Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2019 Hawaii Housing Planning Study
41=111 e' Beyond Information. Intelligence. Established 1960 Database Marketing Economic&Social impact Studies Evaluations Research Modeling/Forecasting SMS HAWAII HOUSING PLANNING 1042 Fart Street Mall STUDY2019 Suite 200 Honolulu: HI 96813 Ph: (808)537-3356 Toll Free(877)535-5767 Prepared for the Office of Housing, County of Hawaii E-mail: info@smshawaii.com Website: www.smshawaii.com Prepared by SMS Research &Marketing Services, Inc. December, 2019 This page intentionally left blank F, Beyond Information. Intelligence. Established 1960* Database Marketing Economic&Social Impact Studies Evaluations December 30, 2019 Research Modeling/Forecasting Mr. Duane Hosaka, Housing Administrator Office of Housing, County of Hawaii SMS 1990 Kino'ole Street, Suite 102 1042 Fort Street Mall Hilo, HI 96720-5293 Suite 200 Honolulu, HI 96813 Ph: (808)537-3356 Dear Mr. Hosaka: E-mail: info@smshawaii.com Website: www.smshawaii.com It is with pleasure that SMS Research presents this Final Report of the findings of the Hawaii Housing Planning Study, 2019. We believe the results will be an important tool to be used by those who will plan for and develop new housing opportunities for Hawaii's people in the remainder of this decade. It has been a pleasure to serve you during this project, and we look forward to working with you in the future. Sincerely, twoor- James E. Dannemiller Executive Vice President Page intentionally blank ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Hawaii Housing Planning Study, 2019 This report is the result of months of work by many people. We wish to acknowledge the participants in this project and their continuing dedication to housing planning based on hard data and the needs of Hawaii residents. The people listed below, and the agencies they represent, have demonstrated the wisdom and foresight required to maintain a comprehensive long-range data system for housing planning. In their dedication to the successful resolution of Hawai`i's housing problems, they have provided the guidance and direction to put the project in motion, the resources to make it possible, and the tireless dedication to making the system work for the people of Hawaii. • Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation: Craig K. Hirai, Former Executive Director; Denise (seri-Matsubara, Interim Executive Director; Janice Takahashi, Chief Planner; Lisa Wond, Planner • City and County of Honolulu: Pam Witty-Oakland, Director, Department of Community Services; Kathy Sokugawa, Acting Director, Department of Planning & Permitting; Marc Alexander, Executive Director, Office of Housing • Maui County: LoriAnn Tsuhako, Director; Linda Munsell, Deputy Director; Buddy Almeida, Housing Administrator • Hawaii County: Neil Gyotoku, Former Housing Administrator; Duane Hosaka, Housing Administrator; Alison Mukai, Grants Management Division Head • Kauai County: Steven Franco, Former Acting Housing Director; Kanani Fu, CHA Housing Development Manager; Adam Roversi, Housing Director • Hawaii Public Housing Authority: Hakim Ouansafi, Executive Director; Barbara Arashiro, Executive Assistant; Kevin Auger, Housing Development Specialist; Ben Park, Planner • Office of Hawaiian Affairs: Jocelyn Doane, Public Policy Manager; Jim Patterson, Program Improvement Manager; Carla Hostetter, Special Projects Research Analyst • U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: Jesse Wu, Director, Office of Public Housing (Honolulu); Mark Chandler, CPD Field Office Director (Honolulu) • Department of Human Services: Harold Brackeen III, Administrator of the Homeless Programs Office • Hawaii Tourism Authority: Chris Tatum, President and Chief Executive Officer; Jennifer Chun, Director of Tourism Research • Hawai`i Department of Hawaiian Home Lands: Andrew Choy, Planning Director Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page i ©SMS December,2019 Many housing experts have contributed to HHPS 2019 and to this report. The people listed below have given their time and expertise to provide ideas and direction, data, and review throughout the last several months. Without their time and talent, this project would not have succeeded. We are grateful to each one of them. • Lori Arakaki, Planner, City and County of Honolulu, Department of Planning and Permitting • Paul Brewbaker, Principal, TZ Economics • Cheryl Enriques, Research Analyst, Honolulu Board of Realtors • Mary Alice Evans, DBEDT Director - Director at Hawaii Office of Planning, Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism • Kim Hester, Property Technical Officer, Real Property Assessment, Finance Kauai County • Nelson Higa, Director of Strategic Development & Government Affairs, Honolulu Board of Realtors • Carla Hostetter, Special Projects Research Analyst, Office of Hawaiian Affairs • Keita Jo, Acting Assistant Real Property Tax Administrator, Hawaii County • Marie Lihn, Economist, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development • Gary Mackler, Member of the Special Action Team on Affordable Rental Housing, Kauai County • Marcy Martin, Real Property Tax Administrator, Maui County • Mike McCartney, Director, Department of Business, Economic Development, & Tourism • Lea Mukai, Director of Executive Services, Honolulu Board of Realtors • Ramona Mullahey, Senior Analyst, Field Policy & Management, HUD Honolulu Field Office, Field Policy and Management, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development • Jim Patterson, Program Improvement Manager, Office of Hawaiian Affairs • Carlos Peraro, HMIS Administrator, C. Peraro Consulting, LLC • Joe Pontanilla, CDBG Program Manager, Community Development Block Grant, County of Maui • Joe Roos, Research & Economic Analysis Division, Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism • Kathy K. Sokugawa, Acting Director, City and County of Honolulu, Department of Planning and Permitting • Eugene Tian, Chief State Economist, Research and Economic Analysis Division, Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism • Steve Young, Planning Research Branch Chief, City and County of Honolulu, Department of Planning and Permitting • Suzanne Young, Chief Executive Officer, Honolulu Board of Realtors Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page ii ©SMS December,2019 Interviews • Cassandra Abdul, Executive Director, Na Hale 0 Maui • Harold Brackeen III, Administrator of the Homeless Programs Office, Department of Human Services • Paul Brewbaker, Principal, TZ Economics • Tom Brower, State Representative, Chair of the State House Housing Committee • Kevin Carney, (PB), NAHP-E, Vice President, EAH Housing • Stanford Carr, President, Stanford Carr Development, LLC • Stanley Chang, State Senator, State Senate Housing Committee Chair • Andrew Choy, Planning Director, Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Home Lands • Grant Chun, Executive Director, Hale Mahaolu • Cheryl Enriques, Research Analyst, Honolulu Board of Realtors • Mary Alice Evans, DBEDT Director - Deputy Director at Hawaii Office of Planning, Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism • Karlylnn Fukuda, President, Munekiyo & Hiraga, Inc. • Gary Furuta, GSF LLC — Project Manager, Hawaii Housing Development Corp. • David Goode, P.E. Director, Department of Public Works Department, Maui County • Jordan Hart, President, Chris Hart & Partners, Inc. • Nelson Higa, Director of Strategic Development & Government Affairs, Honolulu Board of Realtors • Charlie Jencks, Developer of Charlie Jencks • Arryl Kaneshiro, Project Specialist at Grove Farm Company, Inc. • Robert J. Kroning, P.E., Director of Department of Design and Construction — City and County of Honolulu Public Works • Kurt Matsumoto, Chief Operating Officer, POlama Lanai • Michael P. Matsumoto, P.E., FACEC — President/CEO, R. M. Towill Corporation • Reina Miyamoto, Executive Director, Hawaii HomeOwnership Center • Lea Mukai, Director of Executive Services, Honolulu Board of Realtors • Dave Nakamura, Executive Director, Mutual Housing Association of Hawaii • Clarence K. Nishihara, State Senator, Chair of the Committee on Public Safety, Intergovernmental, and Military Affairs • Jillian Okamoto, Division Administrator — Housing Assistance and Referral Programs, Catholic Charities Hawaii • Richard H.K. Onishi, State Representative, Chair of the State House Tourism & International Affairs Committee Chair • Carlos Peraro, HMIS Administrator, C. Peraro Consulting, LLC • Heather Piper, Executive Director, Hawaii Community Reinvestment Corporation • Joe Roos, Research & Economic Analysis Division, Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism • Joy A. San Buenaventura, State Representative — Puna • Linda Schatz, Principal, Schatz Collaborative LLC • Maile S. L. Shimabukuro, State Senator (Dr. Richard Levine on behalf of Senator Shimabukuro) • Will Spence, former Director of the Department of Housing and Human Concerns • Lyle Tabata, Deputy County Engineer, Public Works Department, Kauai County • Janice Takahashi, Chief Planner, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation • Gregg Takayama, State Representative, Chair of the House Public Safety, Veterans, & Military Affairs Committee Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page iii ©SMS December,2019 • Brian Takeda, Planning Project Manager, R. M. Towill Corporation • Suzie Thieman, Executive Director at Lokahi Pacific • Walter Thoemmes, Managing Director for Commercial Real Estate, Kamehameha Schools • Gavin Thornton, Executive Director, Hawaii Appleseed Center for Law and Economic Justice • Eugene Tian, Chief State Economist, Research and Economic Analysis Division, Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism • Tracy Tonaki, Senior Vice President, D.R. Horton, Inc. • David Ward, Developer of David Ward • Craig Watase, President, Mark Development, Inc. • David Yamamoto, P.E. Director, Department of Public Works, Hawaii County • Suzanne Young, Chief Executive Officer, Honolulu Board of Realtors Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page iv ©SMS December,2019 CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. BACKGROUND 1 B. PURPOSE 1 C. METHODS 1 D. REPORT STRUCTURE 2 II. CURRENT HOUSING SITUATION IN HAWAII 3 A. HOUSING SUPPLY IN HAWAII 3 1. Current Housing Stock 3 a. Housing Stock Size 4 b. Trends in Housing Stock, 2011-2017 4 c. Homeownership 5 d. Shelter Cost & Shelter-to-Income Ratios 6 e. Crowding and Doubling-up 7 f. Age and Condition of Units 8 2. Housing Production 9 a. Housing Stock Growth, 1990-2017 9 b. Impediments to Production 10 B. HOUSING DEMAND IN HAWAII 13 1. Historic Demand 13 a. Population and Growth Rates 13 b. Components of Population Growth 13 c. Households and Household Size 14 d. Building Permits 15 2. Demand for Residential Property from Outside the State 16 a. External Demand and Vacancy Rates 16 b. Use of Hawaii Property 17 c. External Demand and Vacant Units 18 3. Survey Demand Estimates 18 a. Raw Demand 19 b. Effective Demand 20 c. Qualified Demand 20 4. Purchase Preferences 21 a. Buyer Qualifications 21 b. Renter Qualifications 22 5. Housing Preferences 24 a. For Owned Units 24 b. For Rented Units 24 C. HOUSING PRICES 24 1. Sales Prices 24 2. Rents 25 3. Affordable Housing 27 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page v ©SMS December,2019 a. Employment and Affordable Prices 27 b. Affordable units in the housing stock 28 III. HOUSING PROJECTIONS, 2019-2040 29 A. HOUSING SUPPLY 29 1. Housing Supply Projection 29 2. Housing Supply Projection Caveats 30 3. The Pipeline 33 a. Classifying Housing Units 34 b. Affordable and Market Rate Units 36 B. HOUSING DEMAND 37 1. Official Demand Estimates 37 2. Total New Units Needed 38 3. Housing Demand Projection Caveats 43 a. Rising Mortgage Rates 43 b. Risk of Recession 43 a. Slowing Population Growth 44 b. Tax Reform 44 c. Student Loan Debt 45 f. Homeless/Special Needs Households 46 C. NEEDED UNITS BY INCOME LEVEL 46 1. Types of Units Needed 46 2. Units for Elderly Housing 47 IV. HOUSING ISSUES 49 A. SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING IN HAWAII 49 1. Demand for Special Needs Housing 49 a. Economic Barriers to Accessing Housing 49 b. Need for Special Services 50 c. Special Needs Housing is Often Temporary 50 d. Special Needs Persons in Need of Housing 51 2. Inventory of Special Needs Housing 52 3. Needed Units for Special Needs Population 54 a. Currently in Housing, Need for Care Homes/Facilities, or in-Home Services. 54 b. Need for Shelter/Clinics/Transitional Housing, then Permanent Housing 54 4. Recommendation 55 B. HOMELESSNESS IN HAWAII 56 1. Introduction 56 a. Definition of Homeless Status 56 b. Context, Policies and Impact 56 Methodology 57 2. Number of Homeless Households 58 3. Reducing the Number of Homeless 59 a. Preventing Homelessness 59 b. Providing Housing as Quickly as Possible 60 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page vi ©SMS December,2019 4. Unmet Demand for Housing for those in Homeless Programs 60 5. Maintaining Permanent Housing and Reducing Recidivism 64 6. Strategy and Planning Implications 64 a. Increase Funding for Prevention Programs 65 b. Increase Rent Subsidies 65 c. Build Additional Affordable, Permanent, and Supportive Housing Units 66 C. HOUSING AND TOURISM �m 1. Traditional Relationship 67 2. Visitor Research Data 68 3. Housing Study Research 70 4. Estimating VRU from Visitor Data 70 5. Estimating VRUs from Survey Data 70 6. Adjusting the Estimate to Comparable VRU 71 7. Impact on Housing 72 a. Units Used for Visitor Rental 72 b. The Shared Economy 72 c. Impact on Residential Rents 72 D. HOUSING AND NATIVE HAWAIIANS 76 E. SUSTAINABLE AFFORDABILITY 80 F. HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION 83 V. PUBLIC SECTOR HOUSING RESOURCES 85 A. HOUSING FUNDING PATTERNS 85 1. Federal Allocations 85 2. State Allocations 86 VI. TRACKING AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK 90 A. BACKGROUND 90 1. Objectives 90 2. Methodology 90 B. DESIGN 90 1. Major Features 91 2. Data Elements 92 C. RESOURCES REQUIRED 93 VII. APPENDIX 94 APPENDIX A: HHPS HOUSING TRENDS 95 APPENDIX B: DETAILED DATA WORKSHEETS 117 APPENDIX C: REFERENCED MATERIALS 120 APPENDIX D: HOUSING AFFORDABILITY ESTIMATES AND RENTS 128 APPENDIX E: CONSOLIDATED PLAN 135 APPENDIX F: MISCELLANEOUS DATA 137 APPENDIX G: GLOSSARY 139 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page vii ©SMS December,2019 APPENDIX H: BIBLIOGRAPHY 146 APPENDIX I: COUNTY AND DISTRICTS TABLES - HAWAI`I COUNTY 150 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page viii ©SMS December,2019 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. HOUSING UNIT TYPES BY COUNTY,2017 3 TABLE 2.STATE OF HAWAII,CHANGES IN HOUSING STOCK,2014-2017 4 TABLE 3.SHELTER-TO-INCOME RATIO BY COUNTY,2019 6 TABLE 4.CROWDING,STATE AND COUNTIES OF HAWAII,HHPS 1992 THROUGH 2019 8 TABLE 5. HOUSING STOCK GROWTH 2010-2017 9 TABLE 6.TOTAL POPULATION,1990-2018 13 TABLE 7.COMPONENTS OF POPULATION CHANGE,HAWAII,1990-2018 14 TABLE 8. NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS,1990-2017 14 TABLE 9. POPULATION INCREASE:COUNTIES,2007-2017 15 TABLE 10.AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE,1990-2017 15 TABLE 11.TOTAL BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED,COUNTIES AND STATE OF HAWAII,1990-2017 16 TABLE 12.OUT-OF-STATE SALES,2008-2018 17 TABLE 13.OUT-OF-STATE SALES BY COUNTY,2018 17 TABLE 14.TYPE AND USE OF OUT-OF-STATE UNITS 2019 18 TABLE 15. HHPS DEMAND SURVEY DEMAND ESTIMATES,BY COUNTY,2019 19 TABLE 16.TOP SIX REASONS FOR NOT BUYING A HOME,2019 19 TABLE 17. EFFECTIVE DEMAND BY COUNTY,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016,AND 2019 20 TABLE 18.QUALIFIED DEMAND FOR ALL UNIT TYPES BY COUNTY,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016,2019 21 TABLE 19. FINANCIAL QUALIFICATION TO PURCHASE A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME,COUNTIES&STATE,2019 22 TABLE 20. FINANCIAL QUALIFICATION TO PURCHASE A MULTI-FAMILY UNIT,COUNTIES&STATE OF HAWAII,2019 22 TABLE 21. FINANCIAL QUALIFICATION TO RENT A SINGLE-FAMILY UNIT,COUNTIES AND STATE OF HAWAII,2019 23 TABLE 22. FINANCIAL QUALIFICATION TO RENT A MULTI-FAMILY UNIT,COUNTIES AND STATE OF HAWAII,2019 23 TABLE 23. MEDIAN HOME SALES PRICES,COUNTIES AND STATE OF HAWAII,2010-2018 25 TABLE 24. MEDIAN RENT FOR ALL UNITS,COUNTIES AND STATE OF HAWAII,2009-2019 26 TABLE 25.AVERAGE FAIR MARKET RENT FOR ALL UNITS,COUNTIES OF HAWAII,2009-2019 26 TABLE 26. MEDIAN RENT BY UNIT TYPE AND SIZE,STATE OF HAWAII,2009-2019 27 TABLE 27. FY16 HOUSING WAGE,HAWAII 2018 27 TABLE 28.TOTAL NUMBER AND AGGREGATE VALUE OF OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS OWNED BY BABY BOOMERS,2017 31 TABLE 29. GOVERNMENT-ASSISTED HOUSING UNITS,STATE OF HAWAII,2000-2025 34 TABLE 30. GOVERNMENT-ASSISTED HOUSING UNITS,COUNTY OF HAWAII,2000-2025 35 TABLE 31. AFFORDABLE AND MARKET-RATE HOUSING UNITS,STATE OF HAWAII,2014-2024 36 TABLE 32. AFFORDABLE AND MARKET-RATE HOUSING UNITS,COUNTY OF HAWN'',2014-2024 36 TABLE 33. PROCEDURE FOR ESTIMATING UNMET DEMAND,2019 38 TABLE 34. NEEDED HOUSING UNITS BY HUD INCOME CLASSIFICATION,COUNTIES&STATE OF HAWAII,2020-2025 40 TABLE 35. NEEDED HOUSING UNITS BY INCOME CLASSIFICATION,COUNTIES AND STATE OF HAWAII,2020-2025 41 TABLE 36. NEEDED HOUSING UNITS BY HUD INCOME CLASSIFICATION,ELDERLY PERSONS,COUNTIES AND STATE OF 48 HAWN'',2020-2025 48 TABLE 37. HOUSEHOLDS WITH SOMEONE WHO HAS CHALLENGES PERFORMING ACTIVITIES WITH DAILY LIVING 50 TABLE 38.ONE-PERSON HOUSEHOLDS WITH SOMEONE WHO HAS CHALLENGES PERFORMING ACTIVITIES WITH DAILY LIVING 50 TABLE 39.SPECIAL NEEDS GROUP SIZES 51 TABLE 40.COMMUNITY CARE FOSTER FAMILIES 52 TABLE 41.ADULT RESIDENTIAL CARE HOMES,HAWAII,AS OF JANUARY 2019 53 TABLE 42.ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES,HAWAII,AS OF JANUARY 2019 53 TABLE 43.SKILLED NURSING AND INTERMEDIATE CARE FACILITIES,HAWN'',2019 53 TABLE 44.OTHER INTERMEDIATE CARE FACILITIES,HAWN'',2019 53 TABLE 45. HOMELESS PIT COUNTS,STATE AND COUNTIES OF HAWN'',2009-2019 57 TABLE 46. HOUSEHOLD SIZE AMONG HOMELESS PERSONS 58 TABLE 47. HOUSEHOLDS AT-RISK OR WITH HIDDEN HOMELESS,STATE AND COUNTIES OF HAWAII,2019 59 TABLE 48. NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS ASSISTED TO KEEP THEM FROM BECOMING HOMELESS 60 TABLE 49. NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS ASSISTED IN EXITING HOMELESSNESS 60 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page ix ©SMS December,2019 TABLE 51.UNHOUSED HOUSEHOLDS WITH No SPECIAL NEEDS 62 TABLE 52.UNHOUSED HOUSEHOLDS WITH A SINGLE CONDITION 62 TABLE 53.UNHOUSED HOUSEHOLDS WITH MULTIPLE CONDITIONS 62 TABLE 54:HOUSING UNITS NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE HOMELESS PERSONS IN 2019 63 TABLE 55. AVERAGE HOMELESS HOUSEHOLD INCOME SOURCE:HAWAII HMIS DATA,2019. 64 TABLE 56. HOUSEHOLD EXITS TO PERMANENT HOUSING BY PROGRAM TYPE 65 TABLE 57. HAWAII VISITOR INDUSTRY STATISTICS,2009-2018 69 TABLE 58. RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES RENTED OUT ON A SHORT-TERM BASIS 71 TABLE 59.ADJUSTING THE ESTIMATES 72 TABLE 60.CROWDING AND DOUBLING UP,NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSEHOLDS,STATE OF HAWAII,2019 76 TABLE 61. DEMAND AND HOUSING PREFERENCES,NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND NON-NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSEHOLDS,2019 78 TABLE 62. NEEDED HOUSING UNITS BY HUD INCOME CLASSIFICATION,NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSEHOLDS,COUNTIES 79 AND STATE OF HAWAII,2020-2025 79 TABLE 63. 99-YEAR LEASE REACTION BY COUNTY 82 TABLE 64. HOUSING&TRANSPORTATION INDEX BY COUNTY 83 TABLE 65. EXAMPLES OF HAWAII HOUSING&TRANSPORTATION INDEX 83 TABLE 66.COMMUTER CHARACTERISTICS 84 TABLE 67. FEDERAL HOUSING EXPENDITURES,STATE OF HAWAII AND COUNTY OF HAWAII,2015-2019 85 TABLE 68. STATE LEGISLATIVE FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING,2014 TO 2019 87 TABLE 69. STATE LEGISLATIVE FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING,2014 TO 2019 89 TABLE 70. FIELDS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING DATABASE 92 TABLE A-1.CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSING UNITS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 95 TABLE A-2. HOUSEHOLD INCOME DATA,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 96 TABLE A-3. HOUSEHOLDS AT HUD INCOME GUIDELINES BY COUNTY,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 97 TABLE A-4A. HOUSING UNIT CONDITION,OWNED UNITS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,AND 2016 98 TABLE A-4B. HOUSING UNIT CONDITION,RENTED UNITS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,AND 2016 99 TABLE A-5.AVERAGE MONTHLY HOUSING COST,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 100 TABLE A-6. MORTGAGE PAYMENTS BY YEARS IN UNIT,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 101 TABLE A-7. HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 102 TABLE A-8. HOUSEHOLD CROWDING,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 103 TABLE A-9. HOUSEHOLD CROWDING BY TENANCY,STATE AND COUNTIES OF HAWAII,2019 104 TABLE A-10.SHELTER-TO-INCOME RATIOS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 105 TABLE A-11.SHELTER-TO-INCOME RATIOS BY YEARS IN UNIT,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 106 TABLE A-12. INTENTION TO MOVE,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 107 TABLE A-13. PREFERRED LOCATION FOR NEXT MOVE,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 108 TABLE A-14.TENANCY PREFERENCE OF CURRENT OWNERS&RENTERS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 109 TABLE A-15. PREFERRED UNIT TYPE,BUYERS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 110 TABLE A-16. PREFERRED UNIT TYPE,RENTERS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 111 TABLE A-17. PREFERRED NUMBER OF BEDROOMS,BUYERS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 112 TABLE A-18. PREFERRED NUMBER OF BEDROOMS,RENTERS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 113 TABLE A-19.AFFORDABLE HOUSING COST FOR NEW UNITS,BUYERS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 114 TABLE A-20.AFFORDABLE HOUSING COST FOR NEW UNITS,RENTERS,1992,1997,2003,2006,2011,2016 AND 2019 115 TABLE A-21. PREFERRED LOCATION OF NEW HOUSING UNIT,2019 116 TABLE B-1. HOME OWNERSHIP RATES,1990-2017 117 TABLE B-2.VACANCY RATES,BY STATE: 1986 TO 2018 118 TABLE B-3. VACANCY CATEGORIES,2009-2017 119 TABLE C-1.2O1H PROCESS FLOWCHART 120 TABLE C-2. PROJECTING HOUSING SUPPLY IN HAWAII,2020 THROUGH 2050 127 TABLE D-1. HOUSING AFFORDABILITY ESTIMATES,2019 128 TABLE D-2. MEDIAN RENT FOR SFD AND MFD BY NUMBER OF BEDROOMS,STATE OF HAWAII,2009-2015 129 TABLE D-3. MEDIAN RENT FOR SFD AND MFD BY NUMBER OF BEDROOMS,CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU,2009-2019 130 TABLE D-4. MEDIAN RENT FOR SFD AND MFD BY NUMBER OF BEDROOMS,COUNTY OF MAUI,2009-2019 131 TABLE D-5. MEDIAN RENT FOR SFD AND MFD BY NUMBER OF BEDROOMS,COUNTY OF HAWAII,2009-2019 132 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page x ©SMS December,2019 TABLE D-6. MEDIAN RENT FOR SFD AND MFD BY NUMBER OF BEDROOMS,COUNTY OF KAUAI,2009-2019 133 TABLE D-7. MEDIAN SALES PRICE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY AND CONDOMINIUM DWELLINGS BY COUNTY,2000-2017 134 TABLE E-1.COMPARISON OF HHPS 2016 AND DBE DT HOUSING DEMAND 2015-2025 135 TABLE E-2.STATE AND COUNTIES CONSOLIDATED PLAN 2015 ANNUAL GOALS 136 TABLE F-1. FEDERAL FUNDING,2015-2019 137 TABLE F-2. HOMELESS PIT COUNTS,STATE AND COUNTIES OF HAWAII,2009-2019 138 TABLE F-3. HOMELESS SERVICE CLIENTS BY COUNTY,FY 2008-2017 138 TABLE I-1.UNIT DESCRIPTIONS,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 150 TABLE I-2. HOUSEHOLDS DEMOGRAPHICS,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 151 TABLE I-3. FINANCIAL CHARACTERISTICS,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 152 TABLE I-4. DOUBLING UP,CROWDING,AND HIDDEN HOMELESS,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 153 TABLE I-5. INTENTION TO MOVE,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 154 TABLE I-6. MOVER TENANCY PREFERENCES,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 155 TABLE I-7. BUYER UNIT PREFERENCES,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 156 TABLE I-8. RENTER UNIT PREFERENCES,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 157 TABLE 1-9. PREFERRED NEXT LOCATION,BUYERS,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 158 TABLE 1-10. PREFERRED NEXT LOCATION,RENTERS,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 159 TABLE I-11.CURRENT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING PAYMENT,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 160 TABLE I-12. DOWN PAYMENT AND REAL ESTATE OWNERSHIP,COUNTY AND DISTRICTS OF HAWAII,2019 161 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page xi ©SMS December,2019 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1.TOTAL HOUSING UNITS,HOUSING STOCK,SEASONAL AND OTHER VACANT UNITS,COUNTY OF HAWAII,2000-2017 5 FIGURE 2. HOMEOWNERSHIP RATES,STATE AND COUNTY OF HAWAII,2000-2017 6 FIGURE 4.TOTAL BUILDING PERMITS&ADDED UNITS,STATE AND COUNTY OF HAWAII,2000-2016 16 FIGURE 5.VACANT UNITS HELD FOR SEASONAL OR OCCASIONAL USE,BY COUNTY,2009-2017 18 FIGURE 6. HOUSING PRICES IN HONOLULU,1985-2018 24 FIGURE 7. MEDIAN RENTS,COUNTIES AND STATE OF HAWAII,2009-2019 26 FIGURE 8. NEW CONSTRUCTION,STATE OF HAWAII,1990-2030 29 FIGURE 9. COMPLETED,PLANNED,AND PRELIMINARY GOVERNMENT-ASSISTED UNITS,STATE,2000-2025 35 FIGURE 10.TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS,STATE OF HAWAII,2000-2030 37 FIGURE 11. NEEDED HOUSING UNITS BY HUD CATEGORY AND INCOME CLASSIFICATION,COUNTIES&STATE OF HAWAII,2020-2025 42 FIGURE 12. POPULATION PROJECTION,STATE OF HAWAII,1990-2025 54 FIGURE 13. LOCATION BEFORE ENTERING PROGRAMS 60 FIGURE 14. HAWAII HOTEL ROOM RATES AND RESIDENT RATES,2010-2018 73 FIGURE 15. 99-YEAR LEASE QUESTIONS 81 FIGURE 16.GOVERNMENT-ASSISTED HOUSING UNITS CONSTRUCTED,2000-2018 88 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page xii ©SMS December,2019 This page intentionally left blank Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page xiii ©SMS December,2019 I. INTRODUCTION A. BACKGROUND Housing Inventory: An inventory of all residential housing units in the State was The Hawaii Housing Planning Study (HHPS) conducted in the first quarter of 2019. The series began in 1992. The studies have been inventory data were taken from real property tax conducted as comprehensive assessments of files for each of the four counties. Results are housing markets in Hawaii. Results covering all presented in a separate report and have been four of Hawai'i's counties have been presented in incorporated in this report as needed. a set of reports summarizing market conditions. Since 1997, HHPS has included a housing Housing Demand Survey: A statewide survey projection to support housing planning. Over the of more than 5,000 households was conducted in years, HHPS studies have investigated a rotating order to measure resident opinions and list of housing issues. Some issues have evaluations of current housing conditions, their remained part of the study, and some have been plans to move to a new unit, their preferred replaced with topics of greater interest. In 2019, characteristics of new units, their financial HHPS includes the influence of access to public qualifications for purchase or rent, and household transportation and mass transit on preferred demographic information. Special topics for 2019 housing location, special finance options for home included: transportation and rail, transportation buyers, a new viewpoint on homelessness, the and employment, unique financing options, relationship between tourism and housing, and special needs housing, and housing prices. housing for special needs groups. Housing Projections: In the past, projections B. PURPOSE were taken from a separate housing model developed in the nineties. In 2019, the projection The purpose of the 2019 HHPS report is to method was updated to incorporate new and provide housing planners with contemporary data more relevant data. Projected elements included on the housing situation in Hawaii to support housing units, housing demand, housing planning activity. Reported here is research production, and housing prices, all to support an conducted from January through August 2019. estimate of needed units by income group through Included in this study are housing demand, the year 2025. housing supply, housing prices, affordable housing, and needed housing units. Findings are Housing Price Study: A study of housing prices fully supported by analysis of data from both the (sales prices for ownership units and contract Housing Demand Survey and numerous rents for rental units) was conducted. Data were secondary data sources, including the United collected from several sources, including rental States Census Bureau and Hawai'i's Department unit advertisements, a national rent producer, of Business, Economic Development & Tourism, several real estate data providers, the U.S. among others. The State report is a summary of Department of Housing and Urban Development data collected from all study methods and across (HUD), and the American Community Survey all counties. (ACS). C. METHODS Producers Survey: We conducted interviews with housing producers and planning department The HHPS 2019 incorporates data from ten data personnel to enhance understanding of issues collection and analysis sources: related to housing development and to review County data on scheduled housing unit production. Findings were used to develop estimates of short-run housing production. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 1 ©SMS December,2019 Housing for Special Needs Groups Study: D. REPORT STRUCTURE This study centered on interviews with service providers and advocates for people with special The report begins with Section II, a description of needs. The focus was on the demand and supply current housing conditions in Hawaii including of housing units to serve their needs. Statistical demand, supply, and pricing of residential units data were gathered to connect the needs data over time. Section III discusses the projections for with housing planning and production in the next demand and supply and presents the most five years. requested output of the study --"Needed Units" -- the number of additional units required to house Homeless Study: Information was drawn from our people from 2020 through 2025. Section IV several HHPS components to generate a more covers the current housing issues for the year: comprehensive understanding of homelessness transportation, sustainable affordability, military as a housing issue this year. The intention was to housing, tourism, homelessness, and housing for bring homelessness studies into the realm of persons with special needs. Section V discusses housing planning and production. In 2019, we public sector housing resources, including recent expanded the homelessness study to include housing production in the public sector. Section data taken from a specially prepared extract of VI provides guidance on developing a data data from the Hawaii Homeless Management system for tracking housing production and an Information System. inventory of affordable housing units. Tourism Study: A separate study component An appendix presents support materials for covered the relationship between the number one significant elements of the report and a glossary industry in Hawaii - tourism - and the residential of terms. housing market. To our literature search and secondary data gathering, we added specific questions to the Demand Survey and conducted a survey specific to out-of-state property owners. Native Hawaiians: To enable specific stakeholders to conduct more in-depth analysis, the number of surveys completed with residents self-identifying as Hawaiian or Part-Hawaiian was increased in the Housing Demand Survey and questions were added just for this group. Secondary Data: The study team gathered existing data and available projections to support each of the study elements discussed here. We also reviewed housing plans and production, government spending on housing, and comparisons with housing data in other states and municipalities. Although not directly part of HHPS 2019, a Fair Market Rent survey for the County of Kauai was conducted during the study. Each of these project elements is described in detail in the HHPS 2019 Technical Report. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 2 ©SMS December,2019 II. CURRENT HOUSING SITUATION IN HAWAII The 2019 study of Hawai`i's housing market begins excludes group quarters (prisons, dormitories, with a review of the fundamental data for housing nursing homes, shelters, etc.) and commercial planning -- housing supply, housing demand, and residential properties (hotels, condominium housing prices. hotels, hostels, timeshare units, etc.), which are available only on a short-term rental basis. A. HOUSING SUPPLY IN HAWAII Total housing units are further defined as either In this section, we consider (1) housing stock, the occupied or vacant. By Census convention, the current collection of housing units available to number of occupied housing units is always Hawaii residents and migrants, and (2) housing equal to the number of households in the State. production levels and the rate at which new The total housing stock includes all occupied housing units are added to the housing stock. housing units plus vacant housing units available to the market (Table 1). 1. Current Housing Stock Residential housing construction fell after the According to the Census, there were 532,880 Great Recession began in Hawaii in 2008. Total housing units in Hawaii in 2017, up about 2.0 housing units grew by about 5,600 units per year percent from 524,852 units in 2014. (2.2%) between 2009 and 2011. Between 2011 and 2014, growth slowed to 2,800 units per year Total Housing Units (Table1) are units that are - half what it was in the previous five years. Between 2014 and 2017 available for occupancy as residential owned or , growth slowed further long-term rental accommodations. The definition to about 2,675 units per year. Table 1. Housing Unit Types by County, 2017 Housing Unit Types Honolulu Hawai'i Maui Kaua'i State Total Housing Units 346,374 84,750 71,467 30,289 532,880 Occupied Housing Units 311,451 67,054 54,381 22,563 455,449 Vacant Housing Units 34,923 19,956 17,712 7,670 45,373 Vacant and Available 11,214 5,994 6,700 2,488 26,396 Vacant and Unavailable 23,709 13,962 9,242 5,732 52,645 Vacant for agricultural use 61 38 5 32 136 Vacant for seasonal use 14,358 9,708 6,937 4,301 35,304 Other Vacant 9,290 4,216 2,300 1,399 17,205 Housing Stock 322,665 73,048 61,081 25,051 481,845 Pct. available (occupied &vacant) 93.2% 86.2% 85.5% 82.8% 90.4% Percent unavailable units 6.8% 16.5% 12.9% 18.9% 9.9% Percent vacant for seasonal units 4.2% 11.5% 9.7% 14.2% 6.6% Percent other vacant 2.7% 5.0% 3.2% 4.6% 3.2% Source:ACS 2017 5-yr Estimates,Table B25004 and DP04. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 3 ©SMS December,2019 a. Housing Stock Size other legal proceedings, units held while they are being refurbished or rebuilt, or while owners are Among the 532,880 housing units in Hawaii in deciding what to do with their vacant property. In 2017, 482,803 housing units were available to the 2017, Hawai`i's other vacant units made up one- resident housing market (Table 2). We refer to third of vacant and unavailable units and 3.2 this number as the housing stock. Within the percent of total housing units. housing stock, 455,449 were occupied units and Hawaii has typically been in the top 15 percent of 27,354 were available vacant units. states losing housing units to vacancies. We About 52,645 housing units (9.9%) were not part ranked 12th for percent of total housing units held of the housing stock in 2017. Of those, over 67 for seasonal, recreational, and occasional use in percent were vacant for seasonal, recreational, or 2017. Only two states ranked higher than the occasional use. A small number of units (136) counties of Hawaii, Kauai, and Maui with respect were vacant and held off the market for use by to the percent of total units held off the market for migrant agricultural workers. seasonal use. Units that were vacant for seasonal, recreational, Across the State, there were differences in the or occasional use (seasonal) are the most percent of total housing units counted as housing significant component of Hawai`i's unavailable stock. In Honolulu, 6.8 percent of all units were housing units. There were 35,304 of them in unavailable. In the other counties, that figure was significantly higher as in 19 percent for Kau 2017, up 6.8 percent from 2014. That was 44.1 ai percent of vacant housing units and 6.6 percent County, 16 percent in the County of Hawaii, and of all housing units in the State. 13 percent for Maui County. There were 17,205 housing units classified as b. Trends in Housing Stock, 2011-2017 "other vacant." The definition includes housing units that are held off the market while a decision A brief overview of housing trends from 2014 and is made regarding their status. Types of decisions 2017 Census data will highlight changes to the include litigation, settling estates, involvement in housing stock in recent years (Table 2). Table 2. State of Hawaii, Changes in Housing Stock, 2014-2017 2014 2017 Change 2014-2017 Number I Percent Number I Percent Number I Percent Total Housing Units 524,852 100.0% 532,880 100.0% 8,028 1.5% Single Family 282,060 53.7% 286,873 53.8% 4,813 1.7% Multi-Family 242,792 46.3% 246,007 46.2% 3,215 1.3% Total Available Housing Stock 477,520 91.0% 482,803 90.6% 5,283 1.1% Total Occupied Housing Units 450,299 85.8% 455,449 85.5% 5,150 1.1% Owner Occupied Units 257,121 49.0% 264,622 49.7% 7,501 2.9% Renter Occupied Units 193,178 36.8% 190,827 35.8% -2,351 -1.2% Total Vacant Units 74,553 14.2% 79,999 15.0% 5,446 7.3% Vacant Available 27,221 5.2% 27,354 5.1% 133 0.5% For Rent 18,704 3.6% 20,026 3.8% 1,322 7.1% Rented,not occupied 2,418 0.5% 2,134 0.4% -284 -11.7% For Sale only 4,085 0.8% 3,193 0.6% -892 -21.8% Sold,not occupied 2,014 0.4% 2,001 0.4% -13 -0.6% Vacant Unavailable 47,332 9.0% 52,645 9.9% 5,313 11.2% Seasonal Use 33,054 6.3% 35,304 6.6% 2,250 6.8% For Migrant Workers/Ag.Use 93 0.0% 136 0.0% 43 46.2% Other Vacant 14,185 2.7% 17,205 3.2% 3,020 21.3% Source:ACS 2014 and 2017 5-yr. Estimates,Tables B25004, S2504, and S1101. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 4 ©SMS December,2019 The total housing unit growth rate is slowing. Figure 1. Total Housing Units, Housing Stock, Between 2003 and 2007, Hawaii added 31,639 Seasonal and Other Vacant Units, County of housing units to its total. Between 2007 and Hawaii, 2000-2017 2011, 14,895 were added. Between 2011 and 100,000 14,000 2014, 7,468 units were added to total housing 90,000 units and 8,028 units were added between 2014 0, 8000 12000 Y ro and 2017.1 70,000 10,000 60,000 8,000 O In recent years, Hawaii has been building more Y 5000 0 6,000 m units that aren't being used for Hawaii families. In m 40,000To 0 Table 2 we see that total housing units grew by = 30,000 4,000 30000 1.5 percent between 2014 and 2017. Housing g 1, 0,000 2,000 stock, on the other hand, grew by only 1.1 0 0 percent. Vacant and unavailable housing units M P A I P I A , o U grew by 11.2 percent. Tota lHousing Units Housing Stock o Seasonal Other Vacant Within the housing stock, the number of occupied Source: SMS calculations from State of Hawaii Time Series Data Book and ACS Tables in Series B25000. housing units grew by 1.1 percent, the same rate as housing stock. But the number of vacant units went up by 7.3 percent, due almost entirely to c. Homeownership increasing numbers of rental vacancies. Homeownership rates fell across the nation as a Still, the major concern is over vacant unavailable result of the Great Recession and Hawaii was no units. The increase in seasonal units was 6.8 exception. Some experts feel the low percent between 2014 and 2017, down somewhat homeownership rate is a sign that the housing over the earlier part of the decade but still rising market recovery is not yet complete. High prices, faster than the usable housing stock. The growth low inventories, and a lack of confidence in the in "other vacant" units was 21.3 percent in the last market slowed sales, especially in high-priced four years as more of our usable stock is markets like Hawaii. More important, the impact remaining unoccupied when families vacate. of the slow recovery falls heaviest on first-time buyers. It is their entry to the market that boosts The County of Hawaii had the largest average the homeownership rate. annual increase, adding 1.7 percent to its housing stock each year. The City and County of Honolulu Between 1990 and 2010, while the housing stock had the smallest average annual increase at 0.3 was growing, homeownership rates also grew. percent per year. The counties of Maui and Kauai Homeownership rose during the market run-up in added 2.1 and 0.8 percent to their total housing the early nineties and fell during the late nineties. stock each year. Overall, the number of vacant and available units changed little. There were 27,221 vacant units in 2014 and 27,354 vacant units in 2017. The overall numbers hide a large increase in rental vacancies and a significant decrease in vacant-for-sale units. The market gets tighter as we build in more unavailable units. 1 DBEDT Data Book 2014, Table 21.20, Housing Units by County: 2000 to 2014. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 5 ©SMS December,2019 Figure 2. Homeownership Rates, State and households (11.3%) devoted 30 to 39 percent of County of Hawaii, 2000-2017 their income to shelter payments, leaving the remaining one-quarter of households spending 40 70% percent or more of their income on housing. 68% "' 66% In 2019, 17.3 percent of households had no 64% shelter payment and 43.2 percent had a shelter- to-income ratio of less than 30 percent. The rest 62% were spending more than 30 percent of their Zu 60% income on shelter and were, therefore, shelter 58, burdened. One in ten households statewide devotes 30 to 40 percent of their income to shelter 56% costs. For nearly one-quarter of households 54% statewide (23.1%), shelter payments take up -County of Hawaii -State of Hawai'i 52% more than 40 percent of their income each month. 50% o Nm co m Li, VD N. o N Li, VD N. Table 3. Shelter-to-Income Ratio by County, 2019 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Monthly Shelter Payment as a Percent of Monthly Source: U.S. Census 2000; 2001-2006 calculated; ACS 2007-2008 3-year estimates; ACS 2009-2017 5-year Household Income estimates. An atypical one-year drop in 2007 has been No Under smoothed here. Shelter 30 30to40 Over40 Not enough Payment percent percent percent information Homeownership rose again during the last Honolulu 17.0% 44.1% 9.7% 23.1% 6.1% housing market boom to a high of 60 percent in Maui 14.5% 43.3% 10.5% 23.8% 7.8% 2006. Homeownership in Hawaii then fell steadily Hawaii 21.1% 41.0% 8.8% 21.8% 7.3% to its low of 56.9 percent in 2015. Since then, Kaua'i 17.2% 38.3% 10.5% 24.5% 9.4% however, homeownership for the state and its State 17.3% 43.2% 9.7% 23.1% 6.7% counties appears to be trending upward. Figure Source: Housing Demand Survey,2019. Base is owners and 2 shows state and county homeownership rates renters in Hawaii. as they drifted downward from the peak of the bubble through 2015, then began to climb The shelter-to-income data show different levels between 2015 and 2017. The 2017 statewide of housing affordability across counties (Table 3). homeownership rate was 58.1 percent. The City & County of Honolulu and Maui County had the largest percentage of households with STI ratios of less than 30 percent (44.1% and d. Shelter Cost & Shelter-to-Income Ratios 43.3%, respectively). That was an approximately 20 percent increase over 2016 for these two High-priced housing markets like Hawai`i's often counties. Kauai County had the largest have high ratios of shelter cost to household percentage of households paying more than 40 income. Households with shelter-to-income (STI) percent of their income for shelter (24.5%), ratios greater than 30 percent are said to be cost- followed by Hawaii County with 21.8 percent. burdened, and those with ratios higher than 50 percent are said to be severely cost-burdened. The percent of households with an STI ratio of more than 30 percent is often used as an In 2011, about 51 percent of Hawaii residents indication of housing affordability. There is were paying less than 30 percent of their monthly evidence that Hawai`i's STI ratios are higher than income for shelter. most of the nation. In 2019, the percentage of mortgage holders whose monthly housing cost In 2016, the proportion of Hawaii households was greater than 30 percent of monthly income paying less than 30 percent of household income was 40.3 percent, the highest in the nation.3 The for shelter (rent or mortgage plus utilities) was up percentage of renters paying more than 30 to 58.2 percent.2 Roughly eleven percent of percent was 55.6 percent, ranking Hawaii third in 2 HHPS 2016. 3 ACS, Table DP04 2017 5-year estimates. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 6 ©SMS December,2019 the nation after Florida (59.0%) and California e. Crowding and Doubling-up (57.2%). Crowding and doubling-up are frequently used STI ratios usually rise slowly over time and have measures of housing condition. Both are changed very little in Hawaii in recent years.4 STI accepted as indicators of housing issues. They ratios for rented households are higher than are are thought of as measures of pent-up demand those for homeowners and rise a bit faster over for housing and as a sign that household time. The depressed housing market of the formation may be constricted. nineties held prices and rents in check while the burgeoning economy raised household incomes. We sometimes hear that Hawai`i's doubling-up Housing prices soared between 2003 and 2006 rate is the result of our propensity for extended and pushed the number of renter households family living. Our relatively large household size paying more than 30 percent of their income for supports that idea. However, survey questions shelter to 48 percent in 2006, climbing to 60 measured doubling up for financial reasons only percent in 2011 and 2016. The current STI ratio and show substantial doubling rates. for renters has improved somewhat, with just over half of all renter households spending more than In past studies, crowding was measured using the 30 percent of their income on housing.5 Census method (the ratio of persons in the household to rooms in the unit they occupy). In The shelter-to-income data show different levels 2016. We switched to the persons per bedroom of housing affordability across counties (Table 3). definition, which we believe is the more The City & County of Honolulu and Maui County appropriate measure for housing planning.6 had the largest percentage of households with STI ratios of less than 30 percent (46.9% and Doubling-up includes having more than two 47%, respectively). That was an 18 percent generations in the household, having unrelated increase over 2016. Kauai County had the individuals in the household, or having same- largest percentage of households paying more generation relatives in the household. In all than 40 percent of their income for shelter cases, the Housing Demand Survey shows that (27.1%), followed by Hawaii County with 23.6 doubled-up persons are in the household percent. because they cannot afford to live elsewhere. Table 4 shows HHPS crowding and doubling-up data for the State and each of the counties. The 1992 study followed a major price run-up during which high prices kept many would-be buyers from entering the market. The study conducted in 1997 was nearing the end of a very long market recovery during which incomes were catching up with prices and crowding was notably lower than in 1992. The 2003 measure was taken at the beginning of the next price run-up. 4 See Table A-10 and A-11 in the Appendix for trend data. 6 Crowding based on persons per bedroom is consistently 5 ACS, Table B25070, 2006-2017. only 4-8% higher than crowding levels based on persons per room. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 7 ©SMS December,2019 Table 4. Crowding, State and Counties of Hawaii, By 2006, Hawaii was at the peak of the largest HHPS 1992 through 2019 price run-up in its history. During that period, Crowding Indicators housing production increased and crowding and Crowded doubling remained low. In 2008, the Great and/or Recession began in the housing market and the Total Doubled Doubled effects were dramatic. Crowding began to County Year Households Crowdeda Upb Upb increase. In 2011, crowding seemed to have 1992 247,349 23.2% N/A 32.0% peaked. After a slight decline in 2016, levels of 1997 272,234 10.6% N/A 27.2% crowding appear to be on the rise again, with a 2003 292,003 10.1% 10.0% 17.6% 3.1 percent increase from 2016 to 2019. Honolulu 2006 303,149 8.1% 9.7% 15.2% 2011 310,882 13.3% 13.8% 22.9% Crowding and doubling-up behave differently in 2016 317,459 11.4% 11.9% 21.0% each of the counties. Hawaii County has been 2019 311,451 14.1% 13.3% 23.1% the least crowded and least volatile market. The 1992 34,266 26.8% N/A 25.9% pattern of change in crowding and doubling-up is 1997 39,252 10.4% N/A 24.8% nearly the same as for other counties, but the rate 2003 43,687 11.0% 8.7% 17.3% of change is lower. Maui 2006 49,484 7.7% 9.6% 15.3% 2011 54,132 10.7% 13.0% 19.2% Hawai`i's crowding rate has long been among the 2016 55,059 9.8% 14.1% 21.4% highest in the nation. In 2017, Hawaii was ranked 2019 54,434 13.8% 14.1% 22.5% first in crowding for owner-occupied units (6.3%) 1992 39,789 18.7% N/A 26.0% and second for renter-occupied conditions 1997 46,271 7.9% N/A 24.3% (12.8%).7 2003 54,644 7.0% 9.3% 14.4% Hawai'i 2006 61,213 6.9% 11.2% 15.9% f. Age and Condition of Units 2011 67,096 8.4% 11.3% 17.2% 2016 66,989 7.4% 11.1% 16.0% Compared to other U.S. housing markets, 2019 67,054 11.5% 10.3% 18.0% Hawai`i's housing stock is newer, nicer, and 1992 16,981 17.4% N/A 26.3% smaller. Except at the level of individual 1997 18,817 9.1% N/A 25.4% neighborhoods, these issues have not been big 2003 20,460 6.0% 12.5% 16.1% problems in our State. Kauai 2006 21,971 6.6% 11.9% 15.5% 2011 23,201 10.5% 11.7% 18.1% Statewide, the median year built for residential units was 1978, which is slightly younger than the 2016 23,369 8.9% 11.5% 19.2% national median (1977). Among the Counties, 2019 22,563 12.2% 14.5% 21.4% Honolulu's homes are the oldest with a median 1992 338,385 22.2% N/A 30.3% build year of 1975, followed by Maui and Kauai 1997 376,574 10.2% N/A 26.5% Counties (1984) and Hawaii County (1987). 2003 410,794 9.6% 10.0% 17.1% State 2006 435,818 7.8% 10.0% 15.3% According to the U.S. Census Bureau, very few of 2011 455,311 12.1% 13.2% 21.4% Hawai`i's housing units are in poor or substandard 2016 462,876 10.5% 12.0% 20.2% condition (lacking complete plumbing or kitchen 2019 455,502 13.6% 13.0% 22.2% facilities). The 2017 5-year estimate from ACS, Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992 through 2019. says that less than one percent of occupied a. Based on more than one person per room for 1992-2011, housing units Statewide had incomplete plumbing then 2 persons per bedroom for 2016 and 2019. facilities (0.6%), and 1.6 percent had incomplete b More than one family per housing unit(See Glossary). kitchen facilities. Across the counties, the rate of 1990-2003, asked if HH was crowded or doubled u . Later asked crowded/doubled up separately and combined them. incomplete plumbing facilities ranged from a high of 1.5 percent in Hawaii County to a low of 0.4 percent in Honolulu County. The counties' rates ACS 2017 5-yr.est.,Table B25014,tenure by occupants per room. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 8 ©SMS December,2019 of incomplete kitchen facilities ranged from a high Table 5. Housing Stock Growth 2010 - 2017 of 2.3 percent in Hawaii County and a low of 1.1 Housing Housing percent in Kauai County. Housing Units Units Percent Units 2010 2017 Added Change Our housing units are smaller than those in other State 461,437 482,864 21,427 4.6% American housing markets. For the State, the median number of rooms per occupied housing Hawai'i 65,872 72,384 6,512 9.9% unit was 4.6. Nationally, the average housing unit had 5.8 rooms in 2014. At the level of Honolulu 315,489 322,665 7,176 2.3% municipalities, Honolulu, Hilo, Wailuku, and Lihu'e average room counts were lower than all Kauai 23,839 24,901 1,062 4.5% but a handful of other major housing markets in Maui 57,470 62,912 5,442 9.5% the country (e.g., New York, 4.2; San Francisco, 4.4; Boston, 4.5). Source:SMS based these on ACS Tables B25001 —B25004. Housing stock increased by nearly 10 percent in 2. Housing Production the Counties for Hawaii and Maui. The City and County of Honolulu added 7,176 units to its Hawai'i's total housing units count was 520,088 housing stock between 2010 and 2017. Honolulu units in 2010 and 546,213 units in 20188. During had about 68 percent of the housing stock in those years, we produced 26,125 units, an 2010, so the growth rate was only 2.3 percent for average of 2,902 units per year, for an average the seven years. Kauai County's housing stock annual growth rate of about 0.6 percent. This was grew by 4.5 percent (the state and national a bit lower than the national average annual average). growth rate of 1.3 percent for those years (0.9%). a. Housing Stock Growth, 1990-2017 When the population increases and household formation proceeds normally, additional housing Housing stock, adjusted for vacant and units are needed to shelter the resulting new unavailable units, had a slightly different pattern households. (Table 5). The State's growth rate was the same as the average of all 50 states (4.5%). Housing production can be measured by counting completion certificates, or by subtracting this year's stock from last year's stock. As in all the previous HHPS reports, we find again that the housing supply continues to lag behind demand in Hawaii. We will revisit this subject in the projections section of this report and in the closing remarks. In the interim, we ought to note that the growth is not homogeneous across different types of housing stock. Production is slower at the lower end of the housing market. As found elsewhere in the nation, housing prices rise faster for the lower-income quintiles than for the upper ones.9 In addition, production lags demand in the rental housing segment and produces higher numbers of single-family units. 8 DBEDT Data Book Time Series, Table 21.20. 9 Popov, Igor. 2019. Housing markets and income inequality, Rent Economics,April 24, 2019. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 9 ©SMS December,2019 b. Impediments to Production Furthermore, our geography becomes more constrained over time. As more area is In this section, we discuss some major barriers to developed, fewer acres of undeveloped land housing supply in Hawaii. They all affect the State remain. The value of undeveloped land increases and its four counties in like manner, and a and the political power of owners of developed significant amount of research has been reported land grows. Supply is attenuated which causes in peer-reviewed journals to estimate the prices to rise12 and geographic constraints reduce statistically significant correlation between the housing supply by limiting housing investment13 barrier and supply inelasticity and/or high housing prices. There is, however, no research that The purely geographic limitation may not be the defines the net contribution of individual most critical element in limiting housing supply, impediments to a change in housing production. but it is the most resistant to political attempts to Nor is there research that identifies the mitigate its impact. Short of sweeping mechanism by which those elements affect technological advancement in construction housing prices or housing supply inelasticity. techniques, the geographic impediment will Finally, no definitive research has been remain constant. conducted in Hawaii concerning these production barriers. To address these issues effectively Lack of Major Off-Site Infrastructure: Lack of would require research that is outside the scope off-site infrastructure to support new housing of this study. development is the issue of concern here14. It has appeared in public policy documents15 and was Hawai`i's housing market is supply inelastic10. A mentioned by developers, affordable housing change in demand does not lead to a change in advocates, and government housing officials in supply in a timely or efficient manner. That leads our stakeholder interviews this year. to low production and high prices. Previous versions of the HHPS and other studies have Public infrastructure like roads, sewers, water, identified major impediments to the development drainage, and schools has historically been of housing in Hawaii, including the lack of developed by local government. In Hawaii, as the "reasonably priced," developable land, lack of cost of infrastructure increased and development major off-site infrastructure, high development requirements grew16, the responsibility for off-site costs, government regulations; community infrastructure was passed to developers. Housing opposition; and growing environmental developers and those who support affordable requirements.11 We briefly recap the primary housing production agree that this increases the sources of the supply problem below. cost of housing. Some stakeholders noted that it places the burden of developing on the first Geographic Limitation: Hawaii lacks sufficient developer in line and spares any who follow and land near its major population centers. If we make use of the new infrastructure. subtract open water or wetlands and all areas with slopes in excess of five percent (Rose, 1989), the Government policymakers respond that the costs remaining land might be called suitable for are passed to the owners and renters of the new development. As an island state, comprised of development, who are the primary beneficiaries of mountains rising from the ocean floor, Hawaii the housing units developed. The alternative — percentage land suitable for development is the the county provides the infrastructure -- is lowest among the 50 states (Saiz, 2010). 16 A market situation in which any increase or decrease in 13 Paciorek, Andrew D. 2013. Supply constraints and the price of a good or service does not result in a housing market dynamics. Journal of Urban Economics, corresponding increase or decrease in its supply. Vol. 77, p. 11-26. 11 State of Hawai'i, HHFDC, Consolidated Plan for Program 14 As distinguished from the issue of inadequate or Years 2015 through 2019, May 15, 2015. antiquated infrastructure in developed areas. 12 Hilbert and Robert-Nicoud identified a highly significant 15 Mayor's Advisory Housing Advisory Committee, City and independent variable in their analyses of housing prices County of Honolulu, Final Report & Recommendations, was the ratio of acres of developed land to acres of April 2006. developable land. 16 Adding requirements for water prospecting, bike paths, jogging paths, etc. