Comprehensive Housing Study

Transcription

Comprehensive Housing
Needs Analysis for
Marion County, Iowa
Prepared for:
Marion County Development Commission
March 2016
7575 Golden Valley Road
Suite 385
Minneapolis, MN 55427
612.338.0012
www.maxfieldresearch.com
March 28, 2016
Ms. Carla Eysink
Executive Director
Marion County Development Commission
214 East Main Street
Knoxville, IA 50138
Dear Ms. Eysink:
Attached is the Comprehensive Housing Needs Analysis for Marion County, Iowa conducted by Maxfield
Research & Consulting, LLC. The study projects housing demand from 2015 through 2025, and provides
recommendations on the amount and type of housing that could be built in Marion County to satisfy
demand from current and future residents over the next decade.
The study identifies a potential demand for over 2,200 new housing units through 2025. This demand
will be generated by both new households and existing households based on changing demographic
trends and housing preferences. Demand was divided between general-occupancy housing (62%) and
age-restricted senior housing (38%). Because of the strong growth in the 55+ age cohort in Marion
County, there will be strong demand for maintenance-free housing types; both for-sale and rental.
The rental market is characterized by an older housing stock that lacks features and amenities today’s
tenants desire. Furthermore, the low vacancy rates indicate pent-up demand for additional units
throughout the County. Currently there are enough vacant lots in the Pella submarket to meet shortterm demand, but the lot supply is the Knoxville and Pleasantville submarkets are low and new lots will
need to be platted. Detailed information regarding recommended housing concepts can be found in
the Conclusions and Recommendations section at the end of the report.
We have enjoyed performing this study for you and are available should you have any questions or need
additional information.
Sincerely,
MAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC
Matt Mullins
Vice President
Attachment
David Sajevic
Associate
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................
Page
1
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS .....................................................................................................
Introduction ......................................................................................................................
Marion County Submarket Definitions .............................................................................
Population and Household Growth from 2000 to 2010 ...................................................
Population and Household Estimates and Projections .....................................................
Household Size ..................................................................................................................
Age Distribution Trends ....................................................................................................
Race of Population ............................................................................................................
Household Income by Age of Householder ......................................................................
Tenure by Household Income ...........................................................................................
Tenure by Age of Householder .........................................................................................
Household Type ................................................................................................................
5
5
5
8
11
15
16
19
21
29
31
34
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS.................................................................................................
Introduction ......................................................................................................................
Residential Construction Trends 2000 to Present ............................................................
American Community Survey............................................................................................
Housing Units by Occupancy Status & Tenure..................................................................
Age of Housing Stock.........................................................................................................
Housing Units by Structure and Occupancy or (Housing Stock by Structure Type) .........
Owner Occupied Housing Units by Mortgage Status .......................................................
Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Value .........................................................................
Renter-Occupied Units by Contract Rent..........................................................................
Mobility in the Past Year ...................................................................................................
37
37
37
42
42
44
46
48
50
53
56
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS .........................................................................................................
Employment Trends ..........................................................................................................
Resident Labor Force.........................................................................................................
Covered Employment by Industry ....................................................................................
Existing Business Mix by NAICS .........................................................................................
Commuting Patterns .........................................................................................................
Inflow/Outflow ..................................................................................................................
Resident Profile .................................................................................................................
Primary Employers ............................................................................................................
Employer Survey ...............................................................................................................
58
58
58
61
64
66
68
71
73
74
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................
Introduction ......................................................................................................................
Overview of Rental Market Conditions.............................................................................
76
76
76
Rental Trends in the Des Moines Core Area .....................................................................
General Occupancy Rental Projects ..................................................................................
Select Rental Developments in Marion County ................................................................
79
81
92
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS .................................................................................................
Introduction ......................................................................................................................
Senior Housing Defined.....................................................................................................
Senior Rental Trends in the Des Moines Core Area ..........................................................
Supply of Senior Housing in Marion County .....................................................................
Select Marion County Senior Housing Projects.................................................................
95
95
95
97
100
104
FOR-SALE HOUSING ANALYSIS..............................................................................................
Introduction ......................................................................................................................
Home Resales in Marion County .......................................................................................
Current Supply of Homes on the Market ..........................................................................
Owner Occupied Turnover ................................................................................................
Actively Marketing Subdivisions .......................................................................................
Agricultural Land Values ...................................................................................................
Realtor/Builder Interviews ................................................................................................
Planned and Proposed Housing Projects ..........................................................................
106
106
106
110
116
117
120
123
125
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY.....................................................................................................
Introduction .......................................................................................................................
Rent and Income Limits .....................................................................................................
Housing Cost Burden..........................................................................................................
Housing Vouchers ..............................................................................................................
Housing Costs as Percentage of Household Income .........................................................
126
126
127
130
133
134
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS ..............................................................................................
Introduction .......................................................................................................................
Demographic Profile and Housing Demand ......................................................................
Housing Demand Overview ...............................................................................................
For-Sale Housing Market Demand Analysis .......................................................................
Rental Housing Demand Analysis ......................................................................................
Senior Housing Demand Analysis ......................................................................................
136
136
136
137
141
144
147
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................................
Marion County Demand Summary ...................................................................................
Recommended Housing Products by Submarket .............................................................
158
158
181
CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES......................................................................................
Challenges and Opportunities...........................................................................................
183
183
APPENDIX ..............................................................................................................................
197
Definitions .........................................................................................................................
198
LIST OF TABLES
Table Number and Title
Page
D1. Population Growth Trends and Projections, Marion County, 2000 - 2025 ..................
9
D2. Household Growth Trends and Projections, Marion County, 2000 - 2010 ..................
10
D3. Population and Household Growth Trends and Projections,
Marion County, 2000 - 2025 ...…….............................................................................
12
D4. Population Age Distribution, Marion County, 2000 - 2020 ..........................................
18
D5. Population Distribution by Race, Marion County, 2000 & 2010 ..................................
20
D6. Household Income by Age of Householder, Marion County, 2015 & 2020 .................
