Survey Results

Quantitative: Online Survey of Housing Experiences & Preferences

Over winter and spring of 2023, I ran an online survey with close to 200 total respondents. Results of that survey are available below.

You can view interactive online reports of the survey results directly through the Qualtrics platform here:
All Survey Respondents | Renter Specific Questions | Homeowner Secific Questions

download pdf report of all survey responses here

---

Respondent Profiles

This survey was completed by over 200 people, between February and June of 2023. Those participating were slightly more than half renters (53%) and slightly less than half homeowners (46%) with 2% selecting “other”.  Amongst the renters, 47% rent from a property management company, and 37% rent from an individual property owner who manages the property themselves but does not live on site. Renters overall were lower income than owners, younger, more likely to be students, and had shorter tenure in the current housing. Renters also showed a higher rate of racial diversity than homeowners, although the overall make-up of survey participants was majority white. Demographics of survey participants was consistent with City of Bellingham aggregate population demographics.

---

Questions About Current Housing Experiences & Cost

Unsurprisingly, renters report far greater concern about potential eviction than owners, but the stark contrast between them is notable (shown in Question 71 below). More notable, is that when renters’ responses to this question are broken down according to type of rental arrangement, their concern about displacement is similar across all rental arrangements but is particularly acute with the rental arrangement of “individual property owners who manage the property themselves but do not live onsite”.

Overwhelmingly, both homeowners and renters expressed a strong preference for the rental arrangement of renting from “an individual property owner who manages the property themselves but does not live onsite” (shown in Figure 34). This is a notable contradiction to the results for concern about displacement due to affordability issues described in the paragraph above. While renters report particularly high rates of displacement concern for renting from individual property owners who self-manage their rentals, this is still by far the most preferred type of rental arrangement.

This seeming contradiction between, renters’ reported concern over risk of displacement and their overwhelming preference for the rental arrangement of a landlords who manage their rental themselves, can be interpreted in several ways. One straightforward observation is that there is widespread dissatisfaction with the business practices of property management agencies throughout Bellingham. Another is that while there is a perception amongst renters that landlords who manage their own properties directly are likely to be more humane or easier to work with than a rental property company, however the reality is that these landlords may be just as likely to raise rent without warning and fail to respond to tenant complaints and repair requests in a timely manner. Another interpretation is that there is simply a much greater range of potential business practices with landlords who self-manage, with that range including extremes at both ends of abusive or more ethical business practices. Across all types of rental arrangements, participants are concerned about the risk of displacement due to rising rent prices. an independent rental unit, this arrangement is not inherently more secure than rentals operated by property management companies or other more informal arrangements.

---

Homeowners Vs Renters:
“To what extent are you concerned about being displaced from your home due to affordability issues?”

---

Renters Only, with breakout between different types of rental arrangement:
“To what extent are you concerned about being displaced from your home due to affordability issues?”

---

Homeowners Vs Renters:
“Regardless of your current housing situation, which of the following best describes your preferred rental arrangement?”

---

Housing Type Preferences

Figures 35, 36, and 37 show an interesting gradient from current housing types to preferred housing types, to desired neighborhood development. Participants current housing types reflect current overall housing inventories in Bellingham. While single-family homes where overwhelmingly selected by both homeowners and renters as their preferred housing type, all middle housing types were the next most selected, in the following order of preference: townhouses, duplex/triplex/fourplex, accessory dwelling units, cottage court apartments, medium apartment building (less than 40 units), and tiny homes. The following were all similarly unpopular: large apartment buildings (more than 40 units), high-rise apartment buildings (more than 80 units), informal accessory structures (shed, converted garage, yurt, vehicle parked on private property), mobile home parks, RV.

Figure 37 shows that the most highly desired type of residential development is “Co-Housing developments that cluster a variety of medium density housing types around shared common spaces” especially amongst renters. Immediately below that, the most desired type of development is “Existing homes building mother-in-law suites and accessory dwelling units”, and right after that is “single family homes built on existing vacant lots”. The three least desired forms of development overall are large apartment buildings (+40 units), high-rise apartment buildings (+80 units) and new mobile home parks. 