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 10 ©SMS December,2019 equivalent to asking all taxpayers to fund the new Government Regulations: The purpose of development. housing planning and regulation is to bring order to the development of cities and towns, protect By 2006, a Joint Legislative Housing and people against arbitrary development practices, Homeless Task Force encouraged creative, and, more recently, to protect the character of innovative, and cost-effective ways such as tax neighborhoods as they exist. Evidence suggests increment financing or the establishment of these are still the objectives of planners and improvement districts to finance the construction regulators. But, as the proliferation of housing of offsite infrastructure, as well as appropriating regulations continues, some observers have capital improvement project funds." Similar come to see housing regulations as a barrier to provisions have been incorporated in the most production, a cause of housing supply inelasticity, recent update of the Hawaii State Functional and a pathway to higher housing costs. Housing Plan'$. Hawai`i's housing markets are more regulated Construction Costs: There are substantial than most others in the nation. Honolulu's score differences in construction costs across the U.S. on the Wharton Residential Land Use Regulatory and Hawai`i's construction costs are high. Index (Wharton Index21) is the highest in the country (See Appendix Exhibit C-1), and David Rose and La Croix (1989), however, showed that Callies (2010) has painstakingly described the the difference in construction costs was not nearly individual housing regulations in the Aloha State. enough to explain the difference in housing costs across markets. Gyourko and Saiz (2006) also Government regulations and review processes reported construction costs were not significantly are frequently identified as major impediments to related to prices.The more significant contributors housing production, and the 2019 stakeholder to building costs were unionization, local wages, survey shows many people still see regulations as local topography, and the regulatory environment. a significant obstacle to housing production. Combined with Hawai`i's highly volatile housing market, however, construction costs can affect A statewide Affordable Housing Regulatory individual projects. Construction costs can rise Barriers Task Force was convened in 2007 to sharply in construction boom periods and make address regulatory barriers to affordable housing. tight-margin projects like workforce housing units The task force noted that "in the context of challenging to complete.19 building homes that are affordable, government regulations often work against the goal of The cost of construction has been impacted by delivering more affordable housing. Although the high cost of litigation and insurance. The government policies and regulations are often Affordable Housing Advisory Committee notes intended to control or direct growth, target that"everyone involved from accountant to mason resources, and prioritize areas of importance, the contractors have insurance costs that go into the unintended consequence is often that these price of their goods and services. They include regulations add to the cost of building affordable property, general liability, professional liability, homes.22 They identified 14 regulatory barriers, excess liability, unemployment, health, auto, including the land use entitlement process, workers comp, business interruption, and even inconsistent state and county reviews, impact terrorism, to name a few."20 17 Joint Legislative Housing and Homeless Task Force, http://www.k5thehomteam.com/story/32389776/massive prepared by staff of the Senate Majority Office, with -aiea-workforce-housing-condo-project-on-hold. contributions from the House Majority Staff Office, 20 Mayor's Housing Advisory Committee, City & County of "Report of the Joint Legislative Housing and Homeless Honolulu, Final Report&Recommendations,April 2006. Task Force Pursuant to Act 196,Session Laws of Hawai'i 2005,"January 2006. 21 Gyourko, Saiz, and Summers, 2007. Index scores were not calculated for other counties in Hawai'i. s Hawai'i Housing Finance and Development Corporation. zz 2017. The Hawaii State Plan: Housing, State of Hawaii, State of Hawai'i, Office of Governor Linda Lingle,"Report February 21, 2017, p. 19. of the Governor's Affordable Housing Regulatory Barriers 19 Massive 'Aiea workforce housing condo project on hold. Task Force," December 2008. (2016), Hawai'i News Now, June 2016. Download at Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 11 ©SMS December,2019 fees or exactions, fiscal policy, and administrative count of the number of times we were reminded processes. that"time is money." Some observers feel there are deficiencies and Impact of Housing Regulation system-wide weaknesses in the way land use is managed. In 2014, the State Office of Planning It is widely accepted in 2018 that stringent (OP), initiated a review of the State Land Use regulation of housing production will result in high District Boundary Amendment process. OP's housing prices, decreasing elasticity of supply, effort was summed up in the State Land Use and low supply, especially in high-priced, volatile System Review Draft Report, which explored markets26. However, the adverse effects of ways to increase the effectiveness of the land use stringent regulations and onerous review system without compromising the original intent of processes on affordable housing development the Land Use Law."23 The process involved wide- extend beyond supply shortages and high prices. ranging debate and ended with an agreement to Some have said that regulations lead to an consider the issue further. inefficient housing market. Markets are expected to sort supply and demand such that specific Many stakeholders interviewed for this project household needs are matched with appropriate commented on review processes rather than on unit characteristics. In highly regulated situations regulations themselves. Reviews are required at like Hawai`i's, the market seems unable to cope several steps along the way to project approval. with that task. Some lower-income households In 2018, it took eight pages to describe the placed in units beyond their means and some process for using 201 H-38 for workforce housing higher-income families are placed in units that projects in Maui County.24 Across the State and would better serve poorer households. Counties, respondents told us that reviews were duplicative, requiring the same basic reporting to Another effect of regulation comes to us from more than one agency. Some felt certain review Somerville and Mayer (2001, 2003). They found procedures were carried out with less attention that stringent regulation causes the filtering27 and diligence than expected. This sentiment was process to be reversed. In markets with heavy particularly true for SHPDA and DCAB reviews.25 regulation and low supply elasticity, affordable Some procedures require refiling if the initial units tend to filter up and become unaffordable28. submission is not approved. In the worst cases, a Thus, regulation reduces the affordable housing developer can go through the entire set of review stock, making regulation counterproductive. processes, pass all requirements, and then be summarily disapproved at a County Council Some researchers find that highly regulated meeting attended by the public. All review housing markets hinder the movement of labor procedures were said to be lengthy, and we lost from one market to another, a process that decreases local GDP29. 23 Office of Planning, State land use system review, rents encourage landlords to invest less in property. The http://planning.Hawai'i.gov/state-land-use-system- key in either case is that old housing costs more to review, paragraph 1. maintain than new housing." We have several more 24 See the process schematic in Appendix, Figure C-1. citations on this. Filtering is a simple idea that ends up 25 being very complicated. One of the issues that adds to Housing Action Plan, p. 60. that complexity is that regulations change the 26 The literature search conducted for the HHPS 2016 relationship. See Also, Rosenthal 2018, Hertz 2015. captured the first 15 years of the research. Glaeser and 28 Specifically, "regulation increases the probability that a Gyourko (2018, pp. 14-16) summarizes the technical rental unit currently deemed affordable will become research since 2015. Gyourko and Molloy (2017) is the unaffordable, owner-occupied, or demolished, relative to most recent and most comprehensive review of the work staying affordable", p. 53. on regulation. 29 Hsieh and Moretti, 2017)calculated that GDP would be 9 27 Bradford, Chris. 2008. "When property values rise, low- percent higher if there were higher production of new quality housing "filters up" to the high-quality housing housing units in Type 2 housing markets. sub-market. The reason is that rising rents encourage landlords to invest more in the property. When property values fall, high-quality housing "filters down"to the low- quality housing sub-market. The reason is that falling Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 12 ©SMS December,2019 In 2018, research on negative impacts of Overall, the State's population decline since 2016 regulation on housing reached a high point, with has been due primarily to losses in the City and the publication of Kevin Erdmann's book, Shut County of Honolulu. While the population change Out. Erdmann provides strong evidence that the has taken different paths for each county over the housing bubble of 2002-2007 and the resulting past 40 years, all three of the other Counties worldwide recession of 2008-9 were caused by a experienced a significant decline in population housing supply shortage stemming from over- growth rate since 2016. regulation in America's key housing markets. The situation has prompted a revision of Hawai`i's housing demand projections. It has also affected B. HOUSING DEMAND IN HAWAII several sections of this report, most importantly, our estimates of needed units for the next five 1. Historic Demand years. Table 6. Total Population, 1990-2018 a. Population and Growth Rates county Honolulu Hawaii Maui Kauai State Any discussion of housing demand must begin 1990 838,534 121,572 101,709 51,676 1,113,491 from population growth. It has been central to this 1991 850,510 127,266 105,599 53,379 1,136,754 1992 863,959 131,630 108,585 54,439 1,158,613 study since 1992. In 2019, population change 1993 870,348 135,085 111,944 55,461 1,172,838 may be the most important topic we cover here. 1994 878,591 137,713 114,754 56,478 1,187,536 1995 881,399 140,492 117,895 57,068 1,196,854 Table 6 shows the annual population by County 1996 883,443 141,935 120,689 57,688 1,203,755 since 1990. In the nineties, Hawai`i's annual 1997 886,711 144,445 122,772 57,712 1,211,640 population growth rate (1.9%) was lower than in 1998 886,909 145,833 124,648 57,843 1,215,233 1999 878,906 146,970 126,160 58,264 1,210,300 the previous decade. Between 2000 and 2010, 2000 876,629 149,244 129,078 58,568 1,213,519 population growth dropped to 1.2 percent per 2001 882,755 151,690 132,428 59,075 1,225,948 year. From 2010 to 2018, the rate fell to 0.5 2002 890,473 154,576 134,583 59,981 1,239,613 percent annually. That rapid decline culminated 2003 894,311 158,442 137,596 60,805 1,251,154 when, in 2017 and 2018, the State's population 2004 907,997 162,852 140,625 62,095 1,273,569 2005 918,181 168,237 143,448 62,863 1,292,729 went down by -0.3 percent each year. 2006 926,954 173,536 145,776 63,465 1,309,731 2007 925,335 177,733 148,117 64,490 1,315,675 Figure 3. Total Population, State and Counties of 2008 933,680 181,506 151,424 65,603 1,332,213 Hawaii, 1990-2018 2009 943,177 183,629 153,393 66,518 1,346,717 2010 956,296 185,358 155,096 67,213 1,363,963 250,000 1,600,000 2011 967,287 187,066 157,001 67,898 1,379,252 2012 978,073 189,164 158,977 68,691 1,394,905 1,400,000 2013 986,222 191,466 161,105 69,660 1,408,453 200,000 2014 987,649 193,736 163,153 70,324 1,414,862 ° 1,200,000 0 2015 991,339 195,941 164,130 71,074 1,422,484 2016 992,692 198,126 165,712 71,575 1,428,105 1,000,000 v 2017 986,429 199,503 166,491 71,780 1,424,203 z 150,000 2018 980,080 200,983 167,295 72,133 1,420,491 g 800,000 = AAPC 1990-2000 0.5% 2.3% 2.7% 1.3% 0.9% 0 AAPC 2000-2010 0.9% 2.4% 2.0% 1.5% 1.2% 100,000 600,000 o AAPC 2010-2018 0.3% 1.1% 1.0% 0.9% 0.5% AAPC 2016-2018 -0.6% 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% -0.3% 400,000 ° Source: DBEDT Data Book, Table 1.06. 50,000 200,000 b. Components of Population Growth 0 0 a N a g; w o 0 0 0 0 2 " 2 Hawai`i's population grew slower in the last decade than it did in the nineties. The State added ^-Hawai'i Maui Kauai -Honolulu -State an average of about 10,000 persons per year in Source. DBEDT Data Book Time Series, 1990-2018 the nineties, 15,000 per year in the previous Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 13 ©SMS December,2019 decade, and about 7,500 per year since 2010 The stronger impact of net migration in recent (Table 6). years was felt across all four counties but had the greatest impact on Oahu. Honolulu lost almost Table 7 shows that, in the nineties, out-migration 47,000 people to net out-migration in the nineties. exceeded in-migration and reduced the Between 2000 and 2010, Honolulu's net migration population by almost 10,000 persons. In the next accounted for 11 percent of total population decade, in-migration was higher than out- growth. So far in this decade, Honolulu has lost migration causing population growth in excess of more than 19,000 people due to a significant 55,646 persons for the decade. So far this increase in domestic out-migration. decade, the excess of out-migrants has reduced the population by 549 persons. In just two years, 2017 and 2018, Honolulu lost more than 13,000 people due to domestic out- The degree of natural increase in population migration, far exceeding the number of people change has diminished steadily over the last three migrating to Honolulu. That resulted in a net loss decades. The excess of births over deaths of more than 10,000 Oahu residents. Although contributed to 113,112 new residents in the there were substantial gains in natural increase nineties, 93,118 new people in the last decade, for all four counties, that was not enough to offset and 61,529 in the first eight years of the present Honolulu's notable loss in net migration. decade. c. Households and Household Size Table 7. Components of Population Change, Assuming a constant household size, the number Hawaii, 1990-2018 of households should increase at the same rate Net Natural Net as the population. Slower household formation Change Increase Migration can be caused by social change, economic 1990 to 2000 recession, or a shortage of new housing units. If new households30 can't move out, there will be an Honolulu 39,925 86,733 -46,808 increase in household size (crowding), Hawai`i 28,360 10,477 17,883 suggesting pent up demand. Table 8 shows the Maui 27,737 11,301 16,436 number of households for the State and counties Kauai 7,286 4,601 2,685 since 1990. State 103,308 113,112 -9,804 Table 8. Number of Households, 1990-2017 2000 to 2010 Honolulu 77,051 68,958 8,093 County Hawai`i 36,402 9,914 26,488 Maui 26,683 10,729 15,954 Honolulu Hawaii Maui Kauai State Kauai 8,628 3,517 5,111 State 148,764 93,118 55,646 1990 265,304 41,461 33,145 16,253 356,163 2010 to 2018 1995 275,877 49,282 38,326 18,967 382,452 Honolulu 26,874 46,553 -19,098 2000 286,450 52,985 43,507 20,370 403,312 Hawai`i 15,907 5,993 9,992 2005 300,557 60,396 48,393 21,997 431,343 Maui 12,365 6,604 5,840 2010 309,154 62,584 51,893 22,147 445,778 Kauai 5,038 2,379 2,717 2015 307,703 64,201 52,080 21,862 445,846 State 60,184 61,529 -549 2017 312,625 68,857 53,560 22,980 458,022 Source: DBEDT Data Book, 2009-Table 1.59, 2010-Table Source: Decennial Census 1990, 2000; ACS 1-year estimates 1.56, and Census, Estimates of the Components of Resident 2005,2010,2015,2017. Population Change, 2010 to 2018. In Table 9, we see all three population growth factors related to housing demand: total 3° Adult children, roommates ready to be on their own, growing families in need of more space. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 14 ©SMS December,2019 population, households, and household size. Hawai`i's rise in pent-up demand was not unique Ideally, if there were a five percent change in the in the United States. National data show more population, we would expect a five percent pent-up demand from 2010 to 2018. Observers31 change in households and a zero percent change note that lower housing sales were related to in average household size. If supply were running decreasing supply as well as a reticence among ahead of demand, we would get a five percent (or young people to enter the real estate market. perhaps even greater) increase in households as That caused pent-up demand in housing markets pent-up demand is relieved. That would result in across the country. a zero or even a negative change in average household size. The State's population growth was relatively slow during the nineties. The average household size If demand runs ahead of supply, then a five (Table 10) fell off a bit by 2005 and even more by percent growth in population will produce less 2006. It then resumed faster growth but did not than five percent growth in households and larger quite reach the level seen in the years before average household size. This is a primary 2000. In 2017,the average household size for the indicator of pent-up demand. State was 3.02 persons. Table 9. Population Increase: Counties, 2007-2017 Census numbers reported for 2017 were equal to %Change 2007 to 2017 2015 for Honolulu and the State. Average Total Number Average household size was slightly lower for the County Population of HH HH Size of Hawaii and slightly higher for Maui and Kauai Counties. Honolulu 6.8% 3.8% 2.8% Hawaii 12.7% 10.9% 7.9% Table 10. Average Household Size, 1990-2017 Maui 12.3% 10.2% 4.7% County Ka ua`i 11.9% 5.7% 10.7% State 8.5% 5.6% 6.4% Honolulu Hawaii Maui Kauai State Source: Calculated from Table 6 and Table 8. 1990 3.02 2.86 2.99 3.09 3.01 2000 2.95 2.75 2.91 2.87 2.92 At the State level, the total number of households 2005 2.91 2.77 2.86 2.85 2.88 grew by 5.6 percent between 2007 and 2017 (Table 9) - faster than the population (8.5%) and 2010 2.96 2.73 2.89 2.98 2.92 indicating a constrained household formation 2015 3.06 2.90 2.96 3.07 3.02 rate. The average household size grew by more 2017 3.06 2.88 2.97 3.12 3.02 than 6 percent, indicating a corresponding Sources: U.S. Decennial Census, 1990, 2000, 2010, ACS increase in persons per household. This is 2005 (1-yr. Estimate), 2010, 2015, 2017 (5-yr. Estimate). evidence of pent-up demand. d. Building Permits Data for three counties were consistent with a housing market where demand exceeds supply. The number of building permits awarded in a single year is often referenced as an indicator of Hawaii County had an 11.7 percent increase in the demand for new housing units. Since builders average household size over the 10-year period, are unlikely to build new units they cannot sell, the while Kauai County had a 10.7 percent increase. number and nature of building permits is certainly The situation in Maui County was closer to the related to the demand for housing units. Similarly, preferred circumstances: population growth and the number of building permits is related to household formation grew at nearly the same housing supply in that new units cannot be rate, and average household size grew by the constructed if permits are not approved. For both smallest percent. demand and supply, however, the number and nature of building permits approved each year is 31 Rappaport, Jordan. 23018. Pent-up demand and 2018, The Macro Bulletin, Federal Reserve Bank of continuing price increases: The outlook for housing in Kansas City, January 10, 2018. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 15 ©SMS December,2019 not an effective indicator of the number of housing 2. Demand for Residential Property from units needed to satisfy demand or the number of Outside the State units that will be built. Table 11 shows the number of building permits approved by county planning Most demand for residential real estate in Hawaii departments over the last 27 years. originates from residents, but the housing market is also affected by demand from outside the State. Table 11. Total Building Permits Issued, Counties and State of Hawaii, 1990-2017 Perhaps more than any other state, Hawaii has qualities that drive external demand for our County housing units. We have a temperate climate, beautiful beaches, and abundant opportunities for Honolulu Hawaii Maui Kauai State outdoor activities and entertainment. Chronic 1990 17,123 4,720 3,534 2,312 27,689 health conditions are less prevalent than the 1995 11,956 2,707 1,514 1,054 17,231 national average, wages are above average, 2000 12,443 3,254 2,294 1,083 19,074 household incomes are higher than in other states, and our social welfare programs are at 2005 15,174 5,436 2,348 882 23,840 least perceived to be more easily available. 2010 14,254 2,756 1,016 171 18,197 Hawai`i's unique and welcoming culture is 2015 20,146 5,426 1,280 199 27,051 attractive to many people who wish to have a 2017 14,759 2,943 1,348 236 19,286 second home in the islands. All of these make Hawaii attractive to buyers from outside the state. Source: State of Hawaii Time Series Data Book Table 21.01. Figure 4 presents data for the number of Hawaii real estate is also considered to be a good approved building permits and the number of investment to out-of-state buyers. Prices are added housing units in the County of Hawaii high, but appreciation tends to be high, as well. between 2000 and 2016. There is no clear, Average annual prices rise steadily and predictive relationship between the two. appreciation has averaged 4.56 percent every year since 2000, earning Honolulu one of the highest appreciation rankings in the country32. Figure 4. Total Building Permits &Added Units, Rents are usually high enough to provide positive State and County of Hawaii, 2000-2016 cash flow for most properties, and the possibility ResidentlalPermlts-HamaiiCy of making even higher margins by renting to Residential Permits-State visitors is available.33 Units Added-Hawaii Cty 10,000 Units Added-State a. External Demand and Vacancy Rates 3,000 Until recently, the impact of external demand on 6,000 the housing market was largely a matter of 000 ` speculation. Since DBEDT's 2016 study of home 4 \, sales trends34, however, we have good data on the extent of out-of-state demand in Hawaii. 2,6001 0 101.�o° 50\ryo° °� ff ''~ 1� y ''�1942 no�� Source: Permits from Census Table 2au: New Privately Owned Housing Units Authorized. Added units from ACS housing unit data. 32 Honolulu Appreciation Trends, Neighborhood Scout, at 34 Hawai'i Department of Business, Economic Development https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/hi/honolulu/real- and Tourism. 2016. Residential home sales in Hawai'i: estate downloaded June 10, 2019. Trends and characteristics, 2008-2015, May 2016. 33 See Section IV-B, Tourism and Housing, p. 70. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 16 ©SMS December,2019 Table 12. Out-of-State Sales, 2008 -2018 Table 13. Out-of-State Sales by County, 2018 Sales Percent Percent Percent I Sales Price In-State Out-of-State Buyers Out-of- 35 2008 13,616 72.4% 27.6% State Differential 2009 11,426 70.6% 29.4% State 20,409 23.9% 44.6% 2010 14,069 66.5% 33.5% Honolulu 12,993 14.9% 46.6% Hawaii 3,412 41.3% 87.8% 2011 11,889 69.6% 30.4% 2012 12.017 74.1% 25.9% Kauai 1,176 40.2% 62.8% 2013 13,378 75.0% 25.0% Maui i 2,828 37.5% 65.8% Source: DBEDT Data Book 2018,Table 21.39. 2014 13,455 76.0% 24.0% 2015 15,077 77.9% 22.1% Overall, the impact of external demand for Hawaii 2016 15,311 77.2% 22.8% housing units will have a notable impact on the 2017 15,835 77.3% 22.7% efforts of housing planners. We will return to this 2018 15,525 76.1% 23.9% _ topic in later sections of the report. Source: DBEDT Data Book 2018,Table 21.38. b. Use of Hawaii Property For the last ten years, nearly a quarter of all residential home sales in Hawaii were to persons In a 2019 survey, we contacted Hawaii property who live outside the state. That rose as high as owners who had tax billing addresses outside the 33.5 percent in 2010 and has been drifting State. Among those property owners, 38 percent downwards to about 24 percent in 2018. saw their property largely as an investment and 62 percent considered their property to be a Most (85%) of the out-of-state buyers were vacation home for the use of their family and Mainland residents. The other 15 percent were friends.36 international buyers. About 48 percent of out-of-state owners rented The counties were disproportionally impacted by their units while they were not using them. out-of-state sales in the last nine years. In 2018, Another 52 percent left their units vacant or 15 percent of Honolulu sales were made to non- loaned them to family or friends. There was a residents and 37.5 percent of Maui County's strong correlation between the way owners housing unit sales were made to persons living perceived their properties and the way they used outside the State. Hawaii and Kauai Counties them (Table 14). For instance, 61 percent of the also saw approximately 40 percent of their home investors rented their property while they were not sales go to outside buyers. using it themselves. Among those who see their property as a vacation or second home, and 39 In the same year, purchase prices for units bought percent of vacation homeowners rented their units by out-of-state buyers were, on average, 44.6 at least part of the time. percent higher than prices paid by local buyers. On Oahu, out-of-state buyers bought units that were 46.6 percent higher than the average units sold to a resident. The price differential peaked in Hawaii County, where non-Hawaii buyers paid 88 percent more for their units than did County residents. 36 The differential between in-state and out-of-state average 36 About 75 percent were from other U.S. states and 25 sales prices. For example, the average sales price for percent were from foreign countries. For methodology out-of-state units was 49.2 percent higher than the and content see SMS, Hawai'i Housing Planning Study, average sale price for sales to in-state residents. 2019:Technical Report, p.6. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 17 ©SMS December,2019 Table 14. Type and Use of Out-of-State Units 2019 Figure 5. Vacant Units Held for Seasonal or Percent of property owners Occasional Use, by County, 2009-2017 State O`ahu Maui Hawaii Kauai 16,000 Vacation 62 43 77 74 67 Honolulu -Hawai'i Maui Kaua'i home 14,000 Rent unit 39 27 47 53 59 'E 12,000 Investment 38 57 23 26 33 property o Rent unit 61 73 53 47 41 � 10,000 `0 8,000 Source, HHPS Out-of-State Owner Survey, 2019. 6,000 The pattern of owners and renters differs across counties. Oahu out-of-state properties are about 4,000 57 percent investments and 73 percent of those are rented when not occupied by the owner. Forty 2,000 three percent (43%) are vacation homes and only 27 percent of those are ever rented. o 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 In the other three counties, about a quarter of the Source: ACS 5-yr.estimates 2009-2017. units are investment properties and 50 to 60 Seasonal unit trend lines for Kauai and Maui percent are rentedwhen not in use. Three- Counties have been flat for nine years. The quarters of the units are vacation or second impact of seasonal units in Hawaii county has homes, but about 50 percent of those are rented been decreasing since 2014, and Honolulu at least part of the time. This certainly suggests County's trend has risen sharply since 2013. some additional research. The dates of sale also differ across counties. The major growth in out-of- In all, 6.6 percent of Hawai`i's housing units were state owned units on Oahu began as early as seasonal units in 2017. By comparison, the 1990. Maui's median yearbuilt was 2000, national average is about 2 percent. The figures followed by Kauai and Hawaii County in 2010. indicate that external demand for housing units by The first units reported in the survey were dated non-residents substantially reduces the number before 1920, so the demand for out-of-state of housing units that are part of the housing stock. housing units has always been significant. The loss of those units decreases the housing stock needed to accommodate rising demand. c. External Demand and Vacant Units Identifying exactly how many housing units were Many units sold to out-of-state buyers were either converted from residential owned or rented units second homes or timeshare units. Together they were converted to seasonal units (vacation rental made up the bulk of units the Census calls vacant, units [VRUs]) has been a challenge. In 2019, the held for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use emphasis on this research problem has changed (seasonal). These units are reported separately to focus on the outcome of new regulations on from the residential housing stock and are not short-term rentals on Oahu (see pp.74-75). available to residents in need of a housing unit. In Hawaii County (Figure 4), the 9,708 seasonal 3. Survey Demand Estimates units enumerated in the 2017 ACS were 11.5 One objective of the HHPS is to estimate demand percent of the county's total housing units. For for housing units for the next five years and use Honolulu County, the 14,358 seasonal units were those projections to identify the number and types 4.1 percent of O`ahu`s housing units. Maui of units needed for the State. HHPS includes a County's 6,937 seasonal units were 9.7 percent housing demand survey to support demand of total housing units. On Kauai, 4,301 seasonal estimates and describe new buyers and renters, units were 14.2 percent of all housing units. their financial situations, and unit preferences. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 18 ©SMS December,2019 We used data from the 2019 Housing Demand said they would never move from their current Survey to produce estimates of raw, effective, and units. They had found the place they wanted to qualified demand. live in and would stay there for the rest of their lives. Another group said they might move but had a. Raw Demand no plans to go anywhere very soon. Others said they would move sometime in the next ten years. Households with plans to move soon were Survey householders were first asked when they classified as "movers" and the survey estimate for would next move to a new housing unit. Some raw demand. Table 15. HHPS Demand Survey Demand Estimates, by County, 2019 County Honolulu Maui Hawai'i Kaua'i State Count Pct. Count Pct. Count Pct. Count Pct. Count Pct. Total Households 311,451 68.4% 54,434 12.0% 67,054 14.7% 22,563 5.0% 455,502 100.0% Will Not Move 108,025 34.7% 26,694 49.0% 34,175 51.0% 12,975 57.5% 181,870 39.9% Raw Demand 203,426 65.3% 27,740 51.0% 32,879 49.0% 9,588 42.5% 273,632 60.1% Will move, but no plans 67,934 33.4% 7,010 25.3% 8,400 25.5% 3,310 34.5% 86,654 31.7% Move out of state 35,289 17.3% 4,105 14.8% 4,487 13.6% 1,332 13.9% 45,214 16.5% Effective Demand 100,203 32.2% 16,624 30.5% 19,992 29.8% 4,946 21.9% 141,765 31.1% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 2019. Raw demand is households except those who said they would never move. "Wll move, but no plans"is the number of households who were unsure or refused to report when they expected to move. "Will move out of state"is the number of households whose first location choice was out-of-state. Out-of-state and no plan households are excluded from effective demand. In 2019, raw demand was 60.1 percent statewide, up from 40 percent in 2011. At 65.3 percent of all Table 16. Top Six Reasons for Not Buying a Home, households, the City and County of Honolulu had 2019 the highest raw demand. Other counties had County similar levels of raw demand (Maui: 51%, Hawai`i: Honolulu Maui Hawai'i Kauai State 49%, Kaua`i: 42.5%). For all movers to realize Too Expensive 57.3% 61.8% 51.9% 61.1% 57.2% their expectations and move to a new housing unit would result in 273,632 real estate transactions -- cannot Afford 33.9% 23.5% 25.9% 17.2% 31.0% the number of units that would change hands Down Payment duringtheperiod. Won't Stay 17.6% 39.5% 32.1% 45.2% 23.1% Long Enough Do Not Want To Reasons for Not Buying Buy; Prefer To 15.8% 41.6% 32.8% 47.9% 22.2% Rent We asked the 2019 Housing Demand Survey Can't Qualify ° ° ° ° ° respondents who were interested in moving to a fora Loan 20.5/ 13.8/ 15.9/ 7.6/ 18.6/ new home, but not interested in buying, why they Can't Afford would not buy. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of them the Monthly 18.1% 15.2% 13.6% 11.0% 16.9% told us that home prices were too high, or that it Payment was too expensive to buy right now (Table 16). Source: Housing Demand Survey, 2019. This was slightly lower than the 64 percent who cited expense as a reason in 2016. Roughly three Over 22 percent of those who do not plan to buy in ten (31%) said they could not afford the down a home said they preferred to rent(22.2%). Some payment, while 17 percent could not afford the were not going to be in Hawaii for a long time and monthly payment and 19 percent would be unable they did not want to be tied to any one place. to qualify for a loan. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 19 ©SMS December,2019 Others were not ready for the commitment and Table 17. Effective Demand by County, 1992, 1997, maintenance that they would require. 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016, and 2019 Effective Demand b. Effective Demand Percent of total households intending to move to a housing unit in Hawai'i In 2019, more households wanted to move away 1992 1997 2003 2006 2011 2016 2019 from Hawaii (Table A-13). Over 24 percent of all Honolulu 51.7 47.3 38.9 33.2 31.3 32.4 32.0 movers(24.2%)wanted to leave the State on their Maui 38.8 41.4 35.7 39.6 31.3 31.9 30.5 next move -- the highest rate since 1997. That's o Hawai'i 40.2 34.3 33.8 36.3 26.0 30.2 29.8 much higher than in other states, too. At a time when Americans are moving away from their Kauai 38.5 34.2 31.4 30.6 27.3 27.6 21.9 home state at unprecedented rates, Hawaii leads State 48.4 44.4 37.5 34.2 30.3 31.8 31.1 the nation in intentions to leave.37 Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016,and 2019. Reasons for Leaving the State Some observers believe there is more interest in home buying now because sales are stable and Once again, there were many families moving out prices will be higher. Others see few reasons to of Hawaii because they could not afford to buy a buy and point to our decreasing population as a home, which is consistent with Hawai`i's high- caution to prospective buyers. Regardless of priced market and low homeownership rates. buyer motivations, HHPS data show that the level of effective demand inside Hawaii has remained Statewide, about 22 percent of respondents who unchanged since 2011. planned to leave Hawaii said the high cost and limited availability of housing was one of the Historically, the pattern of effective demand problems causing them to move. That was lower across counties has been stable. Honolulu's than the 31 percent in 2016 and 30 percent in effective demand is highest among the counties. 2011 who reported planning to leave the state for Among the Neighbor Island counties, effective housing-related reasons. demand has been highest in Maui County and lowest for Kauai County. Households that leave Hawaii will not increase demand for Hawaii housing units. For this reason, c. Qualified Demand we computed effective demand to include only respondents who will move within the State. Qualified demand narrows the demand estimate Across the State, effective demand fell in each further by considering only effective demand Housing Demand Study year between 1992 households that are financially prepared to (48.4%) and 2011 (30.3%). Statewide effective pursue their preferred tenancy and unit type. This demand climbed slightly to 31.8 percent in 2016 step eliminates households that do not have the but dropped back to 31.1 percent of all financial qualifications to purchase or rent housing households in 2019. units in the current economy. Based on this analysis, we estimate that 29 percent of effective demand households are financially prepared to acquire a different residence (Table 18). This is the lowest level of 37 U.S. data show Hawai'i is No. 2 among States (22.3%) LendingTree, November 19, 2019. See also New York for people wanting to leave. Kapfidze, Tendayi. 2019. Times. 2019. Frozen in place: Americans are moving at LendingTree study reveals the top states where residents the highest rate on record, Nov. 20, 2019. are staying put, moving from and moving to, Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 20 ©SMS December,2019 financial preparedness among mover households percent interest rate, and a 20 percent down since the HHPS was begun in 1992. payment. Results are shown in Tables 19 and 20. Table 18. Qualified Demand for All Unit Types by Statewide, 41 percent of prospective single-family County, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016, 201938 home buyers said they could afford to make the County monthly mortgage payments, but not necessarily the 20 percent down payment. Twenty-seven Honolulu Maui Hawaii Kauai State percent (27%) said they had the funds to make a 1992 51.7% 38.8% 40.2% 38.5% 48.4% 20 percent down payment but could not afford the 1997 47.3% 41.4% 34.3% 34.2% 44.4% monthly payment. About 20 percent of 2003 38.9% 35.7% 33.8% 31.4% 37.5% households statewide were qualified to meet both requirements. 2006 33.2% 39.6% 36.3% 30.6% 34.2% 2011 31.3% 31.3% 26.0% 27.3% 30.3% The same set of financial qualification measures 2016 44.0% 39.7% 36.9% 35.1% 42.1% was applied to potential homebuyers who sought 2019 27.5% 40.2% 25.4% 39.7% 29.2% to purchase a multi-family unit rather than a single-family home. We used the current median Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, sales price for condominiums in each county 2011, 2016, and 2019 rather than the single-family median. As shown in Table 20, residents planning to purchase a multi- 4. Purchase Preferences family rather than a single-family unit were more likely to be financially able to do so. Buyer and renter preferences and qualifications for housing unit types were measured in the The median price, monthly mortgage, and down Demand Survey. The objective was to provide payment required are lower for multi-family units. information on consumer preferences to support Therefore, more Hawaii households were able to housing issue analyses over the next few years. meet the requirements to purchase a townhouse or condominium unit. Study results confirmed that Forty-nine percent (49%) of those who planned to 29 percent of Hawaii households in the market for move said they wanted to buy their next unit. a multi-family ownership unit in the next five years Plans for homeownership were on the upswing, could afford to make the monthly payments. following an all-time low of 42 percent in 2011 and Twenty percent (20%) reported having enough to 47 percent in 2016. But plans to buy do not always make the down payment. Just under 16 percent translate into marketplace reality. About 17 of multi-family buyer households were fully percent of those who planned to purchase their qualified to purchase their next home next home conceded that they were not sure they would be able to afford it and may have to This analysis does not include the impact of continue renting. maintenance fees attached to many multi-family units. Across the State, maintenance and other a. Buyer Qualifications fees are often calculated at $0.60 to $1.50 per square foot. While the national average for To evaluate the financial readiness of households maintenance fees is$331, the average for Hawaii wishing to buy a housing unit in Hawaii in the next has been quoted as $539. If the $539 for five years, we examined their income, affordable maintenance fees was added to the monthly monthly housing payment, and total amount mortgage payment of $1,827 (Table 20), this available for a down payment. These elements would almost certainly reduce the number of were evaluated against a median-priced home households who would qualify for purchase. assuming a fixed-rate, 30-year loan, a four 38 For comparability with prior years, a 20% down payment homebuyers in 2018 was used for all other financial was used in determining financial qualification for this qualification tables. table. The average down payment of 11% made by Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 21 ©SMS December,2019 Table 19. Financial Qualification to Purchase a Single-Family Home, Counties &State, 2019 County Honolulu Maui Hawaii Kauai State Median Sales Price $770,000 $819,500 $362,000 $630,000 $695,000 Down Payment Required* $154,000 $163,900 $72,400 $126,000 $139,000 Monthly Mortgage Payment** $2,940 $3,129 $1,382 $2,406 $2,654 Total Effective Demand SFD Buyers 26,649 7,119 8,332 1,761 43,861 Can Afford Monthly Payment 40.3% 28.4% 43.3% 34.2% 40.8% Have Adequate Down Payment 19.1% 26.8% 25.7% 27.4% 27.1% Fully Qualified 17.2% 11.7% 19.8% 20.3% 19.7% Source. Locations Market Reports, Q1 2019; Housing Demand Survey, 2019. https://www.locationshawaii.com/learn/market-reports/hawai i-statewide-real-estate-report/ *Assumes a 20 percent down payment. **Based on a 30-year fixed loan with a 4% interest rate. Base is effective demand households that plan to move within the next 5 years and purchase an SFD unit. Can Afford Monthly Payment if the monthly payment is less than or equal to 30%of household income. Table 20. Financial Qualification to Purchase a Multi-Family Unit, Counties & State of Hawaii, 2019 County Honolulu Maui Hawaii Kauai State Median Sales Price $418,000 $444,444 $418,500 $459,000 $430,000 Down Payment Required* $83,600 $88,889 $83,700 $91,800 $86,000 Monthly Mortgage Payment** $1,596 $1,697 $1,598 $1,753 $1,642 Total Effective Demand MFD Buyers 20,994 1,298 1,655 493 24,439 Can Afford Monthly Payment 29.2% 27.6% 34.9% 19.1% 28.6% Have Adequate Down Payment 20.3% 19.6% 26.5% 8.1% 20.1% Fully Qualified 16.7% 23.4% 13.2% 8.7% 15.7% Source. Locations Market Reports, Q1 2019; Housing Demand Survey, 2019. https://www.locationshawaii.com/learn/market-reports/hawaii-statewide-real-estate-report/ *Assumes a 20 percent down payment. **Based on a 30-year fixed loan with a 4% interest rate. Base is effective demand households that plan to move within the next 5 years and purchase an MFD unit. Can Afford Monthly Payment if the monthly payment is less than or equal to 30%of household income. b. Renter Qualifications examined as well to determine the financial readiness of prospective renters. Seven in ten households planning to rent their next home cited financial reasons for their Statewide, 15 percent of those planning to rent a decision. Reasons for not buying included the single-family unit indicated they could afford to inability to afford a down payment or monthly make the median monthly rent payment of payment and the belief that homes in Hawaii are $2,220. For 23 percent of these households, their just"too expensive." These households were also current income suggests that making the median asked if they would opt to purchase a home if monthly rent payment would require less than 30 there was a unit available they could afford. Close percent of their income. Twenty-nine percent to 70 percent responded affirmatively. (29%), however, were currently paying more each month for housing than the median monthly rent Financial qualification for households planning to amount. rent their next unit was evaluated using the current average monthly rental rate for single- Among the 53,850 households across the State family and multi-family units in each county. that intend to rent their next unit, 35 percent prefer Household income, current monthly shelter a single-family unit. Those planning to rent single- payment, and affordable monthly rent were family units on Maui were most financially Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 22 ©SMS December,2019 prepared to do so. Residents of Kauai County percent of prospective multi-family renters, the were better equipped than residents of Hawaii current median rent payment would require less and Honolulu Counties to make the median than 30 percent of their household monthly monthly rent payment for a single-family home. income. Among those planning to rent their next unit, close Among those who wanted a multi-family dwelling to half (46%) plan to rent an apartment or other as their next unit, those on Maui were the most multi-family unit. Among those households, about financially prepared to do so. About 21 percent 29 percent were currently making monthly rent currently pay rent equal to or higher than the payments equal to or higher than the median rent median rent amount for the county. amount. Another 15 percent indicated they could afford the median monthly rent payment. For 23 Table 21. Financial Qualification to Rent a Single-Family Unit, Counties and State of Hawaii, 2019 County Honolulu Maui Hawaii Kauai State Median Monthly Rent Amount $2,593 $2,498 $1,713 $2,076 $2,220 Security Deposit + 1st Mo. Rent $5,186 $4,996 $3,426 $4,152 $4,440 Total Effecti',e Demand SFD Renters 10,598 3,368 3,585 1,318 18,868 Current Payment-Same or Higher 25.3% 44.3% 23.2% 30.9% 28.7% Affordable Rent*-Same or Higher 14.0% 12.7% 13.5% 31.9% 14.9% Income-Based Qualification 20.3% 26.1% 29.6% 22.5% 23.3% Source: Median rents from RentRange®(April 2019)for all unit sizes. Qualified renters from the HHPS 2019. Base is households that plan to rent their next SFD unit in the State of Hawai'i in the next 5 years. *Self-reported affordable rent amount. Table 22. Financial Qualification to Rent a Multi-Family Unit, Counties and State of Hawaii, 2019 County Honolulu Maui Hawaii Kaua`i State Median Monthly Rent Amount $2,256 $2,248 $1,563 $1,926 $1,998 Security Deposit + 1st Mo. Rent $4,512 $4,496 $3,126 $3,852 $3,996 Total Effecti'e Demand MFD Renters 19,997 1,890 2,230 384 24,502 Current Payment-Same or Higher 19.7% 21.0% 12.9% 0.0% 18.9% Affordable Rent*-Same or Higher 11.9% 18.7% 18.1% 5.8% 12.9% Income-Based Qualification 26.3% 37.6% 18.9% 19.9% 26.4% Source: Median rents from RentRange®(April 2019)for all unit sizes. Qualified renters from HHPS 2019. Base is households that plan to rent their next MFD unit in the State of Hawai'i in the next 5 years. *Self-reported affordable rent amount. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 23 ©SMS December,2019 5. Housing Preferences (70%). Again, these figures suggest a willingness to accept smaller units than in the past. The a. For Owned Units number of bathrooms required was also relatively low, with 64 percent reporting that they could Once again, most effective demand buyers accept one or one-and-a-half baths. statewide (66%) preferred single-family detached Seventy-two percent (72%) of households that homes. Single-family units are more important to plan to rent their next unit said they would like to buyers in Kauai (98%), Maui (86%), and Hawaii buy a home in the future. Their reasons for not Counties (82%)than in Honolulu (62%). Maui and doing so now most often included the high cost of Kaua'i also showed the lowest preference for housing and insufficient funds for a down condominium units (0.6 and 8%, respectively). payment. Nearly 43 percent of potential buyers said they 'OUSING PRICES would be looking for a three-bedroom unit and 19 percent said they would need four bedrooms. The most distinctive characteristic of Hawai`i's When asked about the minimum number of housing market is high prices. Sumner La Croix bedrooms they could accept, 53 percent felt two may have been the first to point out that our bedrooms would be enough and another 32 housing prices have been some of the highest in percent reported a three-bedroom minimum. This the nation, dating back to at least the end of World willingness to settle for fewer bedrooms was War II. The HHPS has been following the price slightly higher than in the past, perhaps reflecting trends since the first edition in 1992. buyers' readiness to compromise on the unit size in the face of high prices. The same was true for the preferred number of bathrooms. More than 1. Sales Prices three-quarters of households would prefer two to three bathrooms, but close to half of buyers Figure 6 shows single-family and condominium conceded that they would be willing to accept a sales prices from 1985 to 2018 in Honolulu. unit with only one or one-and-a-half bathrooms (48%). Figure 6. Housing Prices in Honolulu, 1985-2018 $900 SFD Condo b. For Rented Units $800 o $• 700 Households that planned to rent their next home $• 600 in Hawaii in the next five years were mostly current renters (83%). Among these households $500 35 percent preferred to rent a single-family house. N $400 About 48 percent preferred a multi-family unit $300 such as an apartment (34%), condominium (8%), $• 200 or townhouse (6%). Preference for single-family homes was once again much higher on Neighbor $100 Islands, ranging from 57 to 70 percent versus 32 $0 percent for Honolulu. On O � � � � � cn� cn� cn ahu, nine percent of M M M �• cncncncn � 000000000 N N N N N N N N N prospective renters were interested in townhomes ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ›- ' versus 2 to 3 percent on the other islands. Source: Honolulu Board of Realtors. Across the State, renters' first choice would be Our last two price run-ups are easily identified. larger units with two (39%) or three bedrooms Housing prices more than doubled in a few years. (25%). Seven out of ten potential renter After each period of expansion, prices dropped households, however, were willing to take units slightly, then held in place. The adjustment period with fewer than three bedrooms, if necessary after 1989 was a decade long and the post-2008 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 24 ©SMS December,2019 recovery has lasted for ten years. Condominium Across the State, the median sales price for a prices regained their 2007 peak by 2012, single- single family home increased 41.5 percent family homes by 2013. between 2010 and 2018 (+5.2% per year). Between 2017 and 2018, the single family sales Since 2016, the median price of single-family price rose by 4.4 percent. The increase in homes went up by about 4.1 percent per year. condominium sales prices was a bit lower at 38.7 During the same period, the median price of percent between 2010 and 2018 (+4.8% per condominium units has increased by 5.1 percent year). In 2018, however, condominium prices per year, on average. rose by 5.1 percent over the 2017 price. Table 23 shows median sales prices for single- Hawaii County also experienced significant family homes and condominiums between 2010 increases in the median sales price of single- and 2018. The period was marked by increasing family homes during this period, with increases of prices but was short of the rate increases 35 percent. expected during a run-up.39 Table 23. Median Home Sales Prices, Counties and ientS State of Hawaii, 2010-2018 In 2019, Hawaii continues to have the highest State of Counties average rents in the nation, followed by the district Hawaii Honolulu) Hawaii I Kauai I Maui of Columbia and New York.40 For the past Single Family House Sales Price(in thousands) decade, Hawai`i's median gross rent has 2010 $487 $600 $260 $498 $460 consistently been 50 to 55 percent higher than the 2011 $470 $580 $246 $455 $432 national median gross rent. 2012 $500 $625 $260 $459 $470 2013 $545 $650 $295 $529 $530 The HHPS review of rental housing prices 2014 $575 $674 $315 $533 $570 gathered rent data from several sources and, 2015 $600 $700 $329 $614 $580 although the sources don't match exactly, the 2016 $633 $735 $330 $626 $639 conclusions are the same. Our analysis is based 2017 $660 $760 $350 $660 $695 on data from the American Community Survey, from HUD Fair Market Rent data, and from 2018 $689 $790 $360 $700 $710 detailed rental data from RentRange®.41 Multi-Family Condominium Sales Price(in thousands) 2010 $310 $305 $260 $270 $378 The important finding is that rent prices leveled off 2011 $290 $300 $213 $237 $310 in 2017 and have grown very little since then. 2012 $318 $315 $258 $290 $358 2013 $333 $332 $250 $310 $374 2014 $351 $350 $280 $346 $415 2015 $363 $360 $275 $360 $410 2016 $390 $390 $300 $399 $415 2017 $409 $410 $312 $435 $445 2018 $430 $421 $350 $461 $500 Source: DBEDT Data Book Time Series, Table 21.36. Further details on home sales prices are shown in Appendix Table D-7. 39 Further details on home sales prices are shown in 40 ACS, Table B25064,5-yr. estimates, for Hawai'i, U.S., 50 Appendix Table D-7. States, and selected SMSAs, 2009 through 2017. 41 RentRange®, see glossary. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 25 ©SMS December,2019 Table 24. Median Rent for All Units, Counties and The median monthly payment made by the 31 State of Hawaii, 2009-2019 percent of households in Hawaii County who rent County their present unit was the lowest in the State at Honolulu I Hawaii Maui Kauai State $1,727. 2009 $2,108 $1,483 $1,904 $1,618 $2,085 2010 $2,077 $1,480 $1,894 $1,682 $2,031 HUD's Fair Market Rents for the counties provide 2011 $2,115 $1,474 $1,876 $1,690 $2,018 rent data for households that qualify for 2012 $2,191 $1,478 $1,859 $1,780 $1,963 government-assisted housing. FMR rents exclude 2013 $2,218 $1,515 $1,848 $1,867 $1,914 units built in the last two years, renters who have 2014 $2,256 $1,576 $1,883 $1,855 $1,900 been in their units for more than two years, and 2015 $2,344 $1,660 $1,985 $1,840 $1,992 those receiving any form of housing assistance. 2016 $2,427 $1,734 $2,132 $1,912 $2,149 As expected, they are lower than median contract 2017 $2,499 $1,754 $2,253 $1,986 $2,239 rents and they continue to increase in all Hawaii 2018 $2,532 $1,733 $2,304 $2,022 $2,283 counties. (Table 25). Increases for Honolulu and 2019 $2,540 $1,727 $2,334 $2,027 $2,315 Kauai Counties ranged from 7.2 to 9.9 percent, while the increase for Maui County was 12.9 Source: RentRange®, 2009-2019. Figures in current dollars. percent. The Fair Market Rent for the County of The contract rent data suggest that, across all Hawaii, however, only increased by 3.3 percent between 2016 and 2019. types (single-family and multi-family) and sizes (one-bedroom through five-bedroom) of rental Table 25. Average Fair Market Rent for All Units, units, renters in Hawaii are paying more for their Counties of Hawaii, 2009-2019 accommodations now than they were in 2014. County Figure 7 shows the change in median rents since Honolulu Hawaii Maui Kauai 2009. For the State, the current median rent is 7.8 percent higher than in 2016. Maui County had 2009 $1,631 $1,160 $1,584 $1,332 the largest increase during the past three years, 2010 $1,906 $1,232 $1,682 $1,414 climbing 9.5 percent (+3.1% per year). 2011 $1,904 $1,280 $1,749 $1,470 Figure 7. Median Rents, Counties and State of 2012 $1,977 $1,295 $1,625 $1,428 Hawaii, 2009-2019 2013 $2,060 $1,150 $1,374 $1,835 2014 $2,046 $1,047 $1,318 $1,739 -Honolulu Hawai'i Maui Kaua'i State $2,600 2015 $2,034 $1,268 $1,321 $1,330 2016 $2,172 $1,311 $1,692 $1,503 $2,400 2017 $2,233 $1,359 $1,795 $1,555 $2,200 2018 $2,278 $1,361 $1,848 $1,624 $2,000 2019 $2,328 $1,354 $1,910 $1,652 Source: Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, 2009- ` $1,800 2019. Current U.S. dollars. $1,600 Analyses of show that increasesrentsby were unittype commonand acrosssize (Table all unit26) $1,400 types and sizes. Between 2016 and 2019, increases in median FMR were larger for single- $1,200 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 family (11.2%) than for condominium (6%) or apartment (7.6%) rental units. Source: RentRange®, 2009-2016. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 26 ©SMS December,2019 Table 26. Median Rent by Unit Type and Size, State of Hawaii, 2009-2019 Single-Family Units Condominium Units Apartment Units All SF All Condo All Apt 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR 5BR 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BR Units Units Units 2009 $1,343 $1,690 $2,290 $2,735 $3,075 $2,250 $1,325 $1,650 $2,265 $2,695 $1,999 $1,280 $1,600 $2,188 $2,640 $1,936 2010 $1,300 $1,580 $2,155 $2,665 $2,950 $2,193 $1,285 $1,580 $2,190 $2,620 $1,939 $1,210 $1,520 $2,145 $2,595 $1,883 2011 $1,290 $1,595 $2,100 $2,535 $2,945 $2,192 $1,250 $1,558 $2,160 $2,600 $1,933 $1,175 $1,475 $2,108 $2,505 $1,856 2012 $1,250 $1,595 $2,065 $2,413 $2,690 $1,996 $1,250 $1,590 $2,115 $2,515 $1,909 $1,185 $1,510 $2,030 $2,425 $1,793 2013 $1,245 $1,605 $2,078 $2,413 $2,705 $1,995 $1,273 $1,620 $2,140 $2,475 $1,898 $1,210 $1,560 $2,095 $2,480 $1,841 2014 $1,205 $1,600 $2,065 $2,400 $2,638 $1,962 $1,260 $1,638 $2,185 $2,460 $1,894 $1,210 $1,575 $2,165 $2,515 $1,878 2015 $1,223 $1,595 $2,128 $2,468 $2,748 $2,028 $1,273 $1,703 $2,290 $2,548 $1,984 $1,205 $1,630 $2,240 $2,595 $1,928 2016 $1,300 $1,658 $2,280 $2,735 $3,048 $2,200 $1,335 $1,775 $2,370 $2,795 $2,110 $1,275 $1,700 $2,343 $2,785 $2,043 2017 $1,355 $1,745 $2,405 $2,890 $3,210 $2,324 $1,395 $1,800 $2,420 $2,920 $2,185 $1,335 $1,760 $2,385 $2,875 $2,110 2018 $1,350 $1,780 $2,498 $3,023 $3,343 $2,399 $1,425 $1,835 $2,423 $2,993 $2,225 $1,355 $1,793 $2,440 $2,930 $2,149 2019 $1,365 $1,798 $2,568 $3,095 $3,373 $2,447 $1,445 $1,875 $2,485 $3,053 $2,237 $1,398 $1,820 $2,475 $2,995 $2,198 %chg (2016- 5.0% 8.4% 12.6% 13.2% 10.7% 11.2% 8.2% 5.6% 4.9% 9.2% 6.0% 9.6% 7.1% 5.7% 7.5% 7.6% 2019) Source. RentRange®, 2009-2019. Figures are current U.S. dollars. Further details are shown in Tables D-2 through D-6 in the Appendix. Median rent for a 2-bedroom single-family unit a. Employment and Affordable Prices increased by 8.4 percent from 2016 to 2019. The monthly rent for a 2-bedroom multi-family unit There are many definitions of affordable housing increased by half as much (5.6 to 7.1%)during the and many ways to describe the impact of same period and the median rent for a 4-bedroom affordability on the population. We have already single-family unit went up by$360(13%) between discussed the shelter-to-income (STI) ratio and its 2016 and 2019. Median rent for a�4-bedroom role in estimating affordability. Households with condominium unit went up by $258 (9%). high STI ratios are said to be living in unaffordable units. Areas average STI The trend is not unique to Hawaii; rents were up affordable thanith thosehwith lower rat osios are less for all major metropolitan areas. Honolulu is consistently ranked near the top of the list of Wage and salary income needed to rent a America's high-rent cities and, in 2019, our median-priced, two-bedroom apartment is also average rent was second only to San Francisco. used to measure housing affordability. Here we use the National Low-Income Housing Coalition 3. Affordable Housing (NLIHC)'s Out of Reach Report. A summary of the findings for 2018 is shown in Table 27. See Table D-1 in the appendix. Having one housing unit per household and enough vacant units to ensure a reasonable Table 27. FY16 Housing Wage, Hawaii 2018 vacancy rate does not ensure that all households will be adequately housed. There must be a mix Hourly wage necessary to of unit types and sizes in the right locations. A afford a 2-bedr000m functioning housing market needs luxury, high- rental unit at HUD Fair priced units for those who can afford them. It Market Rent, 2018 needs a bulk of adequate and comfortable units State of Hawai`i $36.13 for the middle-market and enough safe and Honolulu County $39.06 affordable housing units for low-income people. Hawaii County $25.42 These are the numbers most valuable for housing Maui County $31.13 planners, and the numbers that are the most difficult to find. Kaua`i County $29.06 Source. NLIHC Out of Reach, 2018 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 27 ©SMS December,2019 Compare Hawai`i's Housing Wage ($36.13) with Unlike affordability measures based on the average wage of a renter in the state household income, UI measures affordability as a ($16.16)42, and it is understandable that there are condition of the housing stock. It counts units in many households with high shelter-to-income the housing stock with shelter prices suitable for ratios. In 2018, Hawaii had the largest shortfall (- households at specific HUD income levels. $19.98) between the average renter wage (amount renters earn) and the two-bedroom We applied this approach to 2017 housing unit housing wage (amount required to afford an prices throughout the State using guidelines for average two-bedroom rental unit). At -$11.53, 30 percent, 50 percent, 80 percent, and 100 Maryland ranked a distant second on this shortfall percent of AMI for each county. measure. Substantial differences also exist between the In 2017, just over half of the housing stock City and County of Honolulu and the other statewide (55.5%) was affordable to households counties. Honolulu rental prices necessitate an earning 80 percent of HUD AMI. A notably hourly wage of $39.06 to afford a two-bedroom greater proportion of the units affordable to unit at FMR, while the housing wage in the other households earning up to 80 percent of the AMI three counties is between $25.42 and $31.13. were suited to the higher-income households within this range. Approximately half of the units The NLIHC measure allows us to compare our were affordable to households earning between rent wage with other states. Hawai`i's 2018 rent 50 and 80 percent AMI. Only about 14 percent of wage ($36.13) was highest in the nation, $3.45 the units, however, were priced such that they higher than second-place California ($32.68). would be affordable to households earning less than 30 percent AMI. b. Affordable units in the housing stock The housing stock on the island of Hawaii included the largest percentage of affordable We also use a definition of affordable housing units (71.5%), and in the °city and County of units recently developed by the Urban Institute Honolulu just over half (53/0) of all units were (UI).43 They define affordable housing units as affordable in 2017. Affordable units were most units with a monthly mortgage or rent payment limited in Kauai County, with just 50.9 percent of that would require no more than 30 percent of the island's housing affordable to low-income monthly household income for a household households. earning a specified percent of the HUD Area Median Income (AM I). 