23
D7. Household Income by Age of Householder, Pella Market Area, 2015 & 2020 ............
24
D8. Household Income by Age of Householder, Knoxville Market Area, 2015 & 2020 ......
25
D9. Household Income by Age of Householder, Pleasantville Market Area, 2015 & 2020
26
D10. Household Income by Age of Householder, Melcher-Dallas Market Area, 2015 & 2020 27
D11. Household Income by Age of Householder, Southeast Market Area, 2015 & 2020 ....
28
D12. Tenure by Household Income, Marion County, 2014...................................................
30
D13. Tenure by Age of Householder, Marion County, 2000 & 2010 ....................................
33
D14. Household Type, Marion County, 2000 & 2010 ...........................................................
36
HC1.
HC2.
HC3.
HC4.
HC5.
HC6.
HC7.
HC8.
HC9.
New Construction Residential Housing Units, Marion County, 2000 - 2014................
New Construction Residential Housing Units, Pella and Knoxville, 2000 -2014...........
Housing Units by Occupancy Status & Tenure, Marion County, 2010 .........................
Age of Housing Stock, Marion County, 2014 ................................................................
Housing Units by Structure & Tenure, Marion County, 2014 .......................................
Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Mortgage Status, Marion County, 2014...............
Owner-Occupied Units by Value, Marion County, 2014 ..............................................
Renter Occupied Units by Contract Rent, Marion County, 2014 .................................
Mobility In Past Year by Age of Current Residence, Marion County, 2014 ..................
38
40
43
45
47
49
51
54
57
E1.
E2.
E3.
E4.
E5.
E6.
E7.
E8.
Resident Employment, Marion County, 2000 - 2015 ...................................................
Average Weekly/Annual Wage, Marion County and Iowa, 2001 - 2014 ......................
Covered Employment by Industry, Marion County, 2014 ............................................
Covered Employment by Industry by Establishments, Marion County, 2014..............
Commuting Patterns, Marion County, 2013.................................................................
Worker Inflow and Outflow, Submarkets in Marion County, 2013..............................
Resident Profile, Marion County, 2013.........................................................................
Primary Employers, Marion County, 2015....................................................................
59
62
63
64
67
68
72
73
R1. Bedrooms by Gross Rent, Renter-Occupied Housing Units, Marion County, 2014 .....
R2. Characteristics of Existing Inventory, Des Moines Core Area, 4th Quarter 2015..........
R3. Market-Rate General Occupancy Rental Development Survey Responses,
Marion County, January 2016 ..................................................................................
R4. Affordable/Subsidized General Occupancy Rental Development Survey Responses,
Marion County, January 2016 ..................................................................................
77
80
83
88
S1.
S2.
S3.
S4.
S5.
Characteristics of Independent Living, Des Moines Core Area, 4th Quarter 2015 .......
Characteristics of Assisted Living, Des Moines Core Area, 4th Quarter 2015 ...............
Characteristics of Memory Care, Des Moines Core Area, 4th Quarter 2015 ................
Senior Housing Projects, Marion County, 1st Quarter 2016 .........................................
Senior Housing Summary by Marion County Submarket, January 2016......................
FS1. Home Resales (per Marion County Assessor), Marion County,
2000, 2005, 2010 - 2015 .........................................................................................
FS2. Homes Currently Listed For Sale/Pending, Marion County, January 2016 ..................
FS3. Active/Pending Listings by Housing Type & Submarket, Marion County, January 2016
FS4. Active/Pending Listings by Housing Type, Marion County, January 2016....................
FS5. Owner Occupied Turnover, Marion County .................................................................
FS6. Actively Marketing Single-Family Subdivisions, Marion County, 4th Quarter 2015......
FS7. Survey of Farmland Values, September 2015...............................................................
97
98
99
103
105
107
111
113
114
116
118
121
HA1. HUD Income and Rent Limits, Marion County, 2015 ....................................................
HA2. Maximum Rent Based on Household Size and Area Median Income, Marion County,
2015 ..............................................................................................................................
HA3. Housing Cost Burden, Marion County Market Area, 2013 ...........................................
HA4. Marion County Market Area Housing Affordability - Based on Household Income ....
128
129
131
135
DMD1. Demand for Additional For-Sale Housing, Marion County, 2015 to 2025....................
DMD2. Demand for Additional Rental Housing, Marion County, 2015 to 2020 ......................
DMD3. Demand for Market Rate Active Adult Rental Housing, Marion County, 2015 to 2020
DMD4. Demand for Subsidized/Affordable Senior Housing, Marion County, 2015 to 2020 ...
DMD5. Demand for Congregate Rental Housing, Marion County, 2015 to 2020 ....................
DMD6. Demand for Assisted Living Rental Housing, Marion County, 2015 to 2020................
DMD7. Demand for Memory Care Rental Housing, Marion County, 2015 to 2020 .................
142
145
148
150
152
154
156
R1. General Occupancy Excess Demand Summary, Marion County, 2015 to 2025 ...........
R2. Senior Housing Excess Demand Summary, Marion County, 2015 to 2020 ..................
R3. Housing Recommendations by Marion County Submarket, 2015 to 2025 ..................
159
160
182
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Purpose and Scope of Study
Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC was engaged by Marion County Development Commission to conduct a Comprehensive Housing Needs Analysis for Marion County, Iowa. The Housing Needs Analysis provides recommendations on the amount and types of housing that should
be developed in order to meet the needs of current and future households who choose to
reside in the County.
The scope of this study includes: an analysis of the demographic and economic characteristics
of the County; a review of the characteristics of the existing housing stock and building permit
trends; an analysis of the market condition for a variety of rental and for-sale housing products;
and an assessment of the need for housing by product type in the County. Recommendations
on the number and types of housing products that should be considered in the County are also
supplied.
Demographic Analysis
•
As of the 2010 Census, Marion County had 33,309 people and 12,723 households. Marion
County is forecast to increase by 1,107 people and 625 households between 2010 and 2020.
