 501 632 330 105 203 239 634 164 Citywide average = 62% 220 with 1-2 bedrooms (20,265 units) 224 146 507 277 Range = 37% to 90% 217 324 461 315
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 322 300 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-15 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4
HOUSING TENURE AND OCCUPANCY As illustrated in Figure 26, Census data suggest that Somerville has one of the lowest rates of homeownership in the urban core. 10. Somerville is a city of renters. Unlike the state and the According to these data, Chelsea (29% owner-occupied units) is the nation as a whole, Somerville has not experienced historic most comparable to Somerville. Several factors contribute to trends of increasing homeownership. Somerville’s low homeownership rate, but the primary cause is the City’s preponderance of multifamily housing units. Two-, three- and Federal housing policy has promoted homeownership for many four-family homes represent approximately 64% of the housing stock decades. While the national homeownership rate reached record in Somerville, whereas only 12% of housing units are single-family levels by the end of the twentieth century, Somerville’s rate has homes. (For a detailed discussion of Housing Stock, see Section 1 of remained consistently low, although still comparable to other urban this report). communities. As illustrated in Figure 25, Somerville’s homeownership rate actually declined between 1970 and 2000, from roughly 34% to roughly 31% of all occupied housing units. Figure 26: Homeownership Rate, 2000 Owner-Occupied Percent of
By 2000, less than one-third of Somerville’s housing stock was Housing Units Total Units owner-occupied, compared with roughly two-thirds nationally. Medford 12,993 58.6% Current estimates produced by the US Census Bureau’s American Arlington 11,186 57.6% Community Survey suggest that Somerville has experienced an Malden 9,962 42.2% increase in homeownership since 2000. This trend is largely Everett 6,391 40.2% attributable to the proliferation of condominium units in the City. Cambridge 13,760 32.3%
Boston 77,226 32.2% Figure 25: Homeownership Rate, 1970-2008 Somerville 9,656 30.6% Somerville Massachusetts United States Chelsea 3,440 28.9% 70% Source: US Census 65% 60% Today, Somerville’s sizeable population of students and young 55% 50% professionals serves to create a steady market for rental housing. In 45% 2000, residents aged 20-24 represented approximately 13% of 40% Occupied Somerville’s population, while 27% of residents were aged 25-34. In 35% addition, over 11,000 Somerville residents were enrolled in college or 30% 25% graduate school programs. (For a more complete discussion of age
Percentage Units that are Owner- are that Units Percentage 20% groups and student populations, see Technical Report #1, 1970 1980 1990 2000 2008* “Population Trends in Somerville”). Source: US Census, *American Community Survey
______
September 2009 Page 4-16 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4
Between 1990 and 2000, Somerville experienced a net gain of 258 Chelsea (16%, or 475 units) and Cambridge (15%, or 1,801 units) owner-occupied housing units (2.8%), from 9,398 units in 1990 to experienced the most robust growth in owner-occupancy during the 9,656 units in 2000. As illustrated in Figure 27, Somerville’s growth 1990’s, whereas Boston’s increase was slightly less (10%, or 6,672 in owner-occupied units lagged behind neighboring cities. units). Among neighboring cities, only Medford (4%, or 468 units) showed an increase comparable to Somerville’s.
Figure 27: Change in Homeownership Rate, 1990-2000 American Community Survey data suggest that Somerville has also Chelsea experienced less growth in homeownership than most neighboring Cambridge communities since 2000. As illustrated in Figure 28, owner-occupied units in Somerville increased 5.3% from 2000 to 2007. Boston Everett
Malden 11. Somerville neighborhoods with the highest homeownership rates include Ten Hills, Magoun/Albion and Pearl Steet. Arlington Medford According to the 2000 Census, the Ten Hills neighborhood north of
Somerville Interstate 93 and west of the Fellsway had Somerville’s highest homeownership rate. Of the 539 housing units in this Census Block 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% Group, 52% (273 units) were homeownership units. The second Percent Change in Owner-Occupied Units Source: US Census highest rate (49%, or 138 units) was observed in a Block Group north of Highland Avenue, east of Cedar Street and south of the Figure 28: Change in Homeownership Rate, 2000-2007 Lowell line. As illustrated in Map 6, rates above 40% were common
Chelsea in the Magoun/Albion area, between Broadway and Pearl Street along the McGrath Highway, and north of Washington Street on Cambridge either side of the McGrath Highway. Boston Particularly low homeownership rates were correlated with the Malden presence of large rental apartment complexes. The most extreme Everett case is the Block Group containing the Clarendon Hill Towers (4% Somerville homeownership, or 27 units). Just to the north, the Block Group Medford containing the Somerville Housing Authority Clarendon Hill Apartments complex had a homeownership rate of only 13% (49 Arlington units). Other Block Groups with ownership rates below 20% include 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% Percent Change in Owner-Occupied Units Ten Hills/Mystic Avenue, Walnut Street/Prospect Hill, and East Source: US Census, American Community Survey Somerville along the Charlestown line south of Perkins Street. ______
September 2009 Page 4-17 Map 6: Percentage of Housing Units that are Owner-Occupied, 2000
< 20% of occupied units Source = US Census
20% - 30% of occupied units Data presented by Block Group 30% - 40% of occupied units Labels indicate 208 40% - 50% of occupied units absolute unit count > 50% of occupied units *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
49 76 182
126 130 159 273 27 142 168 120 145 0 127 172 149 124 194 144 176
258 267 147 131 154 182 176 138 66 104 203 170 220 95 83 138 133 109 189 123 169 177 126 83 190 145 144 158 247 189 189 93 75 125 126 146 Citywide average = 31% 81 owner-occupied units (9,663 units) 79 90 190 86 Range = 4% to 52% 79 143 131 192
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 93 140 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-18 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4
12. Somerville has a relatively high rate of residential turnover, Compared to neighboring communities in the urban core, and attracts a higher percentage of new residents from Somerville’s residential turnover is relatively high. As illustrated in outside of Massachusetts than most neighboring cities. Figure 30, only Cambridge (39%) had a lower percentage of residents who had lived in the same house five years prior to the 2000 Census. The US Census provides data on respondents’ place of residence five years prior to the Census. In 2000, approximately 45% of Somerville Cambridge is also the only community for which a higher percentage residents (33,000 persons) lived in the same house as they had five of residents had lived outside of Massachusetts in 1995. Whereas years previously. As illustrated in Figure 29, 20% of Somerville 27% of Somerville residents (roughly 20,000 persons) had lived residents had lived elsewhere in Middlesex County in 1995 (15,000 outside of Massachusetts in 1995, approximately 36% of Cambridge persons). A much smaller percentage had lived in Massachusetts, but residents (35,000 persons) had lived in a different state or country at outside Middlesex County (8%, or 6,200 persons). Nearly 27% of that time. Somerville residents had previously lived in a different state (17%, or 12,500 persons)or a different county (10%, or 7,300 persons) in 1995. The percentage of residents that had lived outside the United States in 1995 is very similar (11% for Cambridge, versus 10% for Somerville). As illustrated in Figure 30, the major difference between Figure 29: Somerville Place of Residence the two cities is in the percentage of residents that had lived in a Five Years Ago, 2000 different US state in 1995. Approximately 25,000 Cambridge residents (25%) had lived elsewhere in the United States in 1995, Same House compared with 12,500 Somerville residents (17%). Different Country Figure 30: Place of Residence Five Years Ago, 2000 9.8% 44.5% Same House Different State Different Country
60%
16.8% 50%
Different State 40%
20.4% 30% 8.4% 20%
10% Same State, Same County,
Different City Percent of Population Aged Older5 and Different County 0% Source: US Census Medford Arlington Everett Malden Chelsea Boston Somerville Cambridge Source: US Census ______
September 2009 Page 4-19 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4
Although Somerville’s renter population is quite transient, the City’s 1983. Only Everett (1982) had an earlier median year of occupancy, homeowners are the least transient in the region. The Census suggesting a similarly well-established population of homeowners. provides data on the length of time a householder has lived in a Medians for Chelsea (1989), Boston (1990) and Cambridge (2000) are current residence. These data are provided in two formats: median recent enough to suggest that the homeowners in these cities are not year that householders moved into a current residence; and, number as well-established as Somerville’s homeowners. of householders who moved into a current residence during a given period of time. Both formats allow breakout by renter versus These median values can be supplemented by Census data on the homeowner households. number of householders moving in a given period. For example, although Somerville had an earlier median year of occupancy for According to Census figures from 2000, the median year that homeowners than Medford, Medford had a slightly higher percentage Somerville renters moved into their home was 1997. As illustrated in of homeowners who had moved into their current residence prior to Figure 31, this value is consistent with most neighboring cities. Only 1980 (62% vs. 60%). As illustrated in Figure 32, percentages for Medford and Everett had an earlier median year of occupancy for the Chelsea (51%), Boston (49%) and Cambridge (48%) were noticeably renter population (1996). lower. Statewide, 54% of homeowners moved into their current residence prior to 1980.
Figure 31: Median Year Householder Moved Into Unit, 2000 Figure 32: Homeowners Moving into Current Unit Prior to 1980 Owner- Renter- All Medford Occupied Occupied Households Medford 1984 1996 1992 Somerville Arlington 1986 1997 1993 Chelsea Everett 1982 1996 1994 Boston
Malden 1987 1997 1995 Cambridge
Somerville 1983 1997 1996 Everett Chelsea 1989 1997 1996 Arlington Boston 1990 1997 1996 Malden Cambridge 1991 1997 1996 Source: US Census 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Percent of Owner-Occupied Households Source: US Census, 2000 Somerville’s owner-occupant households, however, appear to have lived in their current residence for significantly longer than owner- occupants in most neighboring communities. The median year that Somerville homeowners moved into their current residence was ______
September 2009 Page 4-20 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4
Similarly, although the median year of occupancy for Somerville 13. Somerville neighborhoods with particularly high rates of renters (1997) was the same as for Boston, Cambridge, and Chelsea, residential turnover include portions of Beacon Street, Central only Cambridge had a comparable percentage of renters who had Hill, East Somerville, Spring Hill and Winter Hill. moved into their current residence between 1995 and 2000. As illustrated in Figure 33, 71% of renter households in Somerville and An analysis of Census Block Group data suggests that several Cambridge moved between 1995 and 2000. Boston’s percentage was Somerville neighborhoods experienced residential turnover between slightly lower (68%), while Medford (63%) and Everett (61%) were 1995 and 2000, higher than the citywide average (58% of all noticeably lower than other communities in the urban core. households). The single highest percentage of households that moved into their current residence between 1995 and 2005 (77%) was in the Central Hill Block Group between Central Street and Figure 33: Renters Moving into Current Unit 1995-2000 School Street, north of Berkeley Street and south of the Lowell rail Somerville right of way.