42 NLIHC Out of Reach, 2018. affordability gap for extremely low-income renters in 43 Leopold, Josh, Liza Getsinger, Pamela Blumenthal, 2013, Urban Institute Research Report, June 15, 2015. Katya Abazajan, and Reed Jordan. (2015). The housing Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 28 ©SMS December,2019 III. HOUSING PROJECTIONS, 2019-2040 The focus of the HHPS is on planning — using Housing Supply Projection housing information to develop policies and procedures to facilitate housing development that The HHPS housing supply projection is a is consistent with housing demand. This future- projection of total housing units rather than oriented viewpoint requires more than information housing stock. The objective was to prepare a on past performance. It requires projections of housing supply projection that was consistent with how the housing market will function in the future. the housing demand projection produced by DBEDT.44 Total housing units include occupied A. HOUSING SUPPLY housing units, and vacant and available housing units, seasonal units, migrant units, and other The HHPS measures supply in terms of new vacancies. Historical data were taken from construction each year. New construction was decennial census and ACS data. measured as the difference between the housing unit counts for two adjacent years. Supply The historical supply data show the well-known projections were based on past performance of pattern of housing production over the past two the housing market (added units) and population decades. Steady growth in production between growth (new residents). 1990 and 2000 was followed by slightly higher growth after 1999 and a dip after the attack on the After testing several projection models, we World Trade Center in 2001. That was followed selected a regression model with ARMA by much faster growth through the housing bubble coefficients for the population. The model (2002-2008). The prominent downturn in housing produced a reasonable outcome, as shown in production followed the Great Recession in 2009. Figure 8. All model parameters were statistically There has been some slight improvement since significant. Details are presented in Appendix 2017. Table C-2. The projection line suggests a continued increase Figure 8. New Construction, State of Hawaii, 1990- in housing supply at a rate somewhat lower than 2030 in the previous nine years. The slowdown was 600,000 3.0% generated by the decreasing rate of population growth since 2014-2015. Specifically, the model 500,000 2.5% predicts lower production rates between 2020 and 2025. The percentage of growth during this period 400,000 2.0% ranges from 0.4 percent to 0.2 percent annually. 300,000 1.5%t There is no information in the historical data itself 200,000 - 1.0% that indicates a change in the direction of the series. The decrease in population growth 100,000 111111d10.5% suggests fewer housing units would be needed. Should population decline and housing demand 0 R H H R H H 0.0% projections fall, our supply projection would be m In 8 m m O O 8 0 0 N a ro N N N N N M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N adjusted downward. mPercent Change(Hisroncal) =3 Percent Change(Projection) —Total Housing Units(Historical)—Total Housing Unts(Projection) Source: SMS, 2019 as Hawai'i Housing Demand 2020-2030, Hawai'i . Department of Business and Economic Development, Research and Analysis Division, December, 2019. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 29 ©SMS December,2019 2. Housing Supply Projection Caveats Studies continue to appear48 and to clarify the situation. In the long run, however, the impact of The supply projection provided here was sea level rise on the State's 2045 projection will be developed in an atmosphere of change. HHPS minimal and the impact on our 2020-2025 forecast sponsors were interested in investigating a few will effectively be zero. issues that might affect this projection. We review several of those here. Baby Boomers Climate Change and Sea Level Rise Some observers of housing trends worry that housing values may fall as baby boomers die off Recent studies (2-10) have shown that sea levels or sell off49. Two recent studies seem to support in Hawaii will reach 6 inches by 2030, 1.1 feet by that contention, one from Fannie Mae50 and one 2050, 2.0 feet by 2075, and 3.2 feet 2100.45 Later from the Fuller Institute51. The issue is relevant in studies suggest that the rate of change may be Hawaii because we have a rapidly aging faster. A local study published in 2015 showed population and Housing Demand Survey results that the standard rate of change in beach erosion suggest that our younger people are emigrating. might be tripled by 2100.46 That could bring about the 2014 changes even earlier. Baby Boomers — persons born between 1946 and 1964- control about 32 million housing units worth In terms of our housing projection, a study more than $13.5 trillion52. The next generation of published in 201747 predicted that the 3.2-foot rise first-time buyers is the millennials, people born in sea level would destroy 6,500 structures and between the early 1980s and the 1990s. If displace nearly 20,000 Hawaii residents. There is Boomers decided to sell their units quickly and no doubt that sea level rise will impact Hawaii's millennials do not buy them, the market could housing stock in the remainder of this century, and experience a demand shock. Demand will drop planners should take note. Developing new just as supply rises. Prices will fall, resulting in a housing units in the areas that will be affected by large loss of value in the housing market. sea level rise would be unwise and that could be true even earlier than the first studies predict. The The argument depends on certain characteristics UH Manoa study shows that the affected areas will of boomers that together make them look like be subject to greater damage from tsunami and heterogeneous groups with a single set of hurricane storm surge well before the areas are behaviors. Boomers have a desire to age in totally inundated. place53. They have not prepared themselves for retirement, have little savings, have health insurance problems and very few have long-term 45 Climate Change Impacts in Hawai'i : A Summary Of 49 Harney, Kenneth R. 2018. Housing values may fall as Climate Change And Its Impacts on Hawai'i's Ecosystems baby boomers die off or sell off, two studies say. And Communities, UH at Manoa, Sea Grant College Washington Post, July 18, 2018. Program, June 2014, p. iv. 50 Myers, Dowel and Patrick Simmons. 2018. The coming 46 Anderson, T.R., et al., Doubling of coastal erosion under exodus of older homeowners, Perspectives, Fannie Mae. rising sea level by mid-century in Hawaii. Natural 51 Chapman, Jeanette. 2018. Demographic and economic Hazards, 2015. 78(1): p. 75-103. factors affecting the upcoming home sales market in the 47 Hawai'i Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Washington region. The Stephen S. Fuller Institute, Commission. 2017. Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Vulnerability School of Policy and Government, George Mason and Adaptation Report. Prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc. and University, July 10, 2018. the State of Hawai'i Department of Land and Natural 52 Fannie Mae quoted in Lloyd, Alcynna. 2018. Can Resources, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands, Millenials confront the looming threat of aging baby under the State of Hawai'i Department of Land and boomers?, Housing Wire, July 11, 2018. Natural Resources Contract No: 64064. 53 AARP's Survey of Home and Community Preferences, 48 https://www.staradvertiser.com/2018/07/05/Hawai'i- showed that 76% of Americans want to remain in their news/34-of-Hawai'is-coast-at-risl-as-climate-change- current home, and 77% want to stay in their current accelerates-study-finds/ community. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 30 ©SMS December,2019 care insurance. Many of them lost a large part of In Hawaii, baby boomers controlled about 98,814 their real estate value in the Great Recession. All housing units worth more than $ 65 billion. Our this leads to a predictable set of expected own survey found that Hawaii residents become behaviors. Baby Boomers will hang onto their less likely to move to a new home as they get homes until the market starts to fall and then sell older. Sixty-four percent (64%) of seniors ages 60 off en masse. to 65 said they would probably never move. For residents between 66 and 74 years of age, 68 To this point, the data do not show large numbers percent have no intention of moving. At age 75 of sales by homeowners over the age of 65. In and older, the percentage of Hawaii seniors who fact, the number of homeowners among the baby reported that they were unlikely to ever move boomer generation is increasing. Additionally, jumped to 85 percent. evidence shows that not all boomers are tightly tied to their existing units. A 2018 AARP study In contrast, baby boomers in Hawaii County showed 32 percent of seniors were willing to control an estimate of 24,055 units worth $11.8 consider home sharing and 31 percent would billion in 2017. That is about 7.1 percentage points consider ADU's. Over half of seniors were higher than the state, and 13.1 percentage point interested in villages that provide services to higher than the national average. Between 2013 enable aging in place. Another 2018 survey to 2017, homes owned by boomers rose from 47.0 conducted by Realtor.com found 85 percent of to 53.5 percentage points. them had no plans to sell their present home. Millennials The reality is that Boomers are a large and diverse group who will not act in lockstep with any cohort. Millennials are portrayed using the same kind of They will approach the housing market each in stereotyping. They are burdened by college loan their own way and in their own best interest. In the debt, beset by a proclivity to marry late, have end, whatever happens will take place over many children even later, and not inclined to buy years and may not have any noticeable effect at homes55. Their purchase preferences are for a1154. smaller units in the city, with higher densities near public transportation.56 Table 28. Total Number and Aggregate Value of Occupied Housing Units Owned by Baby Boomers, As with baby boomers, there are scholars who 2017 disagree with this viewpoint and offer evidence Units Owned by Boomers that millennials are a very large cohort with more #of Units Agg. Value of Units diverse preferences than some might think57. Honolulu 65,589 $47,872,716,700 Hawai'i 16,659 $6,749,146,700 Still other observers see all of this as much ado Maui 10,826 $7,586,314,700 about nothing. That group, led by Lawrence Yun, Kauai 5,740 $3,746,144,700 chief economist at the National Association of State of Hawai'i 98,814 $65,954,322,800 Realtors, claims that those who worry about the United States 22,841,775 $6,260,165,953,800 baby boomer bust have ignored positive trends in the housing market, rising populations, and Source:ACS 2017 5-year Estimates Table B25079, B25007. increasing demand from foreign buyers. Owners age 65 and over. Even the Fannie Mae researchers don't think there is cause for major alarm but suggest it might 54 Molinsky, Jennifer. 2017, quoted in Realtor Magazine, go to college to escape the lack of opportunity in their rural April 20, 2017. home towns. They incur student debt in the process and 55 Tabit, P.J. and Josh Winter. 2019. "Rural brain drain". move to cities to get jobs and pay back their debt. Examining millennial migration patterns and student loan 56 Realtor Magazine. 2017. The big boomer sell-off coming debt, Consumer and Community Context,Vol. 1, January in the 2020s?, Realtor,April 20, 2017, p. 1. 2019, pp. 7-14. Links millennials preference for cities to 57 Stoetzer, Ethan. 2018. How millennials will reshape student loan debt. Millennials, especially rural millennials, American politics in 2020. Politics, January 22, 2018. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 31 ©SMS December,2019 be wise to develop some financing programs to Out-of-State Homebuyers encourage millennials to buy their first home now so they have the equity they will need to move up If a property is sold to a buyer who lives outside into the Boomers old houses58. the State of Hawaii, there may or may not be an impact on housing supply. Vacation Rental Units The buyer may treat the property as a vacation Vacation Rental Units(VRUs) are discussed in the home or a second home, in which case the unit Tourism section of this report (p. 72). They are becomes part of total housing units, but not part of clearly relevant to the supply of residential housing housing stock. The unit is occupied when the units in Hawaii. When units are taken out of the owner is in town, and vacant when the owner is housing stock and made available to non- away. It becomes a seasonal and recreational residents, the housing supply is decreased. The unit unavailable for use by Hawaii residents. decrease in housing stock will have the effect of increasing housing prices and asking rents. Alternatively, the buyer may treat the unit as an investment, renting it all or most of the time the There is ample evidence that the number of VRUs owner is away from Hawaii. If the rental is in Hawaii has been rising. The Hawaii Tourism available on a long-term contract, the unit is part Authority's annual Visitor Plant Inventory (VPI) of the housing stock. If the rental is available to tells us the State's inventory of vacation rentals is visitors on a short-term contract, the unit is not part large and growing. of the housing stock. Technically, it is a vacation rental and is removed from total housing to The Census shows the percentage of Hawai`i's become a commercial accommodation unit. total housing units used for seasonal or recreational purposes has been increasing. There To the extent that out-of-state buyers treat their is no evidence yet that units removed from the homes as second homes or as vacation rentals, housing stock are the ones that are being let to the units they purchase are not part of useable visitors in as short-term rentals. There are few housing stock. If out-of-state buyers increase, observers, however, who would disagree that then the stock projection must go up. DBEDT's VRU's represent a decrease in the supply of measurement of out-of-state land sales shows Hawai`i's housing stock. fewer out-of-state sales every year. Thus, we expect little impact on our projection. Recent government actions to curb the spread of short-term rentals to visitors may have a Government Spending on Housing significant effect. The success of those efforts is not known as we write this report. They are Government spending affects housing supply in intended to significantly reduce the use of two ways. First, it enables the development of residential units for commercial business. If they housing units at the low end of the market that are successful, then fewer units will be removed would not be built without subsidies. Housing built from the supply, and many may be returned to the with government funding can be controlled using housing stock as long-term rentals. In that case, deed restrictions or agreements that require the our supply prediction would be increased even units to remain within the affordable housing without construction activity. stock. Both subjects are treated elsewhere in this report. To the extent that government funding increases or is increased as a percentage of total construction costs, housing supply can be expected to increase. Federal and state 58 Myers and Simmons, ibid., p. 3. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 32 ©SMS December,2019 allocations to housing in Hawaii increased out-migration high enough to cause measurable significantly since the last HHPS. In 2019, those population decline. allocations returned to their 2014 levels. The$200 million appropriation in 2018 will increase Other components of population change held production of rental units during the 2020 through constant, out-migration will free up housing units, 2025 period. and cause an increase in supply without additional construction. In-Migration Evidence from the demand survey suggests that Planners have long understood that in-migration is an increasing number of people are leaving the related to higher home prices and higher rents. state and that lack of affordable housing is one of Migrating households represent an instant the primary reasons for their move. increase in demand and supply cannot respond fast enough. Some economists have debated this Certainly, if outmigration continues or increases, basic model with a counterproposal that the there will be a positive impact on supply. But our amenities of the receiving municipality were the supply projection model, based on population cause of both in-migration and housing costs. The change and outmigration at its projected rate, issues were recently disentangled in an article59 would not be affected. that showed, even adjusted for the characteristics of the receiving city, in-migration increases 3. The Pipeline housing costs. Further, the contribution of in- migrants to higher housing costs was greater than The supply projection 2020-2025 is the number of the contribution of new native households. pp y p housing units required to accommodate the rate of Hawaii has had high in-migration both foreign and unit productionadjusted for changes in domestic. It has higher amenities than most other population. It is similar in concept to the housing States and it certainly has high rents and housing demand projection produced by DBEDT and is prices. Further, although the research does not well suited to this project. describe the mechanism that links migration and The HHPS 2019 scope of services added a shelter costs, it is not unreasonable to expect that in-migration will result in a decrease in supply request that we investigate housing supply using relative to demand. a "list of existing and planned housing projects in the City and County of Honolulu as the basis for This weaker link between in-migration and supply gathering improved or supplemental information" is not likely to affect our projection. The projection on housing supply. During the final contract model is based on total housing units as affected negotiations, other counties agreed to supply by population. In-migration is a component of similar lists so that the analysis could be applied population change and, therefore, already statewide. For this analysis, the existing units are included in our projection figures. Unless there is those built between 2000 and 2018 (inclusive). a very large, short-term increase in in-migration, The planned units are those that are expected to our projection will not be affected. be built between 2019 and 2025. The latter are sometimes referred to as units "in the pipeline" Out-Migration and ready to be built. The possible impact of net out-migration is much The County lists were collected, combined, and like our discussion of in-migration. The difference expanded to accommodate items of interest to is that Hawaii is currently experiencing increasing one county or another. Results for the State have been summarized in Table 29. 59 Sharpe, Jamie. (2019 Re-evaluating the impact of 60 Hawai'i Housing Finance and Development Corporation. immigration on the U.S. rental housing market, Journal of 2018. RFP No. 18-017-PEO, Addendum No. 4, July 11, Urban Economics, Vol. 111, May 2019, pp. 14-34. 2018, p. 2. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 33 ©SMS December,2019 a. Classifying Housing Units Table 29. Government-Assisted Housing Units, State of Hawaii, 2000-2025 Our definition of"total government-assisted units" Government-Assisted Units is very broad. It includes units that were directly Completed Planned Preliminary funded by federal, state, or county resources 2000 606 (loans, grants, tax credits, or tax exemptions), units that were supported by government grants 2001 2,039 for land acquisition or infrastructure, and market- 2002 773 rate units that were developed as part of 2003 1,122 inclusionary housing policy in which the attached 2004 633 affordable housing was funded by the 2005 3,465 government. 2006 1,158 2007 2,564 15 Table 29 shows the breakdown by project status. 2008 3,997 1,651 Completed units are those that were completed each year according to the definition for each 2009 2,663 481 county. Planned units are those that have all the 2010 2,352 464 required permits and licenses to be classified as 2011 2,663 494 active projects in each county. Preliminary units 2012 1,559 131 are those for which plans have been discussed 2013 1,292 174 with the counties and have not been cleared as active projects. Some of those are still in very 2014 2,601 532 early planning stages. 2015 3,238 710 2016 2,674 532 It goes without saying that the State pipeline 2017 3,365 1,488 numbers are highly influenced by the City and 2018 4,306 2,209 County of Honolulu data. With the lion's share of 2019 4,554 7,474 Hawai`i's population, Honolulu's pipeline list 2020 3,417 3,715 makes up 92 percent of the total. Lists for the other counties are much smaller and reflect their 2021 3,698 5,112 production and planning in recent years. 2022 2,686 3,254 2023 2,474 4,044 Across the State, government-assisted housing 2024 1,982 1,955 units are continually reclassified in the process of 2025 3,269 5,473 planning and construction. Figure 9 shows one 2026 5,173 435 point in time(mid-2019). Completed units resulting from government assistance are produced each After 2026 10,982 21,604 year and flow into the housing market. They are Source. Government-Assisted Housing lists. shown as blue bar segments from 2000 through 2019. In Hawaii County, the pipeline consists of 858 units (Table 30). Hawaii Island has a much smaller population than Oahu and has needed fewer housing units to keep up with the population increase. Between 2000 and 2018, the County added about 2,743 new government-assisted housing units. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 34 ©SMS December,2019 Table 30. Government-Assisted Housing Units, Across the State, government-assisted housing County of Hawaii, 2000-2025 units are continually reclassified in the process of Government-Assisted Units planning and construction. Figure 9 shows one Completed Planned Preliminary point in time(mid-2019). Completed units resulting from government assistance are produced each 2000 93 year and flow into the housing market. They are 2001 329 shown as blue bar segments from 2000 through 2002 0 2019. 2003 21 Figure 9. Completed, Planned, and Preliminary 2004 52 Government-Assisted Units, State, 2000-2025 2005 153 magas 2006 r[r+ ere Plowed U P limin®vy 106 2007 47 2008 173 11 2009 117 2 iobit 2010 230 2011 181 cowI 2012 172 2013 170 4 M I 2014 107 r�C O 2015 292 11111 II I I I I 2016 62 .rocs LC D1; .:id2,3:sM_.cae+raa^a.+gyre 2017 268 Source: Government-Assisted Housing lists. The last column has been truncated (see text). 2018 170 2019 34 Planned units61 are shown in gold. Note that some 2020 264 "planned units" are listed before 2019. That is an 2021 75 artifact of the list construction method62. They are 2022 200 projects that began in a year prior to 2019 and still have units that are scheduled for completion after 2023 2019. 2024 60 2025 225 The same situation exists for "preliminary" units. These units in various stages of development, 2026 352 from preliminary project discussions to "only After 2026 needs one more permit." Those are shown as Source. Government-Assisted Housing lists purple segments. Then, in May 2018, lava began to flow across a The last column in Figure 9 has been truncated at substantial part of lower Puna. The flow continued 15,000 units. There are 10,982 planned units and for several months and destroyed more than 700 35,205 preliminary units (Table 29) included in homes. that column. Those units represent projects with start dates in the far distant future. 61 In the City and County of Honolulu, this classification 62 Ours is a list of projects. The classification is for units. includes"committed"units,those with all permits in order, Hence, a project that began in 2008 can have units yet perhaps awaiting financing. unbuilt, or"planned". Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 35 ©SMS December,2019 b. Affordable and Market Rate Units units and are planning with the goal of accommodating their unique needs. In Hawaii If we trim the end of this 25-year government- County, for instance, the years between 2014 and assisted housing series, we can get a better idea 2018 saw 899 units produced, all of which were of what the numbers mean63 for short-run housing affordable units. That was about 180 units per production in Hawaii. Table 31 shows the number year over the five year period. of units built and planned for five years on either side of 2019. Table 32. Affordable and Market-Rate Housing Units, County of Hawaii, 2014-2024 Between 2014 and 2018, 6,101 affordable Government-Assisted Units housing units were produced in the county — 41 percent of total production. Another 8,590 market- Affordable Market Rate Total rate units were produced during that same period, 2014 107 0 107 for an average of 2,938 units per year. Between 2015 292 0 292 2019 and 2024 (inclusive), there are 9,386 2016 62 0 62 affordable units and 10,759 market-rate units committed and ready for production. The 2017 268 0 268 affordable units account for 47 percent of these 2018 170 0 170 planned housing units. 2019 0 0 0 On average, 3,300 units were constructed per 2020 34 0 34 year for five years before 2019. Of these, 47 2021 264 0 264 percent were affordable. Plans are to build 2,865 2022 75 0 75 units per year in the next five years, 41 percent of 2023 100 100 200 which will be affordable. 2024 60 0 60 Table 31. Affordable and Market-Rate Housing Source. Government-Assisted Housing lists. Units, State of Hawaii, 2014-2024 Government-Assisted Units As noted above, the traditional role of planning in Hawaii County switched to emergency housing Affordable Market(tate Total planning after the volcano started to destroy units 201= 1,253 1,187 2:672 in East Hawaii. The Housing Office was charged 20_5 1,571 1,260 2 83_ with finding places for displaced families to stay, „ _ 828 1,715 , _ ._ and with leading the effort to develop a longer- C6 1-J range solution. The path forward is unclear and 20_7 1,264 1,679 2 9=3 all agencies are working toward the welfare of the 2013 1,15.5 2,749 3,93= people of Hawaii County. 20_9 1,919 1.5:i5 3,454 2020 1,271 1.133: 2,429 2021 1,620 2.762 = 382 2022 1,039 2,086 2025 2,816 ' 527 - J 20,• .. 59_ 2 Source. Government-Assisted Housing lists. In this portion of the analysis, data from the City and County of Honolulu still dominates the results. Other counties have constructed relatively few 63 In the years before 2010, numbers are less reliable the planned and preliminary unit counts may be based on because recoding was sporadic. In the years after 2024, plans that have not been fully conceived. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 36 ©SMS December,2019 B. HOUSING DEMAND islands in 2018, the rate of change in Kauai County was zero. The treatment of housing demand estimates and needed units is somewhat different in 2019 that it The City&County of Honolulu's projections agree has been in the past. It begins from Hawai`i's most with the general direction of the State's projection recent population projections as presented by (albeit for slightly different reasons), and the DBEDT in their 2045 Series.64 HHPS Housing Demand Survey found that our projected number of needed units fell between 1. Official Demand Estimates 2016 and 2019. In December of 2019, DBEDT released the latest Figure 10 shows our own household growth estimates 2000 and 2030. The number of update of its housing demand projections.65 A decline in Hawai`i's population had resulted in a households will continue to grow, but at a slower rate than in the past. dramatic decline in the State's housing demand estimate from about 66,000 housing units in 2017 Figure 10. Total Households, State of Hawaii, to 36,000 units in 2019. 2000-2030 600,000 2.5% DBEDT housing demand estimates measure the number of housing units required to house the Growth Rate Households new households each year. Estimates were based 500'000 20% on the population residing in households and assumptions about the average household size v 40Q000 3 1.5% o (household formation). 300,000 0 45. Three estimates were presented. The low 1.0% estimate assumed that the population decline 200,000 would continue in the short run and create the need for 25,737 units in 2035. The high estimate 100,000 0.5% assumed that the population decline was an IIIhIIIiIIIIIIIIIIII aberration and growth would continue as before 00.0% 2017. That would result in demand for 46,573 " `° . s " Lo o " Lo o 0000000000000000 units by 2030. The intermediate number was the average of the high and low estimates and would Source. DBEDT Data Book Time Series, Table 1.50 2000 produce demand for 36,155 units by 2030. For 2017; SMS estimates based on DBEDT Hawaii Housing this study we elected to use the intermediate Demand: 2020-2030. estimate. The primary driver of the decrease in the housing Changing model assumptions will alter results. Using DBEDT's lower population projection rather demand is population decline and the primary than the intermediate one would decrease the driver of the population decline is out-migration. Year-on-year population growth has been falling total number of households and needed housing in all four counties since 2013. In 2017, the units. Increasing employment would push up population of the City & County of Honolulu fell household incomes and release pent-up demand. below its 2016 level and it fell again in 2018. Increasing interest rates would change the new projection as well. A host of other caveats, Population growth rates continued to fall on all discussed in Section 11.6.3, below, may affect 64 Population and Economic Projections for the State of 65 Hawai'i Housing Demand: 2020-2030, Department of Hawai'i to 2045. Research and Economic Analysis Business, Economic Development and Tourism, Division Department of Business, Economic Research and Analysis Division, December 2019. Development and Tourism(DBEDT). June, 2018. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 37 ©SMS December,2019 these projections. In all, we feel confident that the accommodate homeless households (3,619).66 general trends shown for DBEDT's latest Housing These 50,156 units represent the number (and Demand Projections and the HHPS estimates of characteristics) of units useful to planners. Needed Units reflect the most likely trends for the next five to ten years. The foundation for our estimates has been discussed in previous sections, especially those 2. Total New Units Needed on demand and supply projections, and the discussion of survey demand estimates. Since 1997, HHPS has used population and The needed units estimate will cover housing unit housing projections along with survey data to demand for the next five years, 2020 through develop estimates of unmet demand for housing 2024. A new procedure for calculating needed in Hawaii. They are called"needed unit estimates" units was applied on 2019. We calculated the and identify a set of housing units that are of unmet demand portion the same way and interest to housing planners in Hawaii adjusted it to accommodate population change, Our needed units estimate has three components: then added units needed to accommodate (1) a 5-year housing demand estimate based on homeless households entering the affordable population change only (18,078), (2) a 5-year housing market. target for reducing pent-up demand caused by Table 33 shows summarizes the process used to years of supply shortages (28,459), and (3) a 5- generate Needed Units estimates for 2020-2024. year estimate of the number of units needed to Table 33. Procedure for Estimating Unmet Demand, 2019 Element Number Comment Steps Total Housing Units,2019 455,502 total occupied housing units/households Will move 273,632 will move at some time,excludes"never move" -181,870 never movers Final demand (10 yr) 186,978 probably move, not sure when,DKRF -86,654 no plan to move, 10yr or less Effective demand (10 yr) 141,764 has plan and date to move,will stay in Hawaii -45,214 will leave Hawaii Needed units (10yr) 60,005 not qualified to purchase or rent,2019-2029 -81,759 qualified to buy Needed units (5yr) 28,459 not qualified to purchase or rent,2019-2024 -31,546 needed Units,2025-2029 DBEDT est. pop growth 46,537 units needed to house population growth,2019-2024 + 18,078 add DBEDT demand 2019-2024 Homeless entering mkt. 50,156 units to house homeless persons entering the market +3,619 add homeless unit estimates Special needs impact 51,956 units to house special needs persons entering market + 1,800 add estimate for special needs Source: Housing Demand Survey, 2019 The first four lines of the process were taken from demands for the next five or ten years, we Table 15. There were an estimated 455,502 subtracted those households to get our estimate occupied housing units in Hawaii in 2019. Based of final demand at 186,978 households. We then on the HHPS Housing Demand Survey, about subtracted 45,214 households (24%) who 273,632 of these households (60%)were going to reported that they would be looking for a unit move from the current housing unit to another at outside the State of Hawaii when they next some time in the future. Of those, 86,654 might moved. That produced our estimate of Effective move (32%) but had no idea when that would Demand of 141,674 households. happen or were sure it would not happen in the next ten years. Since we were trying to measure 66 We eliminated units needed for special needs groups entering enough. That makes our needed units estimate a conservative the housing market because our numbers were not strong one. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 38 ©SMS December,2019 We used survey data to classify households as 2019.70 We don't have a national figure for either qualified or unqualified to purchase the unit doubled up, but in 2017, crowding in Hawaii was they were looking for in the next ten years. the highest in the nation.71 Qualification procedures were applied separately for would-be owners and renters and then Other data suggest pent-up demand is high in combined.That produced our ten-year estimate of Hawaii. Pent-up demand is high where there are unmet demand at 60,005 units.67 The ten-year many multi-generational households. There were estimate was divided in half to produce the 5-year 42,213 such households72 in Hawaii in 2019. estimate of unmet demand at 28,459.68 That was 13.3 percent of all households, consistent with our 13.6 percent crowded and Next, the unmet demand estimate was adjusted 13.0 percent doubled up. In 2017, the Census for population change. DBEDT Housing Demand reported 36,424 multi-generational households, Projections were also ten-year estimates. We about 8.0 percent of the housing stock. halved them and added those 18,078 units to the unmet demand estimate. Pent-up demand is high where there are relatively high numbers of households with hidden Finally, we added the 3,619 affordable housing homeless persons in them. In 2019, there were units needed to accommodate homeless more than 90,000 households in Hawaii households entering the housing market between 2020 and 2025 (Tabled 33). That gave us our Pent-up demand is high where there are many estimate of 50,156 needed units in 2019. subfamilies. In 2017, the Census identified 36,566 subfamilies73 in Hawaii or 8.0 percent of all The DBEDT demand estimates and homeless occupied housing units. Nationally the Census units seem reliable enough, but perhaps we found 3.3 percent of occupied housing units with should focus for a moment on the ten-year unmet at least one subfamily. Hawai`i's subfamily rate is demand estimate. First, we note that needed unit 2.5 times higher than the national rate. estimates have been about the same for the last three HHPS -- 60,000 units (±4,000) since 2011. Pent-up demand is high where many millennials live at home with parents or other relatives.74 In There were 59,215 doubled-up-with-family units 2017 there were 308,956 adults aged 18 to 34 in in 2019 and 25,213 of those wanted to move but Hawaii —29 percent of the adult population. That could not for financial reasons.There were 34,002 was about the same as the percent of young households doubled-up with unrelated individuals adults in the nation that year (30%). Nationally, who wanted to move but could not for financial 35 percent of those young adults were living at reasons. In summary, we find 59,215 doubled-up home with their parents or other relatives. In households, which is indicative of unmet demand Hawaii, the comparable figure was 64 percent. and consistent with our 50,156 needed units. Table 34 shows needed units by HUD income The percent of doubled-up households was 13 guidelines. The guidelines are also qualifications percent in 2019. These were households with for assistance through HUD programs. Table 35 more than one family per housing unit, sharing a shows the same projection distributed according unit with other relatives.69 Crowding figures are to the survey income in each county as measured about the same as doubled-up: 13.6 percent in in the Housing Demand Survey. 67 In 2016 the figure was 64,693 units in 10 years, indicating that 72 Three or more generations in one housing unit, self-reported in our unmet demand estimate fell between 2016 and 2019. That the HHPS 2019 Housing Demand Survey. Compare with the 2- was expected due to decreasing population and the increase in or-more generation data reported for Native Hawaiians on p. 77. units produced since 2016. 73 ACS,Table B11013, 5-yr estimates, Hawai'i and United States, 68 This number cannot be compared with the 2016 HHPS Report. 2017. We substituted the DBEDT Housing Demand Projection figure 74 See Broberg, Brad. 2018. The State of Housing Supply and that year. Demand,On Common Ground,National Association of Realtors, 69 Excludes sharing with non-relative. HHPS 2019,Table 45,p.7. December 12, 2018; Freddie Mac. 2018. Young Adults and ° Same definition as the Census. Table 4, Page 7. Household Formation Report, March 16, 2018; Joint Center for 71 ACS 2017, 5-yr estimates,Table B25014. Housing Studies. 2019. The State of U.S. Housing in 2019, JCHS for Harvard University. • Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 39 ©SMS December,2019 Table 34. Needed Housing Units by HUD Income Classification, Counties&State of Hawaii, 2020-2025 Total Units Needed,2020 through 2025 HUD Income Classification LT 30 30 to 50 50 to 60 60 to 80 80 to 120 120 to 140 140 to 180 180+ Total State of Hawaii 10,457 5,730 3,141 6,910 6,055 4,011 5,854 7,997 50,156 Ownership Units 2,135 1,158 1,352 3,755 3,320 2,156 3,982 5,734 23,590 Single-Family 1,719 764 805 2,981 1,866 1,470 2,623 4,593 16,822 Multi-Family 415 393 547 773 1,454 685 1,359 1,141 6,768 Rental Units 8,322 4,573 1,789 3,155 2,735 1,855 1,872 2,263 26,566 Single-Family 3,257 1,871 471 1,724 986 1,047 851 1,149 11,355 Multi-Family 5,065 2,702 1,319 1,432 1,749 808 1,022 1,114 15,211 Honolulu 4,200 2,923 1,979 2,944 3,037 1,710 2,405 2,970 22,168 Ownership Units 543 520 860 1,772 1,553 1,198 1,622 2,243 10,311 Single-Family 392 190 412 1,271 628 675 866 1,484 5,918 Multi-Family 151 329 448 501 925 523 756 759 4,393 Rental Units 3,657 2,403 1,119 1,172 1,484 512 783 727 11,857 Single-Family 1,070 682 165 513 271 99 156 292 3,249 Multi-Family 2,587 1,721 954 658 1,213 413 627 435 8,608 Maui 1,721 777 492 1,272 740 647 1,800 2,955 10,404 Ownership Units 351 253 126 464 211 257 1,104 1,839 4,605 Single-Family 351 230 33 365 157 258 881 1,620 3,894 Multi-Family 0 23 93 99 55 -1 222 219 711 Rental Units 1,370 524 366 808 528 390 696 1,116 5,799 Single-Family 594 418 132 393 333 284 377 561 3,092 Multi-Family 776 106 234 415 195 105 319 555 2,706 Hawaii 3,475 1,356 373 2,285 2,143 1,163 1,198 1,309 13,303 Ownership Units 756 285 196 1,413 1,556 561 924 1,012 6,703 Single-Family 687 264 196 1,249 1,081 398 635 911 5,420 Multi-Family 69 21 0 164 474 164 289 102 1,283 Rental Units 2,719 1,071 178 872 587 601 274 297 6,600 Single-Family 1,225 443 49 514 307 384 251 215 3,389 Multi-Family 1,494 628 129 358 280 217 24 82 3,211 Kauai 1,060 674 297 408 136 492 451 763 4,281 Ownership Units 484 100 170 105 0 139 333 640 1,971 Single-Family 289 80 164 97 0 140 242 579 1,590 Multi-Family 195 20 6 8 0 0 91 62 381 Rental Units 576 574 127 304 136 352 119 123 2,310 Single-Family 367 328 124 303 75 279 67 81 1,625 Multi-Family 208 246 3 1 61 73 51 42 685 Source: Housing Demand Survey and Hawai'i Housing Model, 2019. Housing units needed to eliminate pent-up demand and accommodate new household formation between 2020 and 2025 for the State of Hawai'i and its counties by preferred tenancy and unit type. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 40 ©SMS December,2019 Table 35. Needed Housing Units by Income Classification, Counties and State of Hawaii, 2020-2025 Total Units Needed,2020 through 2025 Income Classification Less than $30k to $45k to $60k to $75k to $100k to More $30k $45k $60k $75k $100k $150k than Total $150k State of Hawaii 11,289 5,595 6,009 6,106 6,610 8,303 6,244 50,156 Ownership Units 2,376 1,321 2,732 2,922 4,227 5,529 4,484 23,590 Single-Family 1,832 897 1,927 1,952 2,915 3,859 3,439 16,822 Multi-Family 544 424 805 970 1,312 1,670 1,045 6,768 Rental Units 8,913 4,274 3,277 3,184 2,383 2,774 1,761 26,566 Single-Family 4,246 1,771 1,433 2,040 569 816 480 11,355 Multi-Family 4,667 2,503 1,845 1,144 1,814 1,958 1,281 15,211 Honolulu 3,979 2,539 2,241 2,368 3,439 4,077 3,526 22,168 Ownership Units 515 370 778 1,197 2,174 2,731 2,545 10,311 Single-Family 363 119 356 605 1,273 1,463 1,740 5,918 Multi-Family 152 251 423 592 901 1,268 805 4,393 Rental Units 3,464 2,168 1,462 1,171 1,265 1,346 980 11,857 Single-Family 1,284 347 489 425 378 178 148 3,249 Multi-Family 2,180 1,821 974 746 887 1,169 832 8,608 Maui 2,039 1,174 1,279 1,143 1,734 1,822 1,213 10,404 Ownership Units 460 316 376 490 929 1,224 810 4,605 Single-Family 407 205 282 391 849 1,023 736 3,894 Multi-Family 52 111 94 98 81 201 74 711 Rental Units 1,579 858 903 653 804 598 403 5,799 Single-Family 915 633 451 509 161 255 169 3,092 Multi-Family 664 225 452 145 643 343 234 2,706 Hawaii 3,904 1,497 2,285 1,982 943 1,774 918 13,303 Ownership Units 887 509 1,461 1,209 774 1,129 734 6,703 Single-Family 761 475 1,188 932 472 993 600 5,420 Multi-Family 126 34 273 277 302 136 134 1,283 Rental Units 3,017 988 825 773 169 645 184 6,600 Single-Family 1,555 581 409 377 30 384 54 3,389 Multi-Family 1,462 407 415 396 139 261 130 3,211 Kauai 1,367 385 204 613 494 630 588 4,281 Ownership Units 514 125 117 27 349 445 394 1,971 Single-Family 301 98 102 24 322 381 363 1,590 Multi-Family 213 27 15 2 28 65 31 381 Rental Units 852 260 87 587 145 185 194 2,310 Single-Family 492 210 84 730 0 0 109 1,625 Multi-Family 360 50 4 -143 145 185 85 685 Source: Housing Demand Survey and Hawai'i Housing Model, 2019. Housing units needed to eliminate pent-up demand and accommodate new household formation between 2020 and 2025 for the State of Hawai'i and its four counties, by preferred tenancy and unit type. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 41 ©SMS December,2019 Tables 34 and 35 show the method of estimating homeless households that will be entering the needed units, or pent-up demand, as it has been housing market. used since 1997. Experience has shown that the information in those tables is too detailed to serve housing planners and policy-makers in their work. The data provided in Figure 11 is shown without detail regarding unit type (single-family v. multi- Figure 11 shows a simpler view of needed units family) or tenure (own v. rent). In demand survey by presenting the total number of units needed by data, those details are gathered to serve as part the State and each of the four counties for the of the analysis. The housing planning function is next five years. These numbers include those units needed to house new households (as carried out under the assumption that the specified in DBEDT's Housing Demand preference for single-family owned units can Projection), as well as to address unmet demand reasonably be filled by providing affordably-priced and units needed to accommodate current multi-family or rental units. Figure 11. Needed Housing Units by HUD Category and Income Classification, Counties & State of Hawaii, 2020-2025 Total Units Needed,2020 through 2025 HUD Income Classification LT 30 30 to 50 50 to 60 60 to 80 80 to 120 120 to 140 140 to 180 180+ Total State of Hawaii 10,457 5,730 3,141 6,910 6,055 4,011 5,854 7,997 50,156 Honolulu 4,200 2,923 1,979 2,944 3,037 1,710 2,405 2,970 22,168 Maui 1,721 777 492 1,272 740 647 1,800 2,955 10,404 Hawaii 3,475 1,356 373 2,285 2,143 1,163 1,198 1,309 13,303 Kauai 1,060 674 297 408 136 492 451 763 4,281 Total Units Needed, 2020 through 2025 Income Classification More Less than $30k to $45k to $60k to $75k to $100k to than Total $30k $45k $60k $75k $100k $150k $150k State of Hawaii 10,123 5,679 5,591 5,730 7,191 8,762 7,080 50,156 Honolulu 3,979 2,539 2,241 2,368 3,439 4,077 3,526 22,168 Maui 2,039 1,174 1,279 1,143 1,734 1,822 1,213 10,404 Hawaii 3,904 1,497 2,285 1,982 943 1,774 918 13,303 Kauai 1,367 385 204 613 494 630 588 4,281 Source: Housing Demand Survey and Hawai'i Housing Model, 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 42 ©SMS December,2019 3. Housing Demand Projection Caveats financing for "a limited number of out-of-state buyers" and expected that to continue. Other demand related issues: One interviewee noted some concern about the a. Rising Mortgage Rates declining population in the State and the repercussions to Hawai`i's economy, particularly An increase in mortgage rates nearly always the banks, construction, and employment. The reduces home sales, particularly among first-time possibility of a worldwide recession that would impact the travel industry would make residents homebuyers. While mortgage rates remain low by historical standards, some experts have been very nervous about buying was also mentioned. predicting the rates will rise. Zillow predicted a 5.8 percent increase by the end of 201975 but we have b. Risk of Recession not yet seen that kind of increase. In fact, in early 2019, observers were reporting that rates were at Often the threat of a recession can impact the near-record lows and Freddie Mac was predicting housing market as much a recession itself. The only 4.5 percent rates for July 2019.76 market frequently responds to a potential recession with decreased demand for housing In its June 2018 Economic Commentary and units. As with increasing mortgage rates, this is Forecast, the Mortgage Bankers Association most prevalent among first-time homebuyers who noted, "We forecast that 30-year mortgage rates fear being caught on the front end of declining real will reach 5 percent by late 2018 or early 2019, estate values. pushed up by firming inflation, growing deficits, and the strong economy. Faster wage growth is Economic experts suggest that the odds that the likely to overcome any headwind of increasing U.S. will be in recession in the next six months mortgage rates, but more home price appreciation increased from 16 percent in May to 19 percent in in combination with the housing inventory June. The odds of a recession are low, as none shortage could put a damper on purchase market of the classic causes of U.S. recessions— growth."77 overheating risk, a shock to the economy's balance sheet, or financial imbalances—look Current predictions by the Mortgage Bankers worrisome. A decline in consumer sentiment and Association have national rates for 30-year fixed- a drop in housing permits increased the rate mortgages increasing only slightly over the probability of recession, while equity prices and next several years, reaching 5.1 percent in 2021. limited initial claims for unemployment insurance benefits helped limit the increase in the odds of a In Hawaii, mortgage rates hover around 3.125 recession. percent for a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. Interviews with mortgage officers at local banks A recent poll by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser conducted in March and April 2019 were very indicated that the level of concern about a positive. They said they expected low interest recession among Hawaii residents was evenly rates to continue and that qualification guidelines divided among those who were concerned, were expected to remain the same. They did note somewhat concerned, and not concerned. If we that the market was slowing down a bit – homes were to move into a recession, the nature of the staying on the market slightly longer, fewer buyers housing units needed to meet housing demand paying more than asking prices – but there was predicted in this report would certainly be no mention of belt-tightening. They were handling affected. 75 Allen, J.D. 201287. Zillow makes its 2019 real estate 77 Strong Economic Growth, Rate Hikes to Continue. MBA predictions, The East Hampton Press&the Southampton Economic and Mortgage Finance Commentary: June 15, Press, December 28, 2018. 2018. Web. 26 June 2018. https://www.mba.org/news- 76 Lucas, Tim. 2019. Mortgage rates forecast for March research-and-resources/research-and- 2019, The Mortgage Reports Editor, February 21, 2019. economics/forecasts-and-commentary/economic- commentary-archives. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 43 ©SMS December,2019 a. Slowing Population Growth All of this was expected to produce a slowdown in home sales in the short run and decreasing home All measures of Hawai`i's population indicate that prices by the end of the year. population growth is slowing, but the timing and degree to which the growth rate will decline is less Results after One Year certain. The most recent Census data estimates that Hawai`i's population declined by about 3,700 One year after they took effect, issues a and b do people from July 1, 2017 to July 1, 2018. That's not seem to be true. Issue c has had some weak the fifth-largest population decline of any state. effect, but only in high-priced, highly-taxed blue states80. Because housing demand estimates are closely tied to anticipated population growth and On the issue of decreasing the use of SALT and household formation, changes in the average MID deductions, there have been two studies. In annual growth rate for the population will one, Zillow looked at taxpayers who took the necessarily impact demand. SALT and MID deductions in tax year 2015 and compared them with taxpayers who took the b. Tax Reform deductions after tax reform was passed in 2018. They compared the number taking the deductions At the end of 2017, when the Tax and Job Act and the average annual home value appreciation details were just appearing, many housing for a year after filing. experts were concerned. Several parts of the act were thought to be problematic and some Roughly one in five tax filers(22%) used the SALT powerful opponents of those policies reacted deduction in a typical U.S. ZIP code in 2015. In strongly78. National surveys of housing experts those areas, annual home value appreciation in showed them split, but with a plurality of 41 July 2018 was about 0.3 percentage points slower percent predicting pessimistic outcomes79. Their than the pace prior to the passage of tax reform in objections included: December 2017. In ZIPs with the most intensive use of the SALT deduction (44% of filers), home 1. Lowering the threshold for the mortgage value appreciation slowed by 0.6 percentage interest deduction (MID) to $750,000 or points. less would be a disincentive to home purchases Controlling for common trends across markets, somewhat slower growth in home value was 2. Deductions for state and local taxes(SALT) attributable to tax reform in ZIP codes with high were capped at $10,000, thus reducing shares of homeowners that historically used the disposable income that might be applied to SALT deduction, compared to those areas with home purchases. less usage historically. The same does not 3. Increasing the standard deduction was appear to be true for the MID81. expected to reduce the number of taxpayers who itemize deductions and therefore to take SALT or MID deductions in the first place. 78 The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act — What it means for 79 Zillow's 2018 Q1 Home Price Expectations Survey, as homeowners and real estate professional, National reported in De Vita, Suzanne. 2018. Experts on housing Association of Realtors®, 2017 at less optimistic as a result of Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, https://www.nar.realtor/tax-reform/the-tax-cuts-and-jobs- RISMedia.com, Feb 21, 2018, downloaded from act-what-it-means-for-homeowners-and-real-estate- https://rismedia.com/2018/02/21/experts-housinq-less- professionals. This includes NAR reaction to the three optimstic-result-tax-cuts-jobs-act/. issues discussed below, as well as objections to other 8° Tarrazas, Aaron. 2018. Housing market showing few ill elements of the proposed law, including some that were effects from tax reform, Zillow,August 30, 2018. removed at NARs' urging. 81 Test results were positive but not statistically significant. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 44 ©SMS December,2019 In another study82, CoreLogic found no statistical The mechanism by which student loan debt evidence that the new tax law had any impact on affects local housing markets is what the Fed calls home prices or sales between June 1, 2017 and "complex.85 On the one hand, student debt can March 1, 2018. That was true no matter what the reduce the buyer's ability to accumulate a down price of the home was. payment or qualify for a loan. On the other hand, a college education leads to higher lifetime Housing experts note problems in the housing earnings and insurance against unemployment. market these days (fewer residential building In either case, it delays the entrance of young permits, rising mortgage rates, scarcity of land, people into the housing market. rising labor costs, and tariffs on building materials83). Still, most find that objections to the Surveys of students with college loans86 provide Tax Cut and Jobs Act were overstated in 2017. some examples of how this works. Fully 87 Even Lawrence Yun of NAR has said that the Act percent of all student debtors said their loans has had no significant impacts. Other experts say would delay life choices like marriage, starting a that whatever impact there may have been has family, and continuing education. Others (61%) been offset by other benefits of the Law, including said repaying their loans would delay retirement general economic growth, personal savings because they would not be able to accumulate prompted by lower taxes, and direct saving enough funds in their retirement accounts. attributable to lower tax rates. We note, however, that we have found no empirical studies citing With respect to the impact on their housing relating those outcomes to the Tax Cuts and Jobs prospects, 20 percent owned a home and 44 Act. percent were paying rent (usually with others). Thirty percent (30%) were living with family or Regardless, the portents for the future, even by friends and paying little or no rent. Among the 80 opponents of the Act, do not include serious percent who did not own a home, 83 percent said impacts of the new tax policy on housing prices or their student loans would delay their purchase of construction. a home, 5 percent said there would be no delay, 7 percent said they didn't know if they would be c. Student Loan Debt delayed, and 5 percent said they never wanted to own a home. Among those who were living with Studies suggest that, beginning in the early family before college, 42 percent said their loans 2000s, the high cost of a college education was forced them to delay moving out of their parents' affecting enrollments. The financial industry and house. the federal government reacted by producing Discussions with local realtors revealed that education credit products for both the students Hawai`i's slow home sales are even slower and parents. In response, educational institutions among young people and that the necessity to raised their tuition and fees, which resulted in a repay student loans was sometimes mentioned as sharp increase in student debt. a problem for young buyers. By 2019, student debt in the U.S. reached $1.41 In Hawaii, less than half of the students had trillion and became the second largest credit debt student loan debt in 2019, and the average debt in the country, trailing only mortgage debt. was $35,000, up 5.8 percent from 2018. Data were not available at the county level. Hawaii 82 Sands,Wade.2018. What are the effects of the Tax Cuts https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/author/ and Jobs Act on Housing?Corelogic Housing and Policy stefan-lembo-stolba/. Division downloaded at https://www.corelogic.com/blog/ 2018/10/what-are-the-effects-of-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs- 85 Guerin, Jessica. 2019. Federal Reserve says student act-on-housing.aspx debt has hampered housing market, HomeWre, January 83 Tankersley, Jim. 2018. The Trump tax cuts were 17, 2019 supposed to depress housing prices. They haven't", New 86 National Association of Realtors and American Student York Times,August 27, 2018. Assistance. 2017 Student loan debt and housing report 84 Stolba, Stefan Lembo. 