•
The population in Marion County is aging and older age cohorts are accounting for a significant percentage of the total population. The 65 to 74 age cohort is projected to have the
greatest percentage growth increasing by 610 people (19.8%) from 2015 to 2020, followed
by the 75 to 84 age cohort (+15.8%) and the 85+ age cohort (+4.3%). The growth in this age
cohort can be primarily attributed to the baby boom generation aging into their young senior years.
•
In 2015, the median household income in Marion County was estimated to be $55,834.
Within the County, the Pella submarket had the highest median household income in 2015,
at $64,203. Lowest incomes were found in the Melcher-Dallas submarket ($45,612).
•
Family households were the most common type of household in the County, representing
approximately 70.9% of all households in 2000 and 69.6% of all households in 2010. Married couples without children comprised 34.6% of all households in 2000 and 35.1% in 2010.
Married couple families with children comprised 26.6% of all the Marion County households
in 2000, dropping to 23.5% in 2010
•
Marion County’s unemployment rate has been much lower than the U.S. unemployment
rate between 2000 and 2014. However, Marion County’s unemployment rate is comparable to Iowa’s unemployment rate. The average unemployment rate in Marion County over
this time period is 4.3%, which is slightly lower than the average in Iowa (4.5%) and much
lower than the average in the U.S. (6.4%).
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
•
About 36% of the workers in Marion County reside within ten miles of their place of employment while nearly 13.4% travel greater than 50 miles. Approximately 33% of workers in
the County travel 10 to 24 miles for employment and 19% commute a distance ranging from
25 to 50 miles.
•
About 38% of Marion County jobs are in the Manufacturing Sector, compared to the state
of Iowa as a whole, where the Manufacturing Sector only accounts for 14% of jobs. Wages
in the Manufacturing Sector are also the highest on average, with an annual wage of
$58,003. The next highest wages are in the Financial Activities Sector, with an average annual wage of $51,674.
Housing Characteristics
•
Between 2000 and 2014, Marion County has averaged 97 single family units and nearly 21
multi-family units. Building permit trends have fluctuated over the last 14 years which
peaked in 2000 (238 new construction units) and bottomed out in 2011 (38 new construction units).
•
The greatest percentage of homes in Marion County by decade, 22%, was built prior to
1940. Approximately 28% of the housing stock in Marion County has been built since 1990.
The Pella and Pleasantville submarkets exceed the county proportion of housing stock built
since 1990, at 34% and 32% of the housing stock respectively.
•
Approximately 63% of Marion County homeowners have a mortgage, on par with the state
average of 62%. About 10% of homeowners with mortgages in Marion County also have a
second mortgage, home equity loan or both.
•
The median owner-occupied home value in Marion County was $135,800, which is higher
than the median home value for the state of Iowa, $126,300.
•
The median contract rent for Marion County was $529. Median rents within the submarkets ranged from $327 in the Southeast submarket to $630 in the Pella submarket.
Rental Housing Market Analysis
•
In total, Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC surveyed twenty-five market rate apartment
properties (8 units and larger) and fifteen affordable/subsidized communities in December
2015 and January 2016. These projects represent a combined total of 869 units, including
537 market rate units and 332 affordable/subsidized units.
•
At the time of our survey, eighteen market rate units and twenty-two affordable/subsidized
units were vacant, resulting in an overall vacancy rate of 5.3%. The overall market rate vacancy rate of 5.3% is similar to the industry standard of 5% vacancy for a stabilized rental
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
market, which promotes competitive rates, ensures adequate choice, and allows for unit
turnover.
Senior Housing Market Analysis
•
As of January 2016, Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC identified twelve senior housing
developments in Marion County. Combined, these projects contain a total of 374 units.
Three of the projects are subsidized, while the remaining nine are market rate.
•
There are a total of 70 active adult subsidized units in Marion County. As of January 2016,
three units were vacant resulting in a vacancy rate of 6.0%. There is on active-adult rental
development in Marion County for a total of 61 units. Pella Manor, located on 608 E 2nd
Street, was built in the mid to late 1960s.
•
There are two congregate senior rental developments located in Marion County. Fairhaven
East Pella and Vriendschap Village, both located in Pella.
•
There are three assisted living projects located in Marion County for a total of 117 units.
Homestead of Knoxville, in Knoxville, is the largest assisted living facility in Marion County.
There were only two vacancies at the time of our survey (98% occupied).
Housing Affordability
•
About 15% of owner households and 41% of renter householders are estimated to be
paying more than 30% of their income for housing costs in Marion County. Compared to
the Iowa average, the percentage of cost burdened households is lower in Marion County
for renter and owners. Iowa cost burdened households are 19% for owner households and
45% for renter households.
•
The number of cost burdened households in Marion County increases proportionally based
on lower incomes. About 72% of renters with incomes below $35,000 are cost burdened
and 34% of owners with incomes below $50,000 are cost burdened. A significantly higher
portion of Pella Submarket renter’s with incomes below $35,000 are cost burdened (82%)
compared to the rest of Marion County.
For-Sale Housing Market Analysis
•
Marion County transaction volume has ranged from a low of 236 resales in 2010 to the peak
in 2015 with over 500 resales. All of the submarkets posted increases in resale activity between 2014 and 2015. Historically, there is an average of about 350 resales annually over
the past five years.
3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
•
Median sales prices in 2015 ranged from $41,155 in the Melcher-Dallas Submarket to
$176,000 in the Pella Submarket. The Pleasantville Submarket had the 2nd highest sales
price in the County at $135,000 in 2015.
•
The median list price in Marion County for a single-family home is $129,900. The median
sale price is generally a more accurate indicator of housing values in a community than the
average sale price.
•
There are thirteen active subdivisions in Marion County with available lots. Excluding
Knoxville Estates that has a number of undevelopable lots; there are 224 vacant lots. All of
the actively marketing product targets move-up or executive-level home buyers.
•
Over 80% of the vacant lot inventory is located in the Pella submarket (184 vacant lots).
The Knoxville submarket has only 29 vacant lots (13%) and the Pleasantville submarket only
11 vacant lots (5%).
