Fells Point Station lobby

Headquartered in McLean, Virginia, Capital One is a committed community partner located right in our own backyard. With branch locations primarily located in New York, New Jersey, Texas, Louisiana, Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia, Capital one applies the principles of innovation, collaboration and empowerment to its communities across the country. The bank recognizes that housing plays a crucial part in neighborhood revitalization and economic recovery; and in 2015 alone, Capital One provided almost $1.5 billion in affordable housing loans.

Walk into the lobby of the new Fells Point Station in Baltimore and you will be able to see Capital One’s commitment for yourself.

With contemporary gas-burning fireplace a huge flat-screen TV mounted on a stone wall, the area feels more like an upscale hotel lobby than the entrance into a mixed-income community that was once an abandoned police station.

For 19 years, Fells Point Station sat as a bombed-out shell—its roof had collapsed, and the entire building was in danger of crumbling to the ground. Today, the original 16,000-square-foot 1800s brick and masonry building is completely renovated, with a 37,000-square-foot addition joined to it by a glass structure that serves as the lobby entrance. It is the first new construction in this neighborhood—Baltimore’s oldest, and a major shipbuilding center in the 1700s and 1800s—in over 50 years.

A mixed-income, mixed-use building, it exemplifies how reclaiming old buildings can mean turning dilapidation into beauty, while helping the city’s low-income residents. The building houses 47 one- and two-bedroom apartments. There’s free Wi-Fi, a ground-floor retail space, an exercise room, a multipurpose room for residents, an elevated courtyard, and a green roof above 33 enclosed parking spaces. In an up-and-coming neighborhood like this, Fells Point Station was built to stand the test of time and to blend in with other new and renovated properties in the area.

Baltimore native and former commissioner of Baltimore’s Housing and Community Development, Daniel Henson spearheaded the Fells Point Station project – and through his company, The Henson Development Company, partnered with Mission First Housing Group on the development. The two companies had worked together several times before, most notably in the development of affordable senior and family developments in DC Golden Rule Plaza and Severna.

To get the financing started, Capital One provided an $8.44 million construction loan and a $1.85 million permanent loan. Additional funding sources included $9.1 million in LIHTC equity and another $634,000 in funding stemming from the property being a qualified historic rehab project. Both streams of tax benefit were syndicated by Hudson Housing Capital to Capital One as the sole investor. The City of Baltimore and the Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development provided other development funding through subordinate loans.

The roof top garden at Fells Point Station

Originally, in 2006, Henson wanted to develop luxury condos on the city-owned site, but then the economy took a nosedive. He quickly discovered that moving toward tiered-income levels helped him qualify for tax credits that could provide needed development capital. Henson, who grew up poor in the Poe Homes nearby, understood what affordable housing could mean to a community. In negotiating with Fells Point community leaders, he learned that the neighborhood liked the idea of making the building 70 percent affordable with the other 30 percent at market rates—bringing a diverse group of new residents into the area.

For one resident, Colin Charon, 53, living at Fells Point Station helped him get his life back on track. Once an assistant to the famous photographer Annie Leibovitz, Charon fell on hard times. While homeless for five years on Baltimore’s streets, he almost drank himself to death due to a one-gallon-a-day vodka habit. He hit rock bottom after a visit to the doctor where he was given a formal letter explaining that if he didn’t stop drinking immediately, death was imminent. That letter now hangs on the wall in his apartment as a constant reminder of just how far he’s come. Sober for over two years now, Charon works as a carpenter and pays just $659 a month in rent—which is half the market rate. He also has a 19-year-old daughter in college.

Colin Charon, Fells Point Station resident

“When I bring my daughter here,” he says, looking at a photo of his daughter, “it is very important for me to show her that I live in a great place and that I am a good person.”

And for Capital One, being a HAND member means a great deal in helping others like Charon.

“HAND is unique in that it affords its members the opportunity to both derive and provide value from engaged membership,” said Ed Delany, senior vice president and senior capital officer, Community Finance, Capital One. “As an organization that connects, supports, educates and inspires affordable housing professionals and advocates across the region, HAND offers networking, teaching and training opportunities, a platform to share best practices and a forum to discuss issues of importance to our everyday work.”

A 25th Anniversary and 2016 Annual Meeting & Housing Expo sponsor, HAND is pleased to spotlight Capital One as a member who certainly contributes to our organization’s COLLABORATION, INNOVATION and TRANSFORMATION within the metropolitan area!