2019. Student loan debt climbs to 2017:When debt holds you back, NAR, December 2017. $1.4 trillion in 2019, Experion.com, June 4, 2019, at Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 45 ©SMS December,2019 student debt is just below average in the national of affordable housing units that will eventually be student debt scale. That may be due, in part, to needed when other special needs households lower debt incurred by in-state students. Those enter the market. who opted to attend mainland schools may have incurred higher debt. C. NEEDED UNITS BY INCOME LEVEL About half of Hawai`i's recent college graduates As identified by the Housing Demand Survey, the have some college debt. That number has been 2018 median household income for the State was rising and we see no evidence that the situation $74,985. The median was somewhat higher for will change soon. In a market characterized by the City and County of Honolulu ($95,404). The very low inventory, with high and rising prices, median income for Maui and Kauai counties was college graduates with student loan debt are likely approximately equal ($74,710 and $74,357, to delay home purchases. The net effect of respectively). At $59,473, the annual median student loan debt on the housing demand household income for Hawaii County was well estimates would be negative. below the state median. The impact of student loan debt on entry into the 1. Types of Units Needed housing market may be correlated with the loss of population over the last few years. The decline in Tables 32 and 33 reflect the demand for housing population and housing demand since 2017 may units by county, tenure and unit type for the next involve young people disproportionately. Young people report leaving the state due to lack of five years. They have been estimated for each of opportunities in the kind of jobs they spent the last eight market levels following U.S. Department of four years qualifying for and a lack of affordable Housing and Urban Development (HUD) income housing. However, since we have already guidelines. incorporated the impact of lack of jobs and The distribution of needed units by tenure, type, housing options, perhaps the net impact of and market-level was developed from Housing student loan debt is insignificant. Demand Survey data. The analysis employs the assumption that needed units are distributed f. Homeless/Special Needs Households according to the effective demand estimates from the survey. It also excludes households deemed The estimated number of needed housing units highly qualified to purchase or rent their next does not include homeless households or home, as these units will likely be developed by households with special needs. Including units the private sector. The detail produced in this required to accommodate persons entering the analysis will be useful in a variety of housing housing market from a homeless or residential planning efforts in the next five years. It is treatment facility would increase the number of relevant, reliable, and utilitarian. needed units. It would also impact the types of housing units needed between 2020 and 2025. Effective demand includes only Hawaii residents who are planning to move to a unit in the State of As outlined in Section III, to provide housing to Hawaii in the next five years. The analysis for households requiring minimal support services Tables 32 and 33 did not account for people who would require an additional 3,619 housing units. are currently doubled-up for economic reasons. These majority of these units would likely be studio rentals, and about 250 larger rental units The lion's share of the needed units is would be needed to accommodate larger families. concentrated at the lowest HUD income levels. Locating supportive services, such as standard This finding suggests that the market is more case management, job training, and financial effective in producing high-end units than low-end assistance may be needed as well. units. Inefficiencies are exacerbated in periods of rapid market expansion when fewer low-end units It is difficult to estimate the number of housing are built. More middle-market and low-end units units needed to accommodate homeless persons are built during periods of market adjustment. with multiple conditions or to estimate the number Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 46 ©SMS December,2019 Needed units are also concentrated in the rental dormitories, nursing homes, etc.) but some are market rather than the ownership market. Again, located outside the market(homeless persons, for the current housing market produces units for sale example) and some, like youths exiting foster more efficiently than units for rent. care, are living with their foster families in occupied housing units. The data on this group, The estimates in the two tables above reflect the along with the process by which they enter the preferences of Hawai`i's likely movers, but do not marketplace, are not yet clear enough to account for their willingness to accept alternatives speculate on the number of units they might or their financial qualifications to make their require in any given year. We are certain, preferred move. As was noted in the prior section however that including them would increase the on qualified demand, not every household is number of needed units in Table 34 and 35. financially prepared to pursue their preferred housing situation. Applying any one of these possible adjustments to the needed units' tables will result in a shift in A portion of demand survey respondents who the total number and type of housing units needed indicated their preference to purchase their next to accommodate Hawai`i's residents by 2025. residence conceded that they might have to rent instead. Similarly, several households that intend 2. Units for Elderly Housing to buy a single-family home when they move noted that they would consider buying a multi- Analysis was also conducted to identify the subset family dwelling if they could not find a single- family unit they could afford. Finally, a percentage of total needed units that would be required to of the survey respondents who indicated that they accommodate elderly households, that is, would be purchasing their next unit also reported households with one or more persons 60 years of that their current financial situation was age or older, no children under the age of 18, and incompatible with that goal (currently living in no persons other than immediate family. Of the public housing, receiving Section 8 assistance, or 50,156 units needed for households between with no money for a down payment). 2020 and 2025, 13 percent were for elderly households statewide (6,714 units; Table 34). We did not explicitly include nearly 60,000 This is up from 9 percent in 2016. All other respondent households that were doubled up. needed housing units referenced here as "family Many of those households were, however, units", would be for the use of all other types of included because one or both families in the households. households were unqualified to buy or rent another unit on their own. Considering just the units needed for elderly households, about 29 percent (1,967 units) are Housing units needed to accommodate homeless needed for o low- and moderate-income persons re-entering the housing market were households (80% AMI or less). The demand for included in Tables 32 or 33. Households entering single-family versus multi-family units was almost the affordable housing market from Special evenly distributed among elderly households. Of Needs housing have not been included in those the 6,714 needed elderly units, there was demand tables. Most are in group quarters (prisons, for 3,129 (47%) single-family dwellings. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 47 ©SMS December,2019 Table 36. Needed Housing Units by HUD Income Classification, Elderly Persons, Counties and State of Hawaii, 2020-2025 Total Units Needed,2020 through 2025 HUD Income Classification LT 30 30 to 50 50 to 60 60 to 80 80 to 120 120 to 140 140 to 180 180+ Total State of Hawaii 400 751 113 704 1,273 678 901 1,894 6,714 Ownership Units 358 190 64 400 772 349 653 1,723 4,509 Single-Family 282 0 14 354 363 152 423 1,229 2,818 Multi-Family 78 190 50 52 412 177 229 503 1,691 Rental Units 23 542 39 308 506 354 250 183 2,205 Single-Family 0 0 0 39 44 100 96 32 312 Multi-Family 23 542 39 269 462 253 154 151 1,894 Honolulu 288 714 72 538 1,159 436 486 1,330 5,022 Ownership Units 288 185 50 273 703 193 331 1,237 3,261 Single-Family 211 0 0 223 291 96 198 764 1,783 Multi-Family 78 185 50 50 412 97 133 473 1,478 Rental Units 0 529 22 265 456 243 154 93 1,762 Single-Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Multi-Family 0 529 22 265 456 243 154 93 1,762 Maui 62 6 16 21 26 75 208 275 689 Ownership Units 43 0 0 16 10 29 197 233 528 Single-Family 43 0 0 16 10 29 146 203 447 Multi-Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 30 81 Rental Units 13 4 11 4 25 58 16 30 162 Single-Family 0 0 0 0 25 47 16 0 89 Multi-Family 13 4 11 4 0 10 0 30 73 Hawaii 49 22 15 132 88 167 160 155 787 Ownership Units 27 0 0 109 59 127 99 155 576 Single-Family 29 0 0 116 62 27 79 164 476 Multi-Family 0 0 0 0 0 81 20 0 100 Rental Units 9 9 6 29 25 53 80 0 211 Single-Family 0 0 0 29 19 53 80 0 180 Multi-Family 9 9 6 0 6 0 0 0 31 Kauai 0 9 11 13 0 0 48 134 215 Ownership Units 0 5 14 2 0 0 26 98 144 Single-Family 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 98 112 Multi-Family 0 5 0 2 0 0 26 0 32 Rental Units 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 60 70 Single-Family 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 32 42 Multi-Family 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 28 Source: Housing Demand Survey and Hawai'i Housing Model, 2019. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 48 ©SMS December,2019 IV. HOUSING ISSUES A few housing issues associated with housing in A third group needs residential service programs Hawaii were selected for special attention in or other group quarters that provide substantial 2019. These included housing for persons with levels of service delivered onsite. These persons special needs, homelessness as a housing issue, with special needs may create demand for the impact of the visitor industry on residential housing that is separate from, and in addition to, housing, homelessness as a housing issue, the rest of the residential housing market. housing for Native Hawaiians, and two others. 1. Demand for Special Needs Housing A. SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING IN HAWAI`V Persons in special needs populations may Beginning in 2011, the HHPS identified housing- experience challenges in obtaining or retaining related issues among persons belonging to ten housing. Low income, the need for supportive special needs populations in Hawaii including: services in or near their homes, and the temporary nature of some special need's services • The elderly (age 62 and older) and frail elderly can keep them from securing adequate and (elderly with physical or mental limitations that affordable housing. may interfere with their ability to independently perform activities of daily living) a. Economic Barriers to Accessing Housing • Persons with severe mental illness. • Persons with alcohol and/or another drug Persons with special needs are often unable to addiction afford adequate market-rate housing due to low • Persons with physical disabilities rates of employment. For example, persons with • Persons with developmental disabilities substance addiction were more likely to be • Persons with intellectual disabilities unemployed than employed.87 Survivors of • Persons living with HIV or AIDS domestic violence were absent from work for an • Victims of domestic violence average of seven days at a time.88 This resulted • Emancipated foster youth in a considerable loss of income. • Exiting offenders Persons exiting prison leave without cash, food, Many members of special needs populations live transportation, or community support.89 Many had in existing households. Depending on their less than high school diplomas, lacked adequate specific needs, they may be cared for by family job training or work experience, and many members, engage services that come to the suffered a physical disability or mental illness. home, or have modifications done to their home There is also a bias against hiring former to enable them to remain in place. prisoners. As a result, it was difficult for exiting offenders to obtain steady work at pay rates high Some special needs persons may receive/require enough to afford market-rate rents.99 some public assistance or services to enable them to live in their current household. Others are Though most of them do not require support in transitioning from care programs and may need activities of daily living, exiting offenders will move extra assistance finding or paying for appropriate into transitional housing if available. Ideally, housing. transitional housing for exiting offenders provides S7 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 90 Urban Institute Justice Policy Center(2008). Employment After Results from the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Prison: A Longitudinal Study of Releases in Three States. Summary of National Findings. October,2008. as Rothman, Hathaway, Stidsen, & de Vries (2007). How http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication- employment helps female victims of intimate partner violence. pdfs/411778-Employment-after-Prison-A-Longitudinal-Study-of- Journal of Occupational Health Psych, 12, p. 136. Releasees-in-Three-States.PDF 89 Comprehensive Offender Re-entry Plan, State of Hawai'I Department of Public Safety,2019. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 49 ©SMS December,2019 substance abuse treatment, reintegration activities of daily living. This assistance may be counseling, and support services that encourage provided by another family member or by a adherence to terms of release and promote commercial vendor. successful reintegration into the community. In September 2019, the State's only Federal Table 38. One-person Households with someone Halfway House is closing, and no replacement who has challenges performing activities with has been identified.91 daily living94 One Person Most young adults who exit the foster care system Households Oahu Maui Hawaii Kauai Statewide Difficult to walk or need to secure their own housing when they age climb stairs 15,147 2,250 3,221 753 21,370 out of the foster system. There are state- and Difficult to bathe or federally-funded programs to facilitate transition dress themselves 4,031 344 718 159 5,252 from foster care to independent adulthood. Young Difficult to travel 8,172 1,014 1,655 305 11,146 people exiting foster care are less likely than average to have a high school diploma and many Nineteen to 26 percent of Hawaii households are have difficulty finding employment that would single-person households (Table 36). Persons in qualify them for market-rate rentals.92 these households, along with households that include frail elderly, persons with advanced b. Need for Special Services terminal illness, or persons with severe mental or physical disabilities, may be unable to perform Although public housing, Section 8, and other activities associated with daily living. They are similar housing support programs help to mitigate unable to live alone and will require shelter in group quarters where daily living support and the economic barriers to accessing housing, medical treatment are available. many special needs persons may need access to support or treatment services delivered at or near Persons with substance addiction will often enter their residence. residential facilities where treatment and Table 37. Households with someone who has counseling are integrated into the residential challenges performing activities with daily living93 context. During long-term residential treatment, an addict will go through a course of treatment At least one person inahousehold Oahu Maui Hawaii Kauai Statewide and receive counseling, job training, and other Difficult to walk or support services.95 Upon the completion of climb stairs 52,424 9,178 12,077 3,339 81,018 residential treatment, persons recovering from Difficult to bathe or substance addiction may move into sober houses, dress themselves 19,587 3,015 3,181 1,192 27,575 a form of transitional housing. Difficult to travel 28,857 5,042 1,441 1,730 42,688 Victims of domestic violence require shelter that As shown in Table 37, 81,018 households stated provides protection from abusers and facilitates that "someone in their household had a physical, access to childcare services, financial and mental or emotional condition that makes it employment support services, and counseling. difficult to walk or climb stairs." Roughly 27,575 households included at least one member who had difficulty bathing or dressing themselves. In c. Special Needs Housing is Often Temporary 42,688 households statewide, at least one member had a physical, mental, or emotional If a person with special needs does secure condition that made it difficult to travel to doctor's affordable housing with access to support offices or shopping places. In these households, services, the challenge shifts from becoming at least one member may require assistance with housed to staying housed. 91 Hawaii's Only Halfway House is Closing, Putting More 93 HHPS Housing Demand Survey 2019. Offenders Behind Bars, Civil Beat,August 20, 2019. 94 HHPS Housing Demand Survey 2019. 92 Hawai'i Kids Count(2012). Issue Brief. Improving Outcomes for 95 National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse Youth Transitioning Out of Foster Care. (2012). Principles of Drug Addiction Treatment: A Research- http://www.yesHawai'i.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/TUES- Based Guide(3rd ed.). Hawai'iKidsCountBrief.jpg. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 50 ©SMS December,2019 Housing in residential service programs - from Table 39. Special Needs Group Sizes domestic violence shelters to prisons - are, by Special Needs Group Number Source their nature,temporary. After a designated period, (Statewide) Persons residents are expected to move into permanent Elderly-Related housing. Sponsoring agencies provide housing Elderly(65+) (2017) 253,750 2017 ACS support only if their funding lasts. Elderly(65+)with any Disability (non- 82,723 2017 ACS institutionalized) (2017) d. Special Needs Persons in Need of Housing Elderly(65+) living 44,001 2017 ACS alone (2017) Estimating the number of persons with special Persons receiving Aid needs who need housing is challenging for a to Aged, Blind & Hawai'i DHS Data of reasons. Disabled (2016 928 Book January 2017 varietyaverage per month) Substance-Abuse Related First, it is often difficult to estimate the number of Substance Abuse& people in the State who have a specific special Mental Health Svcs. need. Even when we have a population estimate, Substance abuse Admin. Behavioral offenders in treatment 4,922 Health Barometer, the number of persons who need housing is often programs (2017) Hawaii Volume 5, unknown. Census estimates of the frail elderly Released 2019,data and persons with disabilities say nothing of their from 2017 Survey Substance Abuse& housing need (all such persons are sheltered in Mental Health existing households), and breakdowns of the Persons with Services Admin. group quarters population are not published. Substance Abuse 85,000 Behavioral Health Barometer, Hawaii (2017) Volume 5, Released Second, many agencies that serve persons with 2019, based on data from 2017 Survey special needs are not required by contract or charter to provide housing. They may not know Domestic-Violence Related Survivors in shelters 13thAnnual Domestic the housing needs in their target populations. one night 2018 Violence Count, Some may even provide housing referrals but 445 Hawaii Summary keepno record of servicesprovided outside of conducted 09/13/18, SMS Calculation those required by charter or contract. Survivors with unmet 13th Annual Domestic requests for shelter one Violence Count, Third, co-occurring disorders are common in this night. 29 Hawaii Summary conducted 09/13/18, group. In one study, 40 percent of persons with SMS Calculation mental health problems also reported substance HIV/AIDS Surveillance use problems.96 About 65 percent of incarcerated Persons living with 2'393 Report, State of 97 AIDS/HIV(2017) Hawaii DOH, persons have substance abuse issues. Victims December 31,2017 of domestic violence are more likely than other Substance Abuse& individuals to have HIV, mental health difficulties, Mental Health Persons with Serious Services Admin. or substance dependence, stemming from their Mental Illness,Adults Behavioral Health abuse.98 Co-morbidity causes double-counting 18+ (2017 Average of 36,000 Barometer, Hawaii and inflates housing need estimates. five years) Volume 5, Released 2019, based on data from 2017 Survey 2018 Annual Statistical Paroles and Ex- 852 per Report, Fiscal year offenders year 2018, Hawaii Paroling Authority Foster Care Children Exiting because of 66 Hawaii DHS Data Emancipation (2016) Book January 2017 96 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 98 World Health Organization (2013). Global&Regional Estimates of (2016). Mental and Substance Abuse Disorders. Violence Against Women: Prevalence of Health Effects of Intimate 97 The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse(2010). Partner Violence and Non-Partner Sexual Violence. Behind Bars II: Substance Abuse and America's Prison Population. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 51 ©SMS December,2019 Nevertheless, it is necessary to develop some four on Hawaii Island, one on the island of Maui estimate of the size of the special needs and 17 on Oahu. It is unclear the number of beds population. Table 39 presents some estimates of or vacancy level for each facility.loo the number of persons in each special needs population. The counts are duplicated across "Therapeutic Living Programs" (TLPs) are long categories and not every person with a special term (up to 6 months) residential programs for need requires housing. adults with severe and persistent mental illness who do not need the care of a specialized Table 39 illustrates the challenge of determining treatment facility. The primary goal of the program the size of special needs groups and the size of is to assist clients in meeting their basic needs the number of people currently being served. To until they can transition into an independent living better identify future needs for residential services option of their choice. Support is flexible, focused, with wrap-around services, a new approach and based on recovery. There are nine TLPs needs to be developed. Ideally, this approach will statewide: four on Hawaii Island, one on the correspond to the types of care facilities that are island of Maui, and four on Oahu. It is unclear available. For example, instead of considering how many beds or vacancies for each of these aged individuals as a group, we could identify the facilities.101 characteristics of adults age 65+ who use the services of a residential care facility versus a "Developmental Disabilities Domiciliary Homes" skilled nursing facility or other service provider. are described under Chapter 333F of Hawaii Once these characteristics are grouped by type of Revised Statutes-Services for Persons with facility, we can better estimate total demand. Developmental Disabilities or Mental Retardation. They provide 24-hour supervision or care, 2. Inventory of Special Needs Housing excluding licensed nursing care, for a fee, to not more than five adults with mental retardation or developmental disabilities. There are 45 of these In this section, we deal with challenges in trying to facilities statewide: one on Hawaii Island, three assess system capacity for housing persons with on Maui and 41 on Oahu. The number of beds special needs. Where available, we include data and the occupancy rates for these facilities are on type of facilities and vacancies. unknown.1°2 Eight facilities statewide offer temporary shelter "Community Care Foster Families"serve the aged for survivors of domestic violence. The capacity and disabled persons by providing housing, of these shelters varies because some have a"no supervision, direct care, and management of turn away" policy meaning they will accommodate resident's non-medical and medical service as many survivors and family members as needs. As shown in Table 40 below, there are necessary. Stays at these facilities can last up to 1,166 homes with 2,975 beds statewide. This is 120 days. During their stays, staff members work a significant increase from the 492 homes and with survivors to find appropriate long-term 1,203 beds in 2016. These homes serve a mix of residences.99 Medicaid and private pay patients.1°3 A "Special Treatment Facility" is a facility that Table 40. Community Care Foster Families provides a therapeutic residential program for care, diagnosis, treatment, or rehabilitation for o`ahu Maui Hawaii Kauai State socially or emotionally distressed persons, Number mentally ill persons, persons suffering from of Homes 957 57 130 22 1,166 substance abuse, and developmentally disabled Capacity 2,433 139 350 53 2,975 persons. There are 24 such facilities in the State: 00 Hawai'i State Coalition Against Domestic Violence. 102 Hawai'i Department of Health, Office of Healthcare 1°° Hawai'i Department of Health, Office of Healthcare Assurance, State Licensing Section, January 2019. Assurance, State Licensing Section, January 2019. 103 Hawai'i Department of Health, Office of Healthcare 01 Hawai'i Department of Health, Office of Healthcare Assurance, State Licensing Section January 2019. Assurance, State Licensing Section, January 2019. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 52 ©SMS December,2019 Table 41 shows the number and capacity for Adult Table 43. Skilled Nursing and Intermediate Care Residential Care Homes (ARCH) and the number Facilities, Hawaii, 2019 of EXP (Expanded Services Programs) and O'ahu Maui Hawaii Kauai State ARCH ll EXP, which are ARCH ll with expanded No. 28 3+1 9 5 46 services). Facilities Capacity 2.830 459 886 333 4.508 Table 41. Adult Residential Care Homes, Hawaii, as of January 2019 Hawai`i's Skilled Nursing and Intermediate Care Number Vacancy Facilities (ICF) provide types of care like those Homes Capacity Vacant Rate provided by ARCH homes but are housed in -.F.01-1 I 200 882 542 61% larger facilities (Table 43). ICF provides 24-hour �.FtCH 11 1pg $5 78.;i: assistance with activities of daily living and care Total 204 991 627provided by licensed nursing and paramedical 53 personnel on a regular long-term basis. EXP 222 1098 676 62% ▪E?CH II EXP 35 423 3 15 74% Skilled nursing facilities provide skilled nursing and related services to residents who require 24- Total EXP 257 1521 991 65% hour medical or nursing care or rehabilitation services. Statewide 46 facilities offer this level of Grand Total 451 2E12 1518 64% care with 4,508 beds.105 This is a decrease of four facilities and an increase of 153 beds. ARCH I and ARCH II are intended to serve adults with minimal service needs, assist with activities Table 44 shows the number of Intermediate Care of daily living. EXP and ARCH ll-EXP provide 24- Facilities for Individuals with Intellectual hour assistance with activities of daily living. Disabilities. Statewide there are 17 facilities with These two programs also provide skilled nursing a total of 86 beds.106 This is a decrease of one services, if needed Statewide, there are 461 facility and two beds. licensed ARCH homes providing 2,512 beds This is a decrease of 23 homes and 154 beds Table 44. Other Intermediate Care Facilities, compared with 2016 As of the last report noted Hawaii, 2019 above, 64 percent of these beds were vacant. Oahu Maui Hawai`i Kaua`i State Table 42. Assisted Living Facilities, Hawaii, as of No. Facilities 13 4 0 0 17 January 2019 Capacity 62 24 0 0 86 Oahu Maui Hawaii Kauai State No. Facilities 14 1 1 1 17 Combining Community Care Foster Families, Capacity 2.219 144 220 100 2.683 ARCH, Assisted Living Facilities, SNF and ICF, there are 12,754 beds providing different levels of Assisted Living Facilities (Table 42) provide a care. This is a 19 percent increase over 2016 combination of housing, meal services, health (2,006) primarily because of the increase in care services, and personalized support services Community Care Foster Families. designed to respond to individual needs. Statewide there are 14 facilities with a 2,683 bed capacity.104 This is a decrease of one facility since 2016, but an increase of 283 beds. 104 State of Hawai'i Department of Health, Office of Health 106 State of Hawai'i, Department of Health, Office of Care Assurance, Medicare Facilities, June 23, 2016. Healthcare Assurance, Medicare Section, July 2019. 105 State of Hawai'i Department of Health, Office of Health Care Assurance, Medicare Facilities, July 2019. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 53 ©SMS December,2019 3. Needed Units for Special Needs will require retrofitting such as grab bars, ramps, Population emergency call systems, special telephones for the blind, etc. There are three types of units required for this population: units in care homes with appropriate Individuals with serious mental illness may also services, temporary units in transitional programs, be seeking beds in a home/facility. The number and housing units for people exiting programs. of persons with SMI is assumed to increase proportionally between 2020 and 2025. In 2017, 36 percent of individuals with any mental illness a. Currently in Housing, Need for Care received some type of service (including Homes/Facilities, or in-Home Services. residential). Assuming this group still makes up 3.3 percent of the population, this would equate to The largest special needs group is the elderly. 2,250 individuals by 2025. The projection by age that DBEDT provided in its 2045 Series Report indicates that the population for the State below age 65 will grow very little b. Need for Shelter/Clinics/Transitional between 2020 and 2025. However, the number Housing, then Permanent Housing of persons aged 65+ will increase significantly from 279,686 to 319,908 (14%; Figure 12). The special needs groups seeking residential shelters/clinics (a form of transitional housing) are Based on the 2020 65+ population, we have one domestic violence survivors, persons with "bed" in a care home/facility for every 22 seniors. foster care, and perhaps persons with HIV/AIDS. By 2025, the number of 65+ seniors is projected There are 19 identified domestic violence to increase by 14 percent. If the need continues programs in Hawaii, not all of which provide to be the same, the state will require a total of shelter for survivors.107 In one night in 2018, there 14,541 beds, an increase of almost 2,000 beds. was an estimated need for 474 units for survivors and it is likely that many had children that stayed Figure 12. Population Projection, State of Hawaii, with them. Domestic Violence service providers 1990-2025 believe the need is much higher and hope that, Statewide Population Projections by Age Group over time, more people who are abused will seek 160,000 1,400,°� assistance. Assuming identified need increases 145,662 at the rate of population for 20+, an additional 15 140,000 1,200,0[ 120,000 1,194,$15 to 20 units will be required at a minimum by 2025. 1,000,00 Most of the survivors exiting the shelter will need 100,000 86,503 800,000 affordable, safe housing. 80,000 87,743 600,000 60'000 There are 4,922 Substance Abuse offenders in 40,000 900'°°° treatment programs. Some of these programs are 20,000 200'00° residential treatment facilities. If the number of offenders increases at the same rate as the 990 2000 2010 2016 2020 2025 population, there will be 5,080 offenders seeking X65-69 °-79 t8o+ }< treatment in 2025. Likewise, current residential treatment programs will have to increase their With only 4.5 percent of seniors cared for in a availability accordingly. Upon the completion of home or facility, it is likely that family or care residential treatment, persons recovering from services will be required for many of the other substance addiction may move into sober houses, 300,000+ seniors in the state age 65+. These many of which are expected to be transitional in seniors will choose to, or will have to, remain in nature. Upon completion of the program, they will their homes or with family, many of these homes 10713th Annual Domestic Violence Count , Hawai'i Summary conducted 09/13/18, Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 54 ©SMS December,2019 need assistance finding housing and subsidies to Generally, these groups will require pay for rent while seeking employment. subsidized housing and assistance in finding housing. The Hawaii Paroling Authority identified 852 parolees and exiting offenders in one year. Recommendation Ideally, most of them will have spent time in transitional housing prior to leaving the facility to provide them the resources and skills they will As the population of Hawaii continues to grow need to acclimate to community living. and age, identification of the demand for, and Unfortunately, the only Federal transition facility is inventory of, special needs housing demand and closing in late September 2019, and it is unclear supply will become more important. Even as we how many State facilities are available. The need recognize that not every individual that has a is for group homes with specialized services that special need will require a specific housing option, can accommodate at least 426 (assume a stay of over time a better tool for projecting and tracking six months) soon to be released or placed on this population will be in order. parole offenders. Upon leaving the transitional The following section on homelessness uses the home, there will be a need for assistance to find data available in the State's Homeless around 852 housing units per year. It is unclear if Management Information System (HMIS). The the number released per year will grow in the next data from the HMIS feeds into a coordinated entry five years. system that matches homeless persons with Each year approximately 66 youth age out of the available housing. The system identifies the Foster Care system. There is a need for a specific needs within the population to enable a transitional-type group setting for them that better match of supportive services required. provides the training and resources to find In fact, many of the people in the Special Needs employment, apply for scholarships, grants, and group willbecome homeless if not offered both find affordable housing. By 2025 an additional ten the transitional places to retreat and prepare for spaces/units per year will be needed. permanent housing and assistance in finding and Approximately 2,393 individuals have AIDS/HIV. funding permanent housing rental units upon Based on the HMIS analysis (to be discussed in leaving the transitional programs. the next section), there were 107 persons who had been served in by a homeless program who We strongly recommend that the State and self-identified as having HIV/AIDS and of these 28 County agencies serving persons with special exited to permanent housing. Having a needs begin exploring how to use HMIS data to transitional option while waiting for permanent determine the programs special needs persons housing will be beneficial for this group. will need in conjunction with housing. Overall, just based on the Special Needs Group discussed here, there is a significant need for: • Care facilities and/or home service providers for the elderly and for persons with serious mental illness; • Transitional shelters/clinics for o Domestic Violence Survivors o Substance Abuse Offenders o Paroles and Ex-Offenders o Emancipated Foster Care Youth o Persons with AIDS/HIV. • Permanent housing available when persons exit their transitional shelters/clinics. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 55 ©SMS December,2019 B. HOMELESSNESS IN HAWAII 1. Individuals and families who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence 1. Introduction including an individual who is exiting an institution where he or she resided for 90 days Homelessness in Hawaii is a persistent and or less and who resided in an emergency vexing problem. Thousands of individuals and shelter or a place not meant for human hundreds of families struggle to access and habitation immediately before entering that institution; maintain housing while local, state, and federal governments funnel millions of dollars into 2. Individuals and families who will imminently outreach, shelter, housing, and service programslose their primary nighttime residence; to curtail the problem. Needs in the homeless community are diverse, 3. Unaccompanied youth and families with but one constant is the need for permanent children and youth who are defined as housing. homeless under other federal statutes who do To end homelessness, we must begin by ensuring the availability of housing units not otherwise qualify as homeless under this definition; and necessary for this sector of the population. In accordance with Housing First best practice 4. Individuals and families fleeing, or attempting to flee, domestic violence, dating violence, principles, now adopted federally and locally, it is sexual assault, stalking, or other dangerous, understood that people need the safety and life-threatening conditions related to violence stability of a home in order to address challenges against an individual or family member. and pursue opportunities.108 The availability of permanent housing is if we are to sustainably house Hawai`i's homeless. Additionally, a supply b. Context, Policies and Impact of supportive housing and service programs is needed to assist those dealing with the disabilities Hawaii homelessness began an unprecedented and life challenges that often compound housing climb in 2010, with overall numbers increasing 26 struggles. Issues like mental illness, substance percent statewide by 2016.111 Unsheltered abuse, physical and developmental disabilities. numbers increased even more significantly, Housing First prescribes that these issues are climbing 47 percent during the same time period. best dealt with once a person is stably housed. Homelessness had become one of the most visible issues in the state. HHPS 2019 continues to support the position that the lack of affordable housing is the primary driver By 2014, momentum gathered around system- of homelessness and that poverty and pathology level changes to the homeless service system. are secondary issues.109 That viewpoint is also Pilot projects and the implementation of several reflected in Hawai`i's primary housing planning new evidence-based strategies were well document, the Consolidated Plan (HHFDC 2015). underway, including the development and utilization of the Vulnerability Index & Service a. Definition of Homeless Status Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI- SPDAT) to assist in identifying the highest need The definition of homelessness has been refined clientele.93 This included new funding and since the last HHPS. HUD has added four increased investment in proven and strategies categories of homelessness in its recent Final such as homeless prevention, Rapid Rehousing, Rule Defining Homeless.110 Coordinated Entry, and an enhanced focus on Housing First practices within existing programs. 1°8USCIH, https://www.usich.gov/solutions/housing/housing- 11° McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. HUD's Final first/ Rule implementing the new definition at 24 CFR Part 91, 109 See HHPS 2006, 2011, 2016; Homelessness Section. 582 and 583. Definition above reflects the changes. 111 HUD, Hawai'i Point-in-Time Count Data. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 56 ©SMS December,2019 By 2016, the development of Coordinated Entry Rapid Rehousing Programs are a key tool for Systems (CES), for the Oahu Continuum of Care moving homeless into permanent housing as (CoC), Partners in Care (PIC) and the neighbor quickly as possible.12 island CoC, Bridging the Gap (BTG), made significant strides to streamline and increase All these system changes were tipping the scale efficiency in the homeless service system. The in the homeless crisis in Hawaii and, in 2017, CES system connects individuals and families Hawaii saw the first decrease in the Homeless seeking services to the complete network of Point-in-Time count in eight years. This reduction resources and housing options available within of 8.8 percent statewide was followed by two their CoC. In 2017, both CoCs launched their consecutive years of modest reductions. respective CES systems. In 2018, Hawaii had the third-highest per capita Prevention and Rapid Rehousing programs rate of homelessness among the 50 states -460 expanded significantly from their onset in 2010, persons per 100,000. The homeless population initially funded by a $2 million federal grant. decreased again from 2018 to 2019 by about 1.3 Prevention efforts have become an essential percent. However,there were still 6,448 homeless piece of effective homeless policy, often referred persons in Hawaii on any given night in 2019 to as "closing the front door" to homelessness. (Table 45). Table 45. Homeless PIT Counts, State and Counties of Hawaii, 2009-2019 Year Pct. Chg. 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2016-2019 Sheltered 3,268 3,535 3,632 3,726 3,745 3,813 3,666 3,613 3,420 3,055 2,810 -22.2% O'ahu 2,445 2,797 2,912 3,035 3,091 3,079 2,964 2,767 2,635 2,350 2,052 -25.8% Hawai'i 321 286 229 170 160 211 220 271 275 200 243 -10.3% Maui 422 392 394 420 421 445 505 484 395 399 420 -13.2% Kaua'i 80 60 97 101 73 78 88 91 115 106 95 4.4% Unsheltered 2,514 2,299 2,556 2,520 2,590 3,105 3,843 4,308 3,800 3,475 3,638 -15.6% O'ahu 1,193 1,374 1,322 1,318 1,465 1,633 2,162 2,173 2,324 2,145 2,401 10.5% Hawai'i 615 313 337 447 397 658 1,021 1,123 678 669 447 -60.2% Maui 581 399 658 454 455 514 632 661 501 474 442 -33.1% Kaua'i 125 213 239 301 273 300 251 351 297 187 348 -0.9% Total 5,782 5,834 6,188 6,246 6,335 6,918 7,509 7,921 7,220 6,530 6,448 -18.6% O'ahu 3,638 4,171 4,234 4,353 4,556 4,712 5,126 4,940 4,959 4,495 4,453 -9.9% Hawai'i 936 599 566 617 557 869 1,241 1,394 953 869 690 -50.5% Maui 1,003 791 1,052 874 876 959 1,137 1,145 896 873 862 -24.7% Kaua'i 205 273 336 402 346 378 339 442 412 293 443 0.2% Source: State of Hawai'i PIT Counts, 2009-2019. Methodology The PIT count is gathered in an annual multi-night There are two primary sources for homeless survey of homeless shelters and locations where counts in Hawaii: the annual Point-in-Time (PIT) homeless persons are known to congregate. PIT Count;13 and the Homeless Management Count data has been best used to track progress Information System (HMIS). 112 https://www.huduser.gov/Publications/pdf/Strategies for methods, definitions, and results of the count. preventingHomelessness.pdf https://www.partnersincareoahu.org/sites/default/files/PIC%202 113 See, for example, Partners in Care 2019 Point-in-Time 019%200ahu%20PIT%20Count%20Report%20- Comprehensive Report for a detailed description of the %20FINAL.pdf Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 57 ©SMS December,2019 and changes within the homeless community over These households represent an important part of time, as it is a snapshot taken once a year. the unmet demand for housing in Hawaii. Their numbers are not included in Census data (the The other source is the Homeless Management basis for population counts and housing demand Information System (HMIS), which maintains data estimates). They are not included in annual on homeless persons in shelters or encountered counts of occupied housing units and they are not at unsheltered locations across the state.14 The housed in any public sector residential programs HMIS data file is populated by homeless services (Group Quarters). Their need for a housing unit agencies and providers based on the clients they represents unmet demand, new demand that is serve. The HMIS database is used daily by added to the demand estimates we develop from providers and state agencies to assist in the population and housing production data. management and tracking of persons seeking services and in the coordination of resources in Characteristics of Homeless Population the homeless sector. Most of this section of the report is based on an Most homeless households are individuals (85%) analysis of HMIS data gathered from April 2018 to (Table 46). The rest are "family households," two April 2019. SMS obtained a de-identified listing of or more individuals who reside together. There all single and family households encountered by were 724 family households in the data (15%)and Homeless Providers in Hawaii from April 2018 to about six percent of those were couples or two- 2019. The overall dataset included all program person households. The remaining nine percent types and households served regardless of of households had more than two members, with housing status. a few having eight or more persons in the unit. Analysis was done by household, rather than by Couples and family households made up a larger individual, to identify the number of housing units percentage of the homeless population in Maui needed to meet demand. The housing demand and Kauai counties (about 25%). In Honolulu and analysis considered only homeless households Hawaii Counties, groups were about 15 percent within outreach, emergency and transitional of the homeless count. shelter programs, and excluded those who had exited to permanent housing since entering Table 46. Household Size Among Homeless programs. Persons HH* Size Hawaii Kauai Maui Oahu State 2. Number of Homeless Households 1 236 290 515 3,145 4,186 Based on the HMIS data, there were 6,610 2 29 27 55 183 294 households served in homeless programs 3 18 8 38 96 160 between April 2018 and April 2019. Of those 4,910 households, more than 70 percent were not 4 11 7 18 70 106 permanently housed. Some of these unhoused 5 11 6 8 54 79 households may have self-resolved during the year (found housing or were otherwise no longer 6 3 4 8 33 48 homeless). Others may still need housing. 7 3 2 1 25 31 Regardless, all were unhoused at some point during the year, and all were seeking help and 8+ 0 0 0 6 6 assistance into housing from one or more Total 311 344 643 3,612 4,910 homeless providers in Hawaii. Source: Hawaii HMIS Data, 2019. *HH=Household 14 See, Yuan, Sarah, Hong Vo, Kristen Gleason, and Utilization Report, 2016, University of Hawai'i at Manoa, Javzandulam Azuma. 2016. Homeless Services Center on the Family, 2015. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 58 ©SMS December,2019 3. Reducing the Number of Homeless Across the State, the percentage of households that contained hidden homeless persons There are three significant leverage points where increased from 17 percent in 2016 to 20 percent actions can be taken to reduce the number of of households in 2019, as shown in Table 47. homeless persons: Across the four counties, there was little • While still housed, preventing difference in the percentage of at-risk or hidden homelessness; homeless. Hawaii County had lowest percent at • Immediately upon entering risk of homelessness (21%) and hidden homeless homelessness, providing housing as (15%), but all other counties were within two quickly as possible; percentage points of the Statewide average. • When being placed in permanent housing from a homeless shelter, currently in Table 47. Households At-Risk or with Hidden programs. Homeless, State and Counties of Hawaii, 2019 At-Risk of All three options rely on the availability of Homelessness Hidden Homelessness affordable rental units. At-Risk House- Some No House- holds Not Hidden Hidden holds at Risk Homeless Homeless a. Preventing Homelessness Hawaii 21% 79% 15% 85% Of the 6,610 households served in homeless Honolulu 26% 74% 21% 79% programs between April 2018 to 2019, 2,177 Kauai 24% 76% 19% 81% (33%) of them were new to the homeless service Maui 24% 76% 22% 78% system. Reducing in-flow to the homeless system State 25% 75% 20% 80% and preventing homelessness is necessary to *The questions used to identify hidden homeless households reduce the homeless problem. changed after HHPS 2011. Source: HHPS 2019. There are two measures used to identify the In all four counties, hidden homeless and those at households likely to become homeless: At-Risk- risk of homelessness were more likely to be Households and Hidden Homeless. In the 2019 people who were younger, relatively recent HHPS Housing Demand survey, respondents arrivals to our state, and persons with fewer were asked how long they could stay in their economic resources. Hidden homeless current residence if they were to lose their primary households were also larger, with 5.8 persons per source of household income. Twenty-five percent household on average. (25%) of Hawaii households reported that they would be forced out of their homes after two It was more common for hidden homeless months or less of sustained income loss. That persons to be doubled up with family members was higher than the 21 percent of at-risk than with unrelated individuals. In 2019, more households in 2016. hidden homeless wanted to move in the next five years (37% compared to 31% in 2016). Further, The other indicator of potential homelessness hidden homeless households had lower income examines households that have doubled up, also per household member than households that did known as "hidden homeless." According to the not include hidden homeless members ($21,250 U.S. Census, doubled-up households are defined vs. $33,750). as those that include at least one"additional" adult — in other words, a person 18 or older who is not Understanding where people lived prior to enrolled in school and is not the householder, entering programs can help identify strategies to spouse or cohabiting partner of the householder. reduce homelessness. Figure 13 presents a We exclude households sharing accommodations breakout of these locations. because they prefer to live as extended families. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 59 ©SMS December,2019 Figure 13. Location Before Entering Programs15 depends on reducing that level of in-flow. If only 10 percent of at-risk households lose their primary 18% source of income, then approximately 14,000 26% � households would need assistance to keep them from becoming homeless. A1C Table 48. Number of Households Assisted to Keep Them from Becoming Homeless rr Program Type Hawaii Kauai Maui Oahu State 6% Homelessness 204 15 102 877 1,198 Prevention Source: Hawai'i HMIS Data, 2019. 8% 40% ■Sheltered Unsheltered Institutional b. Providing Housing as Quickly as Possible Doubled Up Other Source: Hawai'i HMIS Data, 2019. Rapid Rehousing programs have become essential for moving individuals and families out The largest number of homeless persons entering of homelessness quickly. Adhering to Housing shelters came from "unsheltered" locations (40%) First methods, these households are provided followed by "other shelters" (18%). Others (8%) financial assistance to help access housing were in "institutional" settings prior to entering a immediately. Often this type of housing includes homeless shelter. Roughly six percent (6%) were wraparound support services before and after "doubled-up" with family or friends and two placement to assist with challenges related to the percent came directly from housed locations. move. Statewide, 1,420 households of this type were placed by Rapid Rehousing programs Many of the persons exiting from other shelters or statewide in a year. institutional settings were likely special needs individuals coming from institutions like prisons or Table 49. Number of Households Assisted in hospitals, or from other shelters such as Exiting Homelessness HIV/AIDS transitional homes. Strategies to Program prevent homelessness in these groups were Type Hawaii Kauai Maui Oahu State discussed in the earlier Special Needs Section. Rapid 211 46 84 1,079 1,420 Rehousing Homeless prevention programs, prior to and at Source: Hawai'i HMIS Data, 2019. the onset of homelessness, can be an extremely effective tool for reducing homelessness in high- cost housing markets. Successful systems 1.. Unmet Demand for Housing for those include supportive services (especially upon n Homeless Programs discharge from institutions), mediation in housing court, and subsidies for rents and mortgages.16 Among households being served, some cannot The goal is to effectively prevent an episode of find or afford market-priced housing. The rest homelessness before it happens. need additional support services, before and after placement. Table 50 shows total 2019 unmet In 2019, Hawaii homeless service providers demand for individuals, couples/2-person prevented 1,198 households from becoming households, and family households of three or homeless. Progress in eliminating homelessness more. To estimate the number of needed housing 115 HMIS,April 2018 to April 2019 Data. 116 HUD, https://www.huduser.gov/Publications/pdf/Strategies for preventing_Homelessness.pdf. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 60 ©SMS December,2019 units, we postulated that Individuals, couples and The largest unhoused group with a single 2-person households can be accommodated with condition was the 558 households dealing with a studio. Families of three or more would need a substance abuse. Serving households with larger unit. substance abuse issues requires an adequate supply of residential detoxification and treatment Table 50. Unhoused Households Statewide facilities, after which permanent housing units will Homeless Classification Households be required. Our review of substance abuse treatment facilities (see Special Needs) showed Individuals 4,186 that all or nearly all such facilities have waitlists. Couples and Family Households of 2 294 If our 558 households were to exit homelessness Family Households of 3+ 430 this year, we would need 558 additional Total Households 4,910 substance abuse slots. After treatment, Hawaii Source: Hawaii HMIS Data,2019. would need 558 housing units, 535 studios and 23 larger units. Statewide, there were 4,186 individuals, 294 couples or families of two, and 430 larger families, Mental health conditions affected 501 households who received homeless services over the course in the 2019 HMIS target group. Serving their of the year but did not exit to permanent housing. needs requires a combination of short-term treatment facilities and longer-term supportive Households with No Special Needs housing services, depending on the nature and severity of the condition. Access to adequate At program intake, clients complete the VISPDAT, medical care and treatment is likely necessary for which identifies any conditions or special needs this group to maintain housing. Data on what that could affect their ability to access or maintain percentages of mentally limited homeless housing. These data are collected in HMIS. Table persons proceed to independent housing is hard 49 shows the number of households for which to find. We have assumed that about half of the VISPDAT data indicated no need for special households would remain in permanent services. About half of unhoused households in supportive housing and half would proceed to homeless programs in the target year had no permanent housing. Thus, these cases will result conditions or special needs that would affect their in the need for 501 additional mental health beds ability to access or maintain housing. and, eventually, 251 new housing units. Table 51 shows a need for 1,471 affordable or Table 50 shows 367 households having at least subsidized studios statewide for individuals one person with a physical disability and 36 with (1,372) and couples or small families of two (99). at least one person having a developmental An additional 289 family households of three or disability. Some of these households will need no more would need larger units. Services needed residential treatment and proceed directly to by individuals and families with no special needs permanent housing. Their units may require are limited and usually short-term. They include ramps, grab bars, easy access showers, etc. and case management, job training, counseling, and housing for the developmentally disabled may short-to-mid-term financial or other assistance — requires wraparound services. Other households services that do not require in-residence delivery. in this group may require some living assistance, either in an institutionalized setting or in small Households with a Single Special Need family care homes. Using the assumption that half of the households with a physical or Many individuals and families need additional developmental disability will be able to proceed to short to long-term support or residential services permanent housing, Hawaii will need about 201 to sustainably maintain housing. Table 50 shows new affordable housing units and 202 spaces to the breakdown of supportive housing and service accommodate households in need of assisted needs statewide for unhoused households who living situations. have declared a single condition. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 61 ©SMS December,2019 Households with Multiple Conditions This makes it even more difficult to develop assumptions about types of housing needed by There were 1,688 unhoused households that had these households. More than 90 percent of them more than one condition (Table 51) in the 2019 are individuals. They will need treatment beds and target year. For these households, overlapping studios with wrap-around services. The rest are conditions and complex household situations will families and only 57 of them had three or more require case management services. CES must members. This suggests that the complexity in identify on a case-by-case basis the most the multiple conditions group is caused by co- appropriate solution for each household. morbidity rather than group size. Table 51. Unhoused Households with No Special Needs Households with No Special Needs O'ahu Hawai'i Maui Kaua'i State Individuals 1,049 35 209 79 1,372 Couples and Family Households of 2 66 8 25 9 99 Family Households of 3+ 191 24 45 20 289 Total 1,306 67 279 108 1,760 Source: Hawai'i HMIS Data, 2019. Table 52. Unhoused Households with a Single Condition Substance Abuse Only O'ahu Hawai'i Maui Kaua'i State Individuals 386 14 55 51 506 Couples and Family Households of 2 21 0 5 3 29 Family Households of 3+ 15 3 4 1 23 Total 422 17 64 55 558 Mental Illness Only O'ahu Hawai'i Maui Kaua'i State Individuals 328 34 54 26 442 Couples and Family Households of 2 16 4 2 0 22 Family Households of 3+ 26 4 7 0 37 Total 368 42 63 26 501 Physical Disability Only O'ahu Hawai'i Maui Kaua'i State Individuals 224 18 39 31 312 Couples and Family Households of 2 18 3 7 4 32 Family Households of 3+ 17 2 2 2 23 Total 159 23 48 37 367 Developmental Disability Only O'ahu Hawai'i Maui Kaua'i State Individuals 14 0 5 2 21 Couples and Family Households of 2 3 1 1 0 5 Family Households of 3+ 3 1 4 2 10 Total 20 2 10 4 36 Source: Hawai'i HMIS Data, 2019. Table 53. Unhoused Households with Multiple Conditions Multiple Conditions O'ahu Hawai'i Maui Kaua'i State Individuals 1,144 135 153 101 1,533 Couples and Family Households of 2 59 13 15 11 98 Family Households of 3+ 32 12 11 2 57 Total 1,235 160 179 114 1,688 Source: Hawai'i HMIS Data, 2019. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 62 ©SMS December,2019 Some part of each subgroup will need permanent months between April 2019 and March 2019.11' supportive housing. Using the assumption that By the end of that period, 1,127 of those half of the households with multiple conditions will households were permanently housed, be eventually proceed to permanent housing, suggesting that about 19 percent of homeless Hawaii will need residential treatment facilities for households can be accommodated without another 844 individuals, and another 844 studio additional units each year. The remaining 4,910 apartments later. For those who are less homeless households never exited programs or fortunate, Hawaii will need an additional 844 exited to unknown destinations. These permanent supportive housing slots. households require housing units that must be added to the current housing stock."8 Table 52 Summary of Needed Units summarizes the foregoing analysis and lays out the number and types of units that are needed for The homeless population upon which the former short-term (Transitional Shelter) and long-term analysis was conducted consisted of 6,037 (PSH and Affordable Housing) treatment of households active in homeless programs in the 12 households with each type of conditions. Table 54: Housing Units Needed to Accommodate Homeless Persons in 2019 Transitional Permanent Affordable Housing Type of HouseholdShelter Units19 Supportive Housing Units (PSH) Units Individual or Couple (Studio) 1,471 Family HH 3 or more persons 289 Substance Abuse HH 558 558 Mental Health HH 251 250 251 Physical Disability HH 183 184 Developmental Disability HH 18 18 Mixed Conditions HH 844 844 844 Total 1,653 1,295 3,615 There is a demand for 1,653 additional transitional transitional shelter, sustain an affordable rental shelter beds, mainly for substance abuse (558) unit, with or without wraparound services. and mental health treatment (251), as well as mixed conditions. There is a need for 1,295 Overall, there are 4,910 households represented additional permanent supportive housing units for above. Households counted as needing individuals and families with various special transitional housing were also counted in the needs. Finally, there is a need for 3,615 additional affordable housing category, as the transitional subsidized or unsubsidized affordable housing housing unit is not a permanent housing units for individuals and families across the state. destination. Households without a head or with inadequate data collected were not included. An assumption was made for households in the mental health, physical disability, developmental The SMS projections are more modest than disability, and mixed conditions categories: 50 similar projections generated by the Corporation percent of them would need PSH and 50 percent for Supportive Housing (CSH).120 CSH estimated could either immediately, or after a time in a need for 6,000 additional housing units. "' Households without a head of household were excluded, 19 Following HUD definitions,these units are fundamentally as well as households with inadequate data collected. residential treatment facilities and not emergency shelter. 