I would interpret these responses as an overall preference for experiencing autonomy and independence in a housing arrangement, regardless of whether the structure of that unit is detached, attached, or part of a multifamily building. While many people like the idea of accessory dwelling units, nobody really wants to live in an apartment in the backyard of a single-family home occupied by strangers, and few people like the power dynamic of being housemates with their landlord. At the same time, respondents reported a strong desire for a greater variety of housing types, and a specific desire for small to medium sized multifamily buildings. They also reported a strong preference for clustered housing types and co-housing, which could be interpreted as a desire for community and closeness, with equalized power dynamics and ownership structures. This reflects and supports current industry discourse about “missing middle” housing forms.

Homeowners Vs Renters: “How would you describe your current housing type?”

---

Homeowners Vs Renters:
“What type of housing do you prefer to live in?  Select your top three, or all that apply.”

---

Homeowners Vs Renters: “What kind of residential development would you most want to see in your neighborhood? Check all that apply.”

---

Are Current Homeowners in Bellingham, Washinton Interested in doing Small Scale Development?

Results from the housing survey conducted for this research indicate that there is a significant portion of current single family homeowner households who want to do some form of infill development, potentially more than one-quarter of current homeowners.  Figure 38 shows that more than a quarter of the homeowners surveyed would like to do some kind of development on their property, but they either don’t have funding for the project or permitting and code regulations are a significant barrier. This population is an ideal target demographic for training and technical assistance in small scale infill development. If these survey results are translated across the total Bellingham housing inventory of 18,549 owner-occupied single-family properties, then there could be more than 5,000 potential small-scale developers in Bellingham who would be ready to add additional dwelling units to their properties, with the aid of some financial and technical assistance.

Homeowner: Do you have plans to redevelop your property?  Might include adding Accessory Dwelling Units, converting a single-family residence into a multi-family type, rebuilding the primary structure, subdividing the property, or adding a detached workshop/garage.

---

Key Findings & Summary

• Large apartment buildings are the least preferred form of housing, after informal and makeshift structures.
• Renters experience significantly higher fear of housing displacement than homeowners. This risk of displacement translates directly to costs to public health and wellbeing, as well as increased rates of homelessness.
• There is widespread frustration and dissatisfaction with property management business practices, by both property management companies, and landlords who self-manage.
• Respondents overwhelmingly prefer to rent from an individual property owner who manages the rental unit themselves but does not live onsite.
  • Even so, this type of rental arrangement is not more secure than any other types of rental arrangements.
• Potentially as many as 25% of current single-family homeowners want to do some form of infill development. Projected across all owner-occupied homes in Bellingham, this represents more than 5,000 properties who may be interested in seeking partnership for funding and technical assistance for doing infill development.
• Nearly everyone wants more options for accessory dwelling units, co-housing, clustered housing courts, and small apartment buildings – all forms of Middle Housing.

Existing rental regulations in Bellingham allow business practices that severely compromise the housing security of renter populations. As described in the introduction and problem section, housing insecurity translates directly to increased costs to public health and homeownership is a primary mechanism for establishing generational wealth in the United States. Dropping rates of home ownership and rising rent prices represent a systematic transference of wealth away from lower income populations and towards higher income populations. In this way, the lack of regulatory control on rental property business practices functions as a primary mechanism for exacerbating wealth and income inequality in the city of Bellingham, serving to perpetuate systemic wealth disparities for racial minorities and marginalized populations. While nearly everyone who participated in the survey prefers to rent from small holding property owners who self-manage their rental properties, renters reported similar levels of concern over rent increases and abusive business practices across all types of landlords and rental arrangements.

More than a quarter of homeowner participants reported that they would like to do some form of development on their properties but lack access to funding for the project or are intimidated by permitting processes. As a portion of the total population of current owner-occupied single-family homes, there might be over 5,000 potential properties that would like to add residential units to their homes if they had access to funding and administrative support for navigating permitting processes. This population of current homeowners represents an untapped resource of community partnership and buildable properties that should be seriously considered when planning and designing programming for affordable housing development. Survey responses to questions about preferred forms of housing development highlighted a desire for autonomy and diverse housing options. This desire for autonomy and independence in housing arrangements should also be considered when designing policies for accessory dwelling units and infill development. From renter anxieties to homeowner aspirations, understanding these dynamics is crucial for crafting inclusive and sustainable housing policies and initiatives.