Cambridge The Winter Hill/Ten Hills Block Group north of Broadway, east of Boston Temple Street, and south of Mystic Avenue also had a particularly Malden high rate of turnover (75%). Near Inman Square, the Block Group
Chelsea bordered by Beacon Street to the west and Washington Street to the north had a turnover rate of 74%. As illustrated in Map 7, Block Arlington Groups in East Somerville and Beacon Street/Somerville Medford Avenue/Spring Hill also had turnover rates above 70%. Turnover
Everett rates between 60% and 70% were observed in large areas of Davis Square, Spring Hill, Duck Village, Prospect Hill and Inman Square. 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% Percent of Renter-Occupied Households Source: US Census, 2000 Areas with the lowest rates of residential turnover included a Block Group along Alewife Brook Parkway, north of Sterling Street and west of North Street (36%), and a Block Group on Prospect Hill, north of Washington Street and west of the McGrath Highway (37%).
______
September 2009 Page 4-21 Map 7: Residential Turnover, 1995-2000
Source = City of Somerville < 40% of all households Data presented by 40% - 50% of all households Census Block Group 50% - 60% of all households Labels indicate absolute number of 60% - 70% of all households households moving into 155 current unit 1995-2000 > 70% of all households *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
215 151 250
222 156 286 253 342 271 506 189 189 0 223 488 256 225 303 219 565
439 319 225 181 298 188 251 162 165 224 395 241 241 280 362 181 178 103 267 227 285 574 220 215 297 293 183 309 505 591 323 125 153 271 528 127 Citywide average = 58% 195 238 463 123 (18,325 households) 151 Range = 36% to 77% 195 261 295 433
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 332 249 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-22 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4
14. Somerville’s average household size has decreased Figure 35: Somerville Households by Size, 2000
significantly in recent decades, suggesting that the City’s 1-Person housing stock is being occupied by fewer residents. 2-Person Mirroring trends at the national and state levels, Somerville 3-Person experienced a substantial decrease in average household size during 4-Person the second half of the twentieth century. As illustrated in Figure 34, 5-Person the decreases were pronounced between 1950 and 1980, and have slowed somewhat since 1980. With the exception of 1990-2000, this 6-Person was also a period of decline in Somerville’s overall population. The 7 or more person
City had roughly 102,000 residents in 1950, 95,000 residents in 1960, 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 88,800 in 1970, 77,000 in 1980, and 76,000 in 1990. Percent of Total Households Source: US Census
Figure 34: Somerville Average Household Size, 1950-2000 Trends in Somerville’s average household size are influenced by the 4 age of the City’s householders. A proliferation of households headed by young adults and senior citizens is a likely factor in Somerville’s 3.5 loss of youth under age 18 in recent decades. As illustrated in Figure 3 36, households in which the primary householder was aged 25-34
2.5 accounted for more than 30% of Somerville’s total households. Approximately 17% of the City’s households were headed by a 2 householder aged 65 or older at the time of the 2000 Census. 1.5 Number of Persons per Household per of Persons Number 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Figure 36: Somerville Age of Householder, 2000 Source: US Census Number of Percent of Total
Households Households Somerville is heavily weighted towards households with one or two Age 24 or younger 3,044 9.6% persons. Of the 31,535 total households recorded in the 2000 Census, nearly 9,800 were one-person households (31%). As Age 25-34 9,525 30.2% illustrated in Figure 35, two-person households represented 33% of Age 35-44 6,114 19.4% all households (roughly 10,500 households). Only 5,300 Somerville Age 45-54 4,583 14.5% households had three members (17%), and 3,400 had four members Age 55-64 2,863 9.1% (11%). (For a more complete discussion of trends in household and Age 65-74 2,670 8.5% family size, see Technical Report #1, “Population Trends in Age 75 or older 2,756 8.7% Somerville”). Source: US Census ______
September 2009 Page 4-23 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4
The age profiles of Somerville’s householders also have implications 15. Somerville’s vacancy rate decreased between 1990 and 2000, for housing supply, demand and turnover. This is especially true of reflecting strong demand for housing in the community. the City’s owner-occupied households, since many owner-occupants of multifamily homes are also landlords. Somerville is characterized The US Census collects data on vacant housing units, sending field by a relatively large number of owner-occupied households in which staff to physically inspect all housing units that do not return Census the primary householder was aged 65 years or older at the time of the questionnaire forms. Vacant housing units are recorded, allowing 2000 Census. As illustrated in Figure 37, only Everett, Medford and long-term analyses of vacancy rates. It should be noted that the Arlington have a higher frequency of owner-occupied households Census methodology only captures units that were vacant at the time with a senior householder. of the Census field survey.
Housing literature generally suggests that a 5% vacancy rate is Figure 37: Owner-Occupants Aged 65 and Older, 2000 considered a healthy target, and that rates below 5% suggest an Everett imbalance between supply and demand that can drive housing prices Medford upward. According to the 2000 Census, Somerville had a residential Arlington vacancy rate of 2.84%. Between 1990 and 2000, vacant units in
Somerville Somerville decreased from approximately 1,500 to approximately
Chelsea 900. As illustrated in Figure 38, this drop reversed a trend of increasing vacant units between 1970 and 1990. Malden Boston Figure 38: Somerville Vacant Housing Units, 1970-2000 Cambridge 2,000 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Percent of Owner-Occupied Households with Householder Aged 65+ Source: US Census 1,500 1,467 The 2000 Census data indicates that there are nearly 3,000 owner- 1,000 1,251 occupied households in Somerville headed by a senior aged 65 or 922 older. When these householders vacate their homes, in some cases 500 756 the properties will be kept in the family, providing housing Units Housing Total opportunities for the next generation of Somerville householders. In 0 other cases, the properties will be sold on the open market, which 1970 1980 1990 2000 may increase the chances that any tenants of multifamily properties Source: US Census will be adversely affected through rent hikes or condominium Although housing demand has remained consistently strong in the conversion. urban core for many years, Somerville is noteworthy for its
______
September 2009 Page 4-24 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4 particularly low vacancy rates. As illustrated in Figure 39, 16. While Somerville’s overall vacancy rate was extremely low in Somerville’s vacancy rate has been consistently lower than the 2000, several neighborhoods had vacancy rates far greater vacancy rates for Boston and Cambridge since 1970. than the citywide average, and other neighborhoods had vacancy rates of less than 1% at the time of the Census. Figure 39: Change in Vacancy Rate, 1970-2000 Somerville Boston Cambridge As noted previously, Somerville’s overall residential vacancy rate as of 10% the 2000 Census was 2.84%. Census Block Group data show that certain parts of East Somerville, Magoun Square, Porter Square, 8% Union Square and Winter Hill had vacancy rates twice the citywide 6% average.
4% The single highest vacancy rate was recorded in the Block Group 2% north of Washington Street and east of the McGrath Highway, where
Percentage Units that are Vacant that Percentage Units 0% 18% of all housing units were reported as vacant. This data outlier is 1970 1980 1990 2000 likely attributable to two factors: construction of the 17-unit Source: US Census Sanctuary Lofts condominium project (60 Tufts Street), and demolition of several multifamily homes on Franklin Street for As illustrated in Figure 40, similar trends were present in Medford construction of the Capuano School. The loft units had been and Chelsea, although the vacancy rates for these two communities in constructed, but not yet occupied at the time of the Census field 2000 were closer to Somerville’s vacancy rate. Chelsea experienced a inspection, while the homes on Franklin Street had been vacated but particularly sharp drop in vacancy between 1990 and 2000. not yet demolished when the Census inspectors performed their field
surveys in the neighborhood. These factors would heavily skew the Figure 40: Change in Vacancy Rate, 1970-2000 vacancy data for this Census Block Group. Somerville Medford Chelsea 10% At the same time, the Block Group data suggest that several 8% neighborhoods had vacancy rates less than 1% at the time of the Census. As illustrated in Map 8, there were no vacant housing units 6% recorded for a series of Block Groups stretching from the 4% Charlestown line in East Somerville across the McGrath Highway into Winter Hill. Other clusters with no recorded vacancies can be 2% seen along Somerville Avenue near Spring Hill, and along Highland
Percentage Units that are Vacant are that Units Percentage 0% Avenue around Cedar Street. It is likely that these areas did in fact 1970 1980 1990 2000 have vacant housing units in 2000, but that they were not accurately Source: US Census recorded by the Census survey teams. ______
September 2009 Page 4-25 Map 8: Residential Vacancy Rate, 2000 < 2% of total housing units Source = US Census 2% - 4% of total housing units Data presented 4% - 6% of total housing units by Block Group 6% - 8% of total housing units Labels indicate 23 absolute unit count > 8% of total housing units *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
7 8 14
0 6 9 12 11 0 17 10 0 0 16 18 7 8 29 29 23
21 28 0 9 0 17 18 0 0 0 38 38 0 20 0 14 7 9 0 0 33 21 22 0 33 15 12 0 33 41 21 48 11 0 0
Citywide rate = 2.8% 17 18 (922 vacant units) 0 0 50 0 Range = 0% to 18% 9 21 29 0
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 22 0 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-26 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4
17. Condominium construction and conversions represent the has emphasized ownership condominium units, rather than rental most significant increase in Somerville’s stock of owner- apartments due to market conditions and project financing trends. occupied housing since 2000. Condominium properties have proliferated across the metropolitan region since the 1980, but this trend has affected different The Somerville Assessing Department tracks condominium communities in the region at different times. Cities such as Boston, properties, recording the number of newly constructed condo units, Cambridge and Medford experienced significant condo development as well as residential units that have been converted from rental prior to 2000, while communities including Somerville, Chelsea and apartments to ownership condominiums. In 2000, there were Malden experienced most of their condo development since 2000. approximately 864 residential condominium units in Somerville. Since 2000, 2,789 condo units have been added to the City’s In terms of absolute growth in condominium units, Boston is the inventory, through new construction or conversion. As illustrated in clear leader (Figure 42). Between 2000 and 2008, Boston added more Figure 41, condo activity began in earnest during the late 1990’s, and than 18,000 units to its condo stock through new construction or reached its peak in 2007. conversion of rental units. In Cambridge, there were more than 4,300 new condominium properties created during this period. Since Figure 41: New Condominium Properties, 1990-2009 these cities already had large numbers of condos in 2000, their 700 650 percentage growth was modest compared with other communities. 600 550 500 450 Figure 42: Growth in Condominiums, 2000-2008 400 350 Absolute Growth Percent Growth 300 250 200 Boston 18,661 51.4% 150 100 Cambridge 4,321 52.7%
Number of New Condo Properties 50 0 Somerville 2,789 322.8% 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Arlington 1,095 59.3% Source: City of Somerville Malden 967 94.2% The proliferation of condominium units is partly attributable to large- Chelsea 799 76.2% scale trends in real estate finance, and partly attributable to the local Medford 772 40.5% housing stock. Two- and three-family homes, which represent the Everett 429 45.7% majority of Somerville’s housing stock, are relatively easy to convert Source: MA Department of Revenue from rental units to ownership condominiums. Property owners may find conversions to be a straightforward mechanism by which to Since 2000, Somerville has experienced more percentage growth in its increase short-term revenue. New residential construction since 2000 stock of residential condominium units than any other community in the metropolitan core. As illustrated in Figure 43, the fact that
______
September 2009 Page 4-27 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Tenure and Occupancy Technical Report #4
Somerville had relatively few condo units in 2000, combined with 18. Union Square, and Winter Hill and areas along the brisk condo activity in the years since has resulted in a remarkable Cambridge border have experienced Somerville’s highest 323% increase in condominium units since 2000. rates of condominium activity since 2000.