Development Pipeline
•
Maxfield Research interviewed planning staff members in communities in Marion County in
order to identify housing developments under construction, planned, or pending. At the
time of this study, there are no pending for-sale, rental, or senior projects in the Marion
County communities.
Housing Needs Analysis
•
Based on our calculations, demand exists in Marion County for the following general occupancy product types between 2015 and 2025:
o Market rate rental
303 units
o Affordable rental
175 units
o Subsidized rental
152 units
o For-sale single-family
566 units
o For-sale multifamily
176 units
•
In addition, we find demand for multiple senior housing product types. By 2020, demand in
Marion County for senior housing is forecast for the following:
o Active adult ownership
97 units
o Active adult market rate rental
185 units
o Active adult affordable
269 units
o Active adult subsidized
44 units
o Congregate
92 units
o Assisted Living
74 units
o Memory Care
94 units
4
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
Introduction
This section of the report examines factors related to the current and future demand for both
owner and renter-occupied housing in Marion County, Iowa. It includes an analysis of population and household growth trends and projections, projected age distribution, household
income, household types, and household tenure in Marion County. A review of these characteristics will provide insight into the demand for various types of housing in the County.
Marion County Submarket Definitions
Marion County is located in south-central Iowa and within 40 miles from Des Moines, Iowa.
According to the U.S. Census, the county has a total of 570 square miles. Knoxville is the
County seat, but Pella is the largest city in Marion County. Pella is well known for Pella Corporation, which is one of the largest employers in Iowa.
For purposes of the housing analysis, Marion County was divided into five submarkets; Pella,
Knoxville, Pleasantville, Melcher-Dallas, and Southeast. Subsequent data in the housing analysis is illustrated by submarket and county-wide.
In some cases, additional demand for housing will come from individuals moving from just
outside the area, those who return from other locations (particularly young households returning after pursuing their degrees or elderly returning from retirement locations), and seniors
who move to be near the adult children living in Marion County. Demand generated from
within and outside of Marion County is considered in the demand calculations presented later
in this analysis.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING LLC
5
Marion County - Market Area Definition
City
Pella
Knoxville
Harvey
Pleasantville
Swan
Melcher-Dallas
Bussey
Marysville
Hamilton
Township
Pella MA
Lake Prairie
Summit
Knoxville MA
Knoxville
Washington
Clay
Pleasantville MA
Pleasant Grove
Red Rock
Union
Swan
Union Twp.
Melcher-Dallas MA
Dallas
Franklin
Southeast MA
Liberty
Indiana
Source: Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC
6
7
Population and Household Growth from 2000 to 2010
Tables D-1 and D-2 present the historic population and household growth of each submarket in
Marion County. The data is from the U.S. Census. A breakdown of each township is provided
on the following pages.
Population
•
Marion County’s population grew by 1,257 people (3.9%). During the prior decade, population grew by 6.8% with the addition of about 2,050 new persons.
•
Between 2000 and 2010, the majority of the growth in Marion County can be attributed to
the growth in the Pella submarket. The Pella submarket increased by 1,038 people (8%),
which is due largely to the growth of Lake Prairie Township (+735 people) and Summit
Township (+303 people). The Pella submarket accounted for 83% of the population growth
in the 2000s.
•
The Pleasantville submarket experienced a slight increase in their population base by
growing 367 people (11%), which can be attributed to the growth in Pleasant Grove Township, Red Rock Township, and Union Township.
•
Population declines between 2000 and 2010 were associated with the Melcher-Dallas and
Southeast submarkets. Melcher-Dallas and Southeast submarkets decreased by -65 people
(-3.2%) and -110 people (-6.1%), respectively.
Historic Marion County Population: 1900 to 2010
35,000
Population
30,001
1980
1990
33,309
29,669
26,352
25,886
1930
25,930
1920
27,019
25,727
22,995
24,159
20,000
24,957
25,000
32,052
30,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
1900
1910
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING
1940
1950 1960
Year
1970
2000
2010
8
TABLE D-1
POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS
MARION COUNTY
2000 - 2025
Historic
2000
Pella Submarket
Cities
Pella
Change
2000 - 2010
No.
Pct.
2010
9,832
10,352
520
5.3
Townships
Lake Prairie
Summit
11,763
1,141
12,498
1,444
735
303
6.2
26.6
Pella Submarket Subtotal
12,904
13,942
1,038
8.0
7,731
277
7,313
235
-418
-42
-5.4
-15.2
Townships
Knoxville
Washington
Clay
10,393
511
986
10,373
544
1,000
-20
33
14
-0.2
6.5
1.4
Knoxville Submarket Subtotal
11,890
11,917
27
0.2
Pleasantville Submarket
Cities
Pleasantville
Swan
1,539
121
1,694
72
155
-49
10.1
-40.5
Townships
Pleasant Grove
Red Rock
Union
2,570
506
310
2,769
596
388
199
90
78
7.7
17.8
25.2
Pleasantville Submarket Subtotal
3,386
3,753
367
10.8
Melcher-Dallas Submarket
Cities
Melcher-Dallas
1,298
1,288
-10
-0.8
Townships
Dallas
Franklin
1,714
342
1,671
320
-43
-22
-2.5
-6.4
Melcher-Dallas Submarket Subtotal
2,056
1,991
-65
-3.2
450
54
144
422
66
130
-28
12
-14
-6.2
22.2
-9.7
Townships
Liberty
Indiana
1,034
782
980
726
-54
-56
-5.2
-7.2
Southeast Submarket Subtotal
1,816
1,706
-110
-6.1
32,052
33,309
1,257
3.9
Knoxville Submarket
Cities
Knoxville
Harvey
Southeast Submarket
Cities
Bussey
Marysville
Hamilton
Marion County Total
Sources: U.S. Census; State Data Center of Iowa; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC
9
TABLE D-2
HOUSEHOLD GROWTH TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS
MARION COUNTY
2000 - 2010
Historic
2000
Change
2000 - 2010
No.