On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 from 2:00- 4:00PM, Liz Bramlet Consulting, LLC will host a webinar to help attendees learn how to apply the 45-day grace period,and the IRS’s rules governing the LIHTC rent floor to insure you implement your income limits correctly while generating maximum revenue.  We will also address how to apply these new limits at blended properties including LIHTC projects receiving assistance through the Section 8, Section 236, HOME and RAD programs.

The Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE) announced today that, for the second year in a row, the District of Columbia metropolitan area has earned the #1 ranking in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) annual list of U.S. metropolitan areas with the most ENERGY STAR® certified buildings. This is the second year in a row the District has received the recognition.

“The District is honored to top EPA’s 2016 Top Cities list,” said DC Mayor Muriel Bowser. “We continue to be a national leader in energy efficiency and green building – and these efforts by the private sector are critical to achieving our goal of cutting carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. Building a sustainable and equitable city are a core values of the District. We remain committed to lowering our energy costs, creating healthier neighborhoods, and giving more DC residents a fair shot through good-paying jobs in the green economy.”

“EPA is pleased to recognize Washington, DC among America’s top cities paving the path toward a more energy-efficient economy,” said Jean Lupinacci, Chief of the ENERGY STAR Commercial & Industrial program. “DC and the other top cities continue to demonstrate the economic, public health, and environmental benefits of simple, cost-effective reductions in energy use.”

The Top Cities list ranks metropolitan areas according to the number of buildings earning ENERGY STAR certification in 2015. To qualify, a building must outperform 75 percent of similar buildings nationwide by earning an ENERGY STAR score of 75 or higher on a 100-point scale. Since 2009, Los Angeles, California held the number one spot until the District took the title last year. The DC area boasts 686 local buildings that earned an ENERGY STAR rating in 2015, an increase of 200 buildings more than 2014. Last year, DC’s ENERGY STAR buildings helped the District save $179 million in total energy costs.

“As the first jurisdiction in the nation to pass a benchmarking law, we recognize the importance of performance data as the foundation for all energy efficiency,” said DOEE Director Tommy Wells. “Buildings consume the most energy and are the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the District, but as property owners continue to track their energy and water use, they are taking steps to reduce energy consumption. Through innovative regulatory policies, renewable energy programs, and incentives, we will continue to push the envelope on energy efficiency and green building.”

District of Columbia law requires buildings over 50,000 gross square feet to annually measure and report their energy and water performance for public disclosure; key data for each building is then published online. 2014 benchmarking data for 1,500 public and private buildings is now available on DOEE’s website and on the District’s open data portal.

As of December 2015, more than 27,000 buildings in the United States have earned EPA’s ENERGY STAR certification. Together, these buildings saved more than $3.8 billion and prevented greenhouse gas emissions equal to the annual energy consumption of nearly 2.6 million homes. For more information about the 2016 ENERGY STAR Top Cities list, visit www.energystar.gov/TopCities.  For more information about the District’s energy benchmarking program, visit http://doee.dc.gov/energybenchmarking.

By Lisa Sturtevant, PhD
Lisa Sturtevant & Associates

After decades of public housing development that segregated people by race and income and led to pockets of enduring concentrated poverty – housing advocates, government officials and others now promote the development of mixed-income housing to help meet affordable housing needs. With the release by HUD of the affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH) rule, there is renewed attention to the feasibility and effectiveness of fostering communities that include households of all incomes. Through the HOPE VI and Choice Neighborhoods programs, the Federal government supports the development of mixed-income housing developments. Outside of these Federal programs, developers have found creative ways to build communities that include housing affordable to a range of incomes.  Some neighborhoods have become mixed-income through rapid gentrification and private investment.

Why focus on creating and sustaining mixed-income communities?  What approaches can be most successful at creating and sustaining affordable housing opportunities and creating truly integrated neighborhoods?

There is no universally-accepted or legal definition of “mixed-income housing.”  But, in general, the term refers to developments that include below-market-price housing units that are affordable to very low- and low-income households along with housing that is market-priced. At a larger geographic scale, mixed-income communities or neighborhoods are distinct geographic areas where there is housing affordable to people with a range of incomes.  The goals of mixed-income housing strategies are to reduce poverty among low-income families, facilitate income and racial integration and contribute to urban revitalization.
Conway Center (Rendering courtesy of Wiencek + Associates, Architects + Planners and SOME)

There is a fair amount of research on the benefits of mixed-income communities, including recent compelling research on the importance of neighborhood characteristics on economic mobility.  However, there is also debate (see also this piece in the Atlantic) about how well the theoretical benefits of mixed-income housing play out in reality. The specific characteristics of the communities—and the ways in which they have developed—matter a lot.