Figure 43: Increase in Condominiums, 2000-2009 Although new construction and conversion occurred in nearly all of Somerville’s neighborhoods, certain areas experienced particularly Somerville high levels of condominium activity. As illustrated in Map 9, these Malden areas include Duck Village, Porter Square, Teele Square, Union
Chelsea Square and Winter Hill. Absolute growth, rather than percentage growth is used in this analysis, due to the small stock of condo units Arlington in many Somerville neighborhoods in 2000. Cambridge Boston The City’s largest increase in condominium units occurred in the area Everett south of Union Square and west of Prospect Street/Webster Avenue,
Medford where 113 new condo units were produced since 2000. Roughly 85 of these units were developed as part of the phased Union Place 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% 350% development. The second largest increase (97 units) occurred in the Percent Change in Number of Condo Properties Source: MA Department of Revenue area east of Porter Square. This neighborhood was characterized by conversion of small multifamily rental properties, with 25 of its 29 No community in the urban core has experienced a growth rate since condo projects producing three or fewer units. 2000 that is comparable to Somerville’s. Malden experienced the region’s second-highest growth rate (94%), which was less than one- East Somerville is notable for its relatively low rate of condominium third of Somerville’s growth rate. Chelsea had the next highest activity. The neighborhood around the McGrath Highway, north of growth rate, at 76%. Interestingly, Everett (46%) and Medford Pearl Street and south of Broadway featured the City’s lowest (41%) ranked even lower in condo growth than Boston and number of new condo units. As illustrated in Map 9, three Block Cambridge, despite having much smaller numbers of condo units in Groups in this area had fewer than ten new condominium units 2000. produced between 2000 and 2008.
Because condo conversions remove housing units from the rental market, this trend can restrict housing choice for low- and moderate- income renters. On the other hand, condos can be more affordable than single-family or multi-family homes, making first-time homeownership more feasible for moderate-income households.
______
September 2009 Page 4-28 Map 9: Condominum Activity, 2000-2008
Source = City of < 10 new condo units produced Somerville
10 - 30 new condo units produced Data presented by Census Block Group 30 - 50 new condo units produced Labels indicate 32 50 - 70 new condo units produced number of constructed or converted units > 70 new condo units produced *Assembly Square Assembly Square Block Group* Block Group split for spatial accuracy
8 10 32
18 28 59 38 42 22 27 71 33 0 10 35 31 11 58 59 90
54 66 59 65 49 33 25 34 6 39 66 59 73 26 33 49 23 2 7 28 57 35 33 25 62 40 18 19 97 81 83 27 41 27 39 22 35 43 84 Citywide total = 2,789 units 29 0 Range = 0 to 113 units 83 113 67 11
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 48 35 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-29 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Prices Technical Report #4
HOUSING PRICES Figure 44: Somerville Median Home Value, 1970-2000 19. Housing values in Somerville have exhibited major $300,000
increases since 1980. In 2000, Somerville’s median value was $250,000 $273,797 $268,351 higher than values in many neighboring communities. $200,000
The Boston metropolitan region is widely regarded as having some of $150,000 the nation’s highest housing prices. As part of the regional housing $92,898 $100,000 market, Somerville’s housing prices have been subjected to major $113,156 increases in recent decades. US Census data can be used to analyze $50,000 long-term trends in housing prices. The Census survey form asks Median Value of Owner-Occupied Properties 1970 1980 1990 2000 homeowners to estimate the market value of their home. As a result, Source: US Census; all values adjusted for inflation to 2009 levels the Census data capture the values of single-family homes, multifamily homes and condominium properties. The Census data Census data suggest that in 2000, the inflation-adjusted median value represent a snapshot of housing prices at the time of the Census, and of an owner-occupied property in Somerville was $268,351. As market fluctuations immediately preceding or following the decennial illustrated in Figure 45, Medford ($284,269) and Boston ($238,896) Census may influence the long-term trend line. were Somerville’s most comparable neighbors. Values for Chelsea, Everett and Malden were significantly lower. The median home Somerville’s inflation-adjusted median home value in 1970 was value for Cambridge ($499,476) was nearly twice the median value for approximately $93,000, and in 1980 the median home value was Somerville. reported at $113,000. As illustrated in Figure 44, the City’s median home value increased to $274,000 in 1990, a remarkable 142% Figure 45: Median Home Value, 2000 increase from 1980. This sharp jump may be attributable to the Cambridge timing of economic boom and bust cycles: at the time of the 1980 Arlington Census, the nation was recovering from a major recession in 1978- Medford
1979, suggesting that home values may have been particularly low. Somerville The 1990 Census, on the other hand, followed the economic expansion of the late 1980’s, and as a result home values may have Boston been particularly high at that time. Malden Everett Interestingly, the median home value in 2000 appears to be slightly Chelsea lower than the 1990 median. Data maintained by the Somerville $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000 $450,000 $500,000 Assessing Department indicate a similar trend line between 1990 and Median Value of Owner-Occupied Property 2000 (see page 4-31). Source: US Census; all values adjusted for inflation to 2009 levels ______
September 2009 Page 4-30 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Prices Technical Report #4
Valuation data produced by the City of Somerville’s Assessing 20. Somerville neighborhoods with the highest home value in Department can be used to complement the Census data on home 2000 were generally located in West Somerville. values. The data record for assessed values in Somerville is available from 1986 onward, and uses average, rather than median values. The US Census provides data on the value of owner-occupied Massachusetts law requires that properties be assessed at fair market housing units, including the median value of home by Census Block value. In order to maintain fair market valuation, the Assessing Group. These data are collected as part of the Census survey, and Department performs revaluations every two to three years, which only reflect the values that are specified by owner-occupants who are certified by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue. respond to the Census. As illustrated in Map 10, Census Block Group data from 2000 suggest that higher home values tended to be As illustrated in Figure 46, the average assessed value for a residential located in West Somerville. property in Somerville has increased significantly over the past twenty years, but the increases have not been steady. In 1986, the average The City’s highest inflation-adjusted median home value ($455,000) assessed value was $120,890. By 1990, the average value had more was in the Block Group southeast of Powder House Circle, between than doubled, reaching $230,959. Broadway and Kidder Avenue. Eleven other Block Groups in West Somerville had inflation-adjusted median values above $400,000.
Figure 46: Somerville Average Assessed Value for Residential Properties, 1986-2008 The only other Block Groups with median home values above $550,000 $400,000 were located in Duck Village, and on Prospect Hill. $500,000 $450,000 $400,000 The lowest median home value in 2000 was in the East Somerville $350,000 Block Group north of Washington Street and south of Perkins Street, $300,000 $250,000 between Myrtle Street and the Boston line. This Block Group had a $200,000 median home value of $181,000. The second-lowest value ($197,000) Average Assessed Value $150,000 was observed in the neighborhood around Tufts Street and Allston $100,000 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Street, north of Washington Street and east of the McGrath Highway. Fiscal Year Source: City of Somerville Other areas with median values below $250,000 include the south side of Union Square, the Hinckley/Magoun neighborhood, and Following decreases during the first half of the 1990’s, average Somerville Avenue around the intersection with Lowell Street. assessed values had rebounded by 2000 to reach $227,560. Since 2002, the increase in average value has been dramatic, reaching a peak in 2007 at $520,831. In 2008, the most recent year for which data are available, values had decreased slightly to $496,258.
______
September 2009 Page 4-31 Map 10: Median Home Value*, 2000
< $250,000 * Value of owner-occupied residential properties
$250,000 - $300,000 Source = US Census
$300,000 - $350,000 Data presented by Block Group $409500 $350,000 - $400,000 Labels indicate median home value, adjusted for inflation > $400,000 **Assembly Square Block Group Assembly Square Block Group** split for spatial accuracy
$414875 $411125 $359875
$328500 $427875 $439750 $380375 $314750 $310125 $251375
$370750 $444500 $454750 $407125 $277625 $373875 $343750 $225250 $341125
$414125 $397125 $328500 $356000 $411125 $240250 $323750 $245625 $290750 $396750 $420750 $383625 $306625 $248125 $347125 $389375 $304125 $250875 $279750 $253875 $441000
$329625 $328625 $277750 $180625 $386875 $326250 $304750 $368375 $285875 $197375 $402625 $247750 $295000 $271500
Citywide median = $268,351 $388625 $310250 for owner-occupied properties $247500 $316750 $283625 $207500
Range = $181,000 to $455,000 $439750 $238250 $211000 $343000
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone $249250 $285750 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-32 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Prices Technical Report #4
21. Sale prices for Somerville homes have increased dramatically A second measure of sale prices is the median sale price of a since 2000, reaching an apparent peak around 2005. residential property. Unlike average sale price, the median price is less likely to be skewed by extremely high or extremely low prices in Somerville’s home sales prices have generally reflected the post-2000 the data record. This is particularly important in comparing sales of increases in assessed value. Sales prices can be analyzed in several single-family homes, multifamily homes and condos. different ways. A common measure used to compare prices for properties of varying sizes is a per-square-foot cost. This value can As illustrated in Figure 48, the median sales price for residential provide a consistent measure between single-family homes, properties in Somerville exhibits an earlier peak than the average sale multifamily homes and condominium properties. This measure uses price data. The median sale price in 2001 was roughly $422,395. In net square feet (also known as “living area”) in order to prevent 2002, the median sale price jumped to $472,200. Since 2002, there skewing by square footage in multifamily buildings that is allocated to has been a general downward trend in Somerville’s median sale price. common areas. This discrepancy may be attributable to a change in the types of According to sales data recorded by the City’s Assessing Department, properties being sold in recent years. As discussed in Section 2 of the average sales price per net square foot in 2000 was roughly $177. this report, more than 2,000 condominium units have been added to As illustrated in Figure 47, the average sale price in Somerville the Somerville market (through new construction, or conversion of increased steadily until 2005, when it peaked at roughly $319 per net rental apartments) since 2002. Condos are often sold at lower prices square foot. Average sales prices seem to have moderated slightly than single-family or multifamily homes, suggesting that sales of between 2006 and 2008, although they are still significantly above condo properties are a major factor in the recent decrease in median prices at the beginning of the decade. sale prices.
Figure 47: Somerville Average Home Sales Price, 2000-2008 Figure 48: Somerville Median Home Sales Price, 2000-2008 $400 $500,000
$350 $450,000 $300
$250 $400,000
$200 $350,000 $150
$100 $300,000 Average Price per Net Square Foot
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Median Sale Pricefor Residential Properties 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Calendar Year Calendar Year Source: City of Somerville, all values adjusted for inflation to 2009 levels Source: City of Somerville, all values adjusted for inflation to 2009 levels ______
September 2009 Page 4-33 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Prices Technical Report #4
In general, home sales prices have moderated since 2007 across the 22. Somerville neighborhoods with the highest average home urban core. Somerville’s decrease during this period was more sale prices between 2000 and 2008 were located along the significant than many neighboring communities. According to data Cambridge border. published in the 2008 Greater Boston Housing Report Card, the median sales price for Somerville homes decreased from $441,475 in An analysis of average home sale prices per net square foot can 2007 to $390,500 in 2008 (12%). Note that these data are published provide a consistent measure of real estate trends in Somerville’s by Fiscal Year (July 1st to June 31st). neighborhoods. According to City data, there were 3,760 qualified (arms-length) sales of residential properties between January 2000 As illustrated in Figure 49, Somerville’s percentage decrease during and December 2008. The average price for these qualified sales was this period was double that in Boston and Medford (6% each). $281 per net square foot. Decreases were more pronounced in Malden (10%) and Everett (17%). Chelsea’s median home sales price exhibited a dramatic 29% As illustrated in Map 11, Somerville’s higher rates (greater than $325 decrease between 2007 and 2008. Cambridge and Arlington were per square foot) tend to be clustered along the Cambridge border, in exceptions to the downward trend, both showing a 6% increase in neighborhoods abutting Beacon Street, Porter Square, Davis Square the median home sales price. and Clarendon Hill. Somerville’s highest average sales rate ($386 per square foot) was in a neighborhood south of Davis Square, between Figure 49: Change in Median Home Sales Price, 2007-2008 Russell Street and the Community Path. The second highest sales 10% rate was in the neighborhood west of Davis Square, bordered by
5% Cameron Avenue, Holland Street and the Community Path.