12o Corporation for Supportive Housing, Hawaii Housing "$ See Number of Homeless Households, Para 2, p. 62. Projections and Financial Modeling,2017. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 63 ©SMS December,2019 This section of the SMS analysis focused on The average income for an unhoused homeless housing demand within homeless programs only. individual served in the state was $375 a month We developed estimates of current units needed (Table 55). Homeless two-person family beyond market capacity.The CSH report included households did slightly better at $864 ($432 per a demand analysis for all levels of housing person). Larger households per person income intervention, including demand for Prevention and decreases as family size increases. Rapid Rehousing funding, as well as incorporating projected demand and financial There is little likelihood that these households modeling used for cost analysis. If annual newly (especially those with conditions and special homeless numbers remain high, demand for needs) can maintain available market-rate additional units in these categories will rise. housing without deep, long-term subsidies, in the absence of significantly increased income. 5. Maintaining Permanent Housing and In the 2019 Housing Demand Study, renters were Reducing Recidivism asked how much per month they spent on rent and utilities. Average costs for single household One of the biggest challenges for keeping renters was $1,280 a month, up to $2,200 a formerly houseless persons in permanent month for a 4-person household. Based on the housing is their ability to afford rental payments average incomes for unhoused homeless over a longer period. households, an average subsidy of$960 a month would be needed for these families to pay rent on a market-rate unit. Table 55. Average Homeless Household Income Source: Hawaii HMIS Data, 2019. Household Size Hawai'i Kaua'i Maui O'ahu State 1 $521 $593 $413 $338 $375 2 $786 $1,595 $1,091 $700 $864 3 $1,445 $1,814 $1,127 $709 $946 4 $1,385 $2,709 $1,530 $980 $1,230 5 $1,057 $2,538 $1,191 $957 $1,115 6 $2,055 $2,575 $2,172 $931 $1,345 7 $1,493 $2,892 N/A $1,245 $1,335 8+ N/A N/A N/A $1,278 $1,278 HH Average $673 $813 $576 $401 $470 Current subsidy programs pay varying amounts of Waiting lists for these programs range from subsidies for shorter and longer periods of time. immediate access for some Rapid Rehousing Rapid Rehousing Programs can last from a few funds for highly vulnerable families, the Public months to two years and can pay the entire rent Housing Subsidy program is no longer accepting for a household. These programs try to taper applications due to limited supply, and up to three down assistance over time to promote long-term to five years for Section 8. Finding affordable units sustainability post-program. The Hawaii Public and landlords willing to work with homeless or Housing Authority (HPHA) Rental Subsidy Section 8 clients can prove challenging. This Program can pay up to $500 a month for larger limits the potential of the program's success. households. The Federal Housing Choice Voucher Program, more commonly referred to as 6. Strategy and Planning Implications Section 8, lasts for as long as the household qualifies and only requires a household to pay 30 to 40 percent of their gross income in rent Our objective for 2019 was to bring together data depending on the affordability of the selected unit. to help planners develop homeless support Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 64 ©SMS December,2019 programs and to estimate the number of housing a. Increase Funding for Prevention Programs units that might be needed to house homeless persons entering the ranks of the housed. In order to"close the front door"to homelessness, enhanced targeted prevention programs are Between April 2018 and May 2019, nearly 9,000 needed to lessen the number of newly homeless households were served in Prevention, Outreach, families entering shelters and the streets each Shelter, and Housing programs statewide. Of year. In the last year, statewide prevention those, more than 2,500 households exited to programs served about 1,200 households. If permanent housing. That was about 30 percent of those households had become homeless, the the total households served over the course of State could have seen an 18 percent increase in that year, which leaves about 70 percent of the households on the streets or in shelters that year. served population still homeless, struggling, receiving services, or unaccounted for. Prevention efforts reduce costs and pressure on the homeless service system. Prevention Table 56. Household Exits to Permanent Housing programs are more successful in keeping by Program Type households in permanent housing over a longer Households Permanent Exit period compared to other programs. It is easier, Served Housing Rate more humane, and more affordable to keep Homelessness 1,187 702 59% people in housing than to find them housing after Prevention they have become homeless. Rapid 1,389 734 53% Rehousing Street Outreach 2,518 185 7% More than 30 percent of those served by homeless service providers between April 2018 Emergency 2,584 670 26% and April 2019 were newly homeless households. ShelterTransitional(ES) Reducingthe number of households entering Housing (TH) 935 272 29% homelessness is a cost-effective way to reduce Total 8,613 2,563 30% overall homeless numbers and is a significant Source: Hawaii HMIS Data 2019 leverage point in the system for addressing homelessness. In addition to all the currently homeless persons, newly homeless will continue to enter the system, b. Increase Rent Subsidies as shown in the number of at-risk and hidden homeless households. Over our 12-month The cost of not placing homeless households into period, approximately 2,000 individuals and 500 permanent housing is very high. For example, families became newly homeless. Given no many of these individuals and families are served significant changes in the economy, these in emergency shelters for extended periods of numbers are likely to continue. While lower than time. The average length of stay in an emergency the numbers served, these are less than the shelter in Hawaii in the fiscal year 2017 was 112 numbers being permanently housed. days.121 A shelter bed funded by the U.S. The following are recommendations to improve Department of Housing and Urban Development the housing and policy environment, hopefully costs, on average, $8,000 more each year than a leading to progress in solving the homeless crisis Section 8 housing voucher. A shift in resources, in Hawaii with an emphasis on expanding state-level prevention and rental subsidy programs and efforts, would lessen overall homeless program expenses by targeting this sector of the population. 121 Hawai'i HMIS, Service Utilization Reports. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 65 ©SMS December,2019 The average unhoused individual served during available to lower-income sectors of the the year made less than $400 a month.122 This population. reality is in stark contrast to average monthly housing costs paid by single-person households c. Build Additional Affordable, Permanent, statewide: $1,280.123 and Supportive Housing Units Existing programs, including Section 8, HPHA Adequate investment in suitable supportive Rental Subsidy Program, and Rapid Rehousing temporary and permanent residential housing Programs, should be expanded to reach more of options, as well as supportive services for those the unhoused population. Subsidies will need to in off-site housing, is necessary to effectively be significant and long-term. Subsidies are often assist these households. the only alternative to homelessness when there is a lack of affordable housing stock for the lowest "Supportive housing not only resolves income groups. homelessness and increases housing stability, Extending the length of time a subsidy is available but also improves health and lowers public costs will enable newly placed households to continue by reducing the use of publicly funded crisis in permanent housing and keep them from again services, including shelters, hospitals, psychiatric centers, jails, and prisons."124 While the cost of becoming homeless. housing this population can be quite high, the Concern over landlords' reluctance to accept alternative is higher. For example, in Los Angeles, housing vouchers and subsidies remains a the average public cost for an unsheltered persistent problem in the service community. homeless person was $2,897 per month and the Finding a unit with a landlord who will accept a average public cost for a resident in supportive homeless or at-risk client can make the housing housing was $605 per month, a five times greater process even more time-consuming. The cost to the public for those unhoused versus those government could promote renting to low-income who were provided supportive housing. persons or leasing to social service organizations Consideration should be given to identifying by providing incentives to those landlords willing shelters or other facilities that can be retrofitted to to participate. Some programs have had more provide single-person units offering specific success in finding and maintaining affordable supportive services. Supportive services can be rentals long term by "master leasing" units and delivered more efficiently when clients are in a acting as the intermediary between their clients residential setting. Depending on the conditions and the landlords. and special needs of the individuals, some Other options include creating Section 8 landlord shelters may be Permanent Supportive Housing guarantees and providing prompt money-back or Transitional, eventually exiting to a permanent options for landlords who claim losses in excess housing location with or without services. Given of the security deposit due to damages caused by the number of individuals with single and multiple Section 8 tenants. conditions, providing additional Supportive Housing options in the state will be necessary. Piloting and expanding programs such as these may help increase the stock of housing units 122 Hawaii HMIS Data 2019. 124 USICH,www.usich.gov/solutions/housing/supportive-housing/. 123 HHPS Demand Survey,2019. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 66 ©SMS December,2019 C. HOUSING AND TOURISM rents? Does the increasing demand for alternative visitor accommodations lead to a loss of Hawaii has a thriving visitor industry because it residential housing stock? has many amenities — a pleasant climate, scenic beauty, great beaches and water sports, good 1. Traditional Relationship visitor products and infrastructure, a well-trained and experienced labor force, a pleasant lifestyle, The traditional relationship between tourism and and a host culture that provides a foundation for hospitality and our Aloha Spirit. housing markets starts with tourism's benefits to local economies. Virtually all sources agree: (1) The visitor industry has been Hawai`i's number tourism is a good way to turn non-economic one industrysince replacing sugar and pineapple assets into exports, improve the economy, create production n the nineties. It providesp 164,000 jobs, and generate income126; and (2) if you obsper year, accounts for a substantial choose the visitor industry as a way to run your Jpercentageof the GSP, and contributes $1.8 economy, you can expect high housing prices127 billion each year in Hawaii State General Excise and other problems.128 Fitz (2006) showed that Tax and the Transient Accommodations Tax. tourism leads to an increase in second homes which increases property taxes and Biagi, et al. Overall, residents understand the economic found that higher housing prices lead to issues in benefits of tourism. However, with visitor arrivals affordability, displacement, and gentrification.13° approaching the 10 million mark, residents seek These research findings will not surprise anyone benefits beyond the economic, a greater return on in Hawai`i's visitor industry. their "investment." While residents largely continue to view the industry favorably, some In Hawaii, the academic literature has not indicators of Hawaii Resident Sentiment have produced much on the direct impact of tourism on weakened.125 A strong visitor industry may also the housing market. The popular press, on the bring higher population growth, greater external other hand, continues to investigate the issues. housing demand, and higher housing prices. Some went as far as to claim, "Some people complain that illegal rentals have caused housing What is of interest to us here is the impact of the prices to soar and have torn apart communities visitor industry on the residential housing market where residents know all their neighbors."131 In in Hawaii. Do rising room rates affect residential addition to these public reaction stories, some 125 Hawai'i Tourism Authority, HTA Resident Sentiment accelerated housing price appreciation, especially in Survey 2018 Highlights, 2019. supply-inelastic markets; and (4) local investment in 126 Gunderson, Ronald J. and Pin T. Ng. 2005. Analyzing physical amenities resulted in increased demand for the effects of amenities, quality of life and tourism on visits. They saw this as evidence of a self-perpetuating regional economic performance using regression cycle of tourist development housing appreciation. quantiles, Regional Analysis&Policy, vol. 35, no. 1. 129 Fitz, Richard G. (1982) Tourism, vacation home 127 Reeder, Richard J. and Dennis M. Brown. 2005. development and residential tax burden: A case study of Recreation, tourism, and rural well-being. United States the local finances of 240 Vermont towns, American Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Services, Journal of Economics and Society, Vol. 41, No, 4, pp. Economic Research Report Number 7, August, 2005. 375-385, October 1982. See also Ko, Dong-wan and William P. Stewart. 2002. A 130 Biagi,Bianca,Dionysia Lambiri,and Alessandra Faggian. structural equation model of residents' attitudes for 2012.The effect tourism on the housing market, in Uysal, tourism development,Tourism Management,Vol. 23, pp. M., et. al., (eds.), Handbook of Tourism and Quality-of- 521-530, 2002. See also, Affordable homes and tourism Life Research: Enhancing the Lives of Tourists and are election issues in Midhurst, Midhurst and Petworth Residents in Host Communities, International Handbooks Observer, (UK),April 13, 2015. of Quality-of-Life,Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 128 Carlino and Saiz (2008) used visitor arrivals as a 2012. measure of consumer preference for local amenities. They found: (1) amenities were linked to population and 131 Riker, Marina. 2015, State, City looking to crack down on job growth; (2) "beautiful cites" attracted more skilled illegal vacation rentals, Honolulu Civil Beat, March 10, employees; (3) growth in visitor arrivals was related to 2015. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 67 ©SMS December,2019 data appeared, noting that, "at 80 percent show that Individually Advertised Units (IAU) occupancy,the average Airbnb rent in 2015 would counts of VRU may have been as high as 30,135 bring in $5,900 per month." That is nearly 3.5 in 2018.134 times the average rent for a residential rental unit in 2015.132 VPI supplemental studies show that short-term IAUs exist in nearly all communities in Hawaii, What concerns us here is one particular part of suggesting that residential housing stock may visitor industry operations in Hawaii --the number have been affected. The same studies also show of rental properties being used for short-term that the units are heavily concentrated in visitor rentals to transient parties. Short-term means destination areas. Because the regulation and rental contracts for 30 days or less. Transient permitting of vacation rentals is under each parties include visitors from out of state and county's jurisdiction, counties have different residents, traveling overnight or longer permitting requirements and may prohibit short- interisland. term rental units outside specific districts. These types of rental units have been discussed Visitor Research Data using a variety of names. In this report, we will use the term Vacation Rental Units (VRU). As used here, VRUs include single-family house rentals, Hawai`i's tourism economy has been growing multifamily condominium rentals, and bed and impressively for the last ten years. Between 2009 breakfast properties. For 2019, we also looked at and 2018, visitor arrivals grew from 6.4 million to additional alternative accommodation types: 9.8 million (53.1 /o). timeshare, room or rooms in the owner's place of residence, and cottage or other units on owner's 53 presents data for the recovery period following property. Some VRUs started as visitor the Great Recession. Before the Recession, accommodations units and others may be visitor volume reached 7.4 million visitor arrivals. The recovery was completed by the middle of transformed residential housing units. In Hawaii, 2012, but visitors continued to flock to Hawaii as in other visitor destination areas, VRUs are The two most recent years showed strong growth subject to regulations, registrations, business taxes, and tourist taxes. In addition, like other in arrivals of 5 - 6 percent. visitor communities, there are claims that some Throughout this period of growth, the pattern of VRUs operate illegally, in violation of zoning visitor accommodations has shifted. The percent codes or tax responsibilities. of visitors who stayed at commercial visitor Regardless of the nomenclature, there is little accommodations units grew during the recovery doubt that the number of VRUs in Hawaii has years but slowed down after 2016 to return to the been increasing. The Visitor Plant Inventory (VPI) 2009 level. shows an increase from 10,768 in 2015 to 13,082 in 2018133 a 21 percent increase in just four years. The VPI Supplemental Report extracted data from four vacation rental booking sites to 132 Honolulu rental market: Affordable rental housing study visitors. Obtaining an accurate list of VRUs has been update, 2014, prepared by Ricky Cassiday for increasingly difficult and VPI has acknowledged that VRU Department of Community Services, City and County of counts may be underestimated. Honolulu, December 30, 2014, p. 115. 134 The report notes that the count includes listings of 133 The Hawai'i Visitor Plant Inventory is an annual count of properties on the North Shore of Kaua'i that were visitor accommodations units conducted by HTA. The temporarily closed due to limited access after the April study develops a list of visitor properties and then surveys flooding and rentals in the Puna area that may have been them to measure the number of rooms available to destroyed following the May volcanic eruption. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 68 ©SMS December,2019 Table 57. Hawaii Visitor Industry Statistics, 2009-2018 Chg. 2009- 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2018 Visitor Arrivals(x1,000) 6,420 6,917 7,174 7,867 8,003 8,196 8,563 8,822 9,278 9,827 53.1% by air Number of Parties 2,899 3,102 3,282 3,497 351 3,662 3,915 4,010 4,191 4,431 52.8% (x1,000) Percent Use 87.6 88.0 88.8 89.4 89.7 89.6 89.4 89.7 87.6 87.6 0.0% Commercial Units' Percent Use Traditional 82.2 82.4 82.6 83.0 82.5 81.9 80.9 75.6 74.3 72.4 -11.9% Unitsb Percent Use VRU 5.4 5.6 6.2 6.4 7.1 7.8 10.7 7.7 11.8 13.5 150.0% Hotel Occupancy Rate 65.3 70.7 73.3 76.9 76.6 77.1 78.8 79.1 80.2 80.0 22.5% (%) Average Daily Room $177 $175 $189 $205 $230 $235 $244 $254 $264 $277 56.6% Rate Average Residential $1,755 $1,730 $1,743 $1,768 $1,806 $1,844 $1,917 $2,019 $2,069 $2,083 18.7% Rent Rates a. The percent of all visitor parties that used any type of commercial visitor accommodations units. Excludes those who stayed with family and friends and those who remained aboard a cruise ship. b. The percent of all commercial accommodations user parties that use traditional visitor accommodations units - hotels, apartment hotels, condominium hotels, hostels,or timeshare units. Sources: DBEDT, HTA Annual Reports, RentRange® The number of visitors that used traditional visitor of market share to VRUs, the share of revenue accommodations units135 grew but at a slower may not have been affected. Average daily hotel pace than visitor arrivals --from 5.3 million in 2009 room rates rose from $177 to $277 during the to 7.1 million in 2018 (+35% growth vs. +53% same period, a growth of 56.6 percent. growth for arrivals). However,the share of visitors that used traditional units declined from 82.2 Finally, the median monthly rent for residential percent to 72.4 percent over the past ten years. housing units in Hawaii rose from $1,755 in 2009 to $2,083 in 2018 -- an 18.7 percent growth rate There was a significant increase in demand for over ten years. Therefore, as the post-recession vacation rental units (including B&Bs, private recovery proceeded, growing visitor arrival rooms, and shared rooms). The percent of visitors numbers were met by rising visitor rents (ADR). that used these units increased one and a half Residential rents grew by only a third of the rate times between 2009 and 2018 (5.4% to 13.5%). in the visitor industry. A property owner Furthermore, the growth rate for the use of VRUs considering the prospects of renting to visitors by Hawai`i's visitors outpaced the use of rather than residents might have been convinced traditional visitor accommodations during this by the numbers. There was a substantial period. difference in what could be charged for a room night - perhaps 3-times the local residential rate. Hotel occupancy rates rose from 65.3 percent to In addition, there was a potential for even higher 80 percent during the recovery for a 22.5 percent rents in the future as visitor rental rates grew growth rate over ten years. Most of the growth much faster than residential rates. occurred before 2015 and occupancy rates have been relatively steady for the last three years. Moreover, even if the traditional visitor accommodation unit numbers suggest some loss 135 Hotels,apartment hotels,condominium hotels,hostels,or timeshare units. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 69 ©SMS December,2019 3. Housing Study Research VRU usage. The estimated number of IAUs in Hawaii in 2017 was 38,100, as reported in VPI. This study brings additional data to the subject. A However, HTA noted, the figure may be set of questions sponsored by HTA were included overestimated137 and the 2018 figure is a better in the demand survey and there was a separate estimate because a change in technology allowed survey of out-of-state property owners. The the vendor to identify duplicate listings across demand survey queried Hawaii property owners platforms. Therefore, the best estimate of the on the use of their real estate as a rental property number of VRUs in Hawaii in 2018 was and asked whether they rented to visitors. The approximately 30,000 out-of-state property owners' survey asked similar questions of a sample of owners whose tax billing Estimating VRUs from Survey Dat address was outside of Hawaii. It also borrowed data from the most recent visitor research by Two important data sources, first developed in the HTA. HHPS 2016, were used to estimate the number of VRUs in Hawaii. The first was the Housing Estimating VRU from Visitor Data Demand Survey. In that survey of 5,599 Hawaii resident households, we asked homeowners if The HTA Visitor Plant Inventory (VPI) provides they rent out any residential property they own historical data on accommodations units available and, more specifically, how many properties did to house Hawai`i's visitors. The 2018 VPI reports they regularly rent out on a short-term (less than that there were 13,082 vacation rentals available 30-day) basis. The short-term basis question is a for visitor use in 2018 that was a +3.3 percent better determinate of units available for visitors to increase in units from 2017 (12,661). However, in rent than directly asking the owners if they rent to the VPI Supplemental Report of the 2018 VPI, visitors. As mentioned earlier, a visitor would based on data extracted from the four booking include those Hawaii residents who live on websites, there were 30,135 Individually another island; owners may not make that Advertised Vacation Rental Units (IAU)136 listed in distinction and would instead classify their renter the State of Hawaii in 2018. Furthermore, the as a resident. total number of bedrooms available, represented by these IAU was 49,348. The second source was the Out-of-State Property Owners Survey, in which we asked 2,251 out-of- HTA explained that this count was based on data state property owners a similar set of questions to extracted from four vacation rental booking sites. help estimate the number of VRUs they might Even though VPI includes vacation rentals as a contribute to the inventory. property type, "due to the large number of vacation rental properties and the fluid nature of Combining those data, SMS developed an the vacation rental supply, identifying and analysis model in which the 2,251 Out-of-State gathering survey data from vacation rentals has surveys represented about 58,535 out-of-state been a challenge. As a result, the Visitor Plant property owners and the 5,599 Housing Demand Inventory survey has likely undercounted the Survey respondents represented 455,502 actual number of Vacation Rental Units." resident households. The results show that there were 64,843 units available for short-term rental The supplemental study estimate is a better to visitors in 2018. match than the VPI counts for visitor reports of 136 HTA 2018 VPI, pp. 60-61. rental unit listed on the booking sites, it is currently not 137 The Supplemental Study suggests the estimate possible to identify and eliminate much of the double and may be overstated, noting:"Because of the lack of unique triple counting that occurs when a property is listed on identifying information associated with each vacation multiple booking sites." Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 70 ©SMS December,2019 Table 58. Residential Properties Rented Out on a Short-term Basis County Residential Properties Rented out on a Short- term basis Total Oahu Maui Hawaii Kauai County County County County Hawai'i Resident Owners (Demand Study) 43,712 31,013 5,091 5,633 1,975 Out of State Owners 21,131 6,042 6,797 3,038 5,255 Total Residential Properties Rented out on a 64,843 37,054 11,888 8,671 7,230 Short-term basis Source: HHPS Demand Survey, 2019; Out-of-State Owners Survey, 2019. 6. Adjusting the Estimate to Comparable short-term contracts. We adjusted that count to VRU only include individually rented units (instead of Adjusting the Estimate from HHPS Results. those managed by a hotel or condo pool). VPI Supplemental study estimates would be short of That figure of 64,843 units available for rent on a the Out-of-State Survey estimate by (a) the short-term basis included at least some number of units not being advertised when commercial visitor rental units. These are units Internet downloads were made; (b) the number of that would be included in the hotel or condo rental units not advertised on those specific online pool and would be classified as a traditional booking sites, and (c) the number of units that do condo/condotel under the VPI unit classification. not advertise.138 The two surveys asked the question, "How is your rental property advertised to renters." If they Adjusting Units included in the VPI answered, "Through a hotel pool or condo Supplemental Studies for advertising management company," then we can eliminate methods. The 2018 supplemental study used them from the VRU count. Using figures from both four online booking sites: Airbnb, TripAdvisor, surveys, we determine that 55,576 units would be Homeaway, and VRBO, where VRBO is a classified as VRU. subsidiary of Homeaway. Those four sites accounted for 57.9 percent of the advertising The estimates from VPI and the SMS studies methods mentioned by our Out-of-State Owners would need to be adjusted for differing definitions and only 36.7 percent of our Hawaii resident and procedures. The VPI Supplemental Study owners139 If we use the most conservative value measured IAU as the number of units offered for of 57.9 percent used those online sites then the rent by the on-line booking sites Airbnb, VPI Supplemental estimate of 30,135 would HomeAway, TripAdvisor, and VRBO, at a specific actually represent 52,047 actual VRU in Hawaii point in time. for 2018 (Table 57). The Out-of-State Survey measured VRUs as the number of properties rented to visitors on 138 VPI 2018, p. 60. 139 Out-of-State Property Owners Survey, 2018. Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 71 0 SMS December,2019 Table 59. Adjusting the Estimates Advertise through Individually Advertised using State a hotel rental Rented AirBnB,VRBO, Adjusted VPI Total pool or condo Units HomeAway, or Supplemental (HHPS 2019) management "Non- Trip Advisor Estimate company Commercial" (HTA VPI Supply) Hawaii Resident Owners 43,712 5.8% 41,177 36.70% 82,112 (Demand Study) Out of State Owners 21,131 31.9% 14,399 57.90% 52,047 Total Vacation Rental 64 843 55.576 30,135 52.047 Units ' The locus of decision-making issue: Again, of visitor demand for units outside of the resort one of the findings of the Out-of-State Survey was areas, and the advance of Internet booking sites that many property owners did not know how their decreased the size of the residential housing units were rented. About 62 percent of them used stock. The HHPS surveys found that there were a rental agent and 43 percent were not sure between 52,000 and 55,600 housing units because someone else advertised the property available for rent to visitors on short-term basis in for them. We assumed these "unaware" 2018. respondents had renter profiles like those of property owners who reported advertising details. b. The Shared Economy That may have been optimistic. Property managers may be more likely to rent, more likely The HHPS Housing Demand Survey also asked to list on booking websites, and more likely rent questions related to the "shared economy"140 as on short-term contracts. part of VRU use in Hawaii. Among all Hawaii In summary, the estimated number of VRU homeowners, 15,922 (6.5%) rented rooms in their properties in Hawaii available to visitors differs homes; 5,495 (2.2%) rented out a cottage or other considerably depending on the source. The unit on their property; and 1,632 (0.7%) even adjusted number from the VPI supplemental rented out their whole house, part of the year studies is about 52,000 and the estimate from the HHPS surveys is about 55,600. c. Impact on Residential Rents Impact on Housing Some studies have suggested that there is a relationship between greater use of vacation rentals and higher housing prices. The National Estimating the impact of VRU requires that we Association of Realtors (NAR) blogs that VRUs look at the related items in the multiple data increase rents, decrease affordability, and draw sources available to us. developers' attention to the top of the market. Local researchers report that VRUs exacerbate a. Units Used for Visitor Rental the affordable housing problem by reducing our housing stock and driving up rents, which in turn Speculation is that the increase in visitor arrivals, inflates demand for investment properties at the the slow growth of the visitor plant, the pressure high end of the market.141 140Forbes. (2016). Also called collaborative consumption or snapgoods-and-12-more-pioneers-of-the-share- the peer economy, owners rent out something they are economy/#3608f0f97226 not using (a car, house, a bicycle) to a stranger using 141 Usborne, Isis and Benjamin Sadoski. 2016. The peer-to-peer services. hidden cost of hidden hotels: the impact of http://www.forbes.com/pictures/eeji45emgkh/airbnb- Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 72 ©SMS December,2019 Figure 14 brings together some foundation data Visitor rates increased again in 2014 and have for visitor and residential rents in Hawaii over the remained at a steady 4 to 5 percent growth. Hotel last nine years. For the visitor data, we took the room rate growth has mirrored the growth in average daily room rate (ADR) for all commercial overall visitor arrivals through much of the period properties.142 Figures shown here are six times after the Recession. the ADR to accommodate the scale of the graph. The graph compares the weekly (7-day) rate with Residential rent rates also seemed to have the monthly rate for residential housing. The accelerated in the 2014 to 2015 period but have objective was to compare rates of change over slowed down in the last two years. time. For the residential figures, we chose the contract rent rates for all rental units in the Therefore, in the present time frame, the two rent State.143 We added the hotel occupancy rate as rates do not seem to be following in a similar a rough demand indicator. pattern. However, that does not mean they are not related, of course. Proving that would require Figure 14. Hawaii Hotel Room Rates and Resident a more complex econometric analysis - one that Rates, 2010-2018 is beyond the scope of this project. $2,500 12% Very recently, a Hawaii researcher published a ::::: 10% report of research designed to investigate the link $% between the number of vacation rentals in Hawaii and rising rent prices.144 Specifically, the 6% research showed that residential rents in $1,000 4 neighborhoods with relatively high concentrations $500 2% of vacation rentals did not rise significantly $0 0% between 2016 and 2019. Our own unpublished 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 research in 2017 found similar results. The Visitor Arrivals(%Growth) results of these neighborhood-by-neighborhood projects lend some support to the coincidental -Average Residential Rent Rates($) rates shown in Figure 14. Still, we await more -Weekly Hotel Room Rate($) definitive research to establish the link between decreasing residential rental stock due to VRU Source: HTA; RentRange®. conversion and rising residential rents. In response to the Great Recession, both hotel room rates and residential rates fell and did not Perhaps the problem will be solved by using an show signs of recovery until after 2010. In fact, interrupted time-series research design applied in residential rents did not recover until sometime in the City and County of Honolulu. 2012. Hotel room rates rose quickly with 8 — 12 percent growth per year until 2013. On the other On June 17, 2019, the Honolulu City Council hand, residential rents grew only 1 to 2 percent passed two bills that contained the toughest annually regulations in Hawaii for O`ahu's vacation rental industry. The resulting Ordinance 19-18 allows for 1,715 owner-occupied bed-and-breakfast vacation rentals in Hawai'i, in UNITE HERE Local 5, May, 145 Hawai'i News Now. 2019. City Council approves tough 2016, p. 8. new regulations for vacation rental industry,Hawaii News 142 DBEDT Data Book 2015 includes rates for hotels, condo Now, June 17, 2019. hotels, and timeshare units. We used Hospitality https://www.Hawai'inewsnow.com/2019/06/18/city- Advisors reports for 1st quarter 2016 estimate. council-poised-approve-tough-new-regulations-vacation- 143 Rent Range, average monthly rent for all rental units. rentals/. 144 Rickie Cassiday. 2019. Cost for monthly housing in Hawai'i not hurt by illegal vacation rentals, study finds Hotel Online, Sunday September 22, 2019. Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 73 ©SMS December,2019 rentals in the County. The County says that 816 Initial reactions were interesting. The anti- of those are currently registered and that there are vacation rental forces were quiet. Those against 8,000-10,000146 units operating illegally on Oahu. the new law were quick to predict serious The new units must be B&B-type Vacation Rental problems. They spoke of reduced visitor Units located only in resort areas (Waikiki, Ko accommodations stock, rising local rents, and Olina, and Turtle Bay). They must be registered home prices. They predicted that local landlords and renewed annually. The Ordinance prohibits would be ruined financially and would be forced to transient vacation units without a Nonconforming sell their rental properties. Nationally, there was Use Certificate (NUC). It regulates hosting a prediction that the new regulations would hurt platforms and requires them to file monthly Hawai`i's economy (Expedia) and that Hawaii reports with the Department of Planning and would lose 7,000 jobs, 336 million in household Permitting (DPP). It makes it illegal to advertise income, 77 million in state taxes (Hawaiian Air). short-term rentals not compliant with zoning Countering that, pro-Ordinance representatives regulations in Ordinance 19-18. Vacation rental predicted that local rents will fall and that more owners may not advertise without publishing their new homes will be available at lower prices. registration number in the ad. Violators will receive citations, and if they persist in advertising, As a middle ground, there were predictions that they will receive fines as per the law. It is no effects would be minimal and short-term. Some longer necessary to prove that an illegal contract researchers say that property sales, business was signed or that there was intent to commit a terminations, and tax revenue decreases may crime. The advertisement is the crime. happen, but not in any dramatic way. Santa Monica, after whose vacation rental law The Ordinance provides for fines of$1,000 for first Honolulu's was patterned, passed their law in offense and up to $10,000 per day for repeat 2015 and they did not experience large violations. These are the highest fines ever changes.149 proposed for short-term rental violations. Most researchers and market experts agreed it The law was passed and signed in June. In July, was too early to tell what the ultimate economic DPP informed 5,000 vacation rental operators impacts will be on neighborhoods and landlords, that their units were being considered for action real estate markets, visitor arrivals, and under the ordinance. Ordinance 19-18 went into expenditure accounts.15° effect August 1, 2019. A few impacts have already been felt. Early In July, the City began to announce that there articles in August and September noted that would be quick action on enforcement. They short-term rental listings dropped 37 percent in suspended front-desk operation to handle an the first two weeks,151 reports of vacation expected increase in activity under the new rules. cancellations, and loss of revenue by those who They added new staff to deal with increased supply post-arrival goods and services to inspections147 and to convince rental landlords visitors152. Some said that, in their attempt to find they were serious about enforcement.148 alternative reservations, they discovered that hotel and other rental properties had raised their 146 Rizzo, Cailey. 20-19. O'ahu just passed a new law that 15° Fujii-Oride, Noelle. 2019. Impact of O'ahu's vacation could affect your Airbnb, Travel+Leisure, June 26,2019. rental crackdown, Hawai'i Business Magazine, 147 Associated Press. 2019. Honolulu adds inspectors to September 16, 2019. help enforce vacation rental law, Friday,August 16,2019. 151 Associated Press. 2019. O'ahu illegal rentals drop after 148 City and County of Hawai'i. 2019. Short-Term Rentals, short-term rental law OKed, Associated Press, Wire last updated August 23, 2019, Service Content,August 7, 2019. https://www.honolulu.gov/dppstr. 152 Lapan, Tovin. New vacation rental rules of O'ahu spark 149 Schenfeld, Nikki. 2019. Real estate market impact if cancellations, complaints, Travel Weekly, August 15, vacation rental bills pass, KHON2 June 9, 2019. 2019. Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 74 ©SMS December,2019 rates substantially,153 taking advantage of hapless tourists. All counties have their own new rules for regulating vacation rentals as documented in the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs (DCCA)website.154 We are not aware of and plan to use Honolulu as a field test of the economic impact of vacation rental regulation. 153 Jedra, Christina. 2019. Tourists scramble as O'ahu 154 vacation rentals disappear under new law, Civil Beat, See http://cca.hawaii.gov/ins?s=Transient+Vacat August 12, 2019. ion+Rentals&type=usa for updated information. Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 75 ©SMS December,2019 D. HOUSING AND NATIVE HAWAIIANS Native Hawaiian households also tended to be more multigenerational, with 63 percent of multi- There were 455,502 households in Hawaii in person households having two or more 2019. Of those, 117,371 households (25.8%) generations living under the same roof, while only were Native Hawaiian households.155 Over 6-out- 45 percent of non-Native Hawaiians live in of-10 Native Hawaiian households (62.4%) lived multigenerational households. in the County of Honolulu and 19 percent resided in Hawaii County. Maui County was home to 13 Of the Native Hawaiian households surveyed, 11 percent of Native Hawaiian households and the percent were living on Hawaiian Homestead Land remaining five percent lived on Kauai. (12,755 households) in 2019, similar to 2016.156 Also, among Native Hawaiian households, 20 Almost two-thirds (64.9%) of Native Hawaiian percent had at least one member on the waitlist to households, the head of household had lived in receive a DHHL award (23,883 households) on Hawaii all their life, compared to just 36 percent which they intended to reside. Of those in non-Native Hawaiian households. households, only about three-quarters (73.0%) were sure that they intend to have a house on that The household size among Native Hawaiian land. households was notably larger; almost half of all Native Hawaiian households (46.6%) have four or An additional 21,399 Native Hawaiian households more people compared to just 21 percent of non- stated that they have a household member Hawaiian households. Native Hawaiian eligible to apply for a Hawaiian Home Lands lease households were much more likely than other but were not yet a leaseholder nor an applicant. households to be crowded with more than two persons per bedroom (21.2%v. 10.9%) and much more likely to be doubled up (24.5% v. 9.0%). Table 60. Crowding and Doubling Up, Native Hawaiian Households, State of Hawaii, 2019 Native Hawaiian Non-Hawaiian Households Households Total Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Household Size 4 or more-person-HH 54,672 46.6% 72,198 21.4% 126,870 27.9% Crowded Based on More than 2 or more 23,975 21.2% 34,932 10.9% 58,907 13.6% Persons Per Room persons per bedroom Households doubled up Yes 28,702 24.5% 30,549 9.0% 59,250 13.0% The household income of half (51.8%) of the household members than non-Native Hawaiian Native Hawaiian households in 2019 was under households. $75,000, similar to the household income distribution (49.5%) of non-Native Hawaiians. Over two-thirds of Native Hawaiian households Although both groups have a similar distribution lived in a single-family dwelling (66.7%)versus 57 of income, the income of the Native Hawaiian percent of non-Native Hawaiians. The figure is households supports a greater number of down from 73 percent of Native Hawaiians living 155 According to definitions used for the study, a Native Hawai'ian. The unweighted sample size for Native Hawai'ian household is one in which at least one person Hawai'ian households for the 2019 Demand Survey was identified as Hawai'ian or Part-Hawaiian resides. The 2,481. figures will not match Census or ACS data which define 156 The counts reported from the survey differ from DHHL a Native Hawai'ian Household as one in which the wait list, as the survey counted households and the wait householder (head of household) is all or any part list captures all unique individuals. Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 76 ©SMS December,2019 in single-family dwellings in 2016. Interestingly, households reported they would become Native Hawaiians were less likely to be living in a homeless if they lost their primary source of condominium than non-Native Hawaiians (5.3% income for more than two months. v. 12.7%). Native Hawaiian households sheltered many More than half (56.3%) of Native Hawaiian more hidden homeless persons than non-Native households continue to own their current Hawaiian households. The Housing Demand residence, similar to the non-Native Hawaiian survey data show that 38 percent of Hawaiian households (58.0%) ownership rate. This was a households included at least one person who was greater percentage of Native Hawaiian residing there because they had insufficient homeowners in 2016 (54%), but similar to the resources to buy or rent their own place (hidden figure in 2011 (57%). homeless). The comparable figure for non-Native Hawaiian households was 19 percent. Overall, the monthly mortgage payment made by Native Hawaiian households was similar to non- When asked how soon they planned to move to Hawaiian households, with a third (35.3%) of the another home, four out of ten Native Hawaiian Native Hawaiian households paying $2,000 or households indicated that they would probably more per month. However, Native Hawaiian never move, similar to non-Native Hawaiians households were less likely than other (38.8% vs. 40.3% of non-Native Hawaiian households to have paid off the mortgage on their households). One-third reported that they plan to current residence (19.3% v. 27.7%). move within the next five years, with an additional four percent planning to move in six to ten years. The percentage of Native Hawaiian and non- Native Hawaiian households renting their current When they move, Native Hawaiian households residence was similar (39.2% v. 38.4%). The were more likely to remain on the same island distribution of monthly rent paid by Native (63.1%), with only 7 percent planning to relocate Hawaiian households and non-Native Hawaiian to another island in the State. Among those who households was also very similar, with the median plan to relocate to another island, almost half monthly rent being between $1,400 and $1,699. (44.9%) stated that they wanted to move to Hawaii Island. A significant portion of Consistent with the findings on household households, 16 percent of Native Hawaiian income, Native Hawaiian households were more households, planned to leave Hawaii when they likely to be receiving rental assistance of some move. type than were non-Native Hawaiians (18.2% v. 12.8%). Roughly 8,400 Native Hawaiian For those who planned to move within the State, households received some type of assistance 73 percent of Native Hawaiian households (16,600 non-Native Hawaiians households expected to purchase their next home, while 17 receive rent assistance). Slightly more Native percent of these households, plan to rent their Hawaiians versus non-Native Hawaiian next unit, with the remaining households households lived in public housing (4.0% v. uncertain about their next tenure. Half of these 2.7%), Native Hawaiians were much more likely movers would prefer a single-family home than non-Native Hawaiian households to be (54.4%) with two-thirds expecting three or more recipients of Section 8 rental assistance (9.8% v. bedrooms and three-quarters (77.7%) expecting 5.6%). at least two bathrooms. The Housing Demand Survey indicated that 32 Over half(54.7%) of Native Hawaiian households percent of Native Hawaiian households would be planning to buy their next home reported that they considered at risk for homelessness, up nine had no more than $75,000 available for the down percentage points from the 2016 study. Among payment. A larger percentage of Native Hawaiian non-Native Hawaiian households, the (7.8%) than non-Native Hawaiian households comparable figure was 23 percent. These (3.9%) reported that they had no funds available Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 77 ©SMS December,2019 for a down payment.Almost half(44.9%)of Native indicated that it was simply too expensive to Hawaiian households planning to purchase their purchase a unit in Hawaii. Another major reason next home could afford to make a median monthly (44.8% of households) stated that they could not mortgage payment of no more than $2,000 a afford the down payment. For those Native month. This ability to pay was similar to non- Hawaiian Households who might rent when they Native Hawaiian households. move next, more than half (56.9%) feel they can only afford up to $1,400 per month for all housing Among Native Hawaiian households not planning costs. to buy their next home, more than 7 out of 10 Table 61. Demand and Housing Preferences, Native Hawaiian and Non-Native Hawaiian Households, 2019 Native Hawaiian Non-Native Hawaiian Households Households Total Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Effective Demand Prefer to Buy 18,379 45.8% 49,921 49.1% 68,300 48.2% Movers Prefer to Rent or Other/Unsure 21,779 54.2% 51,686 50.9% 73,465 51.8% Total 40,158 100.0% 101,607 100.0% 141,765 100.0% Source. HHPS Demand Survey, 2019. Previously, we calculated the Effective Demand Fifty-seven percent (57%) of the 14,407 units for housing to be 141,765 households (Table 15). would be needed to accommodate Native Of those units, 40,158 (28.3%) would be from Hawaiian households that earned 80 percent or Native Hawaiian households. Across the State, less of the HUD AMI (8,142 units). Approximately units needed to house Native Hawaiians were 13 percent of the needed units would be required almost evenly divided between ownership (46%) to house Native Hawaiian households earning and rental units (54%). more than 180 percent of AMI annually. Finally, we have prepared a table of needed units Statewide, of the units needed to accommodate for Native Hawaiian households (Table 62). Of Native Hawaiian households, demand for single- the 50,156 housing units needed to family dwellings was roughly 68 percent (9,864 accommodate Hawai`i's households between units). 2020 and 2025, approximately 14,407 will be needed by Native Hawaiian households. Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 78 ©SMS December,2019 Table 62. Needed Housing Units by HUD Income Classification, Native Hawaiian Households, Counties and State of Hawaii, 2020-2025 Total Units Needed,2020through 2025 HUD Income Classification LT 30 30 to 50 50 to 60 60 to SO SO to 120 120 to 140 140 to 180 180. Total State of Ha..:.aii 1554 1,319 473 2,797 1,855 736 1,765 1,911 14,407 Ownership Units --_ 519 145 1,711 655 696 _,383 1,746 7,766 Single-Family 88= 358 142 1,287 5C6 641 1,221 1,520 6,556 Multi-Family SC 163 3 _ L.19 55 165 226 1,210 Renta Un-ts 2,642 8CC 328 _,C86 '1,`199 LC 381 165 6,641 5-ng e•Fami ly 1,22.+ 353 30 824 687 19 `1 68 3,308 Mu t--Family 1,435 447 298 282 512 241 97 3,333 Honolulu 2,349 986 206 2,: 6 1,256 478 1,238 1,117 9,644 Ownership Units 522 384 0 '1,2 . 286 478 91C 1,274 4,893 Single-Family 502 236 0 861 178 423 823 849 3,869 Multi-Family 20 1-S 0 378 128 55 89 225 1,024 Rental Units 1,826 622 206 826 g+2 0 298 43 4,751 Single-Family 731 250 0 655 .99 0 99 42 2,277 Multi-Family 1095 351 206 151 +_ 0 199 1 2,474 Maui 374 143 59 2_9 237 106 334 472 1,945 Ownership Units 120 74 0 115 68 67 264 362 1,068 Single-Family 120 62 0 70 67 66 22S 361 974 Multi-Family 0 12 0 5 C 0 35 1 94 Rental Units 254 69 59 _ _. c„2. 71 110 876 Single-Family 222 67 15 65 1.18: 19 29 26 590 Multi-Family 32 2 44 39 21 4-2 84 286 Hawn 727 1E4 178 439 333 121 209 277 2,430 Ownership Units 222 61 131 329 S22 121 197 265 1,607 Single Family 797 61 131 329 _v_ 121 159 265 1,528 Multi Family 0 0 0 2 _ 0 38 0 79 Renta Units 5(4 104 48 129 34 0 12 13 824 S-ng e-Family 212 36 0 17 13 0 13 0 292 Multi-Family 292 68 48 92 19 0 0 13 532 Kauai 105 26 29 94 25 51 13 45 388 Ownership Units 47 0 14 27 0 51 13 45 198 Single-Family 37 0 11 27 0 51 13 45 185 Multi Family _2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 13 Rental Units 58 _.. 15 67 25 0 0 0 191 Single F{ ly _ 2 _3 67 25 0 0 0 149 Mutv _v 2 2 2 0 0 0 41 Source: Housing Demand Survey and Hawai'i Housing Model, 2019. Impact of Vacation Rental Use in Hawaii,2019 Page 79 ©SMS December,2019 SUSTAINABL F AFFORDABILITY affordable housing in Hawaii. Leasehold arrangements can provide access to more A sustainable lease is a leasehold arrangement affordable housing units and maintain them in the that sustains a property in an affordable price affordable housing stock. Even where leasehold range for a specified period. Details of the property is unpopular, a sustainable lease arrangement vary and are written to preserve appeals to many potential homebuyers. government-assisted affordable housing stock and to facilitate housing acquisition by low-income The 99-Year Lease Research households. Leasehold arrangements have been included in The 2019 Housing Demand Survey investigated a the HHPS studies over the last 16 years.157 That specific sustainable lease product proposed by research has determined that about 16 to 18 the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development percent of potential homeowners want to lease Corporation. Elements of the lease product were their next home. Another 30 to 35 percent would introduced two at a time, as shown in Figure 15. be willing to consider leasing. Together the two groups demonstrate that leasing is a reasonable The questions were asked only of Demand solution for about 45 percent of households, or as Survey respondents who were going to move to a many as 5,500 households per year statewide.158 unit in Hawaii, wanted to purchase their next residence, and said they could afford monthly As more conditions or features were added to the payments between $1,100 and $2,999. In total, lease questions, leasing became more attractive 608 respondents answered all four questions. to potential buyers. Several features that have been attractive to HHPS respondents in the past Analysis began with 56 percent willing to buy include: (1) a nominal down payment [46%], (2) a under the proposed sustainable lease. That was renewable long-term lease (66 to 99)years [55%] much higher than the starting position of any (3) ability to pass the lease to heirs [61%], and a question we have used in the past. In part, that guaranteed buyback at a fixed ROI [71%] may have been because we were asking the persons most qualified to use the program. The In the end, 50 to 60 percent of potential buyers initial question in the past was whether the prefer fee simple ownership. They would not respondent would prefer to buy leasehold or fee consider leasehold in any format. simple property. This year the set began by asking people to give their evaluation of the The characteristics of those who are interested in owner-occupancy and shared equity option of the leasehold are of interest. In the past, we have 99-year lease product (Figure 15). said that leasehold arrangements are most attractive to those who need them most.159 As each subsequent question was asked, some respondents changed their position on the lease. Leases appealed more to renters than to owners. When asked about the multi-family and 99-year They appealed to households that were crowded lease option, 25 percent said they preferred the and/or doubled up. They had strong support lease, 30 percent were willing to consider a lease, among households earning between 80 and 140 and 39 percent said "no." The third question percent of the AMI on Oahu. On Maui and Kauai, introduced the non-profit agency but reduced the interest was highest among households making lease period to 60 years. The "yes" responses less than 80 percent of County AMI. went down to 24 percent, willing-to-consider went up to 34 percent, and negative responses Results of past research show that there is a role dropped to 36 percent. for the sustainable lease concept in developing 157 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study, 2006, 2011, and 2016. 158 None of the leasehold research respondents were The individual questions used were formulated differently qualified by income or any other resources, so the at times, and they were asked of different groups of number of lessees is likely to be over-estimated. respondents. See Appendix Exhibit C-3 for details. 159 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study 2016. p. 72. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 80 ©SMS December,2019 Figure 15. 99-Year Lease Questions No. Features Question Wording SL1 Owner occupancy The State or county government can assist private home builders in and shared equity making homes more affordable by reducing the cost of development. If you purchase a government-assisted home at an affordable price, you must (1) own and occupy the home for an initial period of at least 10 years and (2) share a percentage of the increased value of your home if you no longer use the home as your primary residence (e.g., you rent or sell it). Would you be willing to buy a home at an affordable price with the 10-year owner-occupancy and shared equity appreciation restrictions? SL2 Multi-family and The State is looking into developing townhouses and condominium 99-year lease units on State land and offering these homes for sale in leasehold at affordable prices. If you purchase an affordable leasehold property, you would own the housing unit and make fixed land lease payments to the State over the term of the lease, say 99 years. You could sell or transfer ownership subject to the 10-year occupancy and shared equity appreciation restrictions we covered in the last question. Would you be willing to buy an affordable townhouse or condo with a 99-year lease on State land? SL3 Non-profit agency Would you consider buying an affordable leasehold property if the land and 60-year lease was owned by a non-profit agency, instead of the State, and leased to you for 60 or more years? SL4 Summary: Owner Would you consider buying this kind of leasehold property from a non- occupancy, pass to profit agency if you had to occupy it as your primary residence and never heirs and buy-back rent it, but could pass the home on to your children with a new long-term at Fair ROI, non- lease or sell the home back to the non-profit at a fair return on your profit agency investment? The general impact of the piecemeal introduction During the process, 71 percent of respondents of elements of the 99-year lease product was to changed their positions on the issue, some more increase the number of people who were willing than once. to consider the option. Each new set of options added to the complexity of the issue. In the end, 27 percent preferred the 99-year lease option (Figure 15) and another 40 percent were The fourth question summarized the major willing to consider it. Applying those figures to the elements of the product in slightly different demand estimates in the survey, the market languages. At that point, 34 percent preferred the potential for the product would be as many as 99-year lease, 37 percent who were willing to 32,000 buyers (including those willing to consider) consider it, and 36 percent who still said "no," in the next five years. That is, there could be indicating they preferred fee-simple property. We 32,000 households wanting to begin the process did not lose any respondents as we went along, of obtaining a 99-year lease on a multi-family and the number who said "don't know" or refused condominium unit on State-owned land with a 99- to answer a question dropped steadily as we year lease as described in the survey. A more proceeded with the interview. conservative estimate would be 13,300 buyer households based on those who answered "yes" to the lease questions. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 81 ©SMS December,2019 Our questions were asked of people who conditions described in Figure 15. All of them expected to move in the next five years. In year would be able to pay between $1,100 and $2,999 one, about 2,600 households may apply to buy a per month in shelter payments. multi-family unit with a 99-year lease with the Table 63. 