Pct.
2010
Pella Submarket
Cities
Pella
3,497
3,735
238
6.8
Townships
Lake Prairie
Summit
4,150
379
4,469
469
319
90
7.7
23.7
Pella Submarket Subtotal
4,529
4,938
409
9.0
Knoxville Submarket
Cities
Knoxville
Harvey
3,191
111
3,169
109
-22
-2
-0.7
-1.8
Townships
Knoxville
Washington
Clay
4,150
192
382
4,251
201
390
101
9
8
2.4
4.7
2.1
Knoxville Submarket Subtotal
4,724
4,842
118
2.5
Cities
Pleasantville
Swan
615
39
674
29
59
-10
9.6
-25.6
Townships
Pleasant Grove
Red Rock
Union
984
185
114
1,084
228
142
100
43
28
10.2
23.2
24.6
1,283
1,454
171
13.3
Cities
Melcher-Dallas
517
527
10
1.9
Townships
Dallas
Franklin
654
130
675
130
21
0
3.2
0.0
Melcher-Dallas Submarket Subtotal
784
805
21
2.7
Southeast Submarket
Cities
Bussey
Marysville
Hamilton
184
21
53
176
23
49
-8
2
-4
-4.3
9.5
-7.5
Townships
Liberty
Indiana
401
296
387
297
-14
1
-3.5
0.3
Southeast Submarket Subtotal
697
684
-13
-1.9
12,017
12,723
706
5.9
Pleasantville Submarket Subtotal
Marion County Total
Sources: U.S. Census; State Data Center of Iowa; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC
10
Households
•
Household growth trends are typically a more accurate indicator of housing needs than
population growth since a household is, by definition, an occupied housing unit. However,
additional demand can result from changing demographics of the population base, which
results in demand for different housing products.
•
Marion County added 706 households during the 2000s (5.9%), increasing its household
base to 12,723 households as of 2010.
•
Most of the household growth in the 2000s occurred in the Pella submarket, which increased by 409 households (9%). The Pella submarket accounts for 58% of the household
growth in Marion County in the 2000s.
•
Pleasantville and Knoxville submarkets increased 171 households (13.3%) and 118 households (2.5%). Melcher-Dallas submarket increased by 21 households, while the Southeast
submarket decreased by 13 households.
Population and Household Estimates and Projections
Table D-3 presents population and household growth trends and projections for Marion County
through 2025. Estimates for 2015 and projections through 2025 are based on information from
ESRI (a national demographics service provider) and adjusted by Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC based on local trends.
•
Marion County will continue to experience a steady increase during the next decade, which
is similar to the past decade. We project that Marion County will increase by 1,107 persons
(3.3%) and by about 625 households (4.9%) between 2010 and 2020.
•
The Pella and Pleasantville submarkets will experience the largest increases in population
and households over the next decade. The Pella submarket is projected to increase by 669
people (4.8%) and by 362 households (7.3%). The Pleasantville submarket is expected to
increase by 472 persons (12.6%) and by 186 households (12.8%).
•
The Knoxville submarket is projected to have a small increase in population over the next
decade. The Knoxville submarket is projected to increase by 83 people (0.7%) and 108
households (2.2%).
•
The Melcher-Dallas submarket is projected to decrease by 11 people (-0.6%) and increase
by 13 households (1.6%). The Southeast submarket is the only submarket projected to decline in population and households between 2010 and 2020. The Southeast submarket is
projected to lose -106 households (-6.2%) and -44 households (-6.4%).
11
TABLE D-3
POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD GROWTH TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS
MARION COUNTY
2000 to 2025
Change
U.S. Census
2000
2010
Estimate
Forecast
Forecast
2015
2020
2025
2000 to 2010
2010 to 2020
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
POPULATION
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
Marion County
12,904
11,890
3,386
2,056
1,816
32,052
13,942
11,917
3,753
1,991
1,706
33,309
14,200
11,880
3,985
1,985
1,625
33,675
14,611
12,000
4,225
1,980
1,600
34,416
15,100
12,100
4,490
1,965
1,570
35,225
1,038
27
367
-65
-110
1,257
8.0
0.2
10.8
-3.2
-6.1
3.9
669
83
472
-11
-106
1,107
4.8
0.7
12.6
-0.6
-6.2
3.3
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
Marion County
4,529
4,724
1,283
784
697
12,017
4,938
4,842
1,454
805
684
12,723
5,105
4,900
1,545
820
650
13,020
5,300
4,950
1,640
818
640
13,348
5,500
5,020
1,750
815
630
13,715
409
118
171
21
-13
706
9.0
2.5
13.3
2.7
-1.9
5.9
362
108
186
13
-44
625
7.3
2.2
12.8
1.6
-6.4
4.9
Household Size
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
Marion County
2.85
2.52
2.64
2.62
2.61
2.67
2.82
2.46
2.58
2.47
2.49
2.62
2.78
2.42
2.58
2.42
2.50
2.59
2.76
2.42
2.58
2.42
2.50
2.58
2.75
2.41
2.57
2.41
2.49
2.57
HOUSEHOLDS
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; ESRI; Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
12
13
14
Household Size
Household size is calculated by dividing the number of persons in households by the number of
households (or householders). Nationally, the average number of people per household has
been declining for over a century; however, there have been sharp declines starting in the
1960s and 1970s. Persons per household in the U.S. were about 4.5 in 1916 and declined to 3.2
in the 1960s. Over the past 50 years, it dropped to 2.57 as of the 2000 Census. However, due
to the economic recession this trend has been temporarily halted as renters and laid-off employees “doubled-up,” which increased the average U.S. household size to 2.59 as of the 2010
Census.
The declining household size has been caused by many factors, including: aging, higher divorce
rates, cohabitation, smaller family sizes, demographic trends in marriage, etc. Most of these
changes have resulted from shifts in societal values, the economy, and improvements in health
care that have influenced how people organize their lives.