0% The City’s lowest sales rates (less than $225 per square foot) were -5% slightly more scattered throughout various neighborhoods, although -10% a major concentration is apparent stretching from East Somerville -15% through Gilman Square to Winter Hill and Ten Hills. The single -20% Percent Change lowest sales rate was in the East Somerville neighborhood east of the -25% McGrath Highway, south of Broadway and north of Flint Street, -30% where home sales averaged $210 per gross square foot.
-35% Chelsea Everett Somerville Malden Boston Medford Cambridge Arlington Source: Greater Boston Housing Report Card, 2008
It is important to note that these decreases only reflect properties that sold during this period. While values for homes did not drop across the board, these data point to a general decrease in demand. ______
September 2009 Page 4-34 Map 11: Average Home Sale Prices, 2000-2008
< $225 per net square foot Source = City of Somerville $225 - $275 per net square foot Data presented by Census Block Group $275 - $325 per net square foot Labels indicate sale price per net residential $251 $325 - $375 per net square foot square foot
> $375 per net square foot *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
$270 $266 $274
$274 $278 $278 $238 $317 $254 $244 $304 $311 $0 $291 $237 $331 $316 $276 $280 $220
$324 $259 $298 $377 $296 $280 $234 $274 $218 $310 $386 $252 $223 $262 $307 $249 $228 $215 $210 $244 $308 $265 $227 $230 $260 $263 $248 $257 $359 $275 $246 $314 $303 $280 $292
Citywide average = $281 per $313 $258 net residential square foot $336 $296 $307 $0 Range = $209 to $386 $372 $256 $298 $314
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone $318 $261 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-35 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Prices Technical Report #4
23. The volume of home sales in Somerville increased Region-wide, there has been a slowdown in the number of home significantly between 2000 and 2005, and has decreased sales between 2007 and 2008, but compared with neighboring cities, sharply since 2005. Somerville experienced the most significant decrease in home sales between 2007 and 2008. Data published in the Greater Boston Sales data recorded by the Somerville Assessing Department provide Housing Report Card suggest that home sales in Somerville during a clear trend line of the residential market since 2000. As illustrated this period decreased by approximately 35%. Note that these data by Figure 50, there were roughly 234 qualified sales of single-family are published by Fiscal Year (July 1st to June 31st). homes, multifamily homes and condominium properties in 2000. Gradual increases in sales volume occurred between 2001 and 2003, As illustrated in Figure 52, Somerville’s decrease for this period was and sales increased dramatically in 2004 and 2005. Sales activity the highest among comparable communities. Cambridge (34%), peaked in 2005, with over 700 home sales during the calendar year. Boston (28%), Malden (27%) and Arlington (22%) also experienced major slowdowns in home sales. Interestingly, sales activity increased Figure 50: Somerville Home Sales, 2000-2008 during this period for Chelsea and Everett. As previously noted, 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 these two cities had experienced particularly sharp decreases in Qualified 234 212 291 377 603 713 649 532 154 median home sales price for the same period, suggesting that prices Sales may have dropped enough to spur new demand. In Somerville, these Source: City of Somerville data may indicate that home sellers are tending to hold out for their As illustrated in Figure 51, sales activity slowed in 2006 and 2007. A desired prices. For owners of multifamily homes, rental income may sharp drop in the number of home sales occurred in 2008, when only be a factor in decisions to wait for a market rebound before selling. 154 qualified transactions were recorded.
Figure 52: Change in Number of Home Sales, 2007-2008 Figure 51: Somerville Home Sales, 2000-2008 80% 800
700 60% 600 500 40%
400 20% 300 Percent Change 200 0%
100 -20% 0
Qualified Sales Residential of Properties 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 -40% Calendar Year Somerville Cambridge Boston Malden Arlington Medford Everett Chelsea Source: City of Somerville Source: Greater Boston Housing Report Card, 2008 ______
September 2009 Page 4-36 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Prices Technical Report #4
24. Somerville neighborhoods with the highest sales volume between 2000 and 2008 included Magoun Square and Duck Village/Inman Square.
An analysis of sales as a percentage of the total housing stock can provide a consistent measure of sales volume from neighborhood to neighborhood. As discussed previously, data maintained by the Somerville Assessing Department indicate that 3,760 home sales occurred in the City between 2000 and 2008. There are approximately 32,000 housing units in Somerville, suggesting that the average sales volume was roughly 11.75% of all units citywide.
As illustrated in Map 12, several Somerville neighborhoods exhibited sales volumes significantly above the citywide average. The single highest rate occurred in the Hinckley/Magoun neighborhood, bordered by Lowell Street to the east, Broadway to the north and the Lowell rail line to the south. There were 72 qualified home sales in this neighborhood between 2000 and 2008, representing 22% of all occupied housing units.
The City’s second-highest sales volume (21%) occurred in the neighborhood between Davis Square and Cameron Avenue. Clusters of sales volumes between 15% and 20% appear south of Magoun Square, along Beacon Street in Duck Village and Inman Square, in East Somerville and in Winter Hill.
It is noteworthy that the neighborhoods experiencing the highest sales volumes exhibit some of the highest and lowest average sales prices in Somerville. This trend suggests that certain high-cost neighborhoods are continuing to attract investment, despite their high prices. On the other hand, certain low-cost neighborhoods also experienced brisk sales activity, suggesting that homebuyers continue to take advantage of low prices in some areas.
______
September 2009 Page 4-37 Map 12: Home Sales Volume, 2000-2008
Source = City of < 5% of housing units Somerville 5% - 10% of housing units Data presented by Census Block Group 10% - 15% of housing units Labels indicate 54 15% - 20% of housing units absolute number of qualified sales > 20% of housing units *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
18 27 42
39 40 72 50 39 30 69 59 40 0 37 52 77 38 60 72 94
92 88 80 67 55 64 37 49 17 39 93 63 82 41 41 71 48 18 50 35 85 97 36 53 74 56 52 43 119 89 75 40 41 44 53
43 Citywide = 3,760 sales 25 (11.75% of total housing units) 32 29 126 0 Range = 0% to 22% 50 84 97 40
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 89 49 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-38 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Prices Technical Report #4
25. Somerville experienced major increases in median rent for Another common measure of rental prices is known as “advertised apartments between 1980 and 2000, but rental rates have been rent”. This measure reflects asking rates for rental housing, and may relatively stable since 2000. or may not include furnishings, utilities or other costs. Since advertised rent does not generally capture below-market rental The US Census defines “contract rent” as the monthly rent agreed to, apartments, this measure is more closely tied to market rates than regardless of any furnishings, utilities or services included or contract rent. excluded. Somerville’s median contract rent tracked closely with the median home value between 1970 and 2000. The inflation-adjusted Data on median advertised rent published in the Greater Boston median advertised rent for Somerville households in 1970 was $540 Housing Report Card suggest that Somerville’s rent levels have been per month. As illustrated in Figure 53, rent levels remained relatively stable since 2000. In 2000, the inflation-adjusted median essentially constant between 1970 and 1980. These data represent advertised rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Somerville was the median values for all Census respondents living in rental units at $1,391. As illustrated in Figure 54, the median advertised rent level the time of the Census, and include those paying below-market rents. actually decreased during each of the next four years, reaching a low point of $1,284 in 2005. By 2007, Somerville’s median advertised A major spike occurred during the 1980’s, with median contract rent rent had rebounded to $1,391 per month. Rental rates appear to reaching $1,118 in 1990. The 2000 Census recorded a median have fallen in 2008, reaching $1,248. monthly rent of $1,095, slightly lower than the inflation-adjusted 1990 value. This trend line closely resembles that of median home values recorded by the Census for the same period; as such, it is Figure 54: Somerville Median Advertised Rent for Two-Bedroom Apartment, 2000-2008 important to consider the timing of large-scale market changes such $1,800 as the 1978-1979 recession and the expansion of the late 1980’s. $1,600
$1,400 $1,498 Figure 53: Somerville Median Contract Rent, 1970-2000 $1,445 $1,391 $1,391 $1,389 $1,391 $1,338 $1,400 $1,200 $1,284 $1,248
$1,200 $1,000 MedianRent Monthly
$1,000 $1,118 $1,095 $800 $800 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Source: Greater Boston Housing Report Card; all values adjusted for inflation to 2009 levels $600 $400 $540 $526 Many sub-markets within the Boston urban core exhibited similar
MedianRent Contract Monthly $200 trends of constant or decreasing median contract rent since 2000. In 1970 1980 1990 2000 general, Somerville’s rental rates were lower than those in Boston Source: US Census; all values adjusted for inflation to 2009 levels (Charlestown), Cambridge and Arlington (Figure 55). ______
September 2009 Page 4-39 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Prices Technical Report #4
Despite the differences in scale, these four rental markets exhibit 26. In 2000, Somerville’s highest median gross rent values were similar trend lines between 2001 and 2007, each showing incremental in West Somerville and along the Cambridge border. decreases between 2001 and 2004, followed by stabilization and modest recovery between 2004 and 2007. Sharp differences are clear “Gross rent” is a term used by the Census Bureau to capture the sum in 2008, with rents increasing in Charlestown and Cambridge. of monthly contract rent plus utility costs. The Census provides data on median gross rent at the Block Group level, allowing for Figure 55: Median Advertised Rent for Two Bedroom Apartment, 2001-2008 neighborhood-specific analysis of rental rates in Somerville. Since 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 $2,400 the rent data are provided by Census respondents, these median $2,200 values are influenced by renters paying below market rate rents. $2,000 $1,800 While the inflation-adjusted median gross rent for Somerville as a $1,600 whole was $1,095 in 2000, many neighborhoods had median rent $1,400 values over $1,250. These high cost areas tended to be clustered in $1,200 West Somerville, and in Ward 2 along the Cambridge line. Large $1,000 areas of Central Hill, East Somerville, Ten Hills and Winter Hill had Boston (Charlestown) Cambridge Arlington Somerville Source: Greater Boston Housing Report Card, all values adjusted for inflation to 2009 levels median gross rent values between $1,000 and $1,250.