99-Year Lease Reaction by County State Honolulu Hawai`i Kaua`i Maui Yes, would buy a 99-year lease 27% 23% 31% 46% 43% Willing to consider a 99-year lease 40% 43% 36% 24% 30% No, not interested 27% 27% 30% 22% 23% Other 6% 7% 3% 7% 4% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Percent of movers who wish to buy and expect to pay between $1,100 and $2,999 in monthly shelter costs. Results differed to a small extent across counties. and those with incomes between 120 and 180 The overall support (rows 2 and 3) was between percent of the area AMI were more likely to 66 and 73 percent. The "would buy" response support the lease (80%). showed that a lesser preference on Oahu (23%) compared to the other counties (31 to 43%). At Current homeowners were less likely (65%) to the same time, Oahu had the highest proportion favor the 99-year lease than were current renters (43%) of people who were willing to consider the (83%). 99-year lease. Renters who want to own (84%) were more likely Older people were less likely (63%) to favor the to favor the 99-year lease than homeowners who lease than younger people (73%) and support want to own their next units (65%). reached 78 percent among people younger than Crowded households were more likely to approve 35. Married people were more likely (75%) than the lease, and support among households with single, widowed, divorced, or separated people more than 1.5 persons per room (the U.S. (66%) to be willing to use the lease product. Census definition of extremely crowded) reached 77 percent. Native Hawaiians were more likely (84%) than non-Native Hawaiians (69%) to favor the new People who were going to move relatively soon lease product. were more likely to value the 99-year lease product. Those who wanted to move in the next There was no systematic difference in household five years (about 80%) were willing to use or income. That was not surprising since income consider the lease. Among those whose plans to varies with household size. Neither was there a move were less immediate (5 to 10 years), 59 substantial difference in support for the lease percent were interested. product when we looked at HUD income levels. These are adjusted for household size. As People who live in multi-family units, whether expected, the lower HUD classifications were renters or owners, were more likely (74%) to more in favor of the lease. In the less than 30 approve of the State's proposed 99-year lease percent AMI category, support reached 81 than people who live in single-family units (69%). percent. Also expected, people in the highest The same was true for those who wanted to move classification were least likely to approve (64%). to a multi-family unit (78%). This is a familiar In the mid-range, we found that households with finding based on the respondent's experience incomes between 50 and 80 percent of AMI with multi-family living accommodations. expressed less support (65%) than we expected, Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 82 ©SMS December,2019 c HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION both the 2016 and 2019 Housing Demand Surveys. The Housing and Affordability Index,160 also called the H+T Index, provides a different The table below shows Index results for the perspective on housing affordability by including County of Hawaii and select communities. transportation costs in the equation. The Index provides insights throughout the U.S., including Table 65. Examples of Hawaii Housing & Hawaii. Transportation Index Housing The more traditional measure of affordability Cost(% Transportation Combined Areas on of HH Cost(%of HH (%of HH recommends that housing costs should not Kauai income) income) income) exceed 30 percent of household income. Under Hawaii 33% 28% 61% this view, a little over half (55%) of US County neighborhoods are considered "affordable" for a Hilo 30% 27% 57% typical household. However, that measure fails to Kona 32% 26% 57% consider transportation costs, which are typically Waimea 42% 29% 72% a household's second-largest expenditure. The Ocean View 19% 29% 48% H+T Index offers an expanded definition view of affordability. It sets a new benchmark: combined Statewide over 56 percent of respondents housing and transportation costs should not commute to and from work or school at least four exceed percent of household income. days a week. The percentage of commuters is highest on Oahu and lowest on Hawaii Island. Based on the 45 percent of combined housing Oahu has the highest percentage of commuters and transportation costs plus percentage of that use public transportation at 13 percent. Maui household income benchmark noted, all four and Hawaii Counties have the lowest at 5 counties have significantly higher index levels percent. This is likely due to the extensive bus (Table 64). Hawaii County, the largest of the service available on Oahu. islands, has the highest transportation costs and combined index overall. Table 64. Housing & Transportation Index by County Housing Cost(%of Transportation Combined HH Cost(%of HH (%of HH Counties income) income) income) Hawaii 33% 29% 61% Maui 34% 23% 57% Honolulu 33% 19% 52% Kauai 32% 24% 56% Concepts such as these are the foundation for transit-oriented-development (TOD) nationally - building affordable housing centered on public transportation hubs in order to keep housing and transportation costs affordable to working-class households. Questions related to the interest in living near a transportation hub were included in 160 The Center for Neighborhood Technology's Housing and Transportation Affordability Index, http://htaindex.cnt.org. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 83 ©SMS December,2019 Table 66. Commuter Characteristics Characteristic 0`ahu Maui Hawaii Kauai State Percent of households in which one or more adults commute to and from work or school at least four days a 58.0% 55.5% 51.3% 57.1% 56.7% week Percent of commuters who use public transportation at 13.3% 5.4% 5.4% 8.1% 11.1% least three days a week Average monthly transportation cost for commuters who $92.52 $112.51 $108.59 $131.62 $101.21 use public transportation Number of adult commuters in the household 1.81 1.73 1.60 1.80 1.81 Average travel time for the commuter with the longest 29.9 24.3 29.2 23.3 28.8 commute in the household in minutes 2. Households Wishing to Move Closer to Twenty-three percent (23%) of future movers Place of Employment believe they could afford to pay rent amounts between $800 and $1,099; 40 percent can afford On Hawaii County, 31 percent of potential movers $1,1°00 to $1,999 per month. Twenty-two percent "when they moved intended to move closer to the (22/o) of movers who would like to buy a home workplace of someone in the household to reduce closer to employment say they have less than transportation costs or commute time." Those $25,000 to pay for a down payment, and 10 desiring a unit closer to place of employment percent say they have$400,000 or more. Monthly compared to those who don't differ on the housing costs of $2,000 to $2,999 would be following characteristics more likely to be a renter manageable for 23 percent of homebuyers, 31% (59% v. 54%); live in an apartment (20% v. 14%); would be able to manage a higher amount. be younger - age 18 to °34 (29% v. 16%); and Hawaii County had the highest Housing and single, never married (35% v. 25%). Transportation Index of all the Counties (61% of Households that wanted to move closer to their household income). This may be why 31 percent place of employment wanted to buy their new of Hawaii mover households want to move closer home (46%). They would prefer a single-family to their place of employment — to reduce the home (49%) with two to three bedrooms (67%) combined cost of housing and transportation and one and a half to two bathrooms (54%). together. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 84 ©SMS December,2019 V. PUBLIC SECTOR HOUSING RESOURCES This section covers important public sector A. HOUSING FUNDING PATTERNS housing resources, including funding, public housing, public housing subsidies, and housing In the public sector, funding comes largely from planning. Government-assisted housing has two sources: federal and state governments. been a part of the government's role in zoning and in developing and maintaining public housing for 1. Federal Allocations the lowest income groups. Today, with the advent of inclusionary housing policy, the role of Before 2010, USASpending tells us that federal government in providing housing for its citizens has expanded to touch on nearly every type of allocations for housing in Hawaii amounted to housing in the local market. about $133 million per year (HHPS, 2011). Allocations were high in 2000 and 2001, and then HHPS data focus on public sector housing. In part leveled off at about $70 million a year during the that is because HHPS is funded by the public middle of the decade. With added funds from the sector and its data are published by government American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of agencies. More importantly, the study has always 2009, HUD spending rose to over $200 million a found that housing need is greatest at the lower year in 2008 and 2009 and settled back to $161.3 end of the market. Supply, demand, and needed million in 2010. Between 2012 and 2015, units estimates show that housing shortages are expenditures grew substantially to a level of more prominent among lower-income families and $226.6 million in 2015. Federal expenditures on they often require subsidized housing as a housing fell to $268.6 million in 2018 and $269.1 solution. million in 2019. Table 67. Federal Housing Expenditures, State of Hawaii and County of Hawaii, 2015-2019 HUD Funding for Hawaii,2015-2019 Hawaii,All Counties and State Agencies 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Community Planning&Dewlopment(CPD) Programs(a) $ 30,754,643 $ 10,535,048 $ 127,283,754 $ 36,164,936 $ 36,162,130 Public&Indian Housing(PIH)Programs(b) $ 147,507,059 $ 153,540,813 $ 171,032,492 $ 187,175,581 $ 186,833,240 Native Hawaiian(c) $ 9,100,000 - $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 Fair Housing $ 580,342 - $ 537,350 $ 487,350 $ 487,350 Multifamily Housing Programs(d) $ 38,702,635 - $ 41,833,576 $ 42,724,546 $ 43,619,098 Subtotal $ 226,644,679 $ 164,075,861 $ 342,687,172 $ 268,552,413 $ 269,101,818 FHA Mortgage Insurance Programs(e) $ 201,949,260 $ 201,949,260 $ 583,223,204 $ 5,264,612,644 $ 4,732,258,506 TOTAL $ 428,593,939 $ 366,025,121 $ 925,910,376 $ 5,533,165,057 $ 5,001,360,324 Hawai'i County 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Community Planning&Dewlopment(CPD) Programs(a) $ 2,465,271 $ - $ 14,813,538 $ 2,694,402 $ 2,646,713 Public&Indian Housing(PIH)Programs(b) $ 14,759,085 $ 17,616,704 $ 18,262,080 $ 19,855,665 $ 20,255,724 Native Hawaiian(c) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Fair Housing $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Multifamily Housing Programs(d) $ 3,516,996 $ - $ 3,863,808 $ 4,097,148 $ 4,242,024 Subtotal $ 20,741,352 $ 17,616,704 $ 36,939,426 $ 26,647,215 $ 27,144,461 FHA Mortgage Insurance Programs(e) $ 16,272,865 $ 16,272,865 $ 52,624,119 $ 642,871,450 $ 615,116,166 TOTAL $ 37,014,217 $ 33,889,569 $ 89,563,545 $ 669,518,665 $ 642,260,627 (a)CPD programs include Community Development Block Grant,HOME Investments Partnership,National Housing Trust Fund,and Homeless programs (b)PIH programs include rental subsidy vouchers,self-sufficiency,and public housing operating and capital improvement programs (c)Includes Native Hawaiian housing block grant,training and technical assistance,and loan guarantees (d)Multifamily programs provide supportive housing for the elderly and persons with disabilities.They are distributed directly to projects. (e)Includes mortgage insurance for single family and multifamily(rental housing)loans. They are distributed directly to projects. Source:HUD Honolulu Field Office. Note:HUD expenditures are by Fiscal Year,although certain funds,including Continuum of Care and Fair Housing funds are subject to a one-year lag. Funds are awarded by formula grant or competitively to the State,Counties,and private entities. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 85 ©SMS December,2019 Table 67 shows us that total HUD allocations for CAPER does indicate that 30 units for homeless the County of Hawaii in 2015 amounted to about persons have been built and 5 homeowner units $20.7 million161 In 2019, federal funding for the have been rehabilitated during the past 4 years. county had increased to $27.1 million. Additionally, 147 households have received tenant-based rental assistance Along with other uses, funds allocated under Community Planning and Development Programs Funding for administration, training, and other can be used to produce or preserve housing units. programs that support public housing dipped in They include CDBG and HOME and amounted to 2015 and then rose steadily through 2018 before about$2.5 million in 2015 and $2.6 million in 2019. dipping slightly in 2019. Funding increased notably in 2017, ($14.8 million). In all, the level of funding through CPD 2. State Allocations has been relatively steady over the last few years. There were steady increases in homeless In all the states, most housing funds spent by local program support and administration as well as governments come from federal sources. In administrative and operations funding for the Hawaii, State allocations to housing have been State, the Counties, and the Hawaii Public substantial throughout the last decade (Table 68). Housing Authority. Between 2010 and 2015, the total State allocation Multifamily housing support has also risen steadily to housing amounted to about $90 million per since 2015 with a slight decrease in 2019 from year. Between 2015 and 2018, State allocations $3.5 million in 2015 to $4.2 million in 2019. The to housing rose from $81.1 million to $352.6 most important funding level increase, however, million, with a growth rate of about 335 percent. has been for the FHA Mortgage Insurance Much of the increase (60 to 80 percent)was in the Program. Total FHA-insured mortgage loans form of very generous allocations to the Rental have increased from 16.3 million in 2016 to 615.1 Housing Revolving Fund (RHRF) and the million in 2019. Dwelling Unit Revolving Fund (DURF). There were also greater allocations for rental We see that $267 million was specifically suited to assistance, rental services, homelessness, and housing construction in 2019 and $20.3 million administration. was designated for rental assistance (Section 8 In 2019, State allocations to housing support vouchers). According to Hawaii County's 2019 returned to the 2015 level ($ 96.8 million) and Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER)162, none of the 1,142 rental there were no major allocations to the revolving housing units expected to be built between 2015 funds. and 2020 have actually been constructed. The 161 Excluding Mortgage Insurance Program, USDA Rural 30, 2019. Development funds and Homeless program support. http://records.Hawai'icounty.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx 162 County of Hawai'i Draft Consolidated Annual ?dbid=l&id=101206&page=l&cr=1 Performance and Evaluation Report July 1, 2018-June Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 86 ©SMS December,2019 Table 68. State Legislative Funding for Affordable Housing, 2014 to 2019 Capital Affordable Improvement Housing Funds Projects Administration HPHA Administration Total 2014 $29,764,536 $1,300,000 $6,874,086 $58,006,911 $95,945,533 2015 $51,510,777 $14,332,000 $7,197,377 $8,047,324 $81,087,478 2016 $73,056,877 $1,700,000 $9,842,662 $73,867,668 $158,467,207 2017 $99,600,000 $12,230,000 $11,039,417 $54,028,875 $176,898,292 2018 $298,000,000 $4,200,000 $11,747,671 $38,673,088 $352,620,759 2019 $38,000,000 $2,900,000 $10,930,425 $44,976,508 $96,806,933 Source: Budget, House and Senate approved allocations, 2014-2019. Legislative allocations were of two types. First, The increases in both federal and state funding the State issued general obligation bonds to fund are especially important because the costs of specific projects. They were usually associated producing affordable housing are increasing. with Capital Improvement Project (CI P) Construction costs have been rising and pushing appropriations for public housing and revolving funding gaps up with them. funds (RHRF and DURF)that are used to finance housing development. Second, the State B. GOVERNMENT-ASSISTED HOUSING appropriated General Funds to support homeless shelters and homeless services, as well as public The State's list of government-assisted housing housing renovations and rent subsidies. units was expanded this year.166 It began as a list Recapping, HUD funding under the CDBG and of units produced with the assistance of federal, HOME programs163 can be used to produce or state, and county resources. The list has been preserve units, for acquisition, or provide updated for each of the last three HHPS projects. infrastructure. Those funds amount to about 9 This year the list includes more types of housing, percent of total HUD funding in 2015 and have including units under construction, planned for the been steady over the past five years. near future, and preliminary units that may be constructed over the next ten or more years. In the past, State funding for housing has been The list was initiated by HHFDC and has been lower than federal funding. It expanded in the updated periodically with the assistance of the middle of the current decade primarily due to County housing officers and administrators and higher allocations to 4he RHRF, which provides some County Planning Departments. The data equity gap financing to support rental housing file uses the housing project as a unit of analysis development or preservation. As of June 2016, and has one record per project. Projects may be equity gap financing from the RHRF assisted in of any size, and include federal, state, or county construction or preservation of over 4,300 units. funding or support for new construction as well as Between June 2016 and June 2019, RHRF funds acquisition, redevelopment, and refurbishin g. were used to develop over 1,280 more units.166 A large and growing number of variables describe There would be very few affordable housing units each project. Most important among those are produced today without federal- and state- the number of units associated with each project funding. It is not unusual for a rental project to be and a breakdown of those units according to financed by tapping several funding sources tenure (owner/renter), type (single-family/multi- including LIHTC, HOME (or CDBG), and RHRF. family). 163 In some years HOPWA and ONAP as well. construction and permanent financing for affordable 164 Equity gap funding is intended to cover the difference rental or mixed-use projects. between project costs and available sources of 165 HHFDC, internal records. 166 Section 3, pp. 36-38. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 87 0 SMS December,2019 The list includes units in housing projects the government resources section, and (3) the developed using any federal, state, or county Housing Tracking Study (next section). resources. Government-assisted units include those the government financed, developed, or The current list contains data on 736 projects and required through the State Land Use 165,643 housing units constructed in Hawaii with Commission, county development plans, or the help of public housing funds. Expansion and zoning. The initial list included only "affordable" refinement have been sporadic but effective. housing units. It now includes market-rate units built under inclusionary housing policies for which Some major improvements are scheduled for the the affordable units received some government future, including expanding the list to include assistance. sustainability or preservation. Those will be further discussed in the tracking study section. The Government-Assisted Housing List is a work in progress. It continues to expand in terms of Figure 16 presents a graphic representation of the time, space, content and unit types. This year the units produced in each of Hawai`i's four counties list was an important part of three sections of the by year in which the units were completed. HHPS 2019 report: (1) the Pipeline section, (2) Figure 16. Government-Assisted Housing Units Constructed, 2000-2018 5,000 Hawaii Honolulu Maui Kaua'i 4,500 • 4,000 5 3,500 3,000 ao _ 'i 2,500 o � 2,000 1,500 1111.• 1,000 500 I 111 •.......p 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Source. Government-Assisted Housing List, SMS analysis. Between 2000 and 2009, there were 10,907 Production of government-assisted affordable government-assisted housing units constructed housing units rose from 2002 through 2009, then or preserved (through acquisition or rehabilitation) was stable from 2010 through 2013, and dropped in the State of Hawaii. That was 1,091 units per in 2012 and 2013. Production has been generally year. Between 2010 and 2019, state and county rising since 2014. housing agencies added or preserved 14,322 housing units, or about 1,432 per year. Government-assisted units were predominantly multi-family and rental units. In Honolulu, half of the affordable units were rentals and 68 percent Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 88 ©SMS December,2019 were multi-family units. Across the other three The type of units produced has shifted somewhat counties, closer to 90 percent of the affordable since 2010. Maui County moved toward units were multi-family and rental units. The producing a greater number of multi-family units situation has been quite different for The City and for rent. Honolulu and Hawaii counties, on the County of Honolulu and the other counties, as can other hand, produced more single-family units for be seen in Table 67. ownership compared to the previous decade. Table 69. State Legislative Funding for Affordable Housing, 2014 to 2019 State County Hawai'i Honolulu Kaua'i Maui 2000 to Total 10,907 1,258 7,234 562 1,853 2009 Percent Multi-family 64 68 72 46 40 Percent Renta I s 67 68 72 46 55 2010 to Total 9,933 4,071 198 381 5,283 2014 Percent Multi-family 78 42 94 69 21 Percent Renta I s 60 39 60 69 79 2015 to Total 4,389 592 3,382 177 238 2019 Percent Multi-family 71 100 66 100 79 Percent Renta I s 71 100 74 100 21 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 89 ©SMS December,2019 VI. TRACKING AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK A. BACKGROUND Methodology Recent literature on affordable housing has The tracking system was covered in stakeholder repeatedly urged that efforts to provide affordable interviews with State and County personnel. It housing be accompanied by accurate data and also benefitted from our interaction with county rational analysis. In addition, virtually all Hawai`i's recent investigations into housing (State Plan, housing, planning, and tax assessment personnel ten-year plan, etc.) have identified an affordable in the process of collecting data on affordable housing tracking system as a priority. Following housing. We also met with Housing Directors, this rationale, the 2019 HHPS RFP called for a HHFDC, and State of Hawaii Department of study of ways to track affordable housing projects. Business, Economic Development and Tourism, the Hawaii Office of Planning, managers of the The list of government-assisted housing units Homeless Management Information System, and discussed throughout this report might well GIS specialists to explore barriers and provide the basis for such a tracking system. It opportunities for development of an affordable now contains most, if not all, of the housing unit housing tracking system. types that need to be tracked. In addition, it was B. DESIGN improved with each successive HHPS project since 2011 and is familiar to all the housing offices in the State. It was decided early in the project to pattern the affordable housing tracking system after the Building and maintaining an accurate, up-to-date Homeless Management Information System database will require resources and patience, (HMIS). The HMIS was developed to address the especially for the initial development phase. information needs of homeless services providers Having data to understand affordable housing, and state agencies. It was necessary in order to knowing what happens to affordable housing understand how homelessness worked in Hawaii units over time, and having the ability to develop and which programs and services were best effective housing programs and evaluate them for suited to meeting the needs of homeless people. continuous improvement will be worth the effort. HMIS is funded by HUD, maintained by IT service providers, and managed by its users. 1. ObjectiveF The HMIS is maintained centrally and its use is required as of all homeless service providers who The objective of this phase of the project was to receive State or Federal funds. Providers use provide guidelines to develop a data system for HMIS input formats for new clients and update tracking production and inventory of affordable case information on a regular basis. They can housing units in all four counties. For purposes of then generate a variety of reports that help them this project, affordable housing units are units better understand their clients and evaluate the produced specifically to be sold or rented at prices services they receive. For the 2019 HHPS, SMS below market level. They are subsidized by used a de-identified dataset extracted from HMIS government agencies in order to address the to develop this year's analysis of homeless housing need among households in specified persons' need for housing. income groups. Those units may or may not enter the market at below-market prices or rents. When The structure that we would like to preserve for they do, they may or may not remain at an the affordable housing tracking system is that of affordable price forever. Tracking is applied to an independent, transaction-based data system determine the length of time those units remain to serve the needs of affordable housing affordable. providers. All public and private affordable Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 90 ©SMS December,2019 housing providers will contribute data on a tracking. The content we will discuss here is continuing basis. The dataset will remain already expanded to meet that objective. accessible to all providers. Management of the dataset will be centralized and independent as it Software: The software for creating an updating serves the con tenuous technical capacity of the the database should be commercial database system and the rigorous pursuit of accuracy of the management and analysis software from an data. Management will assure unfettered access established vendor. It should be elementary to the data to all subscribers and will not define or enough to be used by non-specialists. Its primary hinder analysis by qualified users. functionality should be data input and updating. A good, non-proprietary database can be accessed Maor Features by many kinds of analysis software programs. Our current recommendations are Microsoft Excel Working from the HMIS concept, and with the for data entry and Microsoft Power BI for analysis and display. advice of affordable housing stakeholders in Hawaii, we have put together a set of features Geographical Interface: Nearly all housing that will be central to the affordable housing issues are location-oriented. The system must tracking system for Hawaii. bring together land use and tax map key Phasing: Our interviews with public and private information. Ideally, it should accommodate GIS information for mapping output and to interface sector officials who may be involved with the development and use of the affordable housing with State and County GIS systems. tracking system suggest the project will benefits Input: Most of the database content items we for some phasing. The first phase would be describe here are already collected by affordable planning, during which affordable housing housing providers in Hawaii. The exception may providers and government agencies involved be the follow-up items we described in the next could be offered input to the system design. The paragraph. Data input should be in the hands of second phase might include designing a follow-up the providers, allowing them to control the transfer method, security systems, and formulating an of their data to th centralized database. The initial RFP for development. That process will describe data entry and periodic update of those items the project elements that must be included. The should provide for options. The providers should third phase would be development, the coding be able to physically enter data to the system, and testing of the database system. The fourth electronically transfer data across the database phase would be data entry, the populating of the firewall, or submit data in hard copy. database, along with training for those who will input data, and opportunities to tweak the system Follow-Up: Tracking affordable housing involves to serve the needs of data providers. This phase periodic monitoring of the status of individual can also include service to provides who need housing units. Affordable status is conveyed assistance with data access on their end. The last upon housing units that are developed or acquired phase would be operations, or the continued using public sector funds or under the aegis of management and improvement of the system to public programs. They remain in the affordable serve the needs of providers. housing stock as long as they continue to be Content: The tracking system requires a set of available at below-market prices. For any number of reasons, affordable housing units my revert to data and an analysis method suitable for tracking the long-range affordability of units produced with market prices in the years after they are first made to owners available.To track affordable units will require that governmental assistance and provided or renters at below-market prices. In fact, housing the project (with input from providers) develop a officials in Hawaii are considering a more mechanism for monitoring or following up comprehensive dataset that could be applied to affordable units for several years after they are housing issues other than affordable housing first sold or rented. To date, this has not been done on any comprehensive or consistent basis. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 91 ©SMS December,2019 It is likely that systematic information on the fate Table 70. Fields for Affordable Housing Database of affordable units developed before 2020 can be Section Name recovered. We can only propose that tracking will Field Name Type of Entry begin as soon as possible as part of the project. Identifiers Output: There are many types of output from a Unique ID Number good data tracking system and these are often ProjectStreetName;rePhase developed as the system matures and the new it , Address p Y City, District, Island utilities are discovered. Two types of output are Zip Code usually programmed at the beginning. First, there TMK Number is a need for a set of standard reports to serve the Parcel Number primary users. Second, there is an analysis GIS Coordinates function to provide simple analyses and data Zoning de Project Typepe extracts as needed. Type: Land use Residential,Ag, C&I Type:Tenure For sale,for rent, other Management: The project will track affordable Type: Groups served Family, seniors, spec. need housing statewide and the database will be Type: Policy Inclusionary, other, self-help managed at the State level. Management Type:Transaction vacant land, lots,turnkey functions include maintaining the statewide Building Type Single-family, multi-family Project type Rehab; New Construction database, managing the data input and update Project Status Planned, construction, etc. functions, and distributing system products and Status change date Date format outputs to users. The managing agency must Unit Mix—Market Rate have the appropriate resources and authority to Total # carry out those tasks. It will be necessary to For sale, rent, other # MFD develop a data users' group with the collective sMi —Af # Unit Mx—Affordable power to make decisions about data access, Total # membership, and future directions. For sale; rent, other # SFD, MFD # Access: Data output will be available to all Income Targets for Affordable Units <30 % ofHUD AMI # system sponsors (initially, state and county 31 to 60%AMI # housing and planning departments). Access to 61 to 80%AMI # original data will be available to the contributing 81 to 100%AMI # agencies and to a system management agency. 101 to 120%AMI # Access to any system-wide data developed from 120 to 140%AMI # the originally input data will be determined by the >140%AMI # user's group. The access, maintenance, and Number of Units by Bedrooms Studo management functions may or may not be One B # One Bedroom # delegated to a single agency. Two Bedroom # 3 or More Bedrooms # Security: Standard system security measures Project Dates required of all government data must always be in Start Year place . Special security procedures will be Expected finish Year required once the tracking data that identifies new Development Data Agency name owners and renters is developed. Finally, the Funding Source names management agency must monitor the decisions Developer name of the users' group regarding access by one Tracking data county to data input by another county. designed affordable # sold/rent affordable # Deed restrictions Specify,# 2. Data Elements Affordable after 1 yr. # Affordable after 5 # Table 70 presents a preliminary a list of data fields U dIRecent Uon Moos st Recent Update date to be considered for the database. Person that Updated name Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 92 ©SMS December,2019 The list is based on the items that were cited as The ongoing resources for the management, useful to county stakeholders in our interviews. maintenance, development of the system are Items address the kinds of data they would need primary personnel costs. They are both annual to effectively deal with the affordable housing and long-range. The number of employees sustainability issue. required for that task depends on the nature of the system, but the initial specifications presented Most of this information is already being collected. here would probably require one person full-time. Much is included in the Government-Assisted It is unlikely that the job description exists now at Housing List developed for HHPS 2019. The new the state housing agency, and a new hire would data are those that record a change in status of be required. affordable units (follow-up information). At the county level, there would also be initial hard costs for software, development, and training. C. RESOURCES REQUIRED These would be one-time costs and that will be considerably less than cost incurred at the state The Affordable Housing Tracking System will level. The county-level costs for long-term require allocation of resources at both the state management, maintenance, and development and county levels. The state is expected to be the would also be less. If data input and updating for managing agent and would be responsible for the housing data are being handled at the county up-front development costs and the ongoing level now, there may be no need for additional maintenance of the system. personnel. If new positions are needed, they may not require full-time attention to the task and At the state level, the initial expenditures will be would not require the same skills levels that are for software, development, and training. The needed for project management at the state level. software cost is expected to be reasonable and some functionality may already be available in Developing a tracking system for affordable state government programs. The basic Microsoft housing in Hawaii is not technically difficult, time- 365 package, for instance, includes access to consuming, or expensive. The most challenging Excel and Power BI. Developing the database, aspects of the problem are developing a system input/output systems, and security systems is a with clear responsibilities and well-understood one-time cost that could be substantial. We have benefits for all parties concerned. It will also be not priced this aspect of the system. Once the necessary to establish a central management system is developed, it will be necessary to train agency with the authority to enforce compliance, state and county employees to use it. All these if needed, and a user's group. costs can be expensed. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 93 ©SMS December,2019 VII. APPENDIX Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 94 ©SMS December,2019 APPENDIX A: HHPS HOUSING TRENDS Tables presented in Appendix A, referred to in prior years as the "A Tables" or"Trend Tables," provide detailed demographic and housing-related data for the State of Hawaii and its counties. This data is taken from the Housing Demand Survey each year. The fundamental components of the Housing Demand Survey were designed to ensure compatibility with previous versions. These tables allow for the evaluation of trends in the Hawaii housing market across the past 25 years. Table A-1. Characteristics of Housing Units, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Tenancy Unit Size Bedrooms) Studio or Total 1 2 3 4+ County Year Households Own Rent Bedroom Bedrooms Bedrooms Bedrooms 1992 247,349 48% 52% 20% 32% 30% 19% 1997 272,234 54% 46% 16% 27% 36% 21% 2003 292,003 61% 39% 15% 25% 35% 25% Honolulu 2006 303,149 59% 41% 18% 25% 37% 20% 2011 310,882 56% 44% 15% 21% 37% 26% 2016 317,459 55% 45% 17% 26% 32% 25% 2019 306,898 56% 44% 19% 24% 33% 24% 1992 34,266 61% 39% 14% 26% 46% 15% 1997 39,252 65% 35% 12% 23% 46% 19% 2003 43,687 61% 40% 13% 28% 42% 17% Maui 2006 49,484 60% 40% 15% 27% 43% 17% 2011 54,132 54% 46% 17% 26% 37% 20% 2016 55,059 57% 43% 16% 25% 38% 20% 2019 55,842 59% 41% 16% 25% 38% 20% 1992 39,789 68% 32% 7% 25% 53% 14% 1997 46,271 72% 28% 8% 21% 54% 17% 2003 54,644 70% 30% 12% 19% 50% 19% Hewer i 2006 61,213 69% 31% 11% 22% 49% 18% 2011 67,096 67% 33% 13% 21% 47% 19% 2016 66,989 66% 34% 12% 23% 46% 18% 2019 70,662 67% 33% 17% 21% 42% 20% 1992 16,981 60% 40% 12% 19% 53% 15% 1997 18,817 67% 33% 8% 19% 57% 15% 2003 20,460 66% 34% 11% 20% 53% 17% Kauai 2006 21,971 66% 34% 10% 21% 51% 18% 2011 23,201 59% 41% 12% 19% 51% 18% 2016 23,369 63% 37% 13% 17% 50% 19% 2019 22,023 63% 37% 14% 19% 49% 18% 1992 338,385 52% 48% 17% 30% 35% 18% 1997 376,574 58% 42% 14% 25% 40% 20% 2003 410,794 62% 38% 14% 24% 39% 23% State 2006 435,818 61% 39% 17% 24% 39% 20% 2011 455,311 57% 43% 15% 22% 39% 24% 2016 462,876 57% 43% 16% 25% 36% 23% 2019 455,425 58% 42% 18% 24% 35% 23% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016, and 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 95 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-2. Household Income Data, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Household Income Less $15,000 $25,000 $50,000 $75,000 Total than to to to to $100,000 Median HH County Year Households $15,000 $24,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 or more Income 1992 247,349 N/A 24% 29% 12% 6% 7% $36,974 1997 272,234 9% 9% 28% 15% 9% 6% $42,234 2003 292,003 8% 10% 36% 18% 11% 17% $47,917 Honolulu 2006 303,149 13% 7% 26% 22% 12% 20% $58,385 2011 310,882 12% 7% 25% 22% 9% 25% $59,076 2016 317,459 9% 6% 18% 21% 15% 31% $73,824 2019 311,451 8% 6% 16% 17% 14% 39% $95,455 1992 34,266 N/A 20% 36% 11% 2% 3% $35,843 1997 39,252 10% 8% 33% 15% 7% 6% $38,908 2003 43,687 9% 13% 34% 19% 14% 11% $44,297 Maui 2006 49,484 11% 8% 29% 20% 15% 17% $49,795 2011 54,132 12% 10% 27% 19% 11% 21% $58,424 2016 55,059 11% 8% 23% 21% 12% 25% $59,733 2019 54,434 8% 7% 19% 18% 14% 34% $74,451 1992 39,789 N/A 24% 39% 11% 3% 4% $34,063 1997 46,271 14% 14% 30% 12% 4% 4% $31,831 2003 54,644 14% 12% 39% 17% 9% 9% $36,905 Hawaii 2006 61,213 13% 10% 29% 22% 10% 16% $51,920 2011 67,096 18% 13% 25% 17% 10% 17% $44,696 2016 66,989 16% 11% 28% 18% 11% 18% $44,879 2019 67,054 14% 10% 20% 18% 13% 24% $59,503 1992 16,981 N/A 20% 36% 10% 5% 3% $36,966 1997 18,817 11% 13% 30% 15% 5% 3% $34,891 2003 20,460 13% 12% 37% 18% 9% 12% $42,205 Kauai 2006 21,971 10% 10% 27% 23% 11% 19% $53,116 2011 23,201 13% 11% 25% 19% 9% 19% $49,730 2016 23,369 11% 11% 26% 20% 11% 21% $58,789 2019 22,563 10% 6% 20% 16% 15% 34% $74,527 1992 338,385 N/A 24% 31% 12% 5% 6% $36,289 1997 376,574 10% 10% 29% 15% 8% 6% $39,883 2003 410,794 10% 10% 36% 19% 10% 15% $46,086 State 2006 435,818 13% 7% 27% 21% 12% 20% $58,393 2011 455,311 13% 8% 26% 21% 10% 23% $58,700 2016 462,876 11% 7% 20% 21% 14% 28% $72,821 2019 455,502 9% 7% 17% 17% 14% 36% $74,983 Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003,2006, 2011, 2016,and 2019 Note. The number of total households for the Housing Demand survey is an SMS estimate developed using ACS 2017 data prior to the release of Census 2020. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 96 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-3. Households at HUD Income Guidelines by County, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 HUD Household Income Guidelines Total 30% or Over 30% Over 50% Over 80% Over 120% County Year Households less to 50% to 80% to 120% to 140% Over 140% 1992 247,349 N/Aa 20% 19% 23% 10% 27% 1997 272,234 8% 15% 21% 30% 7% 20% 2003 292,003 5% 19% 22% 22% 7% 25% Honolulu 2006 303,149 14% 10% 20% 22% 9% 24% 2011 310,882 19% 16% 25% 12% 7% 21% 2016 317,459 15% 11% 22% 16% 15% 22% 2019 311,451 16% 14% 20% 12% 9% 28% 1992 34,266 N/Aa 20% 19% 24% 9% 28% 1997 39,252 7% 11% 27% 24% 10% 21% 2003 43,687 10% 17% 28% 18% 7% 21% Maui 2006 49,484 13% 11% 19% 21% 7% 28% 2011 54,132 20% 19% 22% 9% 5% 25% 2016 55,059 16% 14% 19% 14% 12% 25% 2019 54,434 14% 9% 15% 7% 10% 45% 1992 39,789 N/Aa 20% 18% 24% 10% 29% 1997 46,271 3% 19% 21% 23% 10% 24% 2003 54,644 5% 14% 28% 22% 6% 25% Hawaii 2006 61,213 14% 11% 18% 20% 5% 31% 2011 67,096 21% 16% 19% 13% 6% 24% 2016 66,989 19% 12% 22% 10% 9% 28% 2019 67,054 19% 13% 18% 13% 11% 26% 1992 16,981 N/Aa 21% 18% 21% 9% 30% 1997 18,817 9% 18% 27% 25% 9% 12% 2003 20,460 6% 23% 27% 20% 7% 18% Kauai 2006 21,971 12% 11% 18% 21% 10% 28% 2011 23,201 19% 18% 23% 13% 6% 22% 2016 23,369 19% 19% 20% 7% 11% 23% 2019 22,563 17% 11% 17% 6% 13% 36% 1992 338,385 N/Aa 20% 19% 22% 11% 28% 1997 376,574 7% 15% 22% 28% 7% 20% 2003 410,794 9% 15% 20% 22% 8% 24% State 2006 435,818 14% 11% 20% 22% 8% 26% 2011 455,311 20% 17% 24% 12% 7% 22% 2016 462,876 16% 12% 21% 14% 13% 23% 2019 455,502 17% 13% 19% 12% 10% 30% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Note: HUD household income guidelines of 30%or less was not available in the Housing Demand Survey 1992. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 97 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-4a. Housing Unit Condition, Owned Units, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, and 2016 Owner Occupied Total Excellent Satisfactory Fair Poor County Year Households condition condition condition condition 1992 247,349 47% 43% 9% 2% 1997 272,234 31% 47% 18% 4% 2003 292,003 42% 46% 11% 1% Honolulu 2006 303,149 39% 46% 12% 3% 2011 310,882 40% 45% 12% 4% 2016 317,459 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1992 34,266 52% 38% 10% 1% 1997 39,252 35% 48% 15% 3% 2003 43,687 45% 42% 10% 3% Maui 2006 49,484 44% 43% 11% 2% 2011 54,132 49% 37% 11% 2% 2016 55,095 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1992 39,789 52% 41% 6% 1% 1997 46,271 42% 42% 13% 4% 2003 54,644 46% 44% 9% 2% Hawai'i 2006 61,213 44% 44% 11% 1% 2011 67,096 48% 38% 11% 3% 2016 66,989 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1992 16,981 49% 42% 7% 2% 1997 18,817 42% 42% 13% 3% 2003 20,460 48% 42% 9% 2% Kaua'i 2006 21,971 44% 43% 11% 2% 2011 23,201 44% 39% 15% 2% 2016 23,369 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1992 338,385 49% 42% 8% 2% 1997 376,574 34% 46% 17% 4% 2003 410,794 43% 45% 10% 2% State 2006 435,818 41% 45% 12% 3% 2011 455,311 43% 42% 12% 3% 2016 462,876 N/A N/A N/A N/A Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, and 2016 Note: This question was not asked in the Housing Demand Survey 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 98 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-4b. Housing Unit Condition, Rented Units, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, and 2016 Renter Occupied Total Excellent Satisfactory Fair Poor County Year Households condition condition condition condition 1992 247,349 23% 52% 20% 6% 1997 272,234 21% 46% 27% 6% 2003 292,003 22% 52% 22% 4% Honolulu 2006 303,149 24% 42% 25% 10% 2011 310,882 31% 46% 19% 5% 2016 317,459 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1992 34,266 27% 43% 24% 6% 1997 39,252 25% 48% 22% 5% 2003 43,687 28% 47% 20% 6% Maui 2006 49,484 31% 40% 22% 7% 2011 54,132 35% 43% 16% 6% 2016 55,095 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1992 39,789 29% 46% 16% 9% 1997 46,271 26% 45% 20% 10% 2003 54,644 27% 46% 23% 5% Hawai'i 2006 61,213 22% 48% 20% 10% 2011 67,096 37% 42% 15% 7% 2016 66,989 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1992 16,981 25% 55% 15% 5% 1997 18,817 27% 44% 22% 7% 2003 20,460 30% 47% 18% 5% Kaua'i 2006 21,971 24% 46% 25% 6% 2011 23,201 26% 42% 27% 5% 2016 23,369 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1992 338,385 24% 51% 20% 6% 1997 376,574 22% 46% 26% 6% 2003 410,794 24% 51% 21% 4% State 2006 435,818 24% 43% 24% 9% 2011 455,311 32% 45% 19% 5% 2016 462,876 N/A N/A N/A N/A Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, and 2016 Note: This question was not asked in the Housing Demand Survey 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 99 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-5. Average Monthly Housing Cost, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Average Monthly Mortgage Payment Average Monthly Rent Total 2-bedroom County Year Households Total Single-family Multi-family Total apartment 1992 247,349 $821 $915 $832 $864 N/A 1997 272,234 $1,430 $1,369 $1,335 $928 $923 2003 292,003 $1,546 $1,650 $1,239 $1,014 $1,072 Honolulu 2006 303,149 $1,142 $1,173 $1,029 $1,300 $1,393 2011 310,882 $1,415 $1,393 $1,510 $1,502 $1,487 2016 317,459 $2,140 $2,353 $1,753 $1,652 $1,688 2019 311,451 $2,275 $2,395 $2,060 $1,818 $1,824 1992 34,266 $776 $831 $719 $730 N/A 1997 39,252 $1,210 $1,664 $789 $850 $1,138 2003 43,687 $1,310 $1,346 $1,104 $979 $1,072 Maui 2006 49,484 $1,461 $1,451 $1,458 $1,256 $1,253 2011 54,132 $1,461 $1,468 $1,411 $1,280 $1,303 2016 55,059 $2,045 $2,100 $1,729 $1,444 $1,429 2019 54,434 $2,063 $2,119 $1,856 $1,644 $1,689 1992 39,789 $651 $691 $579 $556 N/A 1997 46,271 $954 $1,069 $840 $697 $644 2003 54,644 $1,072 $1,078 $919 $859 $843 Hawaii 2006 61,213 $1,057 $1,039 $1,407 $1,146 $1,152 2011 67,096 $1,106 $1,102 $1,389 $1,121 $986 2016 66,989 $1,357 $1,379 $1,106 $1,164 $1,153 2019 67,054 $1,483 $1,505 $1,292 $1,210 $1,274 1992 16,981 $726 $773 $612 $807 N/A 1997 18,817 $1,151 $1,290 $881 $830 $860 2003 20,460 $1,284 $1,306 $1,014 $983 $885 Kauai 2006 21,971 $1,165 $1,178 $974 $1,230 $1,271 2011 23,201 $1,273 $1,254 $983 $1,311 $1,292 2016 23,369 $1,824 $1,841 $1,682 $1,256 $1,354 2019 22,563 $2,134 $2,155 $1,946 $1,543 $1,673 1992 338,385 $800 $863 $813 $793 N/A 1997 376,574 $1,319 $1,330 $1,286 $897 N/A 2003 410,794 $1,433 $1,488 $1,213 $992 $1,037 State 2006 435,818 $1,167 $1,183 $1,081 $1,274 $1,346 2011 455,311 $1,355 $1,332 $1,495 $1,421 $1,398 2016 462,876 $1,987 $2,081 $1,728 $1,554 $1,577 2019 455,502 $2,108 $2,149 $2,016 $1,717 $1,750 Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 100 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-6. Mortgage Payments by Years in Unit, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Average Monthly Mortgage by Years in Unit Total Less than 1 More than 10 County Year Households year 1 to 5 years 6 to 10 years years 1992 247,349 $886 $879 $656 $564 1997 272,234 $1,431 $1,668 $1,697 $1,241 2003 292,003 $1,616 $1,729 $1,689 $1,414 Honolulu 2006 303,149 $2,865 $1,865 $1,445 $824 2011 310,882 $2,488 $2,255 $2,007 $1,088 2016 317,459 $2,850 $2,378 $2,580 $1,905 2019 311,451 $2,841 $2,686 $2,427 $2,091 1992 34,266 $824 $781 $755 $609 1997 39,252 $1,497 $1,519 $1,339 $986 2003 43,687 $1,972 $1,448 $1,436 $1,091 Maui 2006 49,484 $2,245 $2,037 $1,565 $1,072 2011 54,132 $1,671 $1,962 $1,720 $1,202 2016 55,059 $2,516 $2,301 $2,134 $1,898 2019 54,434 $2,065 $2,276 $2,090 $1,973 1992 39,789 $752 $707 $455 $314 1997 46,271 $1,030 $1,168 $1,122 $730 2003 54,644 $1,455 $1,143 $1,174 $953 Hawaii 2006 61,213 $1,700 $1,662 $987 $725 2011 67,096 $1,591 $1,531 $1,403 $792 2016 66,989 $1,985 $1,325 $1,384 $1,316 2019 67,054 $1,845 $1,578 $1,635 $1,418 1992 16,981 $888 $722 $559 $552 1997 18,817 $1,448 $1,304 $1,167 $968 2003 20,460 $1,673 $1,490 $1,373 $1,089 Kauai 2006 21,971 $2,666 $1,634 $1,442 $824 2011 23,201 $2,285 $2,039 $1,587 $1,026 2016 23,369 $2,518 $2,022 $2,221 $1,619 2019 22,563 $3,113 $2,620 $2,182 $1,928 1992 338,385 $867 $853 $634 $553 1997 376,574 $1,387 $1,548 $1,501 $1,135 2003 410,794 $1,636 $1,559 $1,577 $1,299 State 2006 435,818 $2,468 $1,837 $1,378 $835 2011 455,311 $2,157 $2,013 $1,805 $1,049 2016 462,876 $2,547 $2,186 $2,294 $1,798 2019 455,502 $2,490 $2,437 $2,242 $1,956 Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 101 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-7. Household Composition, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Household Type M ultiple Total Single rMlarried, no Parent(s)& Unrelated Families 1 County Year Households member children children roommates Other Undetermined 11992 247.349 11.9% 24.4% 26.3% 1.7% 32.0% 3.7% 1997 272.234 14.1% 25.6% 27.3% 4.2% 27.2% 1.6% 2003 292.003 22.0% 28.9% 21.2% 3.2% 22.9% 1.8% Honolulu 2006 303.149 24.1% 21.8% 20.9% 3.3% 29.3% 0.5% 2011 310.882 22.2% 19.6% 14,1% 5.0%937.6% 1,4 2016 317.459 23.5% 20.2% 13.8% 5.5% 36.5% 0.1 2019 311.451 23.5% 20.4% 12.6% 5.9% 37.3% 0.2% 1992 34.266 12.6% 24.4% 32.9% 1.6% 25.9% 2.3% 1997 39.252 14.1% 25.0% 27.9% 5.4% 24.8% 2.7% 2003 43.687 21.9% 29.6% 25.4% 3.2% 17.6% 2.3% Maui 2006 49.484 21.5% 24.8% 24.0% 3.6% 25.8% 0.3% 2011 54.132 24.7% 22.2% 12.8% 7.0% 30.7% 2.6% 2016 55.059 23.9% 22.2% 13,9% 6.7% 32.4% 0.94 2019 54.434 23.9% 20.3% 12.9% 8.1% 34.5% 0.3% 1992 39.789 9.6% 27.2% 32.3% 0.6% 26.0% 4.3% 1997 4 6.2 71 14.8% 27.0% 28.4% 3.5% 24.3% 2.1% 2003 54.644 22.3% 30.6% 24.4% 3.2% 18.1% 1.4% Hawaii 2006 61.213 19.5% 25.6% 22.6% 2.6% 28.7% 1.05 2011 67.096 24.6% 25.0% 13.5% 6.5% 29.0% 1.4% 2016 66.989 26.5% 26.3% 13.5% 5.9%927.5% 0.3 2019 67.054 25.9% 23.4% 13.0% 9.0% 27.8% 0.7% 1992 16.981 12.7% 26.1% 31.0% 0.5% 26.3% 3.5.5 1007 18.817 13.2% 27.1% 30.0% 1.7% 25.4% 2.5% 2003 20.460 20.9% 26.9% 26.8% 3.2% 20.5% 1.7% Kauai 2006 21.971 19.8% 25.0% 23.3% 3.3% 28.2% 0.4% 2011 2 3.2 01 22.5% 23.6% 14.8% 4.4% 32.5% 2.2% 2016 23.369 22,9% 25.3% 15,3% 5.7% 30.3% 0,5% 2019 22.563 23.3% 25.7% 13.1% 5.6% 32.1% 0.1% 1992 338.385 11.7% 24.9% 27.9% 1.5% 30.3% 3.6% 1997 376.574 14.2% 25.8% 27.6% 4.1% 26.5% 1.9% 2003 410.794 22.0% 29.1% 22.3% 3.2% 21.6% 1.8% State 2006 435.818 22.9% 22.8% 21.6% 3.2% 28.8% 0.6% 2011 455.311 22.9% 21.0% 13.9% 5.5% 35.2% 1.6% 2016 462.876 23.9% 21.6% 13,8% 5.7% 34.4% 0.2% 2019 455.502 23.9% 21.1% 12.7% 6.6% 35.3% 0.3% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Note: aOther household types include a mixture of related and unrelated individuals. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 102 ©SMS December,2019 Table A8 Household Crowding, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Crowding Indicators Crowded Total and/or County Year Households Crowded' Doubled Upb Doubled Up" 1992 247.349 232% WA. 82.0% 1997 2 72.2 34 10.6% N/A. 27.2% 2003 2 g9.003 10.1% 10.0% 17.6% Honolulu 2006 303. 149 8. 1% 9.7% 15.2% 2011 310.882 13.3% 13.8% 22.9% 2016 317.459 11.4% 11.9% 21.0% 2019 311.451 14. 1% 13.3% 23.1% 19g9 34.266 26.8% N/A. 25.9% 1997 39.2 m2 10.4% N/A 24.8% 2003 48.887 11.0% 8.7% 17.3% Mad 2006 49.4 84 7.7% 9.6% 15.3% 2011 54. 1]2 10.7% 13.0% 19.2% 2016 55.059 9.8% 14. 1% 21.4% 2019 54.434 13.8% 14. 1% 22.5% 1989 89.789 18.7% N/A 26.0% 1997 46.271 7.9% N/A 24.3% 2003 54.844 7.0% 9.3% 14.4% Hal.evar5 2006 61.213 6.9% 11.2% 15.9% 2011 67.096 8.4% 11.3% 17.2% 2016 66.989 7.4% 11. 1% 16.0% 2019 67.054 11.5% 10.3% 18.0% 1992 16.981 17.4% WA. 26.3% 1997 18.817 9. 1% N/A 25.4% 2003 20.4 G0 G.0% 12.5% 16. 1% K1 uaj 2006 21.971 6.6% 11.9% 15.5% 2011 23.201 10.5% 11.7% 18. 1% 2016 28.869 8.9% 11.5% 19.2% 2019 22.563 12.2% 14.5% 21.4% 1989 338.385 22.2% N/A. 30.3% 1997 376.574 10.2% N/A 26.6 2003 410.794 9.6% 10.0% 17. 1% State 2006 435.818 7.8% 10.0% 15.3% 2011 455.311 12. 1% 13.2% 21.4% 2016 4 82.878 10.5% 12.0% 20.2% 2019 4 55.5 02 13.6% 13.0% 22.2% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 a Based on more than 2 persons prbedroom. b More than one familygroup in a single housing unit (See Glossary). C Percent of households crowded, doubled up, or both. Before 2003, HHPS measured crowding and "crowded or doubled up." After 2003, HHPS measured crowding and doubled up and the combingbn of both. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 103 »SMS December,2019 Table A-9. Household Crowding by Tenancy, State and Counties of Hawaii, 2019 Current Owners Current Renters Crowded Crowded Total and/or Total and/or Households Crowdeda Doubled Upb Doubled Up° Households Crowdeda Doubled Upb Doubled Up° Honolulu 171,222 6.7% 15.2% 18.8% 140,229 23.9% 11.0% 28.3% Maui 32,008 8.1% 14.8% 19.2% 22,426 22.3% 13.1% 27.2% Hawai'i 44,735 7.8% 11.2% 16.0% 22,319 20.0% 8.5% 21.9% Kaua'i 14,122 8.3% 16.4% 19.9% 8,441 19.3% 11.5% 23.9% State 262,087 7.1% 14.5% 18.5% 193,415 23.1% 11.0% 27.2% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 a Based on more than 2 persons per bedroom. b More than one family group in a single housing unit (See Glossary). C Percent of households crowded, doubled up, or both. Before 2003, HHPS measured crowding and "crowded or doubled up." After 2003, HHPS measured crowding and doubled up and the combination of both. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 104 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-10. Shelter-to-Income Ratios, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Monthly Shelter Payment as a Percent of Monthly Total No Shelter Under30 30to40 Over40 Not enough County Year Households Payment percent percent percent information Honolulu 1992 247,349 55.7% 14.1% 20.2% 10.0% 1997 272,234 55.1% 18.9% 18.4% 7.5% 2003 292,003 16.4% 36.3% 17.9% 14.4% 15.0% 2006 303,149 19.2% 35.7% 10.9% 22.0% 12.2% 2011 310,882 14.6% 35.7% 10.1% 30.6% 9.0% 2016 317,459 21.3% 37.1% 11.4% 24.4% 5.9% 2019 306,898 17.0% 44.1% 9.7% 23.1% 6.1% 1992 34,266 59.3% 18.1% 15.8% 6.7% 1997 39,252 47.9% 16.0% 19.8% 16.4% 2003 43,687 12.0% 40.6% 17.5% 16.2% 13.6% Maui 2006 49,484 16.0% 33.1% 14.4% 27.1% 9.4% 2011 54,132 16.2% 35.5% 12.0% 29.2% 7.1% 2016 55,059 15.0% 35.2% 12.4% 31.4% 6.0% 2019 55,842 14.5% 43.3% 10.5% 23.8% 7.8% 1992 39,789 70.2% 12.4% 11.5% 5.9% 1997 46,271 51.8% 18.1% 20.4% 9.7% 2003 54,644 17.9% 38.7% 16.5% 14.4% 12.5% Hawaii 2006 61,213 15.9% 38.2% 10.9% 23.0% 12.1% 2011 67,096 19.4% 34.1% 12.0% 26.8% 7.7% 2016 66,989 27.0% 37.2% 10.3% 19.3% 6.2% 2019 70,662 21.1% 41.0% 8.8% 21.8% 7.3% 1992 16,981 60.3% 17.7% 13.7% 8.1% 1997 18,817 44.9% 18.7% 24.7% 11.7% 2003 20,460 17.3% 38.9% 14.8% 16.1% 12.9% Kauai 2006 21,971 18.8% 38.7% 10.8% 21.6% 10.0% 2011 23,201 18.6% 35.0% 12.2% 25.5% 8.6% 2016 23,369 20.8% 36.8% 10.8% 26.3% 5.2% 2019 22,023 17.2% 38.3% 10.5% 24.5% 9.4% 1992 338,385 58.0% 14.5% 18.4% 9.1% 1997 376,574 53.5% 18.5% 19.1% 8.9% 2003 410,794 16.1% 37.2% 17.5% 14.7% 14.4% State 2006 435,818 18.4% 35.9% 11.3% 22.7% 11.8% 2011 455,311 15.7% 35.4% 10.7% 29.6% 8.6% 2016 462,876 21.4% 36.8% 11.3% 24.6% 5.9% 2019 455,425 17.3% 43.2% 9.7% 23.1% 6.7% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Note. Under 30 percent includes households with no shelter payment for 1992 and 1997. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 105 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-11. Shelter-to-Income Ratios by Years in Unit, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Percent with shelter-to-income ratio of 30%or more by Years in Unit by Tenancy Total Less than 1 to 5 6 to 10 More than Rented or Owner County Year Households 1 year years years 10 years no cash occupied 1992 247,349 61.1% 43.7% 34.9% 12.7% 44.6% 23.0% 1997 272,234 40.8% 43.2% 46.9% 35.1% 41.4% 39.2% 2003 292,003 42.5% 49.6% 37.6% 24.9% 48.9% 28.0% Honolulu 2006 303,149 53.0% 43.1% 36.9% 22.1% 47.2% 22.7% 2011 310,882 65.8% 55.7% 44.9% 25.9% 61.9% 24.5% 2016 317,459 60.3% 48.8% 38.5% 21.7% 58.1% 23.2% 2019 311,451 56.2% 40.8% 38.1% 20.6% 49.7% 20.3% 1992 34,266 47.3% 49.8% 30.6% 17.0% 43.8% 27.6% 1997 39,252 41.4% 50.0% 47.3% 33.7% 38.6% 46.1% 2003 43,687 52.2% 38.3% 26.5% 26.0% 40.5% 30.0% Maui 2006 49,484 66.3% 46.8% 44.8% 26.3% 54.6% 32.6% 2011 54,132 60.2% 51.5% 40.6% 27.6% 52.7% 31.1% 2016 55,059 65.5% 50.2% 48.4% 33.5% 66.3% 31.4% 2019 54,434 54.2% 41.3% 37.0% 21.4% 51.2% 23.1% 1992 39,789 51.5% 35.8% 18.5% 6.7% 37.8% 17.2% 1997 46,271 49.6% 52.5% 42.6% 30.8% 52.0% 37.0% 2003 54,644 42.4% 41.7% 31.2% 26.8% 49.0% 27.8% Hawaii 2006 61,213 60.8% 43.7% 27.5% 20.3% 48.3% 27.1% 2011 67,096 66.4% 48.7% 38.4% 23.0% 57.3% 28.1% 2016 66,989 38.7% 39.7% 33.3% 21.3% 61.9% 17.7% 2019 67,054 54.2% 41.3% 37.0% 21.4% 53.4% 19.8% 1992 16,981 46.3% 31.1% 18.5% 15.6% 36.9% 28.1% 1997 18,817 61.2% 56.5% 41.4% 39.6% 53.4% 46.1% 2003 20,460 43.2% 43.2% 31.4% 26.0% 44.4% 29.7% Kaua'i 2006 21,971 51.6% 45.2% 37.1% 18.8% 47.7% 24.3% 2011 23,201 65.8% 53.9% 42.9% 29.3% 56.0% 31.7% 2016 23,369 64.5% 50.6% 39.7% 26.3% 58.9% 28.0% 2019 22,563 54.2% 41.3% 37.0% 21.4% 51.4% 25.7% 1992 338,385 57.8% 43.3% 31.1% 12.6% 43.7% 23.0% 1997 376,574 42.2% 45.6% 46.0% 34.7% 40.1% 40.1% 2003 410,794 43.6% 46.2% 35.3% 25.3% 28.3% 28.3% State 2006 435,818 56.4% 43.8% 36.7% 22.1% 48.2% 24.6% 2011 455,311 65.0% 53.9% 43.2% 25.8% 59.8% 26.3% 2016 462,876 58.2% 47.8% 39.2% 23.2% 59.6% 23.5% 2019 455,502 54.2% 41.3% 37.0% 21.4% 50.4% 20.9% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 106 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-12. Intention to Move, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Intention to Move When Household Will Move Raw Probably Will Move Demand- Total Will Not to a New Total Will More Than 5 Not Sure Households Move Unit Move* In 1 Year In 2 Years 3 to 5 Years Years When 247,349 42.6% 57.4% 142,090 29.2% 21.5% 19.0% 10.2% 20.1% 272,234 44.8% 55.2% 150,194 23.5% 20.9% 16.2% 10.9% 28.5% 292,003 56.3% 43.7% 127,683 27.9% 20.5% 19.3% 10.3% 22.0% 303,149 61.2% 38.8% 117,597 24.5% 22.9% 15.5% 8.2% 29.0% 310,882 45.4% 54.6% 168,946 21.5% 21.4% 20.1% 15.6% 21.5% 317,459 40.0% 60.0% 190,377 19.8% 18.3% 20.0% 15.8% 26.1% 311,451 34.7% 65.3% 203,426 18.4% 19.3% 15.9% 13.0% 33.4% 34,266 56.8% 43.2% 14,793 28.6% 24.7% 17.1% 9.2% 20.4% 39,252 51.9% 48.1% 18,894 23.1% 17.2% 13.4% 18.2% 28.1% 43,687 51.9% 48.1% 18,205 22.1% 20.6% 18.6% 10.0% 28.7% 49,484 54.9% 45.1% 22,318 19.6% 26.9% 15.0% 14.0% 24.5% 54,132 52.9% 47.1% 25,282 24.8% 19.4% 17.6% 16.1% 22.2% 55,059 47.7% 52.3% 28,784 20.6% 19.9% 19.9% 17.1% 22.5% 54,434 49.0% 51.0% 27,740 21.2% 16.1% 16.8% 20.8% 25.2% 39,789 55.6% 44.4% 17,685 28.8% 20.8% 17.8% 14.0% 18.6% 46,271 60.0% 40.0% 18,491 22.3% 18.1% 15.5% 15.9% 28.2% 54,644 55.6% 44.4% 21,252 21.4% 19.2% 15.9% 17.3% 26.2% 61,213 57.9% 42.1% 25,769 22.4% 19.3% 19.4% 11.2% 27.7% 67,096 58.4% 41.6% 28,223 20.9% 12.9% 24.9% 20.8% 20.6% 66,989 50.2% 49.8% 33,336 21.7% 17.9% 17.4% 18.9% 24.1% 67,054 51.0% 49.0% 32,879 21.8% 16.5% 17.0% 19.4% 25.3% 16,981 56.8% 43.2% 7,337 32.8% 17.4% 21.4% 6.4% 22.0% 18,817 58.0% 42.0% 7,907 17.1% 13.9% 16.3% 15.3% 37.4% 20,460 63.5% 36.5% 7,468 22.1% 22.4% 15.6% 12.1% 27.9% 21,971 64.4% 35.6% 7,826 23.4% 17.5% 13.6% 17.1% 28.4% 23,201 57.2% 42.8% 9,628 30.3% 15.5% 15.1% 18.3% 20.8% 23,369 55.7% 44.3% 10,355 21.1% 21.6% 19.9% 19.9% 17.6% 22,563 57.5% 42.5% 9,588 18.8% 11.9% 18.8% 16.0% 34.5% 338,385 46.2% 53.8% 181,905 29.2% 21.5% 18.8% 10.4% 20.1% 376,574 48.1% 51.9% 195,486 23.1% 20.0% 15.9% 12.3% 28.8% 410,794 57.5% 42.5% 174,608 26.3% 20.5% 18.6% 11.2% 23.5% 435,818 60.2% 39.8% 173,510 23.5% 22.6% 15.9% 9.8% 28.2% 455,311 49.2% 50.8% 232,079 22.1% 19.8% 20.2% 16.4% 21.4% 462,876 43.2% 56.8% 262,852 20.1% 18.6% 19.6% 16.5% 25.1% 455,502 39.9% 60.1% 273,632 19.3% 18.4% 16.2% 14.7% 31.6% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Base for intention to Move is all respondent households Base for When Households Will Move is 262,852 households who provided a time frame or said not sure (excludes probably never move) Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 107 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-13. Preferred Location for Next Move, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Preferred Location for Next Move Final Demand Total Total Will Same Different Out-of- County Year Households Move' Island Island Not Sure State 1992 247,349 142,090 62.2% 5.3% 6.3% 26.1% 1997 272,234 150,194 52.5% 4.3% 11.0% 32.2% 2003 292,003 127,683 65.7% 2.8% 11.6% 19.8% Honolulu 2006 303,149 117,597 66.1% 4.5% 8.9% 20.5% 2011 310,882 132,696 63.4% 4.3% 5.6% 26.6% 2016 317,459 139,823 59.3% 3.4% 14.2% 23.1% 2019 311,451 135,492 61.1% 4.9% 8.0% 26.0% 1992 34,266 14,793 71.7% 13.3% 5.7% 9.4% 1997 39,252 18,894 72.5% 2.7% 13.0% 11.8% 2003 43,687 18,205 68.3% 6.9% 10.8% 14.0% Maui 2006 49,484 22,318 71.5% 9.5% 6.7% 12.3% 2011 54,132 19,774 58.5% 5.4% 24.9% 11.2% 2016 55,059 21,877 65.9% 6.6% 8.9% 18.7% 2019 54,434 20,729 61.4% 8.9% 9.9% 19.8% 1992 39,789 17,685 80.9% 4.2% 4.4% 10.6% 1997 46,271 18,491 74.3% 4.0% 7.7% 14.0% 2003 54,644 21,252 73.4% 5.4% 12.1% 9.1% Hawai'i 2006 61,213 25,769 73.0% 6.0% 9.4% 11.5% 2011 67,096 22,327 61.9% 7.8% 8.3% 22.1% 2016 66,989 24,746 61.4% 7.2% 13.9% 17.5% 2019 67,054 24,479 68.3% 5.4% 8.0% 18.3% 1992 16,981 7,337 76.7% 6.2% 6.0% 11.1% 1997 18,817 7,907 69.8% 5.7% 10.1% 14.3% 2003 20,460 7,468 71.8% 9.7% 9.0% 9.5% Kauai 2006 21,971 7,826 64.8% 7.4% 9.1% 18.7% 2011 23,201 7,586 62.8% 7.0% 11.1% 19.2% 2016 23,369 8,211 65.7% 5.2% 7.6% 21.5% 2019 22,563 6,278 63.9% 6.8% 8.2% 21.2% 1992 338,385 181,904 65.4% 5.9% 6.1% 22.6% 1997 376,574 195,485 57.2% 4.2% 10.9% 27.8% 2003 410,794 174,607 67.2% 3.9% 11.5% 17.5% State 2006 435,818 173,511 67.8% 5.5% 8.7% 18.0% 2011 455,311 182,384 62.6% 5.0% 8.7% 23.8% 2016 462,876 194,656 60.5% 4.2% 13.4% 21.9% 2019 455,502 186,978 62.2% 5.5% 8.2% 24.2% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 a The total number of Final Demand households differs from the Raw Demand number in Table A-12 because households who didn't know or refused to report when they might move are excluded from the final demand counts. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 108 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-14.Tenancy Preference of Current Owners&Renters, 1992, 1997,2003,2006,2011, 2016 and 2019 Effective Current Owners Current Renters Demand- Planned Next Planned Next Total Will Tenancy Tenancy County Year Move' Total Buy Rent" Total° Buy Rent" 1992 127,810 33,243 89.7% 10.3% 94,567 32.7% 67.3% 1997 128,791 44,335 89.1% 10.9% 84,456 44.0% 56.0% 2003 113,638 41,616 85.5% 14.5% 72,022 55.4% 44.6% Honolulu 2006 100,545 30,973 86.8% 13.2% 69,572 55.4% 44.6% 2011 97,429 32,688 74.2% 25.8% 64,621 25.1% 68.3% 2016 136,933 58,933 75.2% 24.8% 78,000 31.0% 70.3% 2019 100,203 43,447 78.5% 21.5% 56,755 31.1% 68.9% 1992 13,284 4,600 87.6% 12.4% 8,684 49.5% 50.5% 1997 16,239 6,450 84.8% 15.2% 9,789 46.8% 53.2% 2003 15,593 5,657 95.1% 4.9% 9,936 52.4% 47.6% Maui 2006 19,584 7,083 92.0% 8.0% 12,501 52.3% 47.7% 2011 16,937 5,370 72.0% 28.0% 11,396 29.4% 70.6% 2016 19,434 7,431 73.5% 26.5% 11,877 35.4% 64.6% 2019 16,624 6,588 77.6% 22.4% 10,036 38.2% 61.8% 1992 16,004 7,132 93.7% 6.3% 8,872 64.9% 35.1% 1997 15,884 7,694 87.5% 12.5% 8,190 49.6% 50.4% 2003 18,471 8,679 90.0% 10.0% 9,792 57.1% 42.9% Hawaii 2006 22,200 10,264 93.8% 6.2% 11,936 54.7% 45.3% 2011 17,412 6,838 70.1% 29.9% 10,540 37.2% 62.8% 2016 24,570 12,856 67.4% 32.6% 11,568 37.3% 62.7% 2019 19,992 8,823 77.1% 22.9% 11,169 37.8% 62.2% 1992 6,530 2,264 95.9% 4.1% 4,266 54.9% 45.1% 1997 6,428 2,054 92.9% 7.1% 4,374 48.2% 51.8% 2003 6,426 2,737 90.5% 9.5% 3,689 51.6% 48.4% Kauai 2006 6,715 2,614 87.6% 12.4% 4,101 39.3% 60.7% 2011 6,339 1,700 61.3% 38.7% 4,521 20.9% 79.1% 2016 6,750 2,670 70.1% 29.9% 4,077 35.2% 64.8% 2019 4,946 2,088 75.4% 24.6% 2,858 31.7% 68.3% 1992 163,664 47,239 90.4% 9.6% 116,425 37.2% 62.8% 1997 167,343 60,533 88.6% 11.4% 106,810 44.9% 55.1% 2003 154,129 58,689 87.6% 12.4% 95,440 55.1% 44.9% State 2006 149,044 50,934 89.0% 11.0% 98,110 54.3% 45.7% 2011 138,116 46,595 72.9% 27.1% 91,079 26.8% 73.2% 2016 187,687 81,889 73.8% 26.2% 103,997 31.4% 68.6% 2019 141,765 60,947 78.1% 21.9% 80,818 33.0% 67.0% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Base for Effective Demand is households who plan to move, have some idea when they will move, and plan to stay in the State of Hawai'i when they move Base for Current Owners is 60,947 households included in 141,765 Total Will Move households that own their current residence. Base for Current Renters is 80,818 households included in 141,765 Total Will Move households that currently rent their unit or occupy without paying cash rent. a The total number of mover households differs from Table A-12 because those who plan to move out of state are excluded from effective demand counts. Total Current Owners and Total Current Renters do not sum to Total Will Move because those households that refused to provide their current tenancy were excluded from the analysis. b Includes households that plan to rent or are not sure about their next tenancy. C Includes households that currently rent or occupy without payment of cash rent. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 109 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-15. Preferred Unit Type, Buyers, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Preferred Unit Type Total Will Move Single No County Year Buyersa Family Townhouse Condo Apartment Other Preference 1992 60,724 73.9% 14.3% 8.7% 1.1% 0.0% 2.0% 1997 76,663 78.7% 4.2% 12.7% 0.2% 1.3% 2.9% 2003 75,482 78.6% 5.1% 6.8% 1.8% 1.3% 6.4% Honolulu 2006 65,495 69.7% 7.5% 12.7% 1.0% 1.3% 8.6% 2011 40,483 61.0% 7.2% 26.7% 0.0% 2.0% 3.1% 2016 64,168 57.9% 6.2% 21.9% 6.1% 0.2% 7.6% 2019 47,643 55.9% 6.7% 23.8% 5.3% 1.0% 7.2% 1992 8,328 89.7% 2.5% 5.3% 0.6% 1.9% 0.0% 1997 10,051 87.1% 2.2% 8.0% 0.8% 0.0% 1.9% 2003 10,586 85.0% 1.2% 7.4% 1.6% 0.1% 4.7% Maui 2006 12,539 85.6% 2.7% 7.6% 0.0% 0.4% 3.7% 2011 7,156 83.0% 5.7% 9.7% 0.0% 0.4% 1.2% 2016 9,172 80.1% 3.6% 9.7% 1.2% 1.9% 3.3% P 2019 8,417 84.6% 2.5% 9.4% 0.6% 1.1% 1.9% L 1992 12,441 91.8% 3.3% 2.2% 1.0% 0.8% 0.9% A N 1997 10,794 91.7% 1.9% 4.8% 0.2% 0.2% 1.1% 2003 13,402 91.4% 1.8% 2.1% 0.5% 0.2% 4.0% T Hawaii 2006 15,940 84.2% 4.4% 4.9% 0.0% 2.1% 4.4% O 2011 8,711 87.3% 4.0% 5.9% 0.0% 1.0% 1.8% 2016 11,407 80.3% 0.3% 8.0% 0.3% 1.1% 10.0% B 2019 9,986 83.4% 2.6% 8.4% 0.6% 1.3% 3.6% U Y 1992 4,513 95.1% 1.1% 2.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% 1997 4,016 91.0% 4.1% 4.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2003 4,381 86.9% 3.8% 5.8% 0.0% 1.7% 1.8% Kauai 2006 3,879 79.0% 5.3% 8.2% 0.0% 1.3% 6.1% 2011 2,046 81.8% 4.4% 8.3% 0.0% 2.8% 2.6% 2016 3,040 86.7% 1.7% 7.5% 3.4% 0.7% 2019 2,253 78.1% 6.0% 7.5% 0.7% 2.7% 5.0% 1992 86,006 79.2% 10.9% 7.1% 1.0% 0.1% 1.7% 1997 101,524 81.4% 3.8% 11.0% 0.3% 1.0% 2.5% 2003 103,851 81.3% 4.3% 6.2% 1.5% 1.0% 5.7% State 2006 97,853 74.5% 6.3% 10.6% 1.0% 1.3% 7.2% 2011 58,395 68.3% 6.5% 20.9% 0.0% 1.7% 2.6% 2016 87,787 64.1% 5.0% 18.3% 4.8% 0.5% 7.2% 2019 68,300 64.2% 5.6% 19.2% 3.9% 1.1% 6.0% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 a Total Will Move is effective demand households (plan to move, have some idea when they will move, and plan to stay in the State when they move)that want to buy their next unit rather than rent. Note. Sum of county figures may not equal the State total due to rounding. b Single Family is a single-family detached dwelling unit. C Townhouse is a side by side housing unit that does not meet the definition of single-family. d Condo is an apartment building with five units or more in which each owner owns a unit and holds a joint ownership in common areas with other owners in the building. eApartment contains residential suites in which each individual unit is leased to different occupants. f Other includes type of units that are not Single Family, Townhouse, Condo, and apartment Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 110 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-16. Preferred Unit Type, Renters, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Total Will Preferred Unit Type Move Single No County Year Rentersa Family Townhouse Condo Apartment Other Preference 1992 67,086 64.3% 3.9% 12.5% 13.6% 0.6% 5.1% 1997 52,128 50.8% 8.3% 11.4% 19.3% 1.1% 9.1% 2003 38,156 56.0% 9.1% 4.1% 21.1% 2.9% 6.8% Honolulu 2006 40,585 41.3% 10.7% 8.3% 28.8% 2.8% 8.2% 2011 46,396 34.5% 4.3% 13.8% 44.2% 2.0% 1.2% 2016 67,065 26.3% 4.7% 12.4% 30.9% 0.9% 24.8% 2019 50,218 39.1% 6.7% 14.4% 16.6% 3.1% 20.0% 1992 4,956 82.1% 3.8% 6.3% 4.1% 3.7% 0.0% 1997 6,188 60.3% 3.9% 14.0% 17.6% 2.0% 2.2% 2003 5,007 77.9% 6.7% 4.7% 7.2% 1.8% 1.7% Maui 2006 7,265 65.1% 0.8% 11.4% 14.1% 0.5% 8.0% 2011 7,751 57.3% 7.8% 5.0% 14.8% 5.4% 9.7% P 2016 9,178 52.4% 3.3% 6.8% 18.1% 5.1% 14.3% L 2019 7,963 60.3% 3.3% 10.7% 7.8% 4.6% 13.2% A 1992 3,563 80.1% 5.4% 4.7% 4.7% 0.0% 5.1% N 1997 5,090 65.3% 4.1% 4.7% 16.4% 3.4% 6.1% 2003 5,069 69.9% 1.3% 5.0% 18.1% 3.4% 2.3% 0 Hawaii 2006 7,659 61.6% 4.5% 7.7% 15.8% 5.4% 5.0% 2011 6,294 74.1% 4.8% 2.8% 11.7% 1.8% 4.8% R 2016 10,410 48.8% 0.9% 5.0% 16.6% 6.8% 21.8% E 2019 11,402 65.2% 3.2% 4.4% 10.7% 3.3% 13.1% N 1992 2,017 84.4% 3.6% 8.1% 0.8% 3.2% 0.0% T 1997 2,412 79.3% 2.3% 1.1% 5.3% 2.3% 9.7% 2003 2,045 77.3% 0.0% 1.7% 12.9% 0.0% 8.1% Kauai 2006 3,177 64.4% 2.0% 9.8% 10.9% 5.7% 7.1% 2011 3,525 66.5% 1.8% 11.9% 10.6% 3.9% 5.3% 2016 3,179 65.1% 1.5% 4.4% 15.6% 0.9% 12.4% 2019 2,305 62.5% 3.7% 4.3% 10.0% 3.5% 15.9% 1992 77,622 66.7% 4.0% 11.6% 12.3% 0.8% 4.6% 1997 65,818 53.9% 7.3% 10.8% 18.4% 1.4% 8.2% 2003 50,277 60.4% 7.7% 10.8% 19.1% 2.7% 5.9% State 2006 58,686 48.1% 8.2% 10.8% 24.3% 3.0% 7.7% 2011 63,697 42.9% 4.6% 11.6% 35.6% 2.5% 2.8% 2016 89,832 33.0% 4.0% 10.7% 27.4% 2.0% 23.0% 2019 71,888 45.5% 5.8% 12.4% 14.7% 3.3% 18.3% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 a Total Will Move is effective demand households (plan to move, have some idea when they will move, and plan to stay in the State when they move)that want to rent their next unit rather than buy. Note. Sum of county figures may not equal the State total due to rounding. b Single Family is a single-family detached dwelling unit. C Townhouse is a side by side housing unit that does not meet the definition of single-family. d Condo is an apartment building with five units or more in which each owner owns a unit and holds a joint ownership in common areas with other owners in the building. eApartment contains residential suites in which each individual unit is leased to different occupants. f Other includes type of units that are not Single Family, Townhouse, Condo, and apartment. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 111 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-17. Preferred Number of Bedrooms, Buyers, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Total Will Preferred Number of Bedrooms Move No County Year Buyersa Studio or One Two Three Four or More Preference 1992 60,724 2.9% 30.5% 43.3% 23.3% 0.0% 1997 76,663 1.4% 17.6% 49.1% 31.0% 0.8% 2003 75,482 3.9% 22.3% 46.7% 25.5% 1.6% Honolulu 2006 65,495 0.1% 15.1% 41.6% 39.0% 4.2% 2011 40,483 4.5% 23.6% 37.8% 34.1% 0.0% 2016 64,168 3.0% 33.4% 41.0% 22.5% 0.1% 2019 47,643 5.3% 26.7% 43.4% 24.5% 0.4% 1992 8,328 0.4% 27.5% 56.9% 15.2% 0.0% 1997 10,051 6.4% 19.7% 44.5% 28.1% 1.2% 2003 10,586 4.1% 21.8% 37.7% 36.0% 0.4% Maui 2006 12,539 1.7% 19.9% 46.0% 31.7% 0.7% 2011 7,156 1.1% 20.2% 49.1% 29.3% 0.4% 2016 9,172 1.3% 18.1% 56.1% 23.6% 0.9% P 2019 8,417 1.4% 22.6% 45.8% 29.0% 1.2% L 1992 12,441 1.1% 25.4% 55.9% 17.3% 0.3% A N 1997 10,794 6.2% 22.7% 40.3% 29.0% 1.7% 2003 13,402 4.0% 18.4% 45.9% 31.7% 0.0% T Hawaii 2006 15,940 3.1% 17.1% 41.2% 35.4% 3.3% O 2011 8,711 9.5% 29.7% 34.5% 25.3% 1.1% 2016 11,407 1.3% 22.8% 61.6% 14.3% 0.0% B 2019 9,986 6.0% 24.2% 51.6% 18.2% 0.0% U Y 1992 4,513 0.7% 29.3% 48.3% 21.7% 0.0% 1997 4,016 1.6% 21.9% 51.6% 24.9% 0.0% 2003 4,381 5.0% 19.5% 37.6% 37.5% 0.4% Kauai 2006 3,879 0.8% 18.5% 46.3% 34.1% 0.3% 2011 2,046 1.2% 16.5% 49.1% 33.2% 0.0% 2016 3,040 5.1% 20.5% 53.7% 20.7% 0.0% 2019 2,253 8.0% 25.4% 47.6% 19.0% 0.0% 1992 86,006 2.3% 29.4% 46.7% 21.6% 0.1% 1997 101,524 2.5% 18.5% 47.8% 30.3% 0.9% 2003 103,851 4.0% 21.6% 45.2% 28.0% 1.2% State 2006 97,853 0.8% 16.2% 42.3% 37.3% 3.5% 2011 58,395 4.7% 23.8% 39.1% 32.1% 0.2% 2016 87,787 2.7% 30.0% 45.7% 21.5% 0.1% 2019 68,300 5.0% 25.8% 45.0% 24.0% 0.1% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 112 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-18. Preferred Number of Bedrooms, Renters, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Total Will Preferred Number of Bedrooms Move County Year Rentersa Studio or One Two Three Four or More No Preference 1992 67,086 15.2% 40.0% 35.3% 9.5% 0.0% 1997 52,128 7.3% 40.2% 32.4% 19.7% 0.4% 2003 38,156 17.7% 40.6% 28.0% 12.4% 1.3% Honolulu 2006 40,585 11.8% 35.1% 33.4% 16.3% 3.5% 2011 46,396 21.2% 42.8% 29.9% 5.7% 0.4% 2016 67,065 17.4% 35.9% 34.9% 11.4% 0.4% 2019 50,218 20.4% 40.8% 25.3% 13.0% 0.4% 1992 4,956 6.4% 41.0% 49.0% 1.0% 2.6% 1997 6,188 17.9% 34.3% 34.8% 12.7% 0.2% 2003 5,007 9.1% 37.4% 34.0% 18.1% 1.4% Maui 2006 7,265 7.5% 43.7% 35.9% 11.9% 1.0% 2011 7,751 11.6% 47.3% 34.8% 6.3% 0.0% 2016 9,178 11.2% 41.9% 36.9% 8.9% 1.2% P 2019 7,963 11.2% 43.8% 30.5% 13.4% 1.1% L 1992 3,563 5.1% 43.9% 38.7% 12.3% 0.0% A N 1997 5,090 10.7% 31.7% 40.1% 16.8% 0.6% 2003 5,069 18.0% 35.9% 37.5% 8.6% 0.0% T Hawaii 2006 7,659 9.3% 31.6% 41.2% 16.6% 1.3% O 2011 6,294 7.6% 37.6% 34.7% 20.1% 0.0% R 2016 10,410 13.3% 37.5% 35.0% 14.3% 0.0% E 2019 11,402 22.0% 40.4% 27.8% 8.7% 1.1% N 1992 2,017 0.8% 38.1% 47.8% 13.3% 0.0% T 1997 2,412 4.6% 14.7% 63.8% 14.3% 2.6% 2003 2,045 17.8% 23.7% 44.3% 11.7% 2.5% Kauai 2006 3,177 7.3% 33.3% 41.7% 17.1% 0.5% 2011 3,525 12.9% 44.6% 31.9% 8.6% 2.1% 2016 3,179 14.5% 34.7% 39.8% 10.1% 0.9% 2019 2,305 3.7% 37.7% 41.4% 17.2% 0.0% 1992 77,622 13.8% 40.2% 36.6% 9.2% 0.2% 1997 65,818 8.5% 38.0% 34.4% 18.6% 0.5% 2003 50,277 17.7% 40.6% 28.0% 12.4% 1.3% State 2006 58,686 10.7% 35.6% 35.1% 15.8% 2.7% 2011 63,697 18.3% 42.9% 31.0% 7.4% 0.4% 2016 89,832 16.2% 36.7% 35.3% 11.4% 0.4% 2019 71,888 19.0% 41.0% 26.9% 12.6% 0.5% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016, and 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 113 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-19. Affordable Housing Cost for New Units, Buyers, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Total Will Affordable Monthly Housing Costa Move Less than $200 to $500 to $800 to $1,100 to $1,400 to $1,700 to $2,000 to More than County Year Buyersb $200 $499 $799 $1,099 $1,399 $1,699 $1,999 $3,000 $3,000 1992 60,724 0.9% 1.1% 14.7% 29.9% 10.7% 22.0% 7.7% 5.9% 7.2% 1997 76,663 0.0% 0.6% 9.3% 21.7% 18.4% 20.7% 11.6% 14.2% 3.4% 2003 75,482 2.4% 1.3% 4.5% 14.1% 15.5% 17.3% 19.4% 19.1% 6.5% Honolulu 2006 65,495 1.8% 3.9% 6.7% 9.3% 9.2% 12.0% 6.0% 21.5% 13.3% 2011 40,483 0.1% 0.8% 3.1% 7.0% 9.0% 4.3% 8.8% 27.4% 39.5% 2016 64,168 1.5% 2.5% 5.1% 9.8% 13.5% 14.9% 31.5% 13.0% 8.2% 2019 47,643 1.8% 3.8% 4.9% 7.1% 10.4% 10.4% 27.1% 19.1% 15.5% 1992 8,328 3.1% 5.5% 36.5% 23.6% 12.7% 8.4% 4.7% 4.0% 1.5% 1997 10,051 1.1% 6.2% 20.5% 30.8% 13.5% 14.6% 5.4% 6.3% 1.6% 2003 10,586 1.8% 5.9% 11.9% 26.8% 13.4% 12.7% 9.6% 12.1% 5.8% Maui 2006 12,539 2.0% 2.5% 4.3% 7.9% 9.3% 13.8% 8.7% 28.8% 12.4% 2011 7,156 0.0% 0.2% 0.6% 7.7% 5.8% 19.1% 5.3% 32.7% 28.8% 2016 9,172 1.6% 3.0% 5.2% 9.7% 17.9% 8.3% 31.5% 14.0% 8.8% p 2019 8,417 2.7% 2.1% 3.1% 4.5% 9.2% 9.8% 39.4% 17.2% 12.1% 1992 12,441 0.9% 3.4% 17.6% 31.0% 22.8% 11.3% 4.9% 5.0% 3.2% a 1997 10,794 0.9% 3.1% 9.6% 25.0% 12.6% 26.0% 9.6% 10.7% 2.5% n 2003 13,402 1.3% 1.7% 7.2% 16.9% 15.2% 15.6% 20.5% 13.8% 7.9% Hawai'i 2006 15,940 1.4% 3.2% 6.3% 17.8% 8.2% 12.8% 2.3% 18.6% 10.7% 2011 8,711 1.7% 1.6% 6.8% 10.5% 11.2% 18.3% 6.0% 22.2% 21.6% 2016 11,407 5.4% 13.9% 9.1% 17.2% 16.7% 7.5% 21.7% 5.2% 3.2% B 2019 9,986 4.1% 15.1% 11.5% 13.3% 18.1% 8.6% 18.9% 7.2% 3.3% u 1992 4,513 0.0% 1.6% 14.5% 31.3% 23.6% 14.7% 8.5% 4.6% 1.2% 1997 4,016 1.0% 4.5% 13.1% 28.0% 17.2% 16.6% 9.6% 7.5% 2.4% 2003 4,381 1.5% 1.2% 5.7% 21.3% 15.8% 22.3% 14.4% 12.6% 5.2% Kauai 2006 3,879 1.4% 2.4% 3.6% 12.9% 12.4% 12.9% 5.4% 20.1% 13.5% 2011 2,046 2.3% 6.3% 2.1% 11.7% 4.8% 14.7% 9.4% 24.0% 24.8% 2016 3,040 4.9% 3.6% 9.3% 11.6% 14.5% 10.0% 34.6% 4.6% 6.9% 2019 2,253 7.4% 7.6% 2.6% 7.1% 10.5% 11.2% 31.2% 18.3% 4.0% 1992 86,006 1.0% 1.9% 17.2% 29.5% 13.4% 18.7% 7.0% 5.5% 5.7% 1997 101,524 0.3% 1.6% 10.6% 23.2% 17.3% 20.5% 10.7% 12.8% 3.1% 2003 103,851 2.1% 1.8% 5.6% 16.0% 15.3% 16.8% 18.3% 17.4% 6.5% State 2006 97,853 1.8% 3.5% 6.2% 10.5% 9.2% 12.4% 5.8% 21.9% 12.8% 2011 58,395 0.4% 1.0% 3.3% 7.8% 8.8% 8.7% 7.9% 27.1% 34.9% 2016 87,787 2.1% 4.1% 5.8% 10.9% 14.4% 13.0% 30.3% 11.7% 7.6% 2019 68,300 2.5% 5.3% 5.6% 7.7% 11.3% 10.1% 27.5% 17.1% 13.0% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 a Based on self-report from respondents regarding the level of monthly payment they would be able to afford. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 114 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-20. Affordable Housing Cost for New Units, Renters, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 Total Will Affordable Monthly Housing Costa Move Less than $200 to $500 to $800 to $1,100 to $1,400 to $1,700 to $2,000 to More than County Year Rentersa $200 $499 $799 $1,099 $1,399 $1,699 $1,999 $3,000 $3,000 1992 67,086 1.5% 2.8% 29.6% 35.1% 16.3% 9.6% 2.8% 2.3% 0.0% 1997 52,128 2.0% 7.5% 26.1% 31.6% 16.7% 10.6% 3.1% 2.4% 0.0% 2003 38,156 4.4% 10.2% 19.0% 24.9% 11.4% 11.4% 10.3% 5.2% 3.2% Honolulu 2006 40,585 0.0% 7.8% 13.6% 21.1% 13.3% 9.5% 8.8% 6.7% 5.0% 2011 46,396 0.0% 2.2% 14.6% 22.5% 18.7% 12.2% 6.6% 18.5% 4.7% 2016 67,065 3.3% 5.0% 8.7% 21.9% 12.2% 13.2% 8.9% 20.2% 6.7% 2019 50,218 6.2% 4.0% 10.5% 16.8% 12.4% 15.7% 14.0% 16.3% 4.1% 1992 4,956 0.9% 7.6% 53.2% 29.2% 6.8% 2.2% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1997 6,188 4.6% 18.7% 41.7% 21.8% 5.1% 4.5% 1.8% 1.9% 0.0% 2003 5,007 8.0% 11.0% 38.6% 22.2% 9.0% 8.0% 0.0% 1.7% 1.5% Maui 2006 7,265 0.0% 10.2% 12.9% 19.9% 12.5% 17.3% 5.2% 9.1% 3.6% 2011 7,751 3.1% 5.2% 8.1% 30.8% 14.3% 18.9% 8.6% 7.2% 3.9% P 2016 9,178 4.3% 4.6% 13.7% 16.0% 17.3% 17.7% 6.3% 16.9% 3.3% i 2019 7,963 4.0% 5.4% 5.9% 10.1% 21.5% 21.1% 9.1% 18.0% 4.9% a 1992 3,563 0.1% 6.6% 23.8% 32.4% 25.2% 9.7% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0% n 1997 5,090 6.0% 15.5% 26.5% 31.6% 15.3% 2.9% 0.6% 1.7% 0.0% 2003 5,069 7.8% 5.3% 17.7% 33.2% 10.0% 11.2% 3.8% 11.0% 0.0% t Hawai'i 2006 7,659 0.0% 18.3% 16.5% 19.1% 10.7% 9.9% 5.8% 8.6% 1.6% O 2011 6,294 4.8% 10.5% 21.0% 22.9% 8.1% 8.8% 12.5% 7.6% 3.8% R 2016 10,410 12.3% 8.5% 22.1% 24.4% 5.4% 8.1% 6.0% 10.3% 2.8% e 2019 11,402 8.7% 10.4% 15.7% 25.8% 15.2% 10.5% 3.9% 8.8% 1.1% n 1992 2,017 1.0% 8.2% 30.3% 21.4% 22.2% 17.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% t 1997 2,412 6.7% 16.2% 43.0% 24.3% 4.4% 3.7% 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 2003 2,045 4.2% 2.2% 13.8% 34.9% 15.7% 15.0% 2.5% 11.7% 0.0% Kaua'i 2006 3,177 0.0% 9.1% 5.2% 17.7% 15.3% 25.0% 4.5% 7.1% 4.9% 2011 3,525 3.4% 5.3% 8.1% 14.9% 15.7% 16.7% 7.1% 25.9% 2.9% 2016 3,179 6.6% 2.4% 10.9% 20.9% 12.2% 17.6% 9.2% 11.3% 8.9% 2019 2,305 0.9% 5.5% 1.4% 16.6% 14.3% 28.3% 6.8% 11.6% 14.7% 1992 77,622 1.4% 3.4% 30.8% 34.2% 16.3% 9.3% 2.5% 2.0% 0.0% 1997 65,818 2.7% 9.5% 28.2% 30.4% 15.0% 9.2% 2.7% 2.2% 0.0% 2003 50,277 5.1% 9.5% 20.6% 25.9% 11.2% 11.2% 8.3% 5.7% 2.6% State 2006 58,686 0.0% 9.5% 13.4% 20.5% 13.0% 11.4% 7.8% 7.2% 4.4% 2011 63,697 1.3% 3.8% 14.1% 23.2% 16.6% 13.0% 7.6% 16.1% 4.3% 2016 89,832 4.6% 5.3% 10.9% 21.4% 12.0% 13.4% 8.3% 18.3% 5.9% 2019 71,888 6.1% 5.1% 10.3% 17.2% 14.0% 16.1% 11.8% 15.3% 4.2% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 1992, 1997, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2016 and 2019 a Based on self-report from respondents regarding the level of monthly payment they would be able to afford. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 115 ©SMS December,2019 Table A-21. Preferred Location of New Housing Unit, 2019 County of Residence Honolulu Maui Hawaii Kauai State Preferred Next Location Count Pct. Count Pct. Count Pct. Count Pct. Count Pct. HONOLULU PUC 34,449 44.4% 305 2.1% 846 5.1% 117 3.2% 35,717 29.1% Central O'ahu 15,593 20.1% 195 1.4% 166 1.0% 15,954 13.0% East Honolulu 6,901 8.9% 64 0.5% 6,965 5.7% Leeward O'ahu 9,402 12.1% 369 2.6% 401 2.4% 13 0.4% 10,185 8.3% Windward O'ahu 7,964 10.3% 46 0.3% 208 1.3% 8,218 6.7% O'ahu , any 147 0.2% 82 0.6% 229 0.2% HAWAII South Kona-Ka'u 25 0.0% 141 1.0% 318 1.9% 48 1.3% 532 0.4% Puna 367 0.5% 40 0.3% 1,206 7.2% 1,613 1.3% North & South Hilo 453 0.6% 327 2.3% 5,226 31.4% 33 0.9% 6,039 4.9% North Hawai'i 107 0.1% 2,780 16.7% 2,887 2.4% North Kona 921 1.2% 4,844 29.1% 148 4.1% 5,913 4.8% Waimea(Hawai'i Island) 0 0.0% Hawai'i Island, any 201 1.2% 201 0.2% MAUI Hana 31 0.0% 115 0.8% 599 16.4% 745 0.6% Makawao-Pukalani-Kula 365 0.5% 3,564 25.1% 3,929 3.2% Wailuku-Kahului 83 0.1% 3,179 22.4% 69 0.4% 15 0.4% 3,346 2.7% Paia-Haiku 134 484 3.4% 59 0.4% 677 0.6% Kihei-Makena 207 0.3% 2,467 17.4% 65 0.4% 231 6.3% 2,970 2.4% West Maui 1,975 13.9% 214 5.9% 2,189 1.8% Molokai 50 120 0.8% 170 0.1% Lanai 22 0.2% 22 0.0% Maui, any 122 0.2% 716 5.0% 45 0.3% 883 0.7% KAUAI Waimea(Kaua'i) 38 1.0% 38 0.0% Koloa 71 0.4% 428 11.7% 499 0.4% Lihue 196 0.3% 665 18.2% 861 0.7% Kawaihau 115 0.7% 449 12.3% 564 0.5% Hanalei 492 13.5% 492 0.4% Kauai, any 19 0.1% 156 4.3% 175 0.1% Total 77,518 78.8% 14,212 81.6% 16,639 77.8% 3,647 78.3% 122,663 83.4% Total No Preference 20,807 21.2% 3,196 18.4% 4,745 22.2% 1,008 21.7% 24,500 16.6% Total Effective Demand Movers 98,325 100.0% 17,408 100.0% 21,384 100.0% 4,655 100.0% 147,163 100.0% Source: Housing Demand Survey, 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 116 ©SMS December,2019 APPENDIX B: DETAILED DATA WORKSHEETS Table B-1. Home Ownership Rates, 1990-2017 County Hawaii Honolulu Kauai Maui State 1990 61.1 52.6 58.6 57.5 53.9 1992 61.4 52.7 59.7 57.4 54.5 1997 63.8 54.2 61.2 57.4 56.1 1999 64.2 54.5 61.3 57.4 56.4 2000 64.5 54.6 61.4 57.4 56.5 2003 66.1 54.9 62.0 58.3 57.2 2004 66.9 57.2 62.9 58.5 59.0 2005 67.2 57.6 64.0 58.6 59.4 2006 67.2 58.9 65.2 61.4 60.7 2007 66.0 56.9 66.6 58.6 58.9 2008 64.8 57.5 63.7 57.8 58.9 2009 65.7 56.0 65.0 58.1 58.1 2010 66.2 57.6 65.0 58.8 59.3 2011 65.9 56.9 63.6 58.3 58.7 2012 65.1 56.4 62.9 58.1 58.2 2013 65.7 55.5 62.6 58.1 57.6 2014 65.8 54.9 62.7 57.3 57.1 2015 66.4 54.4 61.6 57.7 56.9 2016 66.6 55.0 63.3 58.3 57.5 2017 67.0 55.6 63.0 59.3 58.1 Sources: 1990 and 2000, U.S. Census; Honolulu 2003, 2004,ACS; Honolulu, Hawai'i, and Maui Counties from ACS, 2005;ACS 2007-2008 (3-yr Estimate),ACS 2009-2017 (5-yr Estimate)Table B25003; all other estimated by SMS Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 117 ©SMS December,2019 Table B-2.Vacancy Rates, by State: 1986 to 2018 Rental Rate Homeowner Rate U.S. I Hawaii U.S. I Hawaii 1986 7.7 5.7 1.6 0.8 1987 7.7 6.5 1.7 1.1 1988 7.7 6.3 1.6 0.4 1989 7.4 6.6 1.8 1 1990 7.2 6.6 1.7 0.8 1991 7.4 5.8 1.7 1.4 1992 7.4 5.8 1.5 2.5 1993 7.3 6.8 1.4 3 1994 7.4 7.4 1.5 2 1995 7.6 6.3 1.5 2 1996 7.8 6 1.6 1.4 1997 7.7 7.1 1.6 1.6 1998 7.9 6.9 1.7 1.3 1999 8.1 7.6 1.7 1.8 2000 8 5.3 1.6 0.9 2001 8.4 8.2 1.8 0.8 2002 8.9 7.3 1.7 0.9 2003 9.8 8.9 1.8 1.2 2004 10.2 9.7 1.7 1.3 2005 9.8 5.1 1.9 0.6 2006 9.7 5.5 2.4 1 2007 9.7 6.3 2.7 1.7 2008 10 7.2 2.8 1.7 2009 10.6 9.2 2.6 1.9 2010 10.2 8.1 2.6 1.9 2011 9.5 9.4 2.5 2.2 2012 8.7 10.2 2 2.3 2013 8.3 10.1 2 1.8 2014 7.6 8.3 1.9 1.6 2015 7.1 8.7 1.8 1.5 2016 6.9 10.6 1.7 1.4 2017 7.2 8.7 1.6 1.3 2018 6.9 8.5 1.5 1.7 Source: Homeownership and Vacancy Rate Survey, 1986-2018 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 118 ©SMS December,2019 0) 0) 0 N N Q) L..- Oa as a) d 4 >, (0 (0 (0 (0 'Q E c 7 -p • • as i Q E E 7 0 a) O 0 > a) a) C) 0 co LSC) CO N M coMN o -c •.• O C 3 = N ti O LO CC) M O LO O CO O v) ca O v) co 6) 6) 6) © — M M LC) co = = >, >s Q W CN CN CN Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) Cr) U, o v) a).c pc c o = co O (I) O Q- +J a3 v) -' O U U To 2 w w a0 a) O 7 c er as Cr) CO CN O O O CO O O o c M • w t M CN CO — LC) CO CN CO O i 3 CO CO CO U N O O us N Y O v U ) N N N N— N— N— N— N— N N— CO 4) _c (a . 0 0 Ce W a, o 2 _c 0) o L i� c m o (D L o Q c = 7 w C H R L _c 4 CO 0 L CO H) N ti O O O O 00 N -C >, To = D 2 I` O ti CN CN N- CO CO 0 o N O = 0 to CO CO O LC) - co co o N c � O 0 a) Q 00 CO LO CN 0) _ Ln . LO 0) E, N ) CO CO N- N- N- N- N- N- CO .— c) L L) 4 'C O N (3 L C' _ H Q ,- O Q Q c fn E a) U -c U L L = 0 -0 L c0 O u) a) CO(a a cc• M CO O Cr) Cr) LC) — CO CN CN - 7 Q U .F1O CO O LC) CN O M CO o L o c N— N— CN CO CO M LC) a) T o y r M cO 00 00 I` ti ti ti ti O > a) 000 CO as N N N N N N N N N — L co > (B , L • .j >, co - Q co `n (B -6 v) -0 _ a) v) -C .,.r COc C L O o a m N- O CO M M CO O N o o co 0: co as cu O CO LC) O LC) LC) \ in (n c o > . v Il N- 00 00 M M LO 00 N O - N ' a) c° > o 01 %77 N- O O N N CC) 00 O m o > CC O CO CO N- N- N- N- N- N- CO ~ O o N Q = N (3 ' I NN m = cu O •vi '' .— rum 7r- a) a) O c 0 co O N L V) z a) (B 07 ti 0_ >, = • ,6 > c 0 C CO I` co M .— O CN O N 0 U 2 c N O d m I` CO — If) N- O N- CO O o u) a ca as N O. O N LO ti N LO O LO o a) U '� O a _ I` N in I` O O O N L N al > _ o o •c o p v .N M LO LO lf') N 0 2, u) - = •(a as vi o vs > i cn •' a) I- -7," 75 O � N c � c---,.., o .- c as ._ 0, c O co 01 d .m N CO LC) O , CO LC) CO CO • ? c0) a) o ,- (a � co N ca p _ O Cr) CO — CO CO N Lf) o �n o ,- cV 0 V = N O O N ti O �f) O cB (a >+ M © .— .— - CN CN CN CO CO CN N '� o 0 C LO LO LO LO LO In In In In N a) = .-' O a) OLco 03 12 i •L .. 00 'E Q a) c ✓ co ,.(n_- Q) 7 In I c ca o 7 �_ M 7 a a) E ti N O (30 U O C rn M d� O r N M tD 1� w O U M(I) = 'y N in 65 m .� 0 N < _o C, 000000000 th 4 0:101%10) _0 _,_," 71- CO N N N N N N N N N .0 a) -cao -c - CO c :) C%.1 o 23 Ts N X O co y cC Cl) I- ' (n H o in cu a) .c .c = 0 Rim I .4o4 I �,.rg gm IT sn a _0 S`2 0• o E �� a Ir 0 I 1 1 1 1 A 1 E L _^nn d QQ yn • g Q x m S a J • . - 11Y yy J �'®m= WWWi i - E.-10— .4 • ! E7411s - - ' Ea 7.p r S L r tr} '.BI Z tz W y 3 v• "1 d g- a n l�Gvr ! e6 i 8 E— — — I� 0 2 o • DM- 0E2 rUomtm u CD m ..v =RR /hhi v . LL w a gpa g / . , it da m wch rfY '7 ' $ 9pm8 82421 ' z LL ec � c `" '.. tea 1' '1�$a N i € RE _ I 1 C g i a W Ai C E.y ,. Gill __ W i i _Eli # 073 0q, E ( � ww [. 1 s gpi ,. '2_ .52 st� f t fir A 2 ndi' _ k mCg o [11 114V N d O LU W O R V 0 G '" t - c w z � v=gmv.2 • "J�m V _ o m3 a t a E w a E ,cn — W U G gay .. 5 �' m N E fl �"6 w m.�� `o m ac$ o� n� - IF w x N a c E Qr % 9 - 1.L u c? ,,z,,- _4. s `+� c aE °� Eat. o$ cicaaf of -g- fl I '98S — m2t -7 ...E2a gX61 yme{ 2 . 10E8_1} Z Cl) ;IE laq4 I CA E@@E c W .• C CA P m 0 mID8 4" a ili' i d )( NW g t a =83 L Sa 6 �� CD LL .45 Z o ‹ _ W0- y OO�HM If uno uoissiwwoo ash puel a Cl)ia < = o a) N .- 07 ,- 0 C rnN g N d _a m upC015 y.w `u .1,1'.g —chdbl 0 3pp 11 .1S R$ g Z+ = o y t c 2 4 r g `M. S S-1,9-2,,, C - .::E _.. - F c l� s zL❑ r i C a 1 2 .R.—...z #, . . ? :; , ,,,,, w E i c . - c U t - g 9 - - iii .g651§ ggiPiOill. d11HHhi u v 1 N g � nab �ag '_ "a� O Z W a G c m " C7qR A V m A ; 0 L /. t lil e a 3 ;w n 4 m n r . . a a ' n m a!! fl gt. `� e wOCr Idiby iHh n dor " og 4 co g ES hO: - _ ,VEc` Ikk Ea 6 Uv� � _ _ . /, �fqt _ d "moo .1 8 U8pGu - tIP _ U a asapi m I itilijI i IHui ;IiUll b `_Q pd7'2QQQQQQ o Jr�sCC-cc E1yp pr I= O C a 1 1 9 5 ' O O d. : o G c ft U 4 N Q D _;. .,; ._1 .• .. IL r liiiig v76s � � Ven z 11gI._G_ ra e m £ E $ o n a R n . m vn L_i p p.v EE 8 "Sia c•:g i ;21;if 11 !b1124:1011 il J co E c m�z z3 " ( c5m, ■AIBfi : k _ — eCG gni I __'6.t10. Y8!U S �".:v8 0) n ci 14q� Flat N F- 3._ E `o_ `a_ U Y E V M p 7 L4 � ' ° � r� a4Egcgy5 U) 4_1_, iiilhimh f O cci - ," Igiyii 14V? 13 W * d d I Oa' O0A1 kH = m 0 = 0 CV CO &/ CN a ± C,1 gE § 0 ! f H 7 { di. a2- k A fr 5 Al LA ƒ En- ] ! ir ... IE | . / a' )] E ) f !] z o !4 I m . . P § % ! fk $ !3 2 ;� } �� ' . . . g.3 E • ! i . . A A G. I E a ¥ La. . - \ !\ \ pJ z ) AI ifT CD i4N1 ra ! ! I ! / lam § 2 w _ \ ACi a � E / \ ) § 22 M 6) N O r O N CO O I.-- Via55CD m = a 0_ P a 0 p 02 a=' 7 2 K IE a g $ `2Q^ 8 N n n } S n i m 'a _ O mg m,2a q / .;.1 T i2F I 121278 �. ¢- 2-2 r E WE I /'/f u ¢a �" �`•' �i e..IV�l Sib 90 .( SW i L,'d pg0 5 111.2 - 1111 X } ' ,` W g g}g' E i F y. _ p T3 t[[ i m N a 20 sz lEtaa E c ma d o c m m s ?'c J , qn`ma"' up _ 2vEI o g W t U :ii.4-4p �, .. � — E m 4 _ 4 r8 a aLt -8V- .-I2-EE � �c - PIF° 5W \ E $s y cnO 0_ i W flU aop f m $ 2'� C .- a' I Wim ' �.� En � '�' -t ri3W5 geg3 m t•EC C 18E8 v .c8 . n '$§ Rat3 ; as cy e � a mL� � — go_fE d .2mm a3 4 • Oam � a) SUS c Z n O o rriouaH Ju Alunool pue Alli dlunvc,Pme1-{ _ as I 0 \ \ 0 c � |! © J ± E hp 0 !; & ■ ! �k [ i2 k 5 .....a I% / ° E \ & 1..g 1227 aE ' E k , o 0;1i 3 . (11 a� b I22 , s -! : M .,§ - a : 1.5§§]!3 § a , r2« 7_. .E3 ! a „ kk ' g ; ; ) kI L- U t...0 E!/{§/ . !I' § ) 1— ..E. - 2.E n« 2222k < § ^ \ \« «a z. j- . I m)I!B 111 |1 flj A ` § ,. f|2k §=!2 •� Z”- D I Z”- VI |f, ' tiI " I e - 1laa a \ o \ 2_ / I EfAk! - k IOW -! � iHI j2 _ \ i 8 $ 0 * !n ' o § § = 0 as Q Le cs)N O xi O N m (15 a) a n E a) O a) 0 1 J 6 ▪ i O 11 tr; 11 sv II g .112' 4 U � m L W C 0.1 mgt n _e 2c-41 SSS. d ,iiiro.51 a l a £E o a c) 5 3.. al m ,E Q L ?I= a 2 # ZS,c m „aa s ;_EI.,,— myc a m p S m E C7 C CA G libE2g 0 ISV2q12 IDk 22 m E n c c IC -1 $ - �f 5gE@= c ilia 1181 iti • Eige .... ......... * % O m O 47C n > wmo „ V4.' ? c p12m ter _ c� -� g 0 5 v �a � 3u dli 511LB Ia E may. c 3` y c as o L M dao• .. a gaw I z 0 Aluno3 !ene}i as I 0 CO N O N 241 D, CU 0) & m C E S N x 2 § aai 1 i . E S a - v E u N a nd Tm r0 C _ S0 O N. O V D H QO 2 u1 - 7 2 -mow_ m m p rJ a m . Emo- i "), E Eve E m '' ro§g 8 '5 ,, 8NTC a . m 0. 0�D p L1 N C 0 m V 9 8 N E 2 E ,1 YS g 4 2 g E 6 D .c m E c u cu EER 41 r o c N d= '' .g-2 v vZt t m c E'er' ug a RAJ 0 =-8-o t' O - gj ■N „ „ iIC E ° H m m U u N C ] g p § 5 gm- n R mC ra m=« t 7 oA ] p D D E 8v5mS E.� g1n :pECE g v Nm EE mn ' c,2 [ gS mai g Eyn CnB Ap a�w Nm2 2E _ _ ¢ &mc v aS30.c som@ ° NEu m9 g s T © c ,, 1 g � V . Nmm . s `p CV2p E CEap - LJ O vLasR C �!tJ P, m Cgw wg . gpg p § r Csi $ Ee 'RE Ts DNjv © E , Xgc� � ng'5' 2,)74 '2 opa` CC 8 Ng6-2 . E agm . i $ 8 5212 N tRz8sStm GES' ,0m2 E m b a LL O 0 N • vmLp a o . p 0, • o ri g m Uarr, - v g°3 i c € _cor, mE 4 a a D $ ° s 2 E P # 3'0E, m v E. m o tEf airy m a a ki5r- C � ° O5 ? ,i2 2 ' , Em Q $ owe ?22g% Egmi.p ° N L $,E ` a A Z I F© .26 2 -ttg9 coon = W. _ :z mos G9/1� �-a=� ver,WF © n Hnm - s $ y '� § $ d ' vgfiDes m o W 9 E E 7 9 ...-g131.›. 0 Q p y N N A U tl1 c'nEE a $ EEaaci mtj p 0) CSsS a) V ; m � 5 C „ . 2;g6. ... .... "4ay m. I 3 8 '1. . ..1:'m E m m o Q'd m li Z N N a T$' 8 zz E ' mS- 2 J k = ri^ Sitil m m g _ aom� m c. _ • m $3 a e E E : g A y m 5 6 � 01c'y�S�T7j�� p �`oZ �'�� o�51N� co� !gi�pp p` � O . � & a n S L N N E E C c_ m g G u. N = - = = = =22 C Y N 5 N N N N N N W N 11 E - E E E- - - OOH - E E E E E a E Ei 6 .t .i tS fY m 0 6 6 C7 N or y t m C C C C ma C C C D 8�YQ€fig° sa a) 1- i�faaci�ak EQaake'a- e.W.p� a Z od Q 0) C 0 O D uoissgwwo0 asn puel I co 3 m = 0 Table C-2. Projecting Housing Supply in Hawaii, 2020 through 2050 Projection Model for Housing Supply,State of Hawai'i,1990 through 2030 Regression with ARMA Errors Series:StateHU[,"TotaIHU"] Total Housing Units, State of Hawaii, IV:Resident Civilian Population 1990 to 2030 Regression with ARIMA(1,0,2)errors 600,000- Coefficients: aril mal ma2 xreg Coef. 0.9546 0.8729 0.6656 0.3699 s.e. 0.0526 0.1669 0.1872 0.0132 sigmaA2 estimated as 6935269: log likelihood=-270.25 AIC=550.5 AICc=553.11 BIC=557.34 550,000- z test of coefficients: Est.Std. Standard err. Estimate Error zvalue Pry>IzII C an 0.954632 0.052588 18.1531 <2.2e-16 *** mal 0.872886 0.166920 5.2294 1.7013-07 *** =500,000 level ma2 0.665565 0.187228 3.5548 0.0003782*** 80 xreg 0.398690 0.013200 28.0209 <2.2e-16 *** 0 95 Signif.codes: 0'***'0.001'**'0.01'*'0.05'.'0.1"1 0,, H Point Forecast Lo 80 Hi 80 Lo 95 Hi 95 450,000- 2019 549,062 545,687 552,437 543,900 554,224 2020 551,197 544,166 558,228 540,445 561,950 2021 551,957 541,205 562,709 535,514 568,400 2022 553,096 539,834 566,359 532,813 573,380 2023 554,417 539,223 569,610 531,180 577,653 2024 555,745 538,984 572,506 530,112 581,379 2025 556,955 538,884 575,026 529,318 584,592 400,000- 2026 557,980 538,792 577,167 528,635 587,324 2027 558,809 538,658 578,959 527,991 589,627 2028 559,478 538,488 580,469 527,376 591,580 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2029 560,054 538,326 581,781 526,825 593,283 Year 2030 560,610 538,233 582,988 526,386 594,834 Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 127 ©SMS December,2019 APPENDIX D: HOUSING AFFORDABILITY ESTIMATES AND RENTS Table D-1. Housing Affordability Estimates, 2019 State of Counties Hawaii Hawaii I Honolulu Kauai I Maui Housing Wage (for 2-bedroom FMR) 536.82 825.88 539.75 829.44 532.21 Housing Costs 2-bedroom fair market rent 81.914 51.346 82.067 51.531 51.675 Annual income needed to afford 2BR FMR 876.577 553.840 882.680 861.240 867.000 FT jobs at mini wage needed to afford 2BR 3.6 2.6 3.9 2.9 3.2 Area Median Income (AMI) Annual AMI 592.483 87.010 899.000 890.000 883.800 Monthly rent affordable at AMI 51.406 5999 51.483 51.345 51.355 3Q0 of AMI 827.745 321.030 829.700 527.000 325.140 Monthly rent affordable at 30% of AMI 5694 5526 5743 5675 5629 Renter Households Renter households (2010-2014) 190.880 22.112 138.209 8.350 22.158 % of total households (2010-2014) 42% 33% 44% 37% 41% Estimated hourly mean renter wage (2016) 516.68 513.24 317.65 514.79 514.99 Rent affordable with full-time job at mean 588 5689 5918 579 5780 renter wage Hours per week at mean renter wage 88 78 90 80 86 needed to afford 2BR Source. National Low-Income Housing Coalition"Out of Reach Report, 2019" Hawai'i data. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 128 ©SMS December,2019 0) 0) Y N l0 M N Cr CO N Ln CO 0 M N Q N V l0 a1 V Ln V a1 L 00 l0 N Q1 a N Q l0 l0 l0 l0 r, r, 00 al a1 a1 cn in a) c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i l0 cy Q) i — to to to to to to to to to to to c'I N d 4 E c-I CO Lf1 M Cr N a1 Cr CO c-I M V cc Crl0 N Ln COM CrV CO00 LCO00 COM COM 0 0Q m N N N V M M Ln l0 l0 l0 l0 V fV fV fV fV fV fV fV fV fV fV fV m O iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR -Lc). -Lc). ' I Ln N 00 O 00 M cy a1 a1 a1 lO lO N a 00 Lf1 lO 01 6.c. N 00 O M O V M o E ccm 00 00 00 00 Ql O O N N N N in i m c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I fV fV fV fV fV fV 00 cy c if in in in in in in in in in in Q Q— mN a1 cN-I V CO M a1 CO N N M a a Cr M V V V Ln Ln l0 N N N M r, N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- _ c-I M a1 O DM Lf1 N 00 V ON 00 a a CD mc-I 0 c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N M N N O c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N M ROin- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- 6 c N a�1 c1 V 00 N.M 0 0 0f in V N a LO 00 N l0 N N N CO a1 0 0 0 0 a1 0 U c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I f V f V f V f V 0 _ in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- iR c- c N Q 0) Q 00 V r1 M V l0 l0 Lf1 Lf1 M N cc l0 l0 0 Ln CO CO V l0 r1 l0 CO a a N m N N M M M V Lnl0 N m m 00 v ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry ry Lri r in in in in in in in in in in in ti 'E o N V a1 N m l0 00 N 00 N a cz ' Ln al r1 CO 00 l0 Ln l0 CO l0 CO a E m al CO al al al 0 c-I N N N N CO = O M c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I fV fV fV fV fV fV 00 O in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in O o ��,, U m m CO al al N al l0 Ill CO 1..n a CU m N V V V Lift loo l^O N co com000 M N CI) N f iR if) if) iiiiiiiif) N ^i V1 — E N cy Ln (f1 V c l0 l0 N O N O m acyl CO acyl N N m CO CO M 0 CO c'1 c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I fV ni in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in CD Ca p Ln CO CO M 0 V V N Cr N 0 a 1I L.L. CO CO 0 N N V N CO c-1 c-1 N a O N 00 00 al al al al O c N N N n cy V CD Q if) if) if) if) if) if) if) if) if) if) if) E M m in cr 00 O c^-1 Lf1 l0 -1-1 DM O 0 a a m Lf1 L-) L-) l0 l0 l0 N al 0 0 0 n c-1 Z Lf1 fV fV fV fV fV fV fV fV M M M N (Ti if) if) if) if) if) if) if) if) if) if) if) c-I 0A C Q = O Ln co l0 CO (N V co N O a LL T., m N DCf1 M M M M LNf1 lm0 N N N m 2 3v (-4 (-4 (-4 (-4 (-4 (-4 (-4 (-4 (-4 (-4 (-4 '71: v o in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. i . ca E M c-I N V c-I O l0 Lf1 N Ln 8 Q LL m al al al al al al 0 c-1 N N M CO L a) CO c-1 ,; ,; ,; ,; ,-i' fV fV fV fV fV N <0 co to -,-)_ -,-)_ -,-)_ -,-)_ -,-)_ -,-)_ -,-)_ -,-)_ -,-)_ -,-)_ -,-)_ —i6) C _ o N 0 CDN Cr 0 CO CO l0 c-I l0 V al al IJ N +"' m V V V I V Ln Ln 'M0 NN N N W 0 T N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-Iaj C Lfi 0 "ID .65 a) to to to to to to to to to to in N c 0 0) Nca m V -1 M 0 al c-1 V N N m 00 00 O O 00 00 O CV CV CV N M N CO Lo �a\1 N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I Lf1 0 CD in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- in- co d 2 CC rn c C N a) a) m CD 0 al 0 r1 N CO Cr Ln l0 N CO al 0A c 0 CI N 0 c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I C O C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M fI) m N 4i CD .c.% 00000000000 N N N N N N N N N N N L c-1 L l0 2 - Cr) >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- U c-1 U c I (is C o a o o m C#) H u) i O o rn .,, CO ti N in 0 N 0 CO v m v Q oo l0 in l0 rl l0 in 0 N 00 r1 a a Q CO N oo Q1 0 0 c-1 N N c-I N Q) O N rl rl rl rl N N N N N N N 00 p 0) Q VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT r1 f6 a n E rl 00 00 00 —1 0 01 N V) M Q1 a a V cc 0'1 00 N c-1 00 M V l0 00 Q1 N c-I M 0 m in V in N N 00 Ql Q1 Q1 00 Ql V N N N N N N N N N N N Li r1 in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. r1 C O M Q1 CO CO CO CO O c-1 I, V) E mN V) in 1 N N V) N V0 l0 a a i Cr) 0 N N m V in in V) V) V 00 it M N rl N N N N N N N fV fV N cy c0 ifT ifT ifT ifT ifT ifT ifT ifT ifT ifT ifT N Q Q— 00100 00 l0 Q1 N I-, 1`, 01 ‘..0 a a c-1 ' 1 Q1 l0 Q1 CO V (N N 0 0 l0 m l0 V) V) l0 l0 N 00 Ql Q1 Q1 Q1 N ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ri O ri i.r). i.r). i.r). i.r). i.r). i.r). i.r). i.r). i.r). i.r). i.r). cn 0 N CO N l0 l0 O I, l0 N CO l0 N cc r1 00 I", V) 00 Nin V V V) a cn m N 0 rl N (N CO CO CO V V V CO rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl Q1 V Otn. tn. tn. tn. tn. tn. tn. tn. tn. tn. tn. c'1 N 0 -0 in l0 V V M in 0 V in N 00 C CO 0 r1 r1 in r1 N N 00 l0 Q1 a a 0 O 00 0 0 0 r1 N N N N N CO v r r r rV rV rV rV rV rV rV C ri p — in in in in in in in in in in in C Q 0 = 0 N M Ln M N N to r1 N v a a cc M r1 N V) Q1 V) Q1 v l0 0 V) m to Ln m N N oo Q1 0 0 Q1 Q1 ' 0 O v NI- NI- NI- NI- NI- NI- NI- cri cri Ni Ni ' ni if if if if if if if if if if ii-). ti ++ E C = = 'E l0 r1 N V M 0'1 V) V 0'1 (N 00 a N 0 CO N N r1 N to Ln N M COa O 'E m r1 o r1 N M v in in in V) l0 0'1 C.) 0 CO N N N N N N N N N N N ON ry 1./1. t t t t t t t t t 10 C C 0- cu U r1 00 M M 00 N r1 V) 0'1 00 Cr N N l0 r1 l0 O M O Q1 r1 0 a a m l0 V) l0 N N 00 Q1 O Q1 O O .I O N c-i ri ri ri ri ri ri ry ri ry ry ON p V tn.in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. i (r) — E fn 00 N V) 00 V CO CO N CO 0'1 a cc m N M ti N 00 m 00 (N Ln 0') a O m NNM M M V V COV) V) V) CO O r r r r r r r r r r r m ri L VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT 1./1. 10 m Q c-1 M c-1 l0 l0 Q1 CO V) CM c-1 CO , Cr rl Cr CO CM V) 00 N N N Q1 a a O V) N N N N NM V V) l0 V) V) Q1 R — N N N N N N N N N N N CI: O I.. Q -UT -UT -UT -UT -UT -UT -UT -UT -UT -UT -UT Ja E 00 rl Q1 V) l0 rl Q1 N N N M a = mCO rl V) V) O l0 Q1 V M N l0 a 0 0 0 rl (N N CO in l0 in IJ col0 Z V) co- co- co- co- co co co co co co co Ln O iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR rl OA C Q = Q1 00 V O N O Q1 00 00 -1 O V) N Q1 00 .r-71. l0 V N l0 V V a a N m N N N 00 00 Ql r1 N N rl N V c 3 V N N N N N N M M M M M O C O iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR r1 C (6 V V) tso(N N l0 oo 00m V 0 CO LL cc N Q1 N V V) co 00 00 O l0 I 0 0 Q m CON COM M V in l0 N l0 l0D V .71- a.) N M N N N N N N N N N N N Ln O VJ C _ L V) Q CD O l0 00 00 0 l0 V) V) In 0 M N N co N Q1 Q1 M M Q1 00 in 0 00 rl 00 a a T — m N l0 l0 N N N CO Q1 0 0 0'1 M l0 - C N c-i ri ri ri ri ri ri ri ry ry ri 'flc-i 0O y -,-). -,-). -,-). -,-). -,-). -,-). -,-). -,-). -,-). -,-). -,-). N (n — 0) C CO m 0-10 COO 0 v Ln 1 M ® c RS V) r1 N in m 0 l0 m rl 0 N a 0 m M M M M m m V V V) V) V) 1p ) 1:3rl c-I rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl O E M y ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. r1 N d 0) E E M o°n o°n C o Q1 0 r1 N CO V V) l0 N 00 Q1 13 N 0 rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl rl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ai O N N N N N N N N N N N _C c-1 L l0U i ' Cl >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- U r1 r1 I6 C a ON a ON RS o N 0 H CO 1 O ,- a) Y Q1 N N t0 N CO c-I N t0 0 t0 aCO x- Q M N Q1 t0 c-I N V1 00 Cr CO a) a O Q 00 00 n n W 00 Q1 O c-i c-i c-i cJ N N N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N N N N a n E M tm0 N m Ln 000 0 0 Q0vr 1 a) LL0 a N m v v v m m v to 0o 0o 0o 00v V N N N N N N N N N N fV Vi Ni0 in in in in in in in in in in in vl N M 0 Cr N c-1 0 N Cr c'n 0 01 a cC NJ NJ 0 in N c-1 0 in 00 in N M ^ a N E m c-I c-I c-I o c-I m v Ln v it m N N N N N N N N N N N rri nnc in in in in in in in in in in in- o_ Q- cc 00 rn N ooi 0 rn trvo 00 v NJ a a m V1 V V V V1 V1 t0 N 00 Q1 Q1 `~ t0 N r c c c c c c c c c c N in in in in in in in in in in in N cc LmVI N CO000 CO 0 N M NJ 0 N Cr N Q1 VI a m N N c-I ' N N N M M M v ',._?)F; M c-I c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i O ci in in in in in in in in in in in 0 -0 c-I 00 N M V in c-I 00 in M c-I c Q1 UDMONJNCOMMMO a a 0 CO CO CO CO CO CO a) c-I N CO M V t0 cn tJ c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N N N N t0 G in in in in in in in in in in in Q a) o v m o1 co V1 M N M c c-I to C51 t0 V1 ti to m 00 0 m CO a a G m v v v M M M in N 01 0 01 N o V N N N N N N Ni Ni Ni m Ni Cn N 1n 1n 1n 1n 1n 1n 1n 1n 1n 1n 1n la .E ti oo to 00 0o m ti rn CO 0 . cc 00 co , CO N c-I V1 0 t0 M 00a E m c-I c-I c-I o c-I N CO V1 V1 to to 0 O M N N N N N N N N N N N 00 in in in in in in in in in in in >b. o C 0 cc cn v ON v cN VIVIooo rs) rvo CTCOrn a a m In In In In to to N 00 CPI CPI CO CPI N ri c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i N c-i cri Lri V in in in in in in in in in in in N to - Efn N 00 c 1 N Cn O M rn OM a a cc M o1 v N M t0 Q1 N N a) Cr O v O m M NJ NJ NJ NJ NJ NJ v V1 VI c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i c-i ((N OL in in in in in in in in in in in 10 d m 0 CPI M oo Ln oo N NJ to to Ln o0 LL m V M t0 0 c-I N 01 Cr t0 01 a a 4- N 0 0 0 Q1 Q1 Q1 0 c-I M 'Cr Cr n 00 O N N N c I c I c I N N N N N r ni L Q iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR E t0 V N 0 N V1 0 t0 0 V1 V1 a m Q1 N t0 N V t0 N CO 0 Q1 0 o N N CO N O t0 V1 V1 Q1 N M V Q1 Z V1 N N N N N N N N m m m NCI: VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT VT OA C Q = 09 V 09 l0 000 QVl1 N1 V 0 0 0 a a N Q1 0 u_ N m V Ln V M N N V N Q1 0 c-I t0 V 3 V2 V N N N N N N N N N m m O l0 T pp pp pp CQ cc Q�1 LMn O M N 00 D O o 0 Q LL c-1 0 0 0 0 Q1 V t0 N ^ t0 m 0 0 a) c-I M N m N N N N N V N N N N N ' '�'^ -VT -VT -VT -VT -VTiR -VT -VT -VT -VT -VT 0 0) VJ C _ L N Q O O cc N N N 0 c^-I 0 LNn V lmfl Q^1 N a a N N 4 m V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 V1 t0 N N 00 N ' 6) T N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I ' O �_ ,may iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR if). if). N (n = 00 V 0 V1 M N CO N V CO V 0 0) RS N t0 Q1 M Q1 0 N CO t0 t0 t0 o a CU E m N N N N ci N N N CO M M N 0 0) M 1:3c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I O c� iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR iR if). l0 CL C ct C) CC N t0 N 0") 7 LL 0 13 N 0 0 c-I cN'I cM-I cC-I V I c^-I CO Q51 13 ON 1 cc ON .c.% 00000000000 N _ 0 N N N N N N N N N N N L c-1 L t0 i Cf) } } } } } } } } } } } U c I U c I �ki C Ja CQ ° ON ° ON O N 0 I- CO I © N 6) y O O M CD 61 61 CO 61 N CO I`, o o CO O ti Q c-I 6) CO CO CO N M ul Lf) N Q M M M Lf1 CO CO Lf1 Lf) l0 l0 u; Q i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) c'I d _a - E a) 61 N I- N c-I CO Lf) N O M MU ci Lf) CO N l0 I- O r1 I- M Mx o o Cl) C0 CO CO CO 61 61 O N M N ci ci ul l0 0 c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N N N N N N N CO in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. N C▪ - a! CD n ci N M V) r... Lf1 ci Lf1 E 0[ O O Lf1 u'100 LCO 0 J CO I CO COOCO 01 0) co CO CO Lf) L V fp (11 ci ci x-I- x-I- x-I- x-I- x-I- x-I- x-I- x-I- x-I- chi n CL i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i). a M 61 M CD V) N 61 ci 61 V) 0 0 p[ I`, CO I`, V) CO M N V) ci CO m ci ci ci ci ci N M M 00 x-I N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c'I M i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) N C[ MO NCN/ N 61 m d- ci c^i W OM M o 0 C0 O 8 O O O O `� -(.0. i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) -17;? -(.0. -(.0. -(.0. -(.0.x4 x4 x4 x4 Lf1 ci O l0 61 CO O l0 61 V) 61 ci Cr CO o C Lf) CO Lf) M M N N Lf) I`, o 0 O ch ch 44 44 Lf1 l0 r... n CD Lf1 N. I`, N U c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I Co CO - i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) i/) cn J < 0 N O ci Cr I`, c1 l0 N N CO 61 ci o 0 N l p[ CO 0 61 N V) c-1 O CO <D O [0 CO 61 61 61 O ci M V M N c1 M (l E d- ci c-I c-I ,--i' N N N N N N N N O. m -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). N al C- c-1 M 61 M CO O I- Lf1 O o t Q K N'4 M CO 6) ci O 61 l0 cI M N. o <D co l0 l0 V) V) l0 l0 CO CO l0 V) Lf1 OM c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I r...: c-i _> O -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). -v). xi 0 Ch es1 Co0 Cr V) N U l.0 U I V V) o m N N N N N M Ch ul ul CO ul ooci N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N O N O m 0 0 0 61 61 0 0 ci 0 0 Cr CD L ci ci c-I c-I [./? [./? ci ci ci ci ci ci l0 <D -0 in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. m l0 61 61 I`, V) N CO M ci M 0• 0 N Cr l0 l0 V) ci O I`, N M ci o 0 N V) LI) V) V) V) l0 I-, I`, CO I. n O •71- L ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci M M y Q i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? c-1 J D E -. M 111 111 CO 111 I, 61 l0 ci 61 0 0 Z m Lf1 CO m I`, 61 CO M O Lf1 u 61 O O ci ci ci N Lf1 Lf1 M N Lf1 Cr Ln N N N N N N N N N N N I- CO i Le)JD LI. LI. LI. LI. LI. LI. LI. LI. LI. LI. LI. c'I C ci l0 CO O l0 M N ci O Lf1 o 0 LL K ci 4 CO (9.4 M n 4 l0 Lf1 2 3 m CO CO CO 61 61 O —I N N -1 —I I`, Lf) o ciciciciciNNNNNN CO 4 'a >, in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. in. ci c E f0 d- I`, CO O '4 I- 61 I- 61 111 c 1 Q LL p[ 61 61 I`, V 61 N 61 61 M CO O o 0 m LI) V) V) V) V) V) l0 I`, CO I`, Lf1 M M ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci I- O 6) 6) C t/) t/) t/) t/) t/) t/) t/) t/) t/) t/) t/) C) O N ON N 4- LP) M CO N M 01 N N Co ul O o5:. 61 61 V O 4-, Lf) CO O I`, ci m c-I ci N ,-i ,-i N Nm Co O N —1 O ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. i N (n IX 0) - = I`, c-1 M Lf) Lf) I`, Lf) O M O •- as K ci M M O n N d- I`, ci O O o o a) C m 0 0 0 0 ,L,9 0 0 c1 O O N 61 C M d ice/) ,I. ice/) ice/) t/? t/? ice/) ice/) ice/) ice/) ice/) N d ct CD C C Ili W LO nono C O Q v 61 O ci N M Lf) l0 I`, CO 61 C ON C ON I O ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci CV d co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t c� t vs N 0 N N N N N N N N N N N u ci u ci 2 (2 o N N O N o H co 2 © co O? ..4+ L.) L.) c1 N (.0 01 l0 O O L.) L.) Q lD CO ci Ol l0 N n u M ci M o ,`2,i; 0 Q Lf) Lf) l0 l0 I. n n CO CT CT Cr) Ol lD a) N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I 4 (D a ti? inv? v? v? v? v? v? v? v? v? d � — E a) l0i M IN Lf1 pp W I� 0l0 8 gi o0 c - N VCD c-I c-I c-I M ch ch M ch l0 l00 <D O �c\-I 0 ch N N N N N N N N N N N Lf1 Lry C- v N N O M O VD c-1 I. ch n CO E D[ O N l0 ch N lD CT l0 ci ch O o 0 co N. n n CO CT Cr) CT O ci c-I N Lf1 CO fp m ci x--i' x--i' x--i' x--i' x--i' x--i' N N N N I: l0 {l i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? c'I a N lD NNo O chN M U N U CO mM M V LNf1 L.f1 L�f1 U t..0 l^0 NN CO x-I-I N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I M N i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? ci l0 CO CT Lf1 ch n M N O lD O o 0 D[ l0 CO O ch n (..0n ch N M O [0 O O c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N M N N O Cr ci c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N Cr; 0 Qn -0 CO N )i l0 ci .40 Lf1 CO M CO o C O M N Ol Ol O Io M N ci o O O VD l (D 0 l0 n n n CO CO CT Cr) Ol l0 MI c- c- c- c- c- c- c- c- c- c- c- N i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? ci rn a 0 0 N M Lf1 Lf1 N M M I- I", CO Lf1 M D[ O N U O 0o N- chN O l0 Lf1 0 0 co c-I c-I c-I M V M M ch Lf1 l0 c-I is E .4 N N N N N N N N N N N N rj C— pp Y • E O LI N C CO � LNf) V Co M L1f1 0 0 O o m CO CO CO CO CT O O c-I c-I N N M73 M C c c c c c N N I� urj _> 0 L? L? L? L? L? L? L? L? L? L? L? c-I C 0 a O O l0 O co I- O Cr) M N M O K x--1x--1M ci ul I. CO N N CT N I. o 0 U co ch ch ch Lf1 Lf1 Lf1 ul l0 l0 I, lD N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N N i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? ci N _ E N n CO CO Lf1 N ul CO ch Cro 0 0 K cN-I c�-I c^-I N N N OM M N N Ol Ol CO L ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci c-I" O O d m ul 01 Cr) ch Cr) CO N M CT CT l0 O M d- CO n N CO CO CO u N n o 0 O M n n n co Cr) CO CO Cr) O O O N n L 4 y a v? v? v? v? v? v? v? v? v? v? v? c-1 .Q D[ l�0 U N.W (..0N CT CTN M M o 0 Z [0 Cr) M M ch Lf1 ch ch lD n n n O c-I Lf1 N N N N N N N N N N N O Lry 13 noC - O CO CO MN Ulu') N. N N O LL a! K i cci M u'1 d- O ci chchCO Ol o 0 C 3 C0 ci ci ci N m m m Lf1 Lf) Lf) Lf) C 0 ch N N N N N N N N N N N 4 Lrj 13 ? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? ci c E co N. Lf1 Q D[ O1 O lM0 n Lf1 ON O 0�1 CO CO O o 0 LL LL , co lD n n W Ol Ol Ol Ol O ci ci Lf1 M c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N N N M I� O) U) i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? ci O N (N CD ,F CO M N ci O ci N lD O1 N O1 >. 4-, mO M N. t..0 t..0 ch M 01 N N o o 6 T5 '4 '4 '4 Lf1 Lf1 Lf1 Lf1 u'1 l0 l0 l0 .4 c I 0 N c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-Inj ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. ,I. N Cn Ct ® 0) _ ch to Cr ch lD Lf) ch n O N O as K Ol m l0 ci M CO l0 Lu N CO l0 0 0 0) C 1:3m O ci c-1 N N ci ci N M N N Ol m C N ci -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I -I ri CJ d ca) i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? i/? C0) C - W cDD CT f O Q v Ol O ci N M ch 111 (.0 n CO CT c ON c ON = O ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d co O O O O O O O O O O O t ci t l0 N — Cn 0 N N N N N N N N N N es, u ci u ci i ,- 0 lC O m 0 I— co 2 © Table D-7. Median Sales Price for Single-Family and Condominium Dwellings by County, 2000-2017 State of Counties Hawaii Honolulu Hawaii I Kauai I Maui SINGLE FAMILY 2001 5268.950 5300.000 5187.750 5287.000 5297.500 2002 5310.000 5335.000 5193.500 5327.750 5375.000 2003 5360.000 5385.000 5235.000 5366.375 5440.000 21304 8440.000 865.000 8290.000 5498.925 5560.000 2005 5560.000 5590.000 5385.000 6639.000 3678000 2006 5599.133 5630.000 5421.250 5675.000 5690.000 2007 8595.000 8645.000 8395.000 5650.000 3630.137 2008 6560.000 6625.000 6345.000 5615.000 5575.000 2009 5497.750 5580.000 5278.800 5470.000 5498.106 2010 8487.000 8599.950 5260.000 8497.500 3450.000 2011 5470.000 5579.500 5248.450 5455.000 5432.000 2012 5500.000 5625.000 5260.000 5458.750 5470.000 2013 6545.000 6650.000 5295.000 6529.000 3530.000 2014 6575.000 6673.500 5315.000 6533.000 6570.000 2015 5600.000 5700.000 5328.750 5613.500 5580.000 2016 6632.500 6735.000 5330.000 5625.500 3639.000 2017 5660.000 5760.000 5350.000 5660.000 5695.000 2018 5689.000 5790.000 5360.000 5699.500 5710.000 CONDOMINIUM 2001 6145.000 6132.000 5139.500 5162.500 3197.000 2002 5165.000 5153.000 5165.500 5210.000 5207.000 2003 6185.000 6175.000 6185.000 5287.000 3241.000 20134 5230.000 5208.125 5275.000 5375.000 5310.000 2005 5299.000 5269.000 5369.500 5435.000 5385.000 2006 6339.000 6310.000 6426.498 6405.000 3510.000 2007 5350.000 5325.000 5394.900 5555.000 5550.000 2008 8347.750 5325.000 8370.000 8545.000 5549.500 2009 5319.000 5305.000 5276.550 5330.000 5450.000 2010 5310.000 5305.000 5260.000 5270.000 5377.500 2011 5290.000 5300.000 5212.500 5237.000 5310.000 2012 6317.500 6315.000 6257.750 5290.000 5358.000 2013 5333.000 5332.000 5250.000 5310.000 5374.000 2014 5351.000 5350.000 5280.000 5348.000 3415.000 2015 6363.000 6360.000 6275.000 6360.000 6410.000 2016 5390.000 5390.000 5300.000 5399.000 5415.000 2017 5409.000 5410.000 5312.000 5435.000 5445.000 2018 6430.000 5421.000 6350.000 6461.000 3500.000 Source: The State of Hawai'i Data Book Time Series,Table 21.36 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 134 ©SMS December,2019 APPENDIX E: CONSOLIDATED PLAN Table E-1. Comparison of HHPS 2016 and DBEDT Housing Demand 2015-2025 Support Build/Rehab Financial Other Assistance Assistance Home Ownership Construct/rehab for-sale Financial assistance to housing(1 housing unit) homebuyer(1 Self-help affordable housing(62 household) housing units) Low-Income Rentals Construct new rental units(11 Tenant-based Rental housing units) Assistance(TBRA)(100 Rehab rental unit(1 housing Households) unit) Homeless Rapid Rehousing Emergency shelter financial assistance(275 operations(8,800 persons households) assisted) Hawaii, Prevent homelessness Transitioning homeless to Kauai and financial assistance(150 permanent housing(1,830 Maui persons) persons) County167 Rapid Rehousing relocation &stabilization services(400 households) Prevent homelessness services(150 persons) Special Needs Construct new special needs HOPWA tenant rental Emergency shelter Housing rental units(25 housing units) assistance(75 operations to house victims Rehab special needs rental households) of DV(3,100 persons units(3 housing units) assisted) Rehab transitional housing units HOPWA supportive services (33 housing units) (2,400 persons assisted) Home Ownership Financial assistance to homebuyers(50 households) Housing rehab assistance(50 housing units) Low-Income Rentals Housing development(400 LMI services(50 persons) C&C households) Honolulu168 Homeless Housing First Housing(250 Homeless prevention Housing First Services(250 households) financial assistance(30 households) Renovate homeless shelters(5 persons) Homeless Services(3,750 shelters) persons) Special Needs Senior Services(50 Housing persons) Youth Services(50 persons) Domestic Violence Services (50 persons) Home Ownership 1 Affordable for-sale unit 51 financial assistance to 62 self-help affordable housing homebuyers units 50 housing rehab assistance Low-Income Rentals 12 rental housing units 100 Tenant-based 50 persons LMI services 400 Housing development Rental Assistance (TBRA)Households Statewide Homeless 250 households Housing First 275 Rapid Rehousing 11,900 persons Emergency 5 homeless shelters renovated households shelter operations 180 Prevent homeless 3,750 Homeless services households 1,830 persons and 650 households Transitioning to permanent housing services Special Needs 75 HOPWA TBRA 2,550 persons Other Housing households services 167 Based on State of Hawaii Consolidated Plan for Program Years 2015 through 2019(primarily focus on Hawai'i,Kauai and Maui Counties) 168 Based on City&County of Honolulu Consolidated Plan for Program Years 2015 through 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 135 ©SMS December,2019 Table E-2. State and Counties Consolidated Plan 2015 Annual Goals Support Build/Rehab Financial Other Assistance Assistance Home Ownership Construct new or Down payment/closing cost acquire/rehab of existing assistance and gap loans affordable for-sale through homebuyer loan housing(6 housing units) program(1 household) Self-help housing(8 housing units) Low-Income Rentals Construct/rehab Tenant-based rental affordable rental housing assistance(20 households) Hawaii, (10 housing units) Kauai and Homeless Construct/rehab new Rapid Rehousing—financial ES Operations(1,655 Maui transitional housing for assistance(580 persons) persons) 169 homeless(32 housing Homeless Prevention— Transitioning Homeless County units) financial assistance to to PH(580 persons) persons/families at risk of Rapid Rehousing— homelessness(30 persons) Housing relocation& stabilization services(78 Households) Special Needs Construct/rehab HOPWA—financial assistance DV ES Operations(620 Housing affordable rentals for through tenant-based rental persons) special needs population assistance(15 households) HOPWA Supportive —(36 housing units) Services(516 persons) Home Ownership Financial assistance to LMI homebuyers(10 housing units) Loan assistance for rehab existing homes(17 housing units) Low-Income Rentals Construct/rehab Services to at-risk of Services to benefit LMI C&C affordable and special homelessness(1,333 (185 persons) Honolulu170 needs rental housing(52 persons) housing units) Tenant-Based Rental Assistance homeless prevention(497 persons) Homeless Acquire/rehab building or Housing First Tenant-Based Homeless Services units to support Housing Rental Assistance(50 (2,348 persons) First households) Special Needs Tenant-Based Rental Housing Assistance(155 households) Home Ownership 6 affordable houses 1 housing unit down 8 self-help payment/closing cost assistance 10 housing units financial assistance to LMI 17 housing units loan assistance to rehab existing homes. Low Income Rentals 88 affordable rentals 517 persons tenant based Services(185 persons) rental assistance Statewide Homeless 32 transitional housing 835 persons Housing 4,613 persons and 78 First/Rapid Rehousing Rental households Homeless financial assistance Services 3,006 persons Transition services to permanent housing including Rapid Rehousing Special Needs 36 affordable rentals DV ES Operations(620 Housing 32 transitional housing persons) HOPWA Supportive Services(516 persons) 169 Based on the State of Hawaii Consolidated Plan for Program Years 2015 through 2019(primarily focusing on Hawai'i, Kauai and Maui Counties) 170 Based on City&County of Honolulu Consolidated Plan for Program Years 2015 through 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 136 ©SMS December,2019 APPENDIX F: MISCELLANEOUS DATA Table F-1. Federal Funding, 2015-2019 HUD Funding for Hawaii, 2015-2019 State of Hawai`i 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Rental Assistance Programs $ 187,275,780 $ 195,637,885 $ 207,123,724 $ 217,122,500 $ 215,655,241 Funding suited to construction $ 32,942,494 $ 24,476,070 $ 26,592,407 $ 32,297,804 $ 31,746,827 Funding For Homeless Programs $ 15,771,537 $ 13,972,758 $ 19,208,128 $ 20,499,109 $ 21,485,112 Training and Assistance $ 1,185,523 $ 714,961 $ 1,100,299 $ 1,031,118 $ 723,728 Operations & Administration $ 41,276,971 $ 41,807,662 $ 43,513,671 $ 49,497,389 $ 48,724,982 Total $ 278,452,305 $ 276,609,336 $ 297,538,229 $ 320,447,920 $ 318,335,890 HHFDC 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Rental Assistance Programs $ 26,314,996 $ 28,319,433 $ 31,219,086 $ 36,327,591 $ 35,027,814 Funding suited to construction $ 11,908,628 $ 3,231,395 $ 5,254,034 $ 8,266,908 $ 8,271,969 Funding For Homeless Programs $ 2,546,255 $ 2,540,284 $ 6,419,805 $ 6,682,776 $ 7,620,529 Training and Assistance $ 362,505 $ 132,031 $ 378,031 $ 318,000 $ 72,000 Operations & Administration $ 35,536,034 $ 35,704,725 $ 36,924,771 $ 42,237,598 $ 41,055,764 Total $ 76,668,418 $ 69,927,868 $ 80,195,727 $ 93,832,873 $ 92,048,076 City and County of Honolulu 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Rental Assistance Programs $ 74,266,345 $ 76,386,876 $ 80,361,961 $ 85,065,454 $ 86,735,713 Funding suited to construction $ 9,923,929 $ 10,015,754 $ 9,973,579 $ 11,744,572 $ 11,489,541 Funding For Homeless Programs $ 11,445,806 $ 9,921,468 $ 10,968,985 $ 11,504,436 $ 11,539,867 Training and Assistance $ 403,680 $ 189,008 $ 189,008 $ 144,000 $ 144,000 Operations & Administration $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total $ 96,039,760 $ 96,513,106 $ 101,493,533 $ 108,458,462 $ 109,909,121 County of Hawai`i 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Rental Assistance Programs $ 18,210,429 $ 21,756,896 $ 22,059,684 $ 23,696,508 $ 24,237,850 Funding suited to construction $ 2,465,271 $ 2,491,306 $ 2,524,362 $ 2,694,402 $ 2,646,713 Funding For Homeless Programs $ - $ - $ - $ 189,368 $ 192,961 Training and Assistance $ 65,652 $ 66,204 $ 66,204 $ 66,937 $ 66,937 Operations & Administration $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total $ 20,741,352 $ 24,314,406 $ 24,650,250 $ 26,647,215 $ 27,144,461 County of Maui 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Rental Assistance Programs $ 23,089,994 $ 24,133,589 $ 28,364,705 $ 28,329,400 $ 28,360,041 Funding suited to construction $ 1,711,591 $ 1,731,191 $ 1,803,099 $ 1,900,669 $ 1,830,988 Funding For Homeless Programs $ - $ - $ - $ 152,264 $ 156,876 Training and Assistance $ 164,442 $ 69,000 $ 24,732 $ 60,973 $ 26,957 Operations & Administration $ 608,895 $ 635,920 $ 635,920 $ 159,140 $ 159,140 Total $ 25,574,922 $ 26,569,700 $ 30,828,456 $ 30,602,446 $ 30,534,002 County of Kaua`i 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Rental Assistance Programs $ 7,708,624 $ 7,507,845 $ 8,270,337 $ 8,061,985 $ 8,378,137 Funding suited to construction $ 705,416 $ 696,697 $ 709,098 $ 708,964 $ 695,071 Funding For Homeless Programs $ - $ - $ - $ 135,148 $ 66,264 Training and Assistance $ 133,000 $ 133,000 $ 133,000 $ 132,002 $ 132,002 Operations & Administration $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total $ 8,547,040 $ 8,337,542 $ 9,112,435 $ 9,038,099 $ 9,271,474 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 137 ©SMS December,2019 Table F-2. Homeless PIT Counts, State and Counties of Hawaii, 2009-2019 Year Pct. Chg. 