•
In 2000, the average household sizes ranged between 2.52 (Knoxville submarket) and 2.85
(Pella submarket). In Marion County overall, the average household size was 2.67. By 2010,
the average household sizes ranged between 2.46 (Knoxville submarket) and 2.82 (Pella
submarket). In Marion County overall, the average household size was 2.62.
•
By 2020, the Knoxville and Melcher-Dallas submarkets are projected to have an average
household size of 2.42, while the Pella submarket is projected to drop to 2.76.
•
The figure below shows the median age projections for 2015 and 2020 for each submarket
within Marion County. The Pella submarket is projected to have the lowest median age,
while the Southeast submarket is projected to be the highest.
FIGURE 1
MEDIAN AGE
MARION COUNTY
2015 & 2020
2015
2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
35.6
42.3
39.5
41.1
43.9
36.7
43.2
39.9
41.0
45.4
Marion County
39.3
40.0
Source: ESRI; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC
15
Age Distribution Trends
Table D-4 shows the distribution of persons within nine age cohorts for the four submarkets in
Marion County in 2000 and 2010 with estimates for 2015 and projections for 2020. The 2000
and 2010 age distribution is from the U.S. Census Bureau. Maxfield Research and Consulting
LLC derived the 2015 estimates and 2020 projections by adjustments made to data obtained
from ESRI.
The key points from the table are listed on the following page.
•
In 2010, the largest adult cohort in Marion County was 45 to 54, totaling 4,860 people
(14.6% of the total population). Mirroring trends observed across the Nation, the aging baby boomer generation is substantially impacting the composition of County’s population.
Born between 1946 and 1964, these individuals comprised the age groups 45 to 54 and 55
to 64 in 2010.
Population Age Distribution
Marion County 2000-2020
9,000
2000
8,000
2010
2015
2020
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
Under 18 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 to 84
•
85+
The social changes that occurred with the aging of the baby boom generation, such as
higher divorce rates, higher levels of education, and lower birth rates has led to a greater
variety of lifestyles than existed in the past – not only among the baby boomers, but also
among their parents and children. The increased variety of lifestyles has fueled demand for
alternative housing products to the single-family homes. Seniors, in particular, and middleaged persons tend to do more traveling and participate in more activities than previous
generations, and they increasingly prefer maintenance-free housing that enables them to
spend more time on activities outside the home.
16
•
The Under 18 age group was the largest cohort in Marion County in 2010 with 8,362 people
(25.1%). This age group is projected to remain the largest in Marion County through 2015
and 2020, comprising approximately 23.6% in 2015 (7,961 people), declining to 23.3% in
2020 (8,010 people). The 55 to 64 age group was the second largest adult cohort in Marion
County in 2010 with 3,978 people (11.9%), followed by the 35 to 44 age cohort with 3,929
people (11.8%) and the 25 to 34 age group with 3,590 people (10.8%).
•
Marion County’s population of 18 to 34 year olds, which consists primarily of renters and
first-time homebuyers, increased by 3.3% between 2000 and 2010, and is projected to decline (-1.3%) between 2015 and 2020.
•
The 45 to 54 age cohort is projected to experience the largest percent decline between
2015 and 2020, declining by -9.2% (-408 people), followed by the 18 to 24 age cohort with a
decline of -5.3% (-198 people).
17
TABLE D-4
POPULATION AGE DISTRIBUTION
MARION COUNTY
2000 to 2020
Number of People
ESRI
U.S. Census
2010
2015
2020
2000
U.S. Census
2000-2010
Change
ESRI
2010-2020
Pella MA
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75 to 84
85+
Total
Knoxville MA
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75 to 84
85+
Total
Pleasantville MA
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75 to 84
85+
Total
Melcher-Dallas MA
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75 to 84
85+
Total
No.
3,116
1,923
1,445
1,838
1,536
1,000
843
770
433
12,904
No.
2,959
886
1,403
1,836
1,671
1,160
954
728
293
11,890
No.
967
182
410
558
431
355
222
190
71
3,386
No.
577
139
209
307
288
205
178
121
32
2,056
No.
3,479
2,069
1,506
1,535
1,882
1,453
946
710
362
13,942
No.
3,017
796
1,311
1,424
1,771
1,582
1,029
656
331
11,917
No.
1,006
243
393
527
585
435
317
170
77
3,753
No.
460
168
213
242
306
277
170
118
37
1,991
No.
3,346
2,170
1,491
1,484
1,738
1,751
1,094
733
394
14,200
No.
2,784
935
1,253
1,338
1,598
1,744
1,245
662
322
11,880
No.
1,018
339
414
507
566
512
371
174
84
3,985
No.
473
167
223
231
263
274
199
112
44
1,985
No.
3,371
2,168
1,485
1,603
1,558
1,802
1,386
831
408
14,611
No.
2,748
838
1,330
1,325
1,458
1,714
1,502
748
336
12,000
No.
1,056
318
495
506
544
578
398
246
85
4,225
No.
508
123
221
224
246
268
229
116
45
1,980
No.
363
146
61
-303
346
453
103
-60
-71
1,038
No.
58
-90
-92
-412
100
422
75
-72
38
27
No.
39
61
-17
-31
154
80
95
-20
6
367
No.
-117
29
4
-65
18
72
-8
-3
5
-65
Pct.
11.6%
7.6%
4.2%
-16.5%
22.5%
45.3%
12.2%
-7.8%
-16.4%
8.0%
Pct.
2.0%
-10.2%
-6.6%
-22.4%
6.0%
36.4%
7.9%
-9.9%
13.0%
0.2%
Pct.
4.0%
33.5%
-4.1%
-5.6%
35.7%
22.5%
42.8%
-10.5%
8.5%
10.8%
Pct.
-20.3%
20.9%
1.9%
-21.2%
6.3%
35.1%
-4.5%
-2.5%
15.6%
-3.2%
No.
-108
99
-21
68
-324
349
440
121
46
669
No.
-269
42
19
-99
-313
132
473
92
5
83
No.
50
75
102
-21
-41
143
81
76
8
472
No.
48
-45
8
-18
-60
-9
59
-2
8
-11
Pct.