As illustrated in Figure 56, Somerville’s median rental rates were As illustrated in Map 13, only two Somerville Block Groups had generally higher than those in Medford, Chelsea, Malden and Everett. median rent values above $1,500 per month. The Block Group Medford’s rents are stable between 2002 and 2007, while Chelsea is stretching southeast from Porter Square had a median gross monthly unique in its volatility between 2004 and 2008. The trend line for rent of $1,575, while a Duck Village Block Group north of Malden shows continued decreases since 2006, while Everett in more Washington Street and east of Beacon Street had a median of $1,542. similar to Somerville in its rebound. Block Groups with the lowest median gross rent tended to be areas Figure 56 Median Advertised Rent for Two Bedroom Apartment, 2001-2007 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 with large income-restricted apartment complexes. The Block Group $1,600 containing the Cobble Hill apartments had a median gross rent of $1,500 $345, which was by far the lowest in the City. The neighborhood $1,400 containing the Clarendon Hill Apartments at North Street and $1,300
$1,200 Powder House Boulevard had a median rent of $544, while the area
$1,100 containing the Mystic View Apartments had a median of $660. $1,000 $900 $800 Somerville Medford Chelsea Malden Everett Source: Greater Boston Housing Report Card, all values adjusted for inflation to 2009 levels ______
September 2009 Page 4-40 Map 13: Median Gross Rent, 2000
< $750 per month Source = US Census $750 - $1,000 per month Data presented by Block Group
$1,000 - $1,250 per month Labels indicate median $760 gross monthly rent, adjusted $1,250 - $1,500 per month for inflation to 2009 levels
> $1,500 per month *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
$544 $1169 $1410
$1221 $1288 $1414 $1095 $880 $1474 $660 $950 $1409 $0 $1020 $1115 $1416 $1331 $998 $1274 $1116 $1151 $1086 $1044 $1281 $1319 $1012 $1088 $1219 $1018 $1178 $1291 $1071 $1089 $1291 $1045 $1156 $1054 $1094 $1162 $1002 $1415 $1005 $960 $1121 $852 $981 $1215 $1035 $1269 $1006 $999 $1195 $1084 $1156 $718
Citywide median = $1,095 $1575 $1416 per month (gross rent) $1408 $1110 $945 $345 Range = $345 to $1,575 $1542 $1268 $1060 $1406
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone $1131 $1159 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-41 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4
HOUSING PRESSURES Housing costs are high across the Commonwealth, and the Boston metropolitan region is especially characterized by high sale and rental 27. Nearly 9,000 Somerville households pay in excess of 30% of prices. According to data from the 2000 US Census, Somerville’s their income toward housing costs; nearly 4,000 households frequency of cost burdened households (roughly 36%) is slightly pay in excess of 50% of income for housing. higher than the regional average (roughly 34%), but lower than most neighboring cities. Housing literature generally suggests that households are burdened if they pay more than 30% of household income toward housing costs. As illustrated in Figure 58, Somerville had a slightly lower frequency Of 24,604 Somerville households for which housing cost data was of cost-burdened households than Boston (38%), Cambridge (39%) recorded by the 2000 US Census, 8,806 (35.8%) reported paying and Chelsea (40%). Medford (31%) had a noticeably lower rate of more than 30% of household income toward rent or mortgage costs. cost burden than Somerville. Clearly, the problem of households As illustrated in Figure 57, 3,863 households (15.7%) reported paying paying excessive shares of their total income toward housing costs is more than 50% of income toward rent. a region-wide challenge.
Figure 58: Frequency of Cost Burdened Households, 2000
Figure 57: Somerville Housing Cost Burden, 2000 Chelsea
Households paying Cambridge >50% of income Households paying < 20% of income Boston
Somerville Households paying 3,863 40% -50% of income Everett 1,568 8,929 Malden Medford
3,375 Arlington
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Households paying Percentage of Households Paying >30% of Income Source: US Census 30% -40% of income 6,069
Excessive housing cost burden affects Somerville’s renters more than Households paying 20% -30% of income its homeowners (Figure 59). Of Somerville’s 21,892 renter Source: US Census households, 8,066 (36.8%) reported paying more than 30% of
______
September 2009 Page 4-42 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4
household income toward rent at the time of the 2000 US Census. Somerville’s frequency of rent-burdened households, while high, is By comparison, among homeowners, 27.3% (740 households) lower than most neighboring cities. As illustrated in Figure 61, reported paying more than 30% of household income toward Chelsea (43%), Cambridge (42%) and Boston (40%) all had higher housing costs. percentages of renter households paying more than 30% of income toward rent. Malden (37%) was the most comparable to Somerville, Figure 59: Somerville Households with Cost Burden >30%, 2000 while Medford (35%) and Arlington (34%) had slightly lower frequencies of cost-burdened renter households.
Renter-Occupied
Figure 61: Frequency of Cost-Burdened Renter Households, 2000
Chelsea Owner-Occupied Cambridge
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Boston Percentage of Households Source: US Census Everett Malden Thousands of Somerville households reported housing cost burdens in excess of 50%. As illustrated in Figure 60, 3,553 renter households Somerville (16.8%) reported paying more than 50% of income toward rent, Medford
while 310 owner households (11.4%) reported a cost burden greater Arlington than 50% of household income. 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Percentage of Renter-Occupied Households Paying >30% of Income Source: US Census Figure 60: Somerville Cost Burdened Households, 2000
<20% of 20%-30% 30%-40% of 40%-50% >50% of
income of income income of income income Renter Significantly, Somerville has a higher frequency of cost burden for 7,581 5,469 3,078 1,435 3,553 Households owner-occupied households than any neighboring city. As illustrated % of Renter in Figure 62, Malden (27%) and Medford (27%) are the most 35.9% 25.9% 14.6% 6.8% 16.8% Households comparable to Somerville. Everett (22%), Cambridge (22%) and Owner 1,348 600 297 133 310 Chelsea (19%) have noticeably lower percentages of owner-occupied Households households paying more than 30% of household income toward %of Owner 49.7% 22.1% 11.0% 4.9% 11.4% Households housing costs. Source: US Census ______
September 2009 Page 4-43 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4
28. Concentrations of cost-burdened renter households exist in
Figure 62: Frequency of Cost Burdened Owner Households, 2000 East Somerville, Gilman Square, Winter Hill and Duck Village, while cost-burdened owner households are Somerville concentrated in East Somerville and Winter Hill. Malden While roughly 38% of Somerville’s renter households reported Medford paying more than 30% of household income toward rent, Census Boston Block Group data show that several neighborhoods have frequencies Arlington in excess of 50%. The single highest concentration of rent-burdened households (61%, or 148 households) occurred in the East Everett Somerville Block Group bordered by the McGrath Highway to the Cambridge west, Broadway to the north, Cross Street to the east and Gilman
Chelsea Street to the south.
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% As illustrated in Map 14, other neighborhoods above the 50% Percentage of Owner-Occupied Households Paying >30% of Income Source: US Census threshold included Marshall Street (55%), Cobble Hill/Brickbottom (55%), Tufts Street/Alston Street (55%), Duck Village (54%), Glenwood Road (51%), and Gilman Square (50%). Neighborhoods These data are not necessarily predictors of high foreclosure activity. with particularly low incidence of rent burden (fewer than 20% of Somerville and Medford, despite high frequency of cost-burdened renter households) included Ten Hills north of Interstate 93, Spring owner households in 2000, did not exhibit high rates of foreclosure Hill between Cedar Street and Cherry Street, and Mystic Valley since 2000. Chelsea and Everett, on the other hand, had lower Parkway north of Spencer Street. frequencies of cost-burdened owner households in 2000, but high rates of foreclosure since 2000. This discrepancy may suggest that Excessive cost burden among Somerville’s homeowners is less current foreclosure trends have been driven by loans issued since common (11%). Cost-burdened owner households tend to be 2000. For a detailed discussion of foreclosure trends, see page 4-47 concentrated in East Somerville and Winter Hill (Map 15). The of this report. highest frequency of cost burdened homeowners was in the Census Block Group containing Tufts Street (east of McGrath Highway and north of Washington Street) where 46 of 93 (45%) owner-occupied households reported paying more than 30% of household income toward housing costs.
______
September 2009 Page 4-44 Map 14: Rent-Burdened Households, 2000
< 20% of renter households Source = US Census 20% - 30% of renter households Data presented by Block Group
30% - 40% of renter households Labels indicate households paying 43 40% - 50% of renter households >30% income to rent
> 50% of renter households *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
137 76 92
74 102 100 37 239 142 268 95 113 0 85 219 99 64 109 87 243
107 110 77 72 78 114 90 42 89 77 157 182 164 62 63 143 51 40 148 108 81 201 145 130 121 85 109 139 208 260 94 67 79 83 271 Citywide = 36.8% of renter 77 households paying >30% 97 of income toward rent 117 65 184 138 (8,066 households) 116 126 190 Range = 15% to 61% 172
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 184 129 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-45 Map 15: Cost-Burdened Owner Households, 2000
< 10% of owner households Source = US Census 10% - 20% of owner households Data presented by Block Group
20% - 30% of owner households Labels indicate households paying >30% income 0 30% - 40% of owner households to housing costs
> 40% of owner households *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
0 0 0
5 7 0 16 0 8 44 0 7 0 13 9 13 0 20 19 0
13 30 47 11 14 17 0 16 0 6 11 0 20 8 0 17 13 0 12 0 12 16 8 48 22 0 7 7 8 23 35 45 0 0 7 Citywide = 11.4% of owner 17 households paying >30% 0 of income toward housing costs 0 25 8 0 (740 households) 0 6 Range = 0% to 48% 20 12
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 0 18 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-46 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4
29. Somerville has experienced a recent increase in foreclosures, Figure 64: Foreclosure Petitions, 2007 but to a lesser degree than other urban core communities. Boston
Everett At the national, state and regional levels, residential foreclosures have been trending upward in recent years. The foreclosure process Chelsea begins with a lender filing a petition to foreclose on a delinquent Malden mortgage, and ends with issuance of a foreclosure deed. In Medford
Somerville, although foreclosures have increased since 2004, the Arlington volume of foreclosure activity remains relatively low. As illustrated in Somerville Figure 63, the number of foreclosure deeds in Somerville (properties that have been repossessed and re-sold) is significantly lower than the Cambridge historic peak in 1993. 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6% 0.7% 0.8% 0.9% 1.0% Percent of Total Housing Units Source: Greater Boston Housing Report Card, 2008 Figure 63: Somerville Foreclosure Deeds, 1990-2007 100 In 2007, foreclosure deeds represented approximately 0.2% of 90 Somerville’s total housing units. Again, Cambridge and Arlington 80 were most comparable to Somerville (Figure 65). Everett, Chelsea 70 60 and Malden had the highest rates of foreclosure deeds, while 50 Boston’s frequency was lower. The discrepancy between Boston’s 40 petition rate and deed rate may be attributable to an aggressive 30 foreclosure prevention program administered by the city. 20
Foreclosed Properties 10 0 Figure 65: Foreclosure Deeds, 2007 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Everett Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Chelsea
Compared with neighboring communities, foreclosure activity in Malden Somerville has been low to date. According to data published in the Medford Greater Boston Housing Report Card, there were 47 petitions to Boston foreclose filed for Somerville in 2007. As illustrated in Figure 64, Somerville foreclosure petitions represented 0.14% of all housing units in Cambridge Somerville. The two most comparable foreclosure rates were for Cambridge and Arlington, while filings were much more common in Arlington Medford. Foreclosure petition activity was particularly acute in 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6% 0.7% 0.8% 0.9% 1.0% 1.1% 1.2% Percent of Total Housing Units Boston (0.97%) and Everett (0.84%). Source: Greater Boston Housing Report Card, 2008 ______
September 2009 Page 4-47 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4
In response to the current foreclosure crisis, the City of Somerville 30. Recent foreclosure activity in Somerville has been generally has implemented several measures intended to identify at-risk concentrated in Winter Hill and East Somerville. properties, prevent foreclosures, and bring foreclosed properties back into productive use. Partners in these efforts include local nonprofit According to data published by the Citizens Housing and Planning and community development agencies, state agencies and the private Association (CHAPA), there were 84 residential properties in sector. foreclosure in Somerville between 2007 and 2009. Of these, 45 properties had reached the foreclosure deed stage, while 39 Working with the Somerville Community Corporation, the City has properties were at the foreclosure petition stage. As illustrated in published a Foreclosure Prevention Handbook for property owners Map 16, foreclosure deeds for this period are concentrated in the and tenants. When foreclosure cannot be prevented, the City has City’s central and eastern neighborhoods. The Census Block Group worked with the Citizens Housing and Planning Association north of Broadway and south of Mystic Avenue, between Temple (CHAPA) to implement a “First Look” program that allows the City Street and the Fellsway West experienced six foreclosure deeds and its community partners to acquire foreclosed properties. These between 2007 and 2009. Several other Block Groups in Winter Hill properties are then transferred to local nonprofit agencies for re-use and Magoun/Albion had three foreclosure deeds issued during this as affordable housing. period. According to the CHAPA database, there were no foreclosure deeds west of College Avenue between 2007 and 2009.
