APARTMENTS

the property, Larr said.

Larr added: “Given the market factors and unknowns regarding future LIHTC pricing, along with uncertainty with respect to how much of our total development cost will be (eligible), it is impossible to say if the LIHTC equity contributed to the project will equal 30% of the total development cost.”

Unlike direct subsidies, the tax credits are received over time based on performance, according to the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority, often called CHFA.

“Investors do not receive their tax credits unless the housing is suitable for occupancy and is rented to households with low-income at restricted rents during the initial 15year term,” CHFA’s fact sheet says.

Who could live there e proposal documents label the apartment complex as “workforce housing units,” a term that can vary depending on who is using it. e income limit could end up being even higher for some units.

Units would generally be available to individuals and families making no greater than 60% of the area’s median income, as that gure is calculated annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, according to a Sept. 16 letter from the developer’s team to county sta .

As of April 2022, local households making no greater than 60% of the AMI, and thus eligible for a unit, typically earn between $40,000 to $80,000 per year, the letter says.

“Households with incomes in this range may include employees of Douglas County government, Douglas County School District, local businesses … and critical services, including the Parker Adventist Hospital system and other emergency and essential service organizations,” the letter says.

“As we have presented in our public meetings, we are anticipating providing a 100% income-restricted property to bene t Douglas County. Based on federal guidance we anticipate a range of AMI set asides up to 80% AMI at the maximum,” Larr said.

Property values on the mind

One comment to the county, as compiled in a December county sta report, claimed that if the apartments are built, nearby property values will be “eroded by potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars.”

Several research studies don’t back that assertion.

Some studies have found that Low-Income Housing Tax Credit developments in “higher-income” areas are associated with house price declines, according to the nonpro t Urban Institute.

But results have varied. A New York University study on New York City found that a ordable housing developments have led to increases in property values in many cases.

“ e completion of LIHTC projects is associated with an immediate positive and signi cant ( xed) e ect, indicating that prices surrounding the tax credit housing rise more than prices in the larger neighborhood,” the study reads. “After completion, the degree to which prices in the vicinity of tax credit housing exceed those in the larger neighborhood rises by 3.8 percentage points.” e impact can also change over time, says the study, which looked at counties in 15 states.

A 2017 Stanford Graduate School of Business study found that LIHTC construction in neighborhoods with median incomes above $54,000 leads to housing price declines of approximately 2.5% within 0.1 miles of the development site.

“ ese declines, however, are only seen in high income areas with a minority population of below 50%,” the study says.

“At distances of 0.3 to 0.4 miles away from the LIHTC site, there are modest declines in house prices right away, but they fall over time. It appears the housing market very quickly ‘prices’ the impact of LIHTC very locally, but it takes 5 to 10 years for the house prices 0.3 to 0.4 miles away to fully adjust.”

A study on Alexandria, Virginia, found that a ordable housing in higher-income neighborhoods has a “positive and highly signi cant e ect on surrounding home values, as does a ordable housing in lowerincome neighborhoods.” e study adds: “We nd that affordable units in the city of Alexandria are associated with a small but statistically signi cant increase in property values of 0.09 percent within 1/16 of a mile of a development, on average — a distance comparable to a typical urban block.”

“ is calls into question prior ndings that a ordable housing in highincome areas necessarily causes nearby property values to decline,” the 2022 Urban Institute study says.

Locally, in 2010, the median single-family home price in metro Denver was about $200,000. It was roughly triple that as of 2022, according to Colorado Association of Realtors data.

Worries of crime e Stanford study also looked at the impact of a ordable housing development on local crime rates in certain cities.

Many comments submitted to the county mentioned crime as a concern with the proposed apartment complex.

“We nd both violent and property crime decline in low income areas, regardless of minority share. However, in higher income areas we do not see any increase in crime, rather property crime may even fall slightly,” the study says.

Lawsuit filed e Douglas County commissioners voted 2-1 on Jan. 10 to allow the development to move forward. e lawsuit, led in February, asked a court to reverse the county’s decision and stop the development.

More than 100 area residents recently led a lawsuit against Douglas County’s elected leaders for allowing the development to move forward.

Residents of e Pinery brought the lawsuit, arguing the proposed development does not meet the county’s approval requirements and that it is “incompatible with the existing character” of the area.

For a look at the lawsuit and the county’s approval requirements, see Colorado Community Media’s previous story at tinyurl.com/PineryApartmentLawsuit.