-3.1%
4.8%
-1.4%
4.4%
-17.2%
24.0%
46.5%
17.0%
12.8%
4.8%
Pct.
-8.9%
5.3%
1.4%
-7.0%
-17.7%
8.4%
46.0%
14.0%
1.6%
0.7%
Pct.
5.0%
30.7%
25.9%
-4.0%
-7.0%
32.8%
25.7%
44.6%
10.4%
12.6%
Pct.
10.5%
-26.9%
3.7%
-7.6%
-19.7%
-3.1%
34.9%
-1.6%
20.9%
-0.6%
Southeast MA
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75 to 84
85+
Total
Marion County Total
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75 to 84
85+
Total
No.
506
129
187
294
242
192
146
91
29
1,816
No.
8,125
3,259
3,654
4,833
4,168
2,912
2,343
1,900
858
32,052
No.
400
122
167
201
316
231
160
91
18
1,706
No.
8,362
3,398
3,590
3,929
4,860
3,978
2,622
1,745
825
33,309
No.
340
141
182
171
253
249
182
84
24
1,625
No.
7,961
3,751
3,562
3,731
4,417
4,530
3,091
1,766
867
33,675
No.
326
107
178
182
205
284
185
104
30
1,600
No.
8,010
3,553
3,707
3,839
4,010
4,646
3,701
2,045
904
34,416
No.
-106
-7
-20
-93
74
39
14
0
-11
-110
No.
237
139
-64
-904
692
1,066
279
-155
-33
1,257
Pct.
-20.9%
-5.4%
-10.7%
-31.6%
30.6%
20.3%
9.6%
0.0%
-37.9%
-6.1%
Pct.
2.9%
4.3%
-1.8%
-18.7%
16.6%
36.6%
11.9%
-8.2%
-3.8%
3.9%
No.
Pct.
-18.4%
-12.4%
6.3%
-9.3%
-35.3%
22.8%
15.6%
14.4%
65.3%
-6.2%
Pct.
-4.2%
4.6%
3.3%
-2.3%
-17.5%
16.8%
41.2%
17.2%
9.6%
3.3%
-74
-15
11
-19
-111
53
25
13
12
-106
No.
-352
155
117
-90
-850
668
1,079
300
79
1,107
Source: U.S. Census Bureau; ESRI; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC.
18
Marion County
Projected Growth by Age Group
2015-2020
85+
4.3%
75 to 84
15.8%
65 to 74
19.8%
55 to 64
45 to 54
2.6%
-9.2%
35 to 44
2.9%
25 to 34
4.1%
18 to 24
-5.3%
Under 18
-15.0%
•
0.6%
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
The 65 to 74 age cohort is projected to have the greatest percentage growth increasing by
610 people (19.8%) from 2015 to 2020, followed by the 75 to 84 age cohort (+15.8%) and
the 85+ age cohort (+4.3%). The growth in this age cohort can be primarily attributed to the
baby boom generation aging into their young senior years.
Race of Population
The race of the population illustrates the diversity for each submarket in Marion County. Data
for 2000 and 2010 was obtained from the U.S. Census. Table D-5 presents race data in 2000
and 2010.
•
In 2010, “Whites” comprise the largest proportion of the population in every submarket.
The Pella submarket had the lowest percentage (95.5%) and the Pleasantville submarket
had the highest (98.1%). In 2000, the percentage of “Whites” in each submarket in Marion
County ranged from 96.8% in the Pella submarket to 98.8% in the Pleasantville and
Melcher-Dallas submarkets.
•
While “Whites” has remained the largest race category in 2000, it represented a smaller
proportion of total population decreasing from 97.5% in 2000 to 96.7% in 2010.
•
“Whites” also include Hispanic and Latino population. As of 2010, 1.6% of Marion County’s
population was Hispanic/Latino.
19
TABLE D-5
RACE
MARION COUNTY
2000 & 2010
Black or African
American Alone
White Alone
American Indian or
Alaska Native Alone
Native Hawaiian or
Other Pacific
Islander Alone
2000
2010
2000
2010
2000
2010
2000
2010
12,486
11,604
3,346
2,031
1,770
31,237
13,309
11,597
3,683
1,949
1,665
32,203
21
83
1
3
26
134
98
91
10
5
21
225
22
27
9
1
2
61
25
22
7
2
4
60
6
5
0
1
0
12
96.8%
97.6%
98.8%
98.8%
97.5%
97.5%
95.5%
97.3%
98.1%
97.9%
97.6%
96.7%
0.2%
0.7%
0.0%
0.1%
1.4%
0.4%
0.7%
0.8%
0.3%
0.3%
1.2%
0.7%
0.2%
0.2%
0.3%
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Asian Alone
Some Other Race
Two or More
Races Alone
2000
2010
2000
2010
2000
2010
4
2
0
0
0
6
262
47
14
5
3
331
305
50
20
3
1
379
33
31
4
3
0
71
34
29
8
16
4
91
74
93
12
12
15
206
167
126
25
16
11
345
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.0%
0.4%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
1.0%
2.2%
0.4%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
1.1%
0.3%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.8%
0.2%
0.3%
0.6%
0.8%
0.4%
0.6%
0.8%
0.6%
1.2%
1.1%
0.7%
0.8%
0.6%
1.0%
Number
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
Marion County
Percent of Total
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
Marion County
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC
20
•
Two or More Races Alone” increased the most from 206 to 345 people, an increase of 67%
between 2000 and 2010. “Black or African American Alone” experienced growth between
2000 and 2010, increasing from 134 to 225 people, an increase of 67%. “Some Other Race”
and “Asians” experienced small numerical growth.
•
“Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Alone” and “American Indian or Alaska Native
Alone” experienced small declines in population between 2000 and 2010.