Properties for which foreclosure petitions were issued between 2007 and 2009 are also concentrated in Winter Hill and East Somerville. As illustrated in Map 17, three Block Groups between Broadway and Mystic Avenue had three petitions each. Another area of concentration is apparent stretching from Gilman Square southeast to Washington Street. Additional foreclosure petitions were scattered throughout Magoun Square, Spring Hill, and Union Square.
Again, there was relatively little foreclosure petition activity in the City’s western neighborhoods. Overall, 97% of foreclosure deeds and petitions during this period were located east of Cedar Street, and 87% were located east of Lowell Street.
______
September 2009 Page 4-48 Map 16: Foreclosure Deeds, 2007-2009
0 Foreclosure Deeds Source = CHAPA 1 Foreclosure Deed Data presented by Block Group
2 Foreclosure Deeds Labels indicate absolute number of 0 3 Foreclosure Deeds foreclosure deeds
> 3 Foreclosure Deeds *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 6
0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 3 1 1 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 2 0 0
0 0 Citywide = 45 properties 0 0 1 0 Range = 0 to 6 2 0 0 0
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 0 0 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-49 Map 17: Foreclosure Petitions, 2007-2009
0 Foreclosure Petitions Source = CHAPA 1 Foreclosure Petitions Data presented by Block Group
2 Foreclosure Petitions Labels indicate absolute number of 0 3 Foreclosure Petitions foreclosure petitions
> 3 Foreclosure Petitions *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 3
1 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 1 2 1 0 2 2 1 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 Citywide = 39 properties 0 1 1 0 Range = 0 to 3 0 1 0 0
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 0 1 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-50 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4
It is widely accepted that changes in mortgage lending practices have loans). Only Cambridge (5.2%) and Arlington (5.3%) had lower contributed to the current foreclosure crisis. Mortgage products frequencies of high-cost mortgage loans than Somerville did. The including zero-down payment, adjustable-rate, and high loan-to-value prevalence of high-cost loans in communities such as Everett (34%) mortgages (most without any borrower training or counseling) have and Chelsea (32%) suggest a clear correlation between high-cost extended credit to higher-risk borrowers. Since these exotic loans made between 2004 and 2006, and foreclosure activity in 2007. mortgage loans tend to be associated with higher foreclosure rates, an analysis of lending patterns may provide insight into future foreclosure activity.
The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 31. High-cost loan activity in Somerville between 2004 and 2006 provides mortgage data available through the Home Mortgage was concentrated in the eastern parts of the City. Disclosure Act (HMDA), by municipality and by Census Tract. HUD defines “high-cost loans” as mortgage loans where the rate As noted previously, data on high-cost loans are available at the spread is three percentage points greater than a comparable Treasury Census Tract level. While not as fine-grained as data at the Census security. As illustrated in Figure 66, Somerville’s rate of high-cost Block Group level, the Census Tract data can still be used to analyze loans is significantly lower than many nearby communities. likely locations of foreclosure risk.
As illustrated in Map 18, Census Tracts in Winter Hill, Ten Hills, Figure 66: High Cost Mortgage Loans, 2004-2006 East Somerville and Union Square have much higher frequencies of high-cost mortgage loans than do neighborhoods in West Somerville. Percent of Loans High Cost Loans Whereas the citywide frequency of high-cost loans was roughly 14%, Everett 33.5% 1,572 high cost loans represented 24% of all mortgages in East Somerville Chelsea 32.4% 1,128 (180 loans). Malden 23.4% 1,583 Boston 19.1% 11,838 In the Census Tract north of Broadway (comprising The States, Ten Medford 17.0% 780 Hills and portions of Winter Hill), there were 127 high-cost loans made between 2004 and 2006 (21% of all mortgages). The Census Somerville 13.5% 827 Tract south of Broadway and north of the Lowell railroad right-of- Arlington 5.3% 248 way, between McGrath Highway and Lowell Street had 143 high-cost Cambridge 5.2% 349 loans (20% of all mortgages). Source = US Department of Housing and Urban Development
For the period between 2004 and 2006, HMDA data indicate that
827 high-cost loans were made in Somerville (14% of all mortgage
______
September 2009 Page 4-51 Map 18: High Cost Mortgage Loans*, 2004-2006
Source = US HUD < 5% of HMDA Loans Data presented 5% -10% of HMDA Loans by Census Tract 10% - 15% of HMDA Loans Labels indicate absolute loan count 15% - 20% of HDMA Loans *Home mortgage loans for > 20% of HMDA Loans which the rate spread is 3 percentage points above the comparable Treasury security
33
8
127
13 33 10 50
143 13
180 28 58
31
Citywide = 13.5% (827 loans) 36 Range = 4.6% to 24.0% 64
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-52 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4
32. Household overcrowding remains a problem for many 33. The greatest concentration of household overcrowding Somerville families. occurred in East Somerville.
The US Census tracks the number of occupants in a household, Census Block Group data can be used to evaluate the severity of compared to the number of rooms in the housing unit. Households overcrowding in Somerville’s neighborhoods. As illustrated in Map with more than one occupant per room are classified as 19, twenty-one of Somerville’s sixty-seven Block Groups were overcrowded. In 2000, the Census recorded 1,549 Somerville reported as having overcrowding rates higher than the citywide households as overcrowded (4.9% of all households). average (4.9%). Problems were most acute in East Somerville and Ten Hills. Somerville’s frequency of household overcrowding is comparable to several neighboring communities. As illustrated in Figure 67, Malden The single highest concentration of overcrowded households (5.4%) and Cambridge (4.3%) were the most comparable. Medford occurred in the Ten Hills Block Group east of Temple Street, had an exceptionally low rate (1.6%). In Chelsea, an astonishing between Broadway and Mystic Avenue, where 139 households (19%) 16.1% of all households were reported as overcrowded. It should be were reported as overcrowded. In East Somerville, two Block noted that Chelsea and Boston are considered to have the most Groups had overcrowding rates of 17%, and another three Block accurate Census data from 2000, owing to their outreach efforts Groups had rates between 10% and 15%. among non-English speaking populations. As a result, the number of overcrowded households in the other communities, including In West Somerville, only two Block Groups along Alewife Brook Somerville is likely higher than shown here. Parkway had overcrowding rates above the citywide average. Figure 67: Frequency of Household Overcrowding, 2000 Between North Street and Cedar Street, there were no Block Groups with overcrowding rates above 5%. Chelsea
Boston
Malden
Somerville
Cambridge
Everett
Medford
Arlington
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% Percentage of Households with More than One Occupant Per Room Source: US Census
______
September 2009 Page 4-53 Map 19: Household Overcrowding, 2000
< 1% of households Source = US Census 2% - 5% of households Data presented by Block Group
5% - 10% of households Labels indicate households with >1 22 10% - 15% of households occupant per room
15% - 20% of households *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
43 0
18 15 0 10 47 0 77 0 0 0 7 39 0 0 17 5 139
7 10 0 13 0 10 29 27 7 0 7 0 34 0 24 24 6 17 74 47 7 37 62 56 52 24 47 24 9 55 24 36 8 19 40
7 20 Citywide average = 4.9% 21 22 65 11 (1,549 households) 15 Range = 0% to 19% 69 25 0
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 11 8 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-54 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4
34. Somerville has experienced a recent decrease in its homeless people who cycle through homelessness in any given year is likely population, but the regional nature of the problem, combined much higher. with a decrease in local shelter beds suggest that addressing the issue of homelessness remains a significant challenge. Where possible, point-in-time counts measure homeless individuals by “subpopulations” that may respond to enhanced services. Somerville’s homeless service agencies include the Somerville Subpopulation data suggest that Somerville has experienced decreases Homeless Coalition (SHC), the Community Action Agency of of “chronically homeless” individuals (those who have been homeless Somerville (CASS), the Somerville Community Corporation (SCC), for at least one year, or who have been homeless at least four times in the Cambridge Somerville Program for Alcohol and Drug the past three years). As illustrated in Figure 69, a sharp drop in the Rehabilitation (CASPAR), Cascap, Inc. and the Wayside Youth and chronically homeless population was observed between 2005 and Family Support Network. These service providers conduct an annual 2006. This may be partly attributable to the Somerville Homeless count of the City’s homeless population, including those staying in Coalition’s receipt of a 2005 “Better Homes” grant, which has shelters as well as those on the streets. As illustrated in Figure 68, a allowed the agency to secure rental apartments and provide general downward trend in Somerville’s homeless population was supportive services to the chronically homeless population. observed between 2005 and 2008. Figure 69: Somerville Homeless Subpopulations, 2005-2008 Figure 68: Somerville Homeless Population, 2005-2008 Persons in Households with Children Chronically Homeless Persons 300 200
250 150 200
150 100
100 50 50
0 0 Homeless Individuals, Point-in-Time Count 2005 2006 2007 2008 Homeless Individuals, Point-in-Time Count 2005 2006 2007 2008 Source: US Dept. of Housing & Urban Development Source: US Dept. of Housing & Urban Development
There are significant limitations to these data, however, since annual As illustrated in Figure 69, the number of homeless persons in “point-in-time” counts often do not capture homeless individuals households containing children has remained essentially constant sheltered with family and friends, in hotels/ motels, in vehicles, or between 2005 and 2008. During 2009, however, service providers outside the City. In addition, the point-in-time count only records report that family homelessness appears to be rising sharply across the number of homeless on one particular night; the number of Massachusetts. Anecdotal evidence suggests that homeless families ______
September 2009 Page 4-55 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4 less likely to living on the street, and that doubling-up with friends Somerville has five emergency shelters run by four different and family is a common situation. In order to qualify for emergency organizations. In addition, three organizations provide transitional assistance, a Somerville family must go to the Revere office of the shelter at four different locations for individuals, unaccompanied Massachusetts Department of Transitional Assistance (recently youth, and families; and five organizations provide permanent folded into the Massachusetts Department of Housing and supportive housing at nine sites. Community Development) to begin a certification process. The number of beds available to shelter the homeless has generally Comparative data are not available for all of Somerville’s neighboring declined between 2005 and 2008, with a sharp drop between 2007 communities. However, point-in-time data are available for Boston, and 2008 (Figure 71). Part of this decrease is attributable to the way Cambridge, and Malden/Medford (which are tracked together). To that shelter beds are categorized and which city’s Continuum of Care provide a consistent measure of frequency, comparative analyses for the homeless they are assigned to. For example, a large shelter measure the number of homeless individuals per 10,000 total facility physically located in Cambridge had been counted as a residents of a community. As illustrated in Figure 70, Somerville had Somerville facility until 2007, when those beds were reassigned to a rate of approximately 22 homeless individuals per 10,000 residents Cambridge for administrative purposes. in 2008. This rate is noticeably higher than the rate for Malden/ Medford (12 homeless individuals per 10,000 residents), but significantly lower than the rates for Cambridge (48) and Boston (88). Figure 71: Somerville Shelter Beds, 2005-2008 380 360 Figure 70: Frequency of Homelessness, 2008 340
Boston 320 300 280 Cambridge 260 240 Somerville 220 200
Malden/Medford 2005 2006 2007 2008 Source: US Department of Housing & Urban Development 0 102030405060708090100 Number of Homeless Individuals per 10,000 Residents However, decreases in funding have also contributed to a net loss of Source: US Dept. of Housing & Urban Development shelter beds. Homeless providers classify facilities as emergency shelters, transitional shelters, and permanent supportive housing. ______
September 2009 Page 4-56 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Housing Pressures Technical Report #4
Funds for transitional housing have been particularly impacted in Figure 73: Shelter Beds, 2005-2008 recent years, as focus has shifted to permanent supportive housing. Somerville Malden/Medford Cambridge Two shelters in Somerville managing 66 beds of transitional housing 600 lost funding for those beds between 2007 and 2008. As illustrated in 550 Figure 72, Somerville has experienced decreases in all types of shelter 500 beds between 2005 and 2008. 450 400 Figure 72: Decrease in Shelter Beds by Type, 2005-2008 350 300 Transitional
Number BedsYear-Round of 250 200 Emergency 2005 2006 2007 2008 Sources: US Dept. of Housing & Urban Development
Permanent Supportive
Total
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percent Decrease in Shelter Beds Source: US Dept. of Housing & Urban Development
Communities in the urban core have experienced varying trends in the number of year-round shelter beds since 2005. As illustrated in Figure 73, the total number of shelter beds decreased in Malden/ Medford, while Cambridge experienced slight increases. As discussed previously, much of the increase in Cambridge is attributable to the re-assignment of beds that had previously been recorded for Somerville. Boston, by comparison, experienced a net increase of nearly 1,000 beds between 2005 and 2008.