In a 2011 review of the research on the impacts on low-income families, researchers at the Urban Institute summarize the wide range of positive outcomes associated with living in mixed income communities.  Low-income families in mixed-income communities have access to higher-quality services and better schools, and live in safer neighborhoods and better-quality housing compared to other low-income families. There are positive health and education outcomes for families living in mixed-income communities, through the research is inconclusive on the extent of these benefits.  Similarly, there is some evidence of improved employment outcomes for families but, overall, the evidence has been mixed on the effect of mixed-income communities on employment and wages.

Research documenting the benefits of mixed-income communities generally has focused on characteristics of the neighborhood, rather than on the benefits that might specifically come from living in a building with a mix of incomes. This issue of mixed-income neighborhood versus mixed-income building is an issue that came to a confrontational head last year over a project in New York City and has also been debated here in Washington DC.

Several things seem to be important if the benefits of mixed-income communities are to be fully realized.  First, researchers have found that aside from the characteristics of the community, the attributes of families themselves are often the most important determinant of whether a family benefits from living in a mixed-income community. So, mixed-income housing is not necessarily a universal remedy for problems related to concentrated poverty.

Second, based on the existing research, mixed-income communities haven’t worked as well when there is too much of a difference between the incomes of the highest and lowest income households. Some have stipulated that it is important that communities have a middle income tier between the highest and lowest incomes to promote community stability and to build connections.

Heritage Crossing

Third, the majority of the research on the benefits of mixed-income communities focuses on specific HOPE VI redevelopment projects or on households that move to better neighborhoods through a housing voucher program, and specifically the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) program.  But mixed-income communities can develop in a variety of ways. We need more information about how low-income households—indeed, all households—are impacted by living in a place that includes people from diverse incomes and backgrounds.

Across the Washington DC area, there are examples of mixed-income communities that are arising under very different circumstances:

Mixed-Income through Gentrification: There are some neighborhoods in the District of Columbia that seem to be the very picture of mixed-income, containing households with very low incomes, as well as those with very high incomes.  For example, Logan Circle, Bloomingdale, U Street, and Mount Vernon Square are some of the most socioeconomically diverse neighborhoods in the city. This mix of incomes at the neighborhood level came about not through public redevelopment efforts but rather through rapid gentrification and private investment.  On paper, then, these neighborhoods look like mixed-income communities. But it is not clear that the presumed benefits of mixed-income neighborhoods have been realized by low-income families living in them.

Mixed-Income through Public-Private Partnerships: Throughout the region, private developers have worked with the local housing authority to develop mixed-income housing on publicly-owned land. The City of Alexandria has, perhaps, the most notable examples of this type of mixed-income development.  The developer EYA, in particular, has worked extensively with the City of Alexandria Redevelopment and Housing Authority to redevelop public housing buildings into mixed-income communities. (Full disclosure – I live in an EYA development in Alexandria.)  The process in Alexandria has not always been smooth, and there has not been a comprehensive study of the impact of these mixed-income communities in in the city.  However, this type of public-private partnership and use of publicly-owned land likely represents a way forward locally for the development of mixed-income communities.

Mixed-Income through Inclusionary Policy: A third way that mixed-income communities have been developed in the Washington DC area is through local inclusionary zoning policies. Fairfax County amended its comprehensive plan to define new affordability requirements in Tyson’s Corner.  In exchange for increased density, residential developers are required to include in new buildings housing that is affordable to households at various incomes, up to 120 percent of the area median income. Through this policy, Fairfax will be incentivizing the development of truly mixed-income buildings—including individuals and families at the low and high end of the income spectrums—all in a fast-growing, transit-accessible area.  It remains to be seen how well the policy works at building truly integrated communities and how low-income families will benefits.

There is no doubt that we cannot return to the day when housing low to very low income families is concentrated in a small number of neighborhoods in the region.  Fostering the development of communities that include housing affordable to households all along the income spectrum is important for promoting economic and racial integration across the region and expanding opportunities for low-income individuals and families. However, it is worth giving more critical thought to how we create and sustain mixed-income communities to better understand how everyone can benefit.