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2016-2019 Sheltered 3,268 3,535 3,632 3,726 3,745 3,813 3,666 3,613 3,420 3,055 2,810 -22.2% O'ahu 2,445 2,797 2,912 3,035 3,091 3,079 2,964 2,767 2,635 2,350 2,052 -25.8% Hawai'i 321 286 229 170 160 211 220 271 275 200 243 -10.3% Maui 422 392 394 420 421 445 505 484 395 399 420 -13.2% Kaua'i 80 60 97 101 73 78 88 91 115 106 95 4.4% Unsheltered 2,514 2,299 2,556 2,520 2,590 3,105 3,843 4,308 3,800 3,475 3,638 -15.6% O'ahu 1,193 1,374 1,322 1,318 1,465 1,633 2,162 2,173 2,324 2,145 2,401 10.5% Hawai'i 615 313 337 447 397 658 1,021 1,123 678 669 447 -60.2% Maui 581 399 658 454 455 514 632 661 501 474 442 -33.1% Kaua'i 125 213 239 301 273 300 251 351 297 187 348 -0.9% Total 5,782 5,834 6,188 6,246 6,335 6,918 7,509 7,921 7,220 6,530 6,448 -18.6% O'ahu 3,638 4,171 4,234 4,353 4,556 4,712 5,126 4,940 4,959 4,495 4,453 -9.9% Hawai'i 936 599 566 617 557 869 1,241 1,394 953 869 690 -50.5% Maui 1,003 791 1,052 874 876 959 1,137 1,145 896 873 862 -24.7% Kaua'i 205 273 336 402 346 378 339 442 412 293 443 0.2% Source: State of Hawai'i PIT Counts, 2009-2019. Table F-3. Homeless Service Clients by County, FY 2008-2017 Year Pct.Chg. 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2015-2017 Shelter Programs 6,733 7,501 7,649 8,299 8,507 8,699 8,574 8,844 7,313 8,343 -5.7% O'ahu 5,075 5,311 5,678 6,211 6,305 6,234 6,039 6,364 5,180 5,731 -9.9% Hawai'i 420 679 623 622 574 565 746 783 612 688 -12.1% Maui 1,189 1,116 1,017 1,154 1,297 1,557 1,488 1,345 1,191 1,606 19.4% Kaua'i 49 395 331 312 331 343 341 352 330 318 -9.7% Unsheltered 6,777 7,506 7,997 8,266 7,804 7,415 7,608 8,030 6,702 7,284 -9.3% O'ahu 4,167 4,987 5,368 5,225 4,949 4,837 4,391 4,755 3,950 4,981 4.8% Hawai'i 763 846 1,092 1,098 1,063 832 1,401 1,514 1,078 756 -50.1% Maui 1,446 1,293 1,163 1,580 1,407 1,328 1,488 1,384 1,511 1,211 -12.5% Kaua'i 401 380 374 363 385 418 328 377 163 336 -10.9% Total 12,445 13,717 14,653 14,200 13,980 13,853 14,282 14,954 14,015 15,627 4.5% O'ahu 8,412 9,422 10432 9,781 9,650 9,693 9,548 10,257 9,130 10,712 4.4% Hawai'i 1,204 1,421 1,555 1,422 1,336 1,184 1,770 1,829 1,690 1,'1'1'1 -21.0% Maui 2,201 2,204 2,069 2,492 2,358 2,277 2,332 2,206 2,702 2,817 27.7% Kaua'i 618 670 597 595 636 699 632 662 493 654 -1.2% Source: HMIS, Homeless Service Utilization Report, 2008-2017. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 138 ©SMS December,2019 APPENDIX G: GLOSSARY Adequately Housed: Households that are not classified as at-risk for homelessness or hidden homeless. 50% Hawaiian: An individual is 50 percent Hawaiian if they claimed that status in the Housing Demand Survey. Only Respondents were asked to self-report ethnic status. A household is classified as 50 percent Hawaiian if the household includes at least one adult member who is 50 percent or more Hawaiian. Respondents were asked if there were other members of the household who were 50 percent or more Hawaiian. 50 percent Hawaiian households may or may not be DHHL beneficiaries (lessees or applicants). ADLs: Activities of Daily Living, which include assistance with eating, bathing, getting dressed, getting in or out of bed, or getting to the toilet. Acceptable Bathrooms: The number of bathrooms that are absolutely required in a new unit. Typically, an acceptable bathroom is a more accurate measure of housing characteristic for planning than first-choice preferred bedrooms. Acceptable Bedrooms: The number of bedrooms that are absolutely required in a new unit. Typically, an acceptable bedroom is a more accurate measure of housing characteristic for planning than first- choice preferred bedrooms. Affordable Housing: refers to the generalized concept of housing that residents have enough income and financial resources to be able to purchase or rent. In the U.S., commonly accepted guideline for housing affordability is a housing cost that does not exceed 30% of a household's gross income. Housing costs considered in this guideline generally include taxes and insurance for owners, and usually include utility costs. When the monthly carrying costs of a home exceed 30-35 percent of household income, then the housing is considered unaffordable for that household. Affordable Housing Cost: The average dollar amount that a respondent reported they would be able to pay per month for a new housing unit. Apartment: Refers to apartment building that contains residential suites in which each individual unit is leased to different occupants. Applicant Only: Households in which at least one adult member has applied for, but has not yet been awarded, land from the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. At-Risk for Homelessness: Households in which members would become homeless is less than three months if they suddenly lost their primary source of income. Also called "precariously housed," these people are three monthly paychecks away from homelessness. Available Down Payment: The amount of money available to be used as a cash down payment for new housing. Churn Rate: For any given period, the number of participants who discontinue their use of a service divided by the average number of total participants. Churn rate provides insight into the growth or decline of the subscriber base, as well as the average length of participation in the service. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 139 ©SMS December,2019 COL %: Represents the percentage of the column total for an individual cell in a table [Also referred to as Count Percent or vertical percent]. Condominium/Condo: An apartment building with five units or more in which each owner owns a unit and holds a joint ownership in common areas with other owners in the building. Contract Type: Refers to the two major ownership contracts: leasehold and fee simple. Count Percent: [See Col %]. Crowding Ratio: The average number of household members per bedroom per household. Crowding Ratio by Bedrooms: Number of persons per bedroom. Does not include any rooms other than bedrooms. Households with more than 1.01 persons per bedroom are considered overcrowded [See also Overcrowded]. Crowding Ratio by Rooms: Number of persons per room. Includes all rooms other than closets, hallways, utility rooms, foyers, and lanais. DHHL: Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. This state agency has been responsible for administering the land trust that, in 1921, established about 200,000 acres of land for homesteading by Native Hawaiians. For more information visit: http://www.Hawai`i.gov/dhhl/. Doubled-up: Housing units that are occupied by two or more families or groups of persons who are not related by birth, marriage, or adoption. Elderly: A person 62 years of age or older. Elderly Alone: Single-member households, member is 62 years of age or older. Elderly Couple: Two-member households, male and female, at least one of which is 62 years of age or older. Emancipated foster youth: Youth who are aging out of the foster care system. Equity Gap Funding: The amount of money needed to cover development costs for new or existing affordable rental or mixed-use project or projects for economic development activities directly related to affordable housing. These funds are intended to cover the difference between the projected Exiting offender: Inmates released from the prison system. Fee Simple: A fee simple estate is the least limited interest and the most complete and absolute ownership option. It is of indefinite duration, freely transferable and inheritable. The phrase "fee simple absolute" came about because the estate is of potentially infinite duration (thus "fee"); there are no limitations on its inheritability (thus "simple"); and it is indefeasible and cannot be divested (thus "absolute"). Frail elderly: Elderly afflicted with physical or mental disabilities that may interfere with the ability to perform activities of daily living independently (i.e., bathing, dressing, toileting, and meal preparation). Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 140 ©SMS December,2019 Group quarters: A place where people live or stay, in a group living arrangement, that is owned or managed by an entity or organization providing housing and/or services for the residents. This is not a typical household-type living arrangement. Services may include custodial or medical care as well as other types of assistance, and residency is commonly restricted to those receiving these services. People living in group quarters are usually not related to each other. Group quarters include such places as college residence halls, residential treatment centers, skilled nursing facilities, group homes, military barracks, correctional facilities, and workers' dormitories. Guamanian or Chamorro: Ethnicity of persons from Guam or the Mariana Islands region. HH: Household, person residing in a housing unit for five or more months of the year. Hidden Homeless: Households in which more than one family share accommodations. These households include families that are doubled up (two or more families or groups of persons who are related by birth, marriage or adoption) and those that are sharing (two or more families or groups whose members are not related by birth, marriage, or adoption). Homestead Land: Land entrusted by the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act for homesteading by Native Hawaiians. This trust is current administered by the Department of Hawaiian Homelands Honolulu PUC: Honolulu Primary Urban Center, census tracts 4.01 thru 72, 75.02, and 75.06. For information on Census Tracts visit: http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html? tang=en. Housing Stock: The total housing stock includes all occupied housing units plus vacant housing units available for sale or rent. The stock excludes vacant units held for use for seasonal use, migratory workers, and "other" vacant units. HUD: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. HUD's mission is to increase homeownership, support community development, and increase access to affordable housing free from discrimination. To fulfill this mission, HUD will embrace high standards of ethics, management and accountability and forge new partnerships -- particularly with faith-based and community organizations that leverage resources and improve HUD's ability to be effective on the community level. For more information visit: http://www.hud.gov/ HUD Income Guidelines: [See HUD Income Limits] HUD Income Limits: Calculates income as percentage of the HUD median income for a household of a given size in each geographic area. For information on the HUD median income and HUD income limits visit: http://www.huduser.org/datasets/il/i106/BRIEFING-MATERIALs.pdf HUD Median Income: The median income for a household of a given size in a specific geographic area. For detailed information on the HUD median income and HUD income limits visit: http://www.huduser.org/datasets/il/i106/BRIEFING-MATERIALs.pdf IADLs: Instrumental Activities for Daily Living which include preparing meals, taking medications, making phone calls or managing money. Imputation: A method of replacing missing values for specific variables in survey work. SMS uses a multivariate regression technique to replace missing values with the best estimate of the value for each case, based on reported values of several other related variables. For the Housing Demand Survey, imputation was applied to age and household income. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 141 ©SMS December,2019 In-migration: The number of persons who move to Hawaii from other areas in the United States. Income: Self-reported household income for all sources, for all employed persons in the household, estimated before taxes, for the calendar year preceding the survey (2005). [See also Imputation]. Income as a % of HUD Median: [See HUD Income Limits]. Income Per Household Member: Household income divided by the number of persons living in the household. Intention to Move: The desire to seek a new housing unit at some time in the future. Includes the desire to seek a new ownership unit and the desire to seek a new rental unit. Leasehold: A less than freehold estate by which a tenant possesses real property. In a lease situation, the tenant possesses a leasehold and the landlord possesses the reversion estate; i.e., when the lease terminates, the property will revert to the landlord. Lessee and Applicant: A classification of households used in the Native Hawaiian tabulations and reports referring to a household in which at least one member is a DHHL lessee and at least one is an applicant for a land award from DHHL. Lessee Only: A households occupied by virtue of a Department of Hawaiian Home Lands lease, and having no adult member who is on a DHHL awards applicant list. Military Housing Privatization Initiative: In order to house active duty military personnel and their families, the Department of Defense (DoD) has traditionally relied on two methods. In locations where the local housing supply was adequate, the DoD provided military members with a stipend, the Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH), to defray the cost of residential housing near military installations. For those locations where local housing was extremely expensive or unavailable, quarters were built within the military installations to house military personnel and their dependents. In 1996, a third option was created through the Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI). Because many of the military family housing properties built during the 1950s and 1960s were old and deteriorating, the DoD partnered with private developers to take on the projects since they had the experience and expertise to do the job faster, cheaper, and better. Under the MHPI, private developers renovate or replace old, substandard military housing and, in some instances, build additional units.The developers then become the owners and managers of those properties and the landlords for the military families in those homes. Most important, military families get updated, repaired or newly constructed homes that will be maintained for the next fifty years. The MHPI program has made on-base privatized housing part of the local competitive housing market. Privatized housing operates similarly to any other private rental property business and the resulting competition can impact the local rental market and housing demand. MFD: Multi-Family Dwelling. This includes townhouses, apartments, duplexes, and multiplexes. Multi-Generation Household with Elderly Member: Households with at least two generations present and at least one member 62 years of age or older. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 142 ©SMS December,2019 Non-Hawaiian: A non-Hawaiian individual is a person that reports no Hawaiian ancestry. O`ahu SF Ads: The number of advertisements for single-family homes in the City&County of Honolulu. O`ahu SF Rents: The number of advertisements for single-family homes for rent in the City & County of Honolulu. Occupy without Payment: A type of tenancy in which the respondent occupies a housing unit without payment of cash rent. Includes persons living in rent-free public units, those living in private sector, family-owned units, property managers occupying units in exchange for services, clerics living in church owner units, military dependents in on-base units, etc. Does not include individuals who have paid off their mortgage. Other Vacant: This category includes units held for settlement of an estate, units held for occupancy by a caretaker or janitor, and units held for personal reasons of the owner. Out-migration: The number of Hawaii residents who move to other locations within the United States. Overcrowded: A household with more than 1.01 persons per room. Permanent Supportive Housing: Housing with indefinite leasing or rental with appropriate services for persons with higher acuity. Persons with Alcohol or Other Drug Addictions: Persons whose impairment or disability is due to alcoholism or drug addiction. Persons with Developmental Disability: Persons with a severe, chronic disability that: (1) is attributable to a mental or physical impairment or combination of mental and physical impairments; (2) is manifested before the individual attains age 22; (3) is likely to continue indefinitely; (4) results in substantial functional limitations in three or more of the following areas of major life activity: self-care; receptive and expressive language; learning; mobility; self-direction; capacity for independent living; economic self-sufficiency; and (5) reflects the individual's need for a combination and sequence of special interdisciplinary, or generic services, individualized supports, or other forms of assistance that are of lifelong or extended duration and are individually planned and coordinated. An individual from birth to age nine, inclusive, who has a substantial developmental delay or specific congenital or acquired condition, may be considered to have a developmental disability without meeting three or more of the criteria described above, if the individual, without services and supports, has a high probability of meeting those criteria later in life. Persons with Disabilities: Any person who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; has a record of such impairment; or is regarded as having such impairment. In general, a physical or mental impairment includes hearing, mobility and visual impairments, chronic alcoholism, chronic mental illness, AIDS, AIDS Related Complex, and mental retardation that substantially limit one or more major life activities. Major life activities include walking, talking, hearing, seeing, breathing, learning, performing manual tasks, and caring for oneself. Persons with HIV/AIDS: A person with the disease of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome or related diseases, or any conditions arising from the etiologic agent for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, including infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 143 ©SMS December,2019 Persons with severe mental illness: Persons with a severe and persistent mental or emotional impairment that seriously limits his or her ability to live independently, and which impairment could be improved by more suitable housing conditions. PLANNED HOUSING UNITS: Planned housing units are those that are registered or on record at government agencies as being scheduled for completion by a specified date. The official list of such units usually includes permitted or confirmed units, public and private sector. A major interest in planned units relates to their value in estimating future housing supply, often but not always including its relationship to housing demand. Potential Movers: Households in which the Housing Demand Survey respondent reported an interested in moving to a new unit in the future. Potential Owners: Households in which the Housing Demand Survey respondent reported intent to own their next home. Potential Renters: Households in which the Housing Demand Survey respondent reported intent to rent their next unit. Private Activity Bond: Private activity bonds (PAB) are tax-exempt bonds issued by or on behalf of a local or state government for the purpose of providing special financing benefits for qualified projects. The financing is most often for projects of a private user, and the government generally does not pledge its credit. Private activity bonds are sometimes referred to as conduit bonds. Precariously Housed: [See At Risk for Homelessness] Preferred Bathrooms: The number of bathrooms desired in a new unit. Preferred Bedrooms: The number of bedrooms desired in a new unit. RentRange: RentRange® is a premier provider of rentals data for the United States. We chose this provider because they provide data for 2019, because it has been judged superior in provider comparison studies, because they have recently updated their data and software models (June 2019), and because they were willing to share their historical data file. See comparative evaluation at https://accidentalrental.com/5-best-rent-estimate-tools/. Seniors: See Elderly Shelter to Income Ratio: The percentage of total monthly household income that is used to pay for shelter costs (rent or mortgage payments). In this study, a shelter-to-income ratio in excess of .30 is considered to indicate some level of financial disadvantages. A shelter-to-income ratio in excess of.40 indicates severe financial disadvantage. Short-term Rental: A rental period for a residential unit lasting 30 days or less; also called transient rentals. Single Family Dwelling (SFD): A single-family detached dwelling unit Sustainable Housing: Housing that designed to be affordable in perpetuity. Affordability is defined as having a sales or rental price below market values — usually at or below the price affordable to a Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 144 ©SMS December,2019 family with a household income at the median or at specific HUD income qualification levels. Perpetuity is accomplished through limited-equity arrangements incorporated in the deed or lease agreement. [See also: Sustainable Lease] Sustainable Lease: A housing contract that does not include ownership of the land. The perpetuity is accomplished through a lease agreement. Sustainable lease contracts may be used to eliminate high down payments, can allow property to be passed on to heirs, require no ground rent, and typically have a lease term greater than 60 years. [See also Leasehold and Fee Simple] Tenancy: There are three types of tenancy: own, rent, and occupy without payment Townhouse: Side by side housing units that do not meet the definition of single-family dwellings Unit Condition: Self-reported assessment of the overall condition of the current unit, rated on a scale from excellent to poor. Unit Type: There several different types of units reported in the Housing Demand Survey including single-family detached units, duplexes, multiplexes, townhouses, condominiums, and apartments. We note that condominium in an ownership regime and not a unit type. Since nearly all condominiums in Hawaii are multifamily units, this classification allows a distinction between condominium apartments and standard apartments in multi-family buildings. Victims of Domestic Violence: Victims of felony or misdemeanor crimes of violence committed by a current or former spouse of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the victim as a spouse, by a person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction receiving grant monies, or by any other person against an adult or youth victim who is protected from that person's acts under the domestic, violence or family violence laws of the jurisdiction. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 145 ©SMS December,2019 APPENDIX H: BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen, J.D. 2018. Zillow makes its 2019 real estate predictions, The East Hampton Press & the Southampton Press, December 28, 2018. Anderson, T.R., et al. 2015. Doubling of coastal erosion under rising sea level by mid-century in Hawaii. Natural Hazards, 2015. 78(1): p. 75-103. Associated Press. 2019. O'ahu illegal rentals drop after short-term rental law OKed,Associated Press,Wire Service Content, August 7, 2019. Associated Press. 2019. Honolulu adds inspectors to help enforce vacation rental law, Friday,August 16, 2019. Bonham, Carl S., Kimberly Burnett, and Andrew Kato, (2010) Inclusionary Zoning: Implications for O`ahu's housing market, Honolulu: UHERO. Bradford, Chris. 2008. Filtering, Austin Contrarian, June 26, 2008 found at http://www.austincontrarian.com/austincontrarian/2008/06/filtering.html Callies, David L., Regulating paradise: Land use controls in Hawaii, Second Edition, Honolulu, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2017. City and County of Hawai'i. 2019. Short-Term Rentals, last updated August 23, 2019, https://www.honolulu.gov/dppstr City and County of Honolulu, 2009. Annual report on the status of land use on O'ahu: Fiscal year 2009, Department of Planning and Permitting, August 2010. City and County of Honolulu, 2014. Annual report on the status of land use on O'ahu: Fiscal year 2014, Department of Planning and Permitting, June 2016. City and County of Honolulu. 2011. Review of Current City and State Ordinances, Honolulu High-Capacity County of Hawaii, Consolidated Plan, 2010-2014, prepared by the County of Hawaii Office of Housing and Community Development, January 29, 2010. Domestic Violence Counts: Hawaii Summary. National Network to End Domestic Violence. 2010. http://www.nnedv.org/docs/Census/DVCounts2010/DVCounts10_StateSummary_HI_Color.pdf, Economic Review, Vol. 95, No. 2, pp. 328-330. Erdmann, Kevin, Salim Furth, and Emily Hamilton. 2019. Mercatus Center, George Mason University, Policy Brief, March 2019. Erdmann, Kevin. 2019. Shut Out: How a Housing Shortage Caused the Great Recession and Crippled Our Economy. Mercatus Center at George Mason University. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Freeman, Lance and Jenny Schuetz. 2017. Producing affordable housing in rising markets: What works? Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2017, pp 217-236 Fujii-Oride, Noelle. 2019. Impact of O'ahu's vacation rental crackdown, Hawai'i Business Magazine, September 16, 2019. Gardner, Spencer. The 3 strategies for achieving housing affordability, Envision Frederick County, December Gardner, Spencer. The 5 immutable laws of affordable housing, Strong Towns, December 11, 2017. Glaeser, Edward L. (2009), How to (sort of) predict housing prices, Today's Economist, July 14, 2009. Glaeser, Edward L. and Cass R. Sunstein. 2014. Moneyball for state regulators, Harvard, John M. Olin Discussion Paper Series, Discussion Paper No. 783, July 2014, National Affairs, Summer 2014. Glaeser, Edward L. and Joseph Gyourko, 2002. The impact of zoning on housing affordability, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 8835, March 2002 at http://www.nber.org/papers/w8835. Glaeser, Edward L. and Joseph Gyourko, 2008. Rethinking Federal Housing Policy: How to make housing Glaeser, Edward L. and Joseph Gyourko. 2018. The economic implications of housing supply, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 32, No. 1, Winter 2018, pp. 3-30. Glaeser, Edward L., Joseph Gyourko and Raven E. Saks. 2005. Why have housing prices gone up? American Glaeser, Edward. 2017. Reforming land use regulations, Brookings Center on Regulation and Markets, Series in Market and Government Failures, April 24, 2017. Gyourko, Joseph and Raven Molloy. 2015. Regulation and housing supply, Chapter 19 in Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics 5B, edited by Gilles, Duranton, J. Vernon. Gyourko, Joseph,Albert Saiz, and Anita A. Summers 2007. A New Measure of the Local Regulatory Environment for Housing Markets: The Wharton Residential Land Use Regulatory Index. The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Final Version, March 29, 2007. Hawaii Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism. 2018. Population and economic projections for the State of Hawaii to 2045, Research and Economic Analysis Division, June 2018. Hawaii Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism. 2018. Affordable Rental Housing Report and ten-year plan: Special Action Team on Affordable Rental Housing Report to the Hawaii State Legislature, in response to Act 127 (Session Laws of Hawaii 2016), Honolulu, Hawai`i, July 2018. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 146 ©SMS December,2019 Hawaii Department of Human Service Annual Report 2015. http://humanservices.Hawai`i.gov/wp- content/uploads/2016/01/2015-DHS-Annual-Report.FI NAL_.pdf Hawaii Housing Finance & Development Corporation. 2017. Housing Action Plan, Final Reports to the Hawaii State Legislature, December 2017. Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, State of Hawaii Consolidated Plan for program years 2010 through 2014, Honolulu, January 2010. Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation. 2017. The Hawaii State Plan: Housing, State of Hawaii, February 21, 2017. Hawaii Housing Planning Survey, 2011. Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, June 2012. Hawaii Housing Policy Study, 2006, Homeless Study Report, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, August, 2007. Hawaii Housing Policy Study, 2006, State of Hawaii, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, November 2006. Hawaii Kids Count (2012). Issue Brief. Improving Outcomes for Youth Transitioning Out of Foster Care. http://www.yesHawai`i.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/TU ES-Hawai`iKidsCountBrief.jpg. Hawai'i News Now. 2019. City Council approves tough new regulations for vacation rental industry, Hawaii News Now, June 17, 2019. https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2019/06/18/city-council-poised-approve-tough-new-regulations- vacation-rentals/ Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 201H, 2017-38— Housing development; exemption from statutes, ordinances, charter provisions, and rules. Current as of 2016. Hawaii State Plan on Aging: 2008-2011. State of Hawaii, Executive Office on Aging, June, 2007. http://www.Hawai`iadre.org/Portals/_AgencySite/Hawai`iADRC/Plan.pdf Hawaii State Planning Act. Accessed August 2011. http://Hawai`i2050.org/images/uploads/HRS226_StatePlann ingAct.pdf Hertz, Daniel. 2015. What filtering can and can't do, The Knight Foundation, City Commentary, October 11, 2015. Hilber, Christian A. L. and Frederic Robert-Nicoud. 2010. On the Origins of Land Use Regulations: Theory and Evidence from U.S. Metro Areas. Spatial Economic Research Centre, SERC Discussion Paper 38, January 2010. Homeless Service Utilization Report (2015) University of Hawaii at Manoa, Center on the Family, May, 2016. Honolulu Appreciation Trends, Neighborhood Scout, at https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/hi/honolulu/real-estate downloaded June 10, 2019. Housing Action Plan. 2017. Final Report to the Legislature prepared by Hawaii Institute for Public Affairs, Land Use Research Foundation, Goodwin Consulting Group, and R.M. Towill Corporation in collaboration with the Hawaii Housing Finance & Development Corporation, Honolulu, Hawaii, December 2017. Hsieh, Chang-Tai and Enrico Moretti. 2017. Housing constraints and spatial misallocation, NBER Working Paper 22154, May 18, 2017. http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/411778-Employment-after-Prison-A- Longitudinal-Study-of-Releasees-in-Three-States.PDF Hurley, Timothy. 2019. Aloha O`ahu!, Honolulu Star-Advertiser, April 25, 2019. Jacobus, Rick. 2015. Inclusionary housing: Creating and maintaining equitable communities, Policy Focus Report PF044, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2015. Jedra, Christina. 2019. Tourists scramble as O'ahu vacation rentals disappear under new law, Civil Beat, August 12, 2019, See http://cca.hawaii.gov/ins?s=Transient+Vacation+Rentals&type=usa for updated information. Kapfidze, Tendayi. 2019. LendingTree study reveals the top states where residents are staying put, moving from and moving to, LendingTree, November 19, 2019. La Croix, Sumner. 2016. New perspectives on land and housing markets in Hawaii: Implications for industrial and Commercial land leasing, UHERO, January, 20167. Laney, Leroy O. (2011), Economic Forecast, 2010-2011 Edition, First Hawaiian Bank, Honolulu, 2010. Lapan, Tovin. New vacation rental rules of O'ahu spark cancellations, complaints, Travel Weekly, August 15, 2019. Leopold, Josh, Liza Getsinger, Pamela Blumenthal, Katya Abazajan, and Reed Jordan. (2015) The housing affordability gap for extremely low-income renters in 2013, Urban Institute Research Report, June 15, 2015. Lucas, Tim. 2019. Mortgage rates forecast for March 2019, The Mortgage Reports Editor, February 21, 2019. Mayor's Advisory Housing Advisory Committee, City and County of Honolulu, Final Report & Recommendations, April 2006. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 147 ©SMS December,2019 McDonald, John. 2018. Local politics, planning, land use, controls, and real estate development, in Squires, Graham, Erwin Heukens and Richard Peiser, Routledge Companion to Real Estate Development, Routledge, New York: 2018. McDonald, Lawrence G. and Lawrence G. McDonald (Author) Non-profit Housing Association of Northern California, Affordable by Choice: Trends in California inclusionary housing programs, San Francisco, 2006. Mukherjee, Devaditya. 2017. Understanding the effects of inclusionary zoning on housing markets using a stock-flow model. A Dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master's in city planning, Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, May 18, 2017. New York Times. 2019. Frozen in place:Americans are moving at the highest rate on record, November 20, 2019. Office of Planning. 2017. Special Action Team on Affordable Rental Housing: Report to the Twenty-Ninth Hawaii State Legislature, Regular Session of 2018. Prepared by Office of Planning, Department of Business, Economic Development &Tourism, Honolulu, Hawaii, December 2017. Omori, Jill. "Reasons for Homelessness among Micronesians at a Transitional Shelter in Hawaii." Developing Human Resources in the Pacific, Vol. 14. No. 1. 2007. Out of Reach 2011, National Low Income Housing Coalition, June 2011, http://www.nlihc.org/oor/oor2011. and department of Economics, Florida State University, November 2005. Later published as Ihlanfeldt, K. R. (2007). The effect of land use regulation on housing and land prices. Journal of Urban Economics, 61(3), 420-435. Paciorek, Andrew D. 2013. Supply constraints and housing market dynamics. Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 77, p. 11-26. Plan to End Homelessness in Hawaii. Hawaii Interagency Council on Homelessness. September, 2008. Popov, Igor. 2019. Housing markets and income inequality, Rent Economics, April 24, 2019. Rappaport, Jordan. 2018. Pent-up demand and continuing price increases: The outlook for housing in 2018, The Macro Bulletin, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, January 10, 2018 Rickie Cassiday.2019. Cost for monthly housing in Hawaii not hurt by illegal vacation rentals,study finds Hotel Online,Sunday September 22, 2019. Rizzo, Cailey. 20-19. O'ahu just passed a new law that could affect your Airbnb, Travel+Leisure, June 26, 2019. Rose, Louis A. 1989. Topographical constraints and urban land supply indexes. Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 335-347. Rose, Louis A. and Sumner J. La Croix. 1989. Urban land price: The extraordinary case of Honolulu, Hawaii, Urban Studies, 1989 26:301. Rosen, Kenneth T., David Bank, Avani Patel, Brett Fawley, Heather Belfor, Adam Eckstein, and Anisha Gade. 2017. Rebuilding the American dream : Strategies to sustainably increase homeownership, Rosen Consulting Group, Berkeley, California, November 2017. Rosen, Kenneth T., David Bank, Heather Balfor, Adam Eckstein, Anisha Gade, and Michael Tcheau. Hurdles to Homeownership: Understanding the Barriers. Rosen Consulting Group. June 2017. https://escholarship.orq/uc/item/51w4x9gr Rosenthall, Stuart S. 2018. Owned now rented later? Housing stock transitions and market dynamics, Working Paper, Department of Economics, Syracuse University, February 2, 2018. Saiz, Albert. 2010. The geographic determinants of housing supply, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 125, No. 3, pp. 1253-1296.1 January 5, 2010. Schenfeld, Nikki. 2019. Real estate market impact if vacation rental bills pass, KHON2 June 9, 2019 Schwartz, Alex F. Housing Policy in the United States, second edition, New York: Rutledge, Taylor and Francis Group, 2010. Sharpe, Jamie. 2019. Re-evaluating the impact of immigration on the U.S. rental housing market, Journal of Urban Economics, Vol. 111, May 2019, pp. 14-34. Sisson, Patrick. 2019. Housing inequality mirrors income inequality, Curbed, April 25, 2019. SMS Research & Marketing Services, Inc. 2017. Hawaii Housing Planning Study, 2016, State of Hawaii, prepared for the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, February 2017. SMS Research & Marketing Services, Inc. 2018. County of Maui Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, July 31, 2019. SMS Research & Marketing Services, Inc. 2018. County of Maui Affordable Housing Policy Plan, July 31, 2019. Somerville, C. Tsuriel and Christopher J. Mayer. 2003. Government regulation and changes in the affordable housing stock, Economic Policy Review, June 2003, pp. 45-62. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 148 ©SMS December,2019 Squires, Graham. 2018. Mechanisms for financing affordable housing development, Chapter 16 in Squires, Graham, Erwin Heukens and Richard Peiser, Routledge Companion to Real Estate Development, Routledge, New York: 2018. State of Hawaii Consolidated Plan—for Program Years July 1,2005 through June 30,2010. Prepared by Housing and Community Development Corporation of Hawaii, September 16, 2004. State of Hawaii Consolidated Plan Action Plan—Fourth Program Year; Concentrating on the Counties for Hawaii, Kauai, and Maui. Prepared by Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, May 2008. State of Hawaii Consolidated Plan Action Plan - Program Year 2011. Prepared by Hawaii Housing State of Hawaii Consolidated Plan, Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER), Fifth Program Year, September 2010. Tabit, P.J. and Josh Winter. 2019. "Rural brain drain". Examining millennial migration patterns and student loan debt, Consumer and Community Context, Vol. 1, January 2019, pp.7-14. Title 19 Zoning Code Audit. Orion Planning & Design. March 2018. https://www.mauicounty.qov/DocumentCenter/View/112081 U.S. Census Bureau, Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division, Historical Census of Housing Tables, Vacation Homes, Source, last revised: December 02, 2004. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2014. Addressing the affordable housing need in Maui, Edge an Online Magazine, Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, 2014. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2015 Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance Programs: Housing Inventory Count Reports, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Monday, December 7, 2015. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2016. Leveraging the Health-Housing Nexus, Evidence Matters, Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, Winter, 2016. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2018. Regulatory barriers and affordable housing: Problems and Solutions, Evidence Matters, Spring 2018, pp. 1-10. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Strategic Plan: FY 2010-2015, (2010). U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, May 2010. University of Hawaii at Manoa. 2014. Climate Change Impacts In Hawaii: A Summary Of Climate Change And Its Impacts To Hawaii's Ecosystems And Communities, UH at Manoa, Sea Grant College Program, June 2014, p. iv. Urban Institute Justice Policy Center (2008). Employment After Prison: A Longitudinal Study of Releasees in Three States. October, 2008. Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 149 ©SMS December,2019 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O O O O O O O O O O O O o O o O O o o ( o N V' CO CO 0 M (! O N N- O 00 00 O O 0 0 CONN N -0 N co; N N c'') 4 (O (`' ) I- ON O O) <6 N- N- (`') 4 LO 0 V' CO CO CON— CON r LO (i) i o Q m E 12 U L N 0) 0 O En� 0 z' z' 0 7' z' 0 7' z' 0 0 0 7' 0 z' 0 0 0 0 0 0 W O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O co I� O co. CO O CO 0 O N O O 0 O N 0) 00 O) O) (O 00 c co; N 00 00 O) 4 00 N L 4 Y (0 M co N N () N c0a) (h a)• TO O N Z a) >. o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • > — O O O O O0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O -1 .- CO O N '7 O O O CO LC) N- N— (O CO O O) CO CO N CO in c co R 01) (Co r O (c C O W Z H 0 y cn- a) t) Y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U) ) -a O 00 co O) co co O in O N (O N LO N- (O (O — N N LO N N D C = N N N N (`') a0 (`') If) N- N co; O a0 C'') O 0 = _ a3 0 N— N— .— — t 7t1-, a) 3 O O D "• 4 i Z fN -' A U_ o L 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O zc CO N D co O N— `0- O O H ...,r � 4 N— co 0 0 0 0 o) in • Y co N N- 0)O N N M N 00 v 00 COO () N- N U• 7 = o co .� rn a co H co • mi'dN a) _O = o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • � � ,�_ I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I cn H fC O .7 (O 0 N 0) CO N 0 0C) 00 CO N N- N- 0f') 0) (O 00 N CO = 3 6 N- N (0 N N 4 O (`') N O 6 O O - (0 (O N J a U O Y _ •c cn O C° = Q a; I— o o in H •Q N D C .S c 7 Ce o (B aal O D " ' A r N N c E N N U V j rn Z L a) > _c co O N } Y O x L (/) 2 > Z • ycB c L U) O O R in r a) (B u o 0 E �, Q-0 u) 0' 2 d c O o_-op I iii W Q — Q �, W a) m m _c a) C d X cna a) N n as a p W — a) .� O 0 c c o o o c L } 0- E cn E cn 0 0 -a .N d a) D TM O W W fa Z c p 0 = a o - M - o S2 t O M c c s s o o S2 S2 0 = CL o c I— I— OOO MO) HOO < Oo Z (WHHll ZOOHHHH L o (% Ci) Q H -C I— U) 2O 7) O) N— c) O a) ("`i a) a) (1) d 4 E a) 0 a) 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ta in 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 ++ O O N- O O O O co 0 0 s— 6) N- 6) LC) C) in i- N (0 00 in in i(') (`' N 6) ) () CA O V'in M (O N N N N N- N N V' LO O o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Oco coO coN.- N O 00 O o O N N N Z Y N rn 0o (0 u) o m cri 0o m 00 O CO CO CO N N O N- N V' 3 v O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 ca N.- 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ LO 0 O O O N- (O0 0 N 0 N O 0 o CO N- 00 C) N L00 00 N.: 4 (O O N O M (O M 10 O 00 If) r O— N N N N N- N N 71- '6 O z N V 'L N -p O M o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R = O 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) t t 0 O N— in N in 0 O 0 co co N O co M 4 in N in V' O 00 I O) .O L 3 N O N LC) N N CO O N— N N CO N c Z co 0 u) I CZCZ I t3 o \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O N 0 0 0 0 ,- o o O o 0 0 0 0 0 O 7 O CO 0 O O 00 N 0 0 O O 00 00 I� in O CO in N (O N N O 4 If) 00 Ls) d co O N N N N O N- N N '1' r+ U 15 N 0 . co a Y ct o Y O O O O O O O O O O O O O }' (3 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o \ 0 0 0 0 0 0 C pp N I� CO co) co N N N 0 00 N O N N- CO O Y (O 4 in • M .- On N N , N O N- N ,- N CO,- 0 t co Y t.) ,O^ 0. czO L N a) + >, rn O o a) E C co (N w Ha N p E co D I— U) t a) 0 w + O >, aB -0 O Z LU o m `° _ ? m Q O m E " vim) w Ce as a I 2 E w O I a) �' 0 N t O .a) Q V) -� I a a) c d as om V _� o _1 .0 a v O E -� a)10 E Z O .0 .( I O I ? — c� a`°i — O m o 06 1 a) a) E = m (' v) aa) E m o N N I J � co > >, W 2 ) a) m E z d' = o CD Q cn O N S-2 'E m � N c) a) Z S S = co El cn O O O O a_ c� �_ _ c + + 0 a) H I— } J ,— co 2 I (W 2 0_ D 2 0_ D Y Z Q V) U) N N Z (0 = O NO) L1) N- N- 0 N (N 0) i a) (1) d 4 E a) 0 a) \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O c O O O � O O � O � � O N N � O 00 00 r) �' LC) O 00 N r) O N N r) Lfi ' co ' N R LC) N N N N O O H N- 0 o O o o O O o O o O O o 0 0 0 o O R o 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 o o 0 L 0 o L o O a0 N I� 0) � co co 00 co a0 I� «� 0) O «� O O 00 L() O O O r) O N (O �' O LU r) O O MN - - CO - - - - CO N- N r N N- 0 Z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O '!3 �' O CO CO nr 0) cor) N in 00 O 03 O O 3 v (o o ai ri N 00 o ri cm o N.: N ri ai ' 00 co N- N N - - - - N - CO CO I Lo to Y r L O y Z V 'L O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O H .a O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 I 0 0 I 0 0 I 0 O O I� CO 0 L!') CO L!') O N L() O O L() co 0 R S N- rN-r) ) 00N N N (O N O LC) N (O O 00 O N N - - - - N N '1' N '- Y Y V. 0) 0 (3 N = Z `a 0 N \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'MI Nr N 00 co 00 L() 0 nr 0) coL() L() N co 00 00 in 3 coR 00 O O O Ln N O 4 0) N cri O O Ln N C O o a N r V 'L 0O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q 3 N- (O N N N In N 0) a0 N LC) co (O L!') O N o 00 O O O O L() 4 r) r) N -0 Y r r co r r r r r N r r N r N- C C CtS O >, oa0c in U t Y N O 0) V N:Da cn N 'L 6) ✓ N CU I) fC -D 3 V U) LU U) LU C ca p 0 rn rn rn rn 0 > 0 E • c U U O rn rn rn rn LU 0 0 c 2 Z O 0) 0) 0) 0) O J Z a) f3 O c 4 g 0 LV O d C it M -i ea ea ea 2 O O OU O L 7 0) 0 0 O O O O , 0 U) o o I 2 (B O N o O O O o 7) Q z M J Lu O O O O o 0 o O LL) r) o O Q = 0 O O O O Z 0O o 8..F... O �' H O N o I Q O O O O N O O N J N O N Qi - L() L() O L() o Ln 00 0 w U) -Q cY '� (n El 0 O N L() I� O O O O O N > 2 g O c p O '5 3 NI- 1 _1 ea ea ea ea c 2 ch ch Lo oo O U) Z D ch ,.,> Z Co0 = �O co cn 2 2 $ $ 2 2 2 2 2 2 N- CO r @ 0 0 0 @ .— n o \ # \ \ \ .— } \ \ ® \ 0)\ To▪ 0 2 2 o $ 2 $ 2 2 $ 2 2 2 - as CO w N- CO = # 0 c 0 N- C $ } ® \ N Cr) \ ® N N / ▪ N 0 z - 2 2 $ $ $ 2 2 2 2 E - c N- co o o = r # n 2 # k ® \ ® } \ \ ® \ m m I LO 2 = o 7 0 \ \ = 2 2 $ $ $ $ 2 2 2 $ _ N- CO CO N- In In c R = _ I o = 6 6 N k 6N a o m n = .— c = .— .— - = \ cI ƒ \ - 0 Z ' C 2 2 $ $ $ $ 2 2 2 2 >. r R n ® @ f 9 R 2 \ Q \ / p \ N ® / o § - Q a 0 2 a) k c=' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / s='. % \ / N / ® ® pf "as \ a/ 2 o J '0 m _ C ° L- LU b ; 6 on C m\ \ \ V E = 12 E & K = / 2 0 -6 a i a) \ 2 E / 2 2Lc-) z ; i f Si U) E 6 = 2 © k f 7 \ E \ \ 0 D LU m ) G § E 0) - I / ( / w 2 ( 7 = 0 = m LU & ± @ & I = _ 2z E a / a = E CI R « \ a E « \ $ j om I e = § § I e z = ± _ £ a 2 / i § Cr 0 .E I _ « o / o « » ® L _ $ / $ _ $ < a W § § o $ § § o § a ( \ � k § * q \ \ \ as e Izx a = 2 = z0 II \ I \ 1 Co / / > / _ E 0 \ @ o_ _a 0 0 p 2 2 7 2 2 2 2 \ \ @ f o = o o N n Ta / / 2 N N N N N Q N— _ 2 / 0 \ ca $ 2 \ 2 2 $ $ 2 $ $ co c 7@ c R .— .— n o g = £ 2 $ ? 7 % N — \ 3 \ g &-N. \ Z / 2 $ 2 $ $ 7 2 2 $ $ _ COFs 9 CO n = _ N- o f@ - } \ / ? r o-5 N N N p N ƒ .— ( \ m / / 4in -0 2 2 e $ $ 2 2 2 2 $ \ \ ° n ® 3 @ c 9 CO o @ f § I / a w 3 o o o a o r 7 » » c73 . _ .1' CO = n _ a) _ ■ 0 4- 0 2 § CI Z � \ w E 2 2 « $ $ $ $ $ 2 2 a) _ m r r ƒ = w@ = o r r £ £ o \ \ r N \ N - \ N- ® 5 CV § \ 2 { \ a as (ti = CCI = § I § § 2 2 r $ $ $ $ 2 2 2 ® _ \ CO N \ 7 9 0 N- 0 0) > > g N % N — \ N \ \ -co 0 & \ $ ` o> a ca \ 0 e C 0 In J � � m = \ 0 ?) M c e C 2 \ \ a) o & _ / o / / ± 2 > m 0 \ f ± @ \ / § \ > o a) Cr) z e > o o § § 0 6 \ 0 / 7 •( 474 I & _ I— \ \ 2 = E § G1 _ C $ 0 2 % $ & R 7 '§ = j E _ k z { 2 = 2 o w § ) \ \ \ g ® i c > / I— o & > > > / ± Z 0) = k 5 ¥ I CD k ii k § @ ° r ± ¥ z = .= = t - = Q « $ o z Q o ± 2 0 5 § o 0 o E ± \ CZI I- k x z LI m .g .g n e z a 2 2 co ` n } \ LO CT) N- N- /E 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 f@ @ » R 9 9 2 N # r o = co $ # r = - p N I- / $ $ 2 $ $ $ $ c'' § e w 7 7 r CO 0 w Y . 7 \ \ ® Q / ® . ® o z 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 k / 7 N- 0 CO N- \ 7 co # r co) N— N r...- -C w a oE a) 2 z / / k § 2 2 2 $ $ $ $ 7 o \ _ -0 ° = 9 ® 0 CO CO f CO - L- � � / \ Q / \ Q Q N \ @ ƒ I \ } 0 ~ .-F-. I w 7 o . / } 2 2 2 2 2 $ $ 2 e@ U - c 9 _ @ r CO ± L \ 2 \ \ \ 3 ® ® 7 o , 3 \ \ c0 / & / ( \ \ a $2 $ $ $ $ $ 2 ° (,) o = N- CO n = N— 00N 0 _C _ _ 3 2 N \ \ N N N ® 7 ) 2 Y $ _ w _ u v ¥ / k § o co ƒ 2 ƒ a) / 2 \ 2 § c } $ \ 2 � 3 N ƒ k ( -� c \ § % \ * $ 4 7 ( k k \ \ \ \ \ _ k ctLLI k \ \ CD § j k E 2 § .g $ \ CI) 2 k o % 2 \ C \ \ \ / \ \ I = Cl_ 0 4 a / § ® 2 Z 2 A » CCI Ct » 6 / / f \ Q 1 z Zt = I = _ice _ 2 ® Lu '...!.7' Z _ I— 22m = 0 m = $ $ $ L § o O k \ o 2 z \ \ \ z z / m m m Table 1-7. Buyer Unit Preferences, County and Districts of Hawai'i, 2019 Hawaii Districts North and North North South Kona to Ka'u Puna South Hilo Hawaii Kona Total TOTAL BUYER HOUSEHOLDS 1,002 2,555 3,849 1,899 2,789 12,095 PREFERRED UNIT TYPE SFD 70.9% 85.8% 81.6% 86.1% 73.8% 80.5% Townhouse 14.9% .9% 3.1% 3.0% 5.2% 4.1% Condo 6.8% 3.5% 4.8% 3.9% 17.8% 7.6% Apt 0.0% 0.0% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% .5% Other 1.9% 5.7% 1.1% 4.3% 1.0% 2.6% DK 5.5% 4.1% 7.6% 2.7% 2.3% 4.7% PREFERRED NUMBER OF BEDROOMS 0-None-studio 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1 -One 0.0% 2.8% 3.7% 12.5% 5.5% 5.0% 2-Two 22.0% 30.5% 23.9% 15.9% 25.8% 24.4% 3-Three 57.5% 43.2% 47.1% 54.2% 57.5% 50.6% 4-Four 18.6% 21.4% 21.8% 17.4% 8.8% 17.8% 5-Five or more 1.9% 2.0% 3.5% 0.0% 2.4% 2.3% MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE BEDROOMS 0-None-studio 0.0% 0.0% 4.5% 0.0% 8.0% 3.3% 1 -One 0.0% 15.2% 11.5% 2.4% 10.1% 9.4% 2-Two 46.9% 30.0% 49.3% 50.2% 53.7% 46.4% 3-Three 50.7% 44.5% 25.8% 45.8% 28.2% 35.6% 4-Four 0.0% 5.8% 7.3% 1.6% 0.0% 3.8% 5-Five or more 2.4% 4.5% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% PREFERRED NUMBER OF BATHROOMS 1 -One 0.0% 12.6% 9.2% 12.0% 8.6% 9.4% 2-One and one-half 7.9% 8.3% 6.7% 1.7% 7.1% 6.4% 3-Two 67.4% 44.1% 44.8% 52.7% 63.2% 52.0% 4-Two and one-half 12.3% 7.2% 20.8% 18.6% 6.0% 13.5% 5-Three 7.2% 23.0% 11.7% 6.7% 13.7% 13.4% 6-Three and one-half 0.0% 1.1% 5.8% 3.3% .6% 2.7% 7-Four or more 5.2% 3.7% 1.1% 5.1% .7% 2.5% MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE BATHROOMS 1 -One 33.7% 39.7% 39.8% 34.4% 38.0% 37.9% 2-One and one-half 9.7% 12.6% 12.7% 12.7% 13.7% 12.7% 3-Two 28.6% 40.8% 39.6% 40.2% 40.9% 39.2% 4-Two and one-half 6.3% 0.0% 4.9% 8.1% .9% 3.6% 5-Three 21.7% 6.8% 1.7% 4.5% 6.6% 6.1% 6-Three and one-half 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% .4% 7-Four or more 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Source: Hawai'i Demand Survey, 2019 Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 156 ©SMS December,2019 Table 1-8. Renter Unit Preferences, County and Districts of Hawai'i, 2019 Hawaii Districts North and North North South Kona to Ka'u Puna South Hilo Hawaii Kona Total TOTAL RENTER HOUSEHOLDS 371 1,231 4,104 1,635 2,079 9,421 PREFERRED UNIT TYPE SFD 65.6% 89.2% 52.3% 44.0% 48.9% 55.3% Townhouse 23.0% .0% 3.9% 1.0% 0.0% 2.8% Condo 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 0.0% 0.8% Apt 0.0% 3.6% 31.2% 26.2% 32.3% 25.9% Other 0.0% 5.4% 3.6% 0.0% .0% 2.3% DK 11.3% 1.8% 8.1% 26.8% 18.8% 13.1% PREFERRED NUMBER OF BEDROOMS 0-None-studio 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.3% 1 -One 23.0% 20.6% 35.5% 16.2% 9.7% 24.0% 2-Two 46.8% 57.6% 29.8% 63.6% 50.1% 44.4% 3-Three 10.8% 12.4% 27.2% 10.6% 37.3% 24.0% 4-Four 0.0% 9.4% 5.4% 9.6% 1.5% 5.6% 5-Five or more 19.4% 0.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1.7% MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE BEDROOMS 0-None-studio 0.0% 21.7% 0.0% 0.0% 15.2% 6.1% 1 -One 20.1% 8.0% 4.7% 26.7% 22.7% 13.0% 2-Two 15.6% 56.0% 73.4% 47.6% 42.4% 58.2% 3-Three 14.7% 14.4% 16.5% 25.8% 19.7% 18.2% 4-Four 49.6% 0.0% 5.4% 0.0% 0.0% 4.5% 5-Five or more 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% PREFERRED NUMBER OF BATHROOMS 1 -One 27.2% 30.6% 33.5% 22.9% 19.3% 27.9% 2-One and one-half 0.0% 21.6% 20.9% 1.9% 13.1% 15.2% 3-Two 47.3% 47.8% 35.5% 56.1% 61.0% 46.7% 4-Two and one-half 0.0% 0.0% 4.1% 9.2% 3.7% 4.2% 5-Three 25.5% 0.0% 5.3% 9.8% 2.8% 5.6% 6-Three and one-half 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% .0% 0.0% 7-Four or more 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% .0% 0.3% MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE BATHROOMS 1 -One 6.5% 73.0% 56.8% 52.9% 61.1% 56.3% 2-One and one-half 35.2% 17.2% 19.2% 14.5% 12.3% 16.9% 3-Two 20.6% 0.0% 16.4% 22.6% 26.5% 18.9% 4-Two and one-half 37.7% 0.0% 5.9% 0.0% .0% 4.0% 5-Three 0.0% 9.9% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 3.4% 6-Three and one-half 0.0% 0.0% 1.7% 0.0% 0.0% .6% 7-Four or more 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Source: Hawai'i Demand Survey, 2019 Base for Total Renter Households are effective demand households who plan to rent. Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 157 ©SMS December,2019 Table 1-9. Preferred Next Location, BUYERS, County and Districts of Hawai'i, 2019 Hawaii Districts North and South North North South Kona to Ka'u Puna Hilo Hawaii Kona Total PREFERRED LOCATION OF NEXT UNIT-BUYERS Not in designated 0.0% 0.0% 5.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% districts Primary Urban Center 28.7% 47.7% 26.0% 36.0% 54.7% 37.3% Central Oahu 7.9% 14.4% 15.7% 50.1% 30.2% 22.3% East Honolulu 3.6% 1.9% 4.8% 10.2% 8.6% 5.7% Ewa 5.7% 9.3% 9.2% 27.5% 16.5% 12.8% Koolauloa-Koolaupoko 46.4% 27.3% 9.2% 0.0% 7.7% 13.3% Rural Oahu 14.0% 0.0% 2.8% 3.5% 5.7% 3.9% Oahu-district unknown 0.0% 7.8% 4.3% 11.3% 14.8% 7.7% South Kona to Ka'u 0.0% 8.0% 2.9% .0% .0% 2.5% Puna 0.0% 4.9% 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% North &South Hilo 16.3% 16.1% 17.8% 10.6% 2.2% 13.1% North Hawaii 24.9% 14.8% 15.6% 18.9% 4.9% 14.1% North Kona 8.6% 4.6% 4.6% 7.5% 4.3% 5.2% Hawaii-district unknown 0.0% 0.0% 9.3% .0% 0.0% 4.0% Hana 0.0% .0% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% Makawao-Pukalani-Kula 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 7.3% 2.2% Wailuku-Kahului 0.0% 6.3% 2.7% 11.9% 4.3% 4.5% Pa'ia-Haiku 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.0% .0% 0.6% Kihei-Makena 0.0% .0% 0.7% .0% 0.0% 0.3% West Maui 0.0% 10.4% 4.8% .0% .0% 3.7% Molokai 0.0% 0.0% 4.8% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% Lanai 0.0% 0.0% 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% Maui-district unknown 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 11.9% 7.0% 5.2% Waimea 0.0% 0.0% 3.0% 0.0% .0% 1.3% Hanapepe-Eleele 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0% 2.7% 1.0% Koloa-Poipu-Kalaheo 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Lihue 0.0% 11.4% 5.1% 3.2% 0.0% 4.4% East Kauai 0.0% 10.3% 6.7% 6.3% 2.2% 5.7% North Shore Kauai 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% .0% 0.0% 0.3% Kauai-district unknown 0.0% 0.0% 3.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% Out-of-State Resident 0.0% 7.5% 4.7% 0.0% .0% 3.2% Refused 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% 0.0% .0% 0.9% Total Effective Demand Buyers 889 1,884 2,891 1,677 2,645 9,986 Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 158 ©SMS December,2019 Table 1-10. Preferred Next Location, RENTERS, County and Districts of Hawai'i, 2019 Hawaii Districts North and South North North South Kona to Ka'u Puna Hilo Hawaii Kona Total PREFERRED LOCATION-RENTERS Not in designated 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0% 2.1% districts Primary Urban Center 51.0% 55.7% 19.6% 39.7% 35.7% 32.7% Central O"ahu 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 18.6% 3.1% 5.1% East Honolulu 0.0% 0.0% 14.0% 0.0% 3.1% 6.3% "'Ewa 0.0% 21.0% 2.9% 22.4% 17.1% 12.0% Koolauloa-Koolaupoko 0.0% 24.9% 12.2% 18.8% 8.9% 13.7% RuralO'ahu 0.0% 0.0% 9.7% 0.0% 11.9% 6.4% Oahu-district unknown 0.0% 34.1% 1.6% 13.7% 8.3% 8.9% South Kona to Ka'u 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% .0% .0% 0.0% Puna 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% North &South Hilo 0.0% 12.8% 1.2% 0.0% 15.8% 5.0% North Hawaii 49.0% 33.0% 0.0% 13.7% 7.5% 10.5% North Kona 0.0% 19.7% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 2.4% Hawaii-district unknown 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% .0% 0.0% 2.1% Hana 0.0% .0% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% Makawao-Pukalani-Kula 49.0% 0.0% 12.8% 7.3% 14.3% 12.4% Wailuku-Kahului 49.0% 0.0% 3.2% 4.0% 0.0% 4.7% Pa'ia-Haiku 0.0% 0.0% 5.7% 0.0% .0% 2.3% Kihei-Makena 0.0% .0% 2.4% .0% 0.0% 1.0% West Maui 0.0% 0.0% 8.4% .0% .0% 3.4% Molokai 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 8.5% 2.5% Lanai 0.0% 0.0% .0% 13.7% 0.0% 3.3% Maui-district unknown 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 17.7% 5.7% Waimea 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.4% .7% Hanapepe-Eleele 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% .0% 1.1% Koloa-Poipu-Kalaheo 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 14.9% 3.1% Lihu'e 0.0% 0.0% 3.4% .0% 0.0% 1.4% East Kaua'i 0.0% 0.0% 13.5% 0.0% .0% 5.5% North Shore Kauai 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% .0% 0.0% 0.9% Kauai-district unknown 0.0% 0.0% 11.1% 0.0% 0.0% 4.5% Out-of-State Resident 0.0% 0.0% 9.0% 5.9% .0% 5.1% Refused 0.0% 0.0% 6.1% 0.0% .0% 2.5% Total Effective Demand Renters 485 1,291 4,685 1,099 2,403 9,963 Hawaii Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 159 ©SMS December,2019 Table I-11. Current and Affordable Housing Payment, County and Districts of Hawai'i, 2019 Hawaii Districts North and North North South Kona to Ka'u Puna South Hilo Hawaii Kona Total AVERAGE CURRENT MORTGAGE AMOUNT Single Family $1,132 $1,136 $1,307 $1,867 $2,235 $1,507 Multifamily $920 $1,645 $779 $1,243 $1,420 $1,292 Other $679 $350 $260 $1,094 $650 $653 Not reported AVERAGE CURRENT RENT AMOUNT Studio $912 $728 $881 $1,065 $898 One bedroom $726 $602 $654 $1,096 $1,168 $838 Two bedrooms $1,165 $1,105 $1,219 $1,254 $1,510 $1,274 Three bedrooms $1,491 $1,405 $1,375 $1,753 $2,130 $1,586 Four bedrooms $815 $650 $2,008 $1,749 $1,808 $1,692 Five bedrooms $1,197 $1,747 $887 $950 $1,170 Six bedrooms DK AFFORDABLE MORTGAGE PAYMENT Less than $500 13.0% 3.1% 1.2% 5.6% 3.7% 3.9% $500 to $799 20.7% 23.9% 10.4% 13.4% 7.7% 14.0% $800 to $1,099 10.8% 17.2% 12.5% 9.0% 6.8% 11.4% $1,100 to$1,399 10.3% 14.1% 20.6% 12.0% 9.1% 14.1% $1,400 to$1,699 7.4% 19.6% 24.8% 13.2% 17.6% 18.6% $1,700 to$1,999 14.7% 5.1% 6.8% 9.3% 16.8% 10.0% $2,000 to$2,999 11.4% 4.2% 15.9% 27.4% 25.2% 17.1% $3,000 to$3,999 6.5% 7.2% 6.5% 8.9% 6.7% 7.1% $4,000 or more 5.1% 5.7% 1.4% 1.2% 6.5% 3.9% AVERAGE AFFORDABLE $1,551 $1,543 $1,648 $1,770 $2,007 $1,725 MORTGAGE AFFORDABLE RENT PAYMENT Less than $300 0.0% 6.5% 19.0% 0.0% 0.0% 9.2% $300 to $499 10.0% 32.3% 10.5% 0.0% 4.8% 10.1% $500 to $799 0.0% 16.1% 15.8% 6.2% 14.2% 13.2% $800 to $1,099 10.5% 36.5% 19.7% 43.4% 20.0% 25.6% $1,100 to$1,399 36.9% 2.3% 9.9% 10.1% 24.8% 13.4% $1,400 to$1,699 42.6% 6.2% 10.0% 15.7% 16.1% 13.1% $1,700 to$1,999 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 7.5% 7.9% 4.2% $2,000 to$2,499 0.0% 0.0% 4.6% 13.5% 12.3% 7.1% $2,500 to$2,999 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% 0.0% .4% $3,000 to$3,999 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% $4,000 or more 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% .8% Not sure 0.0% 0.0% 6.1% 1.5% 0.0% 2.9% AVERAGE $1,261 $716 $858 $1,343 $1,283 $1,041 AFFORDABLE RENT Source: Hawai'i Demand Survey, 2019 Hawai'i Housing Planning Study,2019 Page 160 ©SMS December,2019 ,— O) co ,— ,— c) a) N Q) i a3 a) d 4 E a) U a) O O O O O O O O O O O\ O\ O\ 0 co co In I� 00 00 CO N- O In O O 00 O O O O 4 4 N M N.:R N N N— 00 0 OO O O O O O O O O O (a O OO O O O O O O O O O O O � N O O IQ O CO N- M In CO O N O N M 4 O 00 (a M (a O 6 OO a) N 00 t Y 'Cr) Z O O O O O O O O O N O O O C73 r•-- 'V 'V 'VO CO 0 0 0 N-- V' O � 06 00 O N.: O 4 O 4 00 O a) ..— ca c`) a) O I N L Y _ 'Cr) w�Y •V Z ,v Lco O O O O O O O O O O O O O = n -0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0R = o v 6 c6 v o �c ) 6 6 N CO •U 3 LS.+L+ co Z fn 0 a OO O O O O O O O O O O O C — (0 (0 N N N- N 00 a0 (0 O 6 00 6 O 00 6 6 00 M (a .� c N CO E O C M O 0- 0 0 0 Si N O O O O O O O O O O o o 0 O co O N-- O 0 0 N a) NM 6 O O N O O O O a) C Y ch a) O 0 Y ca O ct O y Y W t _ Y Tz0 a) 0 N u) a) Ce O a N (20 CZ To d' Q N a) 0 E u z CZ m 0) 0) 0) 0) 0 C c Q ao) ao) a0)) 0) 0) 0) 0) 7) E �E C H o J Z o 0) 0) rn aS aS aS aS N LU a) m Zt W O 4 a) a) a) 0 Ce 0 Q O O O OO63 6q 6q 6q (0 c 0.Q S H03 N B OOOOOH Lu O Z O O O N I I = Z a--. O O O 0 0 0 0 0 = a i 1:0 0El � O o U) iO o LS 0 I0 0 0 0 0 � � c 0 U O Q 0 Z -1 64 64 64 e» e» N 64 64 2 0 d } Z (0 = O