______
September 2009 Page 4-57 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Public Support for Housing Technical Report #4
PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR HOUSING Additionally, some subsidy programs target “very low income” households (those earning less than 50% of AMI), or “extremely low 35. Somerville has a large and diverse stock of publicly income” households (those earning less than 30% of AMI). subsidized housing, targeting a range of populations. Subsidized housing can also be targeted towards populations with Significant numbers of new subsidized units have been special needs, including elderly persons, disabled persons, homeless created since 2000. persons, formerly homeless persons, victims of domestic abuse, and many others. The City of Somerville and its partners at the federal, state and nonprofit level have invested millions of dollars in recent decades to The federal government created the Public Housing program in 1937, develop and maintain housing affordable to low- and moderate- and Massachusetts began developing state-funded public housing in income residents. Public spending can generally be divided into 1948. The Somerville Housing Authority (SHA) was established in “unit-based” subsidies (including new construction, rehabilitation 1948 to administer federal and state subsidy programs, and major costs, or operating costs) and “tenant-based” subsidies (which usually SHA developments such as Mystic Apartments and Clarendon Hill provide direct payments to landlords for tenants’ monthly rental Apartments were constructed prior to 1950. As illustrated in Figure costs). In both cases subsidies are conditioned on legally binding 75, these two developments produced 456 units of subsidized affordability provisions for the housing units or tenants in question. housing between them. The SHA built three major public housing developments in the 1950’s: Mystic View (215 units), Capen Court Affordability provisions are based on the assumption that a (64 units) and Highland Gardens (42 units). household should spend no more than 30% of its income on housing costs. Most housing programs target low-income households Figure 75: Somerville Subsidized Housing Units, 1940-2009 (defined by the federal government as those earning less than 80% of 3,000 the Area Median Income, or AMI). Other programs target moderate-income residents (defined as those earning between 80% 2,500 and 110% of AMI). Income limits for the Boston metro area are 2,000 calculated based on the number of persons in a household (Figure 1,500
74). For Fiscal Year 2009, the regional AMI for a four-person Total Units 1,000 household is approximately $90,000 annually. 500
0 Figure 74: Income Limits for Housing Subsidy, 2009 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2009 Persons Per Household Source: City of Somerville 1 2 3 4 5 6 80% AMI $46,300 $52,950 $59,550 $66,150 $71,450 $76,750 Changes to federal policy occurred during the 1960’s and 1970’s, and 110% AMI $69,450 $79,400 $89,300 $99,200 $107,150 $115,100 government programs began providing subsidies to private property Source: City of Somerville owners and developers, with the intention of scaling back public ______
September 2009 Page 4-58 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Public Support for Housing Technical Report #4 ownership and operation of housing developments. In many cases, Today, housing programs administered by the City and its partners the role of developer and property manager was filled by nonprofit (including homeownership, rehabilitation/lead abatement, and community groups, including the Somerville Community inclusionary zoning programs) provide subsidies to fund physical Corporation (established in 1969). improvements by small property owners, in return for assurance that the improved units will be rented to low- and moderate-income Major private developments during this period in Somerville include tenants. These programs currently account for more than 300 the Clarendon Hill Towers (460 units), and the B.F. Faulkner Tower affordable units. Large-scale development has continued, with the on Highland Avenue (130 units). Public housing development SHA, VNA and SCC partnering with the City to redevelop sites at continued at a slightly smaller scale, and the SHA opened the Corbett Capen Court (95 units) and St. Polycarp’s (53 units). Apartments (100 units in Winter Hill), Properzi Manor (110 units, Union Square), Brady Towers (84 units, Gilman Square) and Weston Somerville’s current subsidized housing inventory includes Manor (80 units, Teele Square) between 1960 and 1979. approximately 3,300 units. As illustrated in Figure 76, nearly 50% of these units are part of the Somerville Housing Authority’s public Publicly subsidized, privately owned housing continued to be housing system. Private developments account for over 1,300 units developed during the 1980’s, producing 466 new units. The major of subsidized housing (40% of all units). The remaining 10% of private development during this period was the 223-unit Cobble Hill subsidized units are provided through City housing programs. Apartments complex on Washington Street in East Somerville. The SHA developed three new projects that served elderly and special needs populations: Bryant Manor (134 units in East Somerville), Figure 76: Somerville Subsidized Housing Inventory, 2009 Hagan Manor (24 units, Union Square) and Ciampa Manor (53 units, Public Housing - Davis Square). Overall, 677 new units of subsidized housing were Elderly/Disabled created during the 1980’s. Public Housing - Family (731 units) (674 units)
Smaller projects owned by nonprofit and private developers 22% Public Housing - characterized the 1990’s and early 2000’s. The Low Income Housing 20% Special Needs Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, which had been established by the 7% (226 units) federal government in 1986, played an important role in financing Homeownership projects. The Somerville Affordable Housing Trust Fund (SAHTF) Programs 2% (79 units) was established in 1989 by City ordinance, creating another funding 8% vehicle for unit- and tenant-based subsidies. Major developments Rehab/Lead 41% during this period included the Kent Street Apartments (40 units, Programs built in 1998), the Visiting Nurses Association’s Lowell Street (252 units) Private Rental Community (97 units, built in 2000) and the Somerville Community (1,338 units) Corporation’s Linden Street (42 units, 2002). Source: City of Somerville ______
September 2009 Page 4-59 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Public Support for Housing Technical Report #4
The Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community are encouraged to maintain a Subsidized Housing Inventory that is Development (DHCD) maintains data on the number of subsidized equal to or greater than 10% of the total number of housing units. housing units in individual municipalities. These data include federal Of Somerville’s approximately 32,000 total housing units, 3,118 are and state public housing, privately-owned subsidized developments, included in the state-published Subsidized Housing Inventory. As nonprofit and community-based housing, and many (though not all) illustrated in Figure 78, this represents approximately 9.6% of the private properties that have temporary affordability restrictions total housing units in Somerville. It should be noted that roughly 200 through municipal assistance programs. housing units that receive subsidies through City-administered programs are not counted in the DHCD inventory. According to 2008 data provided by DHCD, Somerville’s subsidized housing inventory includes 3,118 units. It should be noted that City- Figure 78: Subsidized Housing Inventory, 2009 administered programs account for another 200 affordable units that Boston are not counted by DHCD. As illustrated in Figure 77, only Boston and Cambridge have larger absolute numbers of subsidized units than Chelsea
Somerville does. Cambridge
Figure 77: Subsidized Housing Units, 2009 Malden Number of Percent of Total Somerville
Subsidized Units Housing Units Everett Boston 48,503 19.4% Medford Cambridge 7,117 16.1% Arlington Somerville 3,118 9.6% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Malden 2,638 11.2% Percent of Total Housing Units Source: MA Deptartment of Housing & Community Development Chelsea 2,187 17.8%
Medford 1,640 7.2% According to this metric, Somerville’s most comparable communities Everett 1,304 8.2% are Malden (11% of total units subsidized) and Everett (8%). Arlington 1,092 5.6% Regionally, the clear leader is Boston, where 19% of the overall housing stock is included in the DHCD inventory. Chelsea (18%) Source = MA Dept. of Housing and Community Development and Cambridge (16%) also have particularly high percentages of Another common measure of a community’s commitment to subsidized housing. Arlington (6%) and Medford (7%) lag behind. affordable housing is the percentage of total housing units included in the subsidized housing inventory. In Massachusetts, municipalities ______
September 2009 Page 4-60 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Public Support for Housing Technical Report #4
36. Somerville’s subsidized housing is generally concentrated in the eastern half of the City.
In general, subsidized housing in Somerville is concentrated in the eastern half of the city. As illustrated in Map 20, the Gilman Square, East Somerville, Union Square and Winter Hill neighborhoods have high absolute counts of subsidized units. Notable exceptions are the privately owned Clarendon Hill Towers, the Somerville Housing Authority Clarendon Hill Apartments, and the SHA and Visiting Nurse Association Capen Court developments (all located along Alewife Brook Parkway in West Somerville).
Census Block Group data indicate that these neighborhoods also have high percentages of the overall housing stock represented by subsidized housing. The clear leader by this metric is the Block Group containing the Clarendon Hill Towers, where 75% of the total housing units are subsidized (501 of 653 total units). The Block Group containing the Cobble Hill Apartments has 223 subsidized units out of 336 total units (66%). Along Mystic Avenue, subsidized units represent 61% of the total housing stock (561 of 915 units) in the Block Group containing the Somerville Housing Authority Mystic View/Mystic Apartments complex.
In addition to large affordable housing developments, affordable units created through City programs such as housing rehabilitation, lead abatement and affordable homeownership also tend to be concentrated in East Somerville and Central Somerville.
______
September 2009 Page 4-61 Map 20: Subsidized Housing Units, 2009
< 2% of total housing units Source = City of Somerville 3% - 10% of total housing units Data presented 10% - 20% of total housing units by Block Group 20% - 40% of total housing units Labels indicate 138 absolute unit count
> 40% of total housing units *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
217 0 1
0 1 0 4 501 0 561 80 0 0 5 3 7 7 2 15 146
54 16 0 6 15 8 17 0 6 5 0 24 26 0 5 4 89 2 22 9 1 67 114 92 2 0 18 142 2 35 5 2 3 12 328
2 Citywide = 3,165 units 0 (9.5% of total housing units) 42 5 10 223 Range = 0% to 75% 0 49 2 26
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 3 1 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-62 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Public Support for Housing Technical Report #4
37. Public housing represents approximately 50% of the City’s 38. Private subsidized rental housing represents approximately 3,300 subsidized housing units; the majority of public housing 40% of subsidized housing in Somerville, and has exhibited units are reserved for the elderly and other populations with significant growth since 2000. special needs. Privately owned subsidized housing is housing built and owned by a Somerville has 16 public housing developments, providing over 1,600 private (though often non-profit), non-governmental entity. These units of subsidized housing for families, the elderly and other special developments generally leverage funding from a variety of needs populations. Of these, 674 are available to families, while 957 government and private sources, and can offer affordability are restricted to elderly, disabled, or other special needs populations. provisions in perpetuity, or for a specified contract period. All are subject to permanent affordability provisions (with the exception of 41 units in the Clarendon Hill Towers, which are subject Somerville currently has 28 developments of privately owned, to a 99-year lease held by the Somerville Housing Authority). publicly subsidized housing, comprising 1,338 units. As illustrated in Figure 80, the Clarendon Hill Towers and Cobble Hill Apartments The SHA operates three large family public housing complexes: account for nearly 50% of private subsidized rental housing. Sixteen Mystic Apartments, Mystic View, and Clarendon Hill Apartments. of the twenty-eight private developments have fewer than 20 units. As illustrated in Figure 79, these developments have higher unit counts than any of the elderly or special needs public housing complexes. Figure 80: Somerville Private Subsidized Rental Housing, 2009 Other Figure 79: Somerville Public Housing Inventory, 2008 Somerville Community Corporation Mystic River Apts Clarendon Hill Apts 306 Mystic View 116 Bryant Manor B.F. Faulkner Properzi Manor Tower 130 Corbett Apts Capen Court 419 Brady Towers Weston Manor 196 Clarendon Hill Ciampa Manor Visiting Nurse Towers Association Highland Gardens 223 Clarendon Hill Towers Hagan Manor
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 Cobble Hill Apartments Total Housing Units Source: City of Somerville Source: City of Somerville ______
September 2009 Page 4-63 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Public Support for Housing Technical Report #4
As with public housing, much of the privately-owned, subsidized (2001) and 82 (2003). Factors influencing the volume of project rental housing is designated for specific populations. Of the 28 activity include funding availability, as well as market conditions developments built under these programs, seven set aside some or all (which may influence property owners’ willingness to voluntarily of their units specifically for the elderly and/or disabled; another two accept below-market rental rates). The City received HUD Lead are specifically for families or individuals in crisis. Hazard Control grants in 2001 and 2006, which contributed to the upward trends in project counts during the following years.
Figure 81: Housing Rehabilitation and Lead Abatement Projects, 2000-2008 39. City housing programs targeting rehabilitation and lead 140
abatement represent a small but growing share of Somerville’s 120
subsidized housing. 100
80
Since 1991, the City of Somerville has successfully operated housing 60 programs that provide funding for rehabilitation of units that are 40 restricted to low- and moderate-income residents. Eligible rehab 20
projects include lead paint abatement, heating system replacement, Receiving CityProjects Assistance 0 and adaptive improvements for the elderly and physically impaired. 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 These programs are primarily funded through the City’s Community Source: City of Somerville Development Block Grant and HOME programs, and the HUD Lead Hazard Control Grants. Qualified homeowners and rental property owners that serve low- and moderate-income individuals 40. City housing programs supporting first-time homebuyers can qualify for assistance grants, deferred payment loans, and low- or have made homeownership more affordable for dozens of no-interest loans. income-eligible Somerville residents since 2000.
Participating property owners agree to maintain the property as their The City provides subsidies to first-time, income-qualified primary residence, and rental property owners agree to keep rents homebuyers through down payment and closing cost assistance affordable to low- and moderate-income tenants. Affordability programs. The down payment program offers loans for up to 15% restrictions are generally in place for three years. According to data of the purchase price, repayable at the time of sale. The closing cost from 2008, there are 252 units currently offering affordability assistance program offers forgivable loans of up to $5,000, provided provisions under these programs. that the homebuyer maintains compliance with program criteria. Currently, 31 homeowners are receiving assistance through these Since 2000, the City has funded rehabilitation and lead abatement programs. Six loans have been successfully closed out to date. As projects for over 400 residential properties. As illustrated in Figure illustrated in Figure 82, assistance through these programs has largely 81, annual project counts for that period have ranged between 24 occurred since 2005. ______
September 2009 Page 4-64 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Public Support for Housing Technical Report #4
Figure 82: First-Time Homebuyer Assistance Projects, 2000-2008 41. Tenant-based subsidy programs including housing choice 20 vouchers and City tenant stabilization programs help provide affordable housing for more than 400 Somerville households. 15 Tenant-based subsidies, including the well-known federal Section 8 10 Housing Choice Voucher program during the early 1970’s as a way to control government costs, while providing geographic mobility to 5 participants. Tenants choose an apartment on the private rental market whose rent meets federal criteria. The vouchers pay the Projects ReceivingCity Assistance Projects 0 difference between 30% of the tenant’s income and the market rent, 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Source: City of Somerville and the tenant can use the voucher for as long as they meet income and other restrictions. These two programs are paid for through the City’s federal HOME block grant, and target families earning up to 80% of Area Median The Somerville Housing Authority currently administers 1,093 Income. Somerville also uses money from its Affordable Housing vouchers, of which 300 are being used by current Somerville Trust Fund to provide closing cost assistance to moderate-income residents (the other voucher holders rent units outside of Somerville). homebuyers (earning up to 110% of AMI). Additionally, the Metro Boston Housing Partnership currently administers 114 housing vouchers in Somerville (Figure 83). The The City has also used money from HOME and the Massachusetts City manages 21 vouchers through the Prevention and Stabilization Affordable Housing Trust Fund to subsidize development costs for Services (PASS) program and the Wayside Youth and Family developers building homeownership units, so that those units can be Network Transitional Housing Program; and six formerly homeless sold at an affordable cost. The units built with these subsidies are households are assisted under HUD’s Shelter Plus Care program. deed-restricted, so that they must be sold to low- or moderate- income families (depending on the particular subsidy) for a period of Figure 83: Tenant-Based Vouchers, 2008 at least 50 years. Number of Administration Agency Vouchers There are currently 28 units of housing kept affordable through these Somerville Housing Authority 300 subsidies; none of the deed restrictions have expired. Seven units are available to families earning up to 110% of AMI; the rest are reserved Metro Boston Housing Partnership 114 PASS/Wayside Youth and Family for families earning 80% AMI or less. Notable examples include the 21 Somerville Community Corporation’s Temple Street condominiums Network/City of Somerville US Department of Housing (eight low-income and seven moderate-income ownership units 6 & Urban Development developed in 2007) and Wheatland Street condominiums (eight low- and moderate-income ownership units, developed in 2001). TOTAL 441 Source = MA Dept. of Housing and Community Development ______
September 2009 Page 4-65 Housing Trends City of Somerville Comprehensive Plan Public Support for Housing Technical Report #4
42. Somerville’s inclusionary zoning ordinance has produced 43. Affordable housing units produced through Somerville’s over 70 units of subsidized housing in the past decade. inclusionary zoning ordinance are generally concentrated in the eastern part of the city. The City of Somerville adopted an inclusionary zoning ordinance in 1986 (most recently amended in 2006), which requires private Somerville’s inclusionary zoning ordinance is triggered by market-rate developers of market-rate housing to adopt affordability provisions residential developments of eight or more units. When a project of for 12.5% of the new units (or to make payments-in-lieu to the eight or more units is permitted, the developer is required to reserve Somerville Affordable Housing Trust Fund). Since 1997, the 12.5% of the total units developed as affordable to residents earning ordinance has resulted in development of 71 units of permanently 80% of AMI. Affordable units can be created on the development affordable housing. As illustrated in Figure 84, production of site, or can be provided off-site. A third option allows developers to affordable units varies widely from year to year. make payments-in-lieu into the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund, which is used to help finance future developments.
Figure 84: Somerville Inclusionary Zoning Units, 1997-2008 20 As illustrated in Map 21, the majority of Somerville’s 71 inclusionary units have been located east of Lowell Street. More than one-third of 15 inclusionary units are located in the Census Block Group south of Washington Street, between Prospect Street/Webster Street and the 10 McGrath Highway. There have been 27 inclusionary units built in this neighborhood since 2000. Twenty of these units have been 5 produced by the Union Place condominium development. Number of UnitsNumber of Created 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 In West Somerville, two neighborhoods south of Broadway and Source: City of Somerville Holland Street have had affordable units developed under the inclusionary zoning ordinance. The Weston View condominiums At least ten inclusionary units were produced in 2003, 2004, 2005 and produced two inclusionary units in 2002. The 1188 Broadway 2008. In 2008, 13 new affordable units were produced under the condominium project also produced two units in 2007. ordinance. Factors influencing the annual unit count include the overall development climate, as well as the phasing and completion date of individual projects. For example, Union Place (a phased 131- unit condominium development at Webster Avenue and Norfolk Street) produced six inclusionary units in 2003, six units in 2004, eight units in 2005 and seven units in 2008.
______
September 2009 Page 4-66 Map 21: Inclusionary Housing Units, 2009
0 inclusionary units Source = City of Somerville 1 inclusionary unit Data presented 2 - 3 inclusionary units by Block Group 4 - 5 inclusionary units Labels indicate 0 absolute unit count
> 6 inclusionary units *Assembly Square Block Group split for Assembly Square Block Group* spatial accuracy
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 5
0 0 Citywide = 71 units 3 5 2 0 Range = 0 units to 27 units 5 27 3 0
Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone 0 0 Office of Strategic Planning and Community Development Page 4-67