Marion County (2010)
White Alone
Black or African American
American Indian or Alaska
Native Alone
Native Hawaiian or Other
Pacific Islander Alone
Asian Alone
Some Other Race
Two or More Races Alone
Household Income by Age of Householder
The estimated distribution of household incomes in Marion County and each submarket for
2015 and 2020 are shown in Tables D-6 to D-11. The data was estimated by Maxfield Research
and Consulting LLC based on income trends provided by ESRI. The data helps ascertain the
demand for different housing products based on the size of the market at specific cost levels.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development defines affordable housing costs as 30% of
a household’s adjusted gross income. For example, a household with an income of $50,000 per
year would be able to afford a monthly housing cost of about $1,250. Maxfield Research and
Consulting LLC utilizes a figure of 25% to 30% for younger households and 40% or more for
seniors, since seniors generally have lower living expenses and can often sell their homes and
use the proceeds toward rent payments.
A generally accepted standard for affordable owner-occupied housing is that a typical household can afford to pay 3.0 to 3.5 times their annual income on a single-family home. Thus, a
21
$50,000 income would translate to an affordable single-family home of $150,000 to $175,000.
The higher end of this range assumes that the person has adequate funds for down payment
and closing costs, but also does not include savings or equity in an existing home.
•
In 2015, the median household income in Marion County was estimated to be $55,834.
Within the County, the Pella submarket had the highest median household income in 2015,
at $64,203. Lowest incomes were found in the Melcher-Dallas submarket ($45,612).
•
In 2015, the 35 to 44 age group has the highest median income in the County with $74,718.
With a household income of $74,718, a household could afford a monthly housing cost of
about $1,868, based on an allocation of 30% of income toward housing.
Median Income by Age of Householder
Marion County: 2015 & 2020
$110,000
2015
$100,000
2020
$90,000
$80,000
$70,000
$60,000
Total
<25
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65-74
$34,447
$-
$30,018
$57,259
$50,294
$74,290
$62,136
$78,311
$69,236
$82,629
$61,767
$55,514
$39,599
$10,000
$36,552
$20,000
$63,250
$30,000
$55,834
$40,000
$74,718
$50,000
75+
•
In 2015, 9.2% of the non-senior (under age 65) households in Marion County had incomes
under $15,000 (861 households). All of these households would be eligible for subsidized
rental housing. Another 6.4% of Marion County’s non-senior households had incomes between $15,000 and $25,000 (598 households). Many of these households would qualify for
subsidized housing, but many could also afford “affordable” or older market rate rentals. If
housing costs absorb 30% of income, households with incomes of $15,000 to $25,000 could
afford to pay $375 to $625 per month.
•
Incomes are expected to increase by 13.3% between 2015 and 2020 in Marion County for a
median income of $63,250 for all households. This equates to an increase of 2.7% annually.
22
TABLE D-6
HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER
MARION COUNTY
2015 & 2020
Age of Householder
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Total
<25
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 -74
75+
1,278
1,258
1,149
1,889
2,902
1,873
1,936
396
340
13,020
106
68
57
95
84
41
28
7
4
490
178
110
139
314
490
247
236
46
36
1,796
120
97
88
246
457
366
508
74
53
2,009
204
120
130
310
567
471
497
118
56
2,473
253
203
171
322
598
436
424
71
127
2,605
188
209
209
319
457
224
163
41
58
1,868
229
451
355
283
249
88
80
39
6
1,780
$55,834
$36,552
$55,514
$74,718
$69,236
$62,136
$50,294
$30,018
1,201
981
911
1,711
2,963
2,230
2,339
629
382
13,348
105
49
44
81
88
46
33
8
5
461
166
84
102
275
506
304
300
68
43
1,848
105
67
60
204
430
404
597
122
54
2,045
155
76
84
226
476
474
505
162
51
2,208
220
121
109
279
595
515
519
129
138
2,626
191
177
181
331
551
343
259
79
83
2,195
260
406
330
315
317
143
126
60
7
1,966
$63,250
$39,599
$61,767
$82,629
$78,311
$74,290
$57,259
$34,447
-77
-277
-238
-178
61
357
403
233
42
328
-1
-19
-13
-14
4
5
5
1
1
-29
Change 2015- 2020
-12
-15
-26
-30
-37
-28
-39
-42
16
-26
57
38
64
89
22
48
7
1
53
36
-49
-44
-46
-84
-91
3
8
44
-5
-265
-33
-82
-62
-43
-3
79
95
58
11
21
3
-32
-28
12
94
119
96
38
25
327
31
-45
-25
32
68
56
46
21
1
186
$7,416
$3,047
$9,075
$12,154
$6,965
$4,429
$6,253
2015
2020
$7,911
Sources: ESRI; US Census Bureau; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC
23
TABLE D-7
PELLA MARKET AREA
2015 & 2020
Age of Householder
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Total
<25
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 -74
75+
324
438
407
650
1,104
824
945
208
205
5,105
36
12
25
40
45
14
18
1
3
194
46
48
66
128
189
121
125
22
18
764
29
29
26
61
139
172
236
47
42
782
51
39
30
91
181
211
259
65
41
970
41
68
70
94
202
194
205
42
69
987
35
73
53
104
192
81
71
14
29
653
85
168
136
131
154
30
29
17
3
754
$64,203
$42,599
$59,574
$88,307
$83,699
$76,590
$55,340
$33,770
301
338
318
574
1,063
930
1,162
383
231
5,300
39
9
22
37
46
15
24
1
4
199
37
34
44
98
173
142
169
35
21
754
26
20
18
51
123
185
290
86
43
843
36
23
17
60
132
198
253
104
37
861
32
37
42
74
176
217
258
91
75
1,003
39
67
48
110
223
122
123
37
47
818
90
147
125
143
190
50
44
28
3
822
$76,070
$45,538
$72,993
$99,528
$94,032
$89,007
$63,402
$38,925
-23
-100
-89
-77
-41
105
218
174
26
195
3
-3
-3
-3
1
1
6
0
1
5
Change 2015- 2020
-9
-3
-14
-9
-22
-8
-30
-10
-17
-16
21
12
43
53
13
39
3
1
-10
61
-15
-16
-13
-32
-49
-13
-6
39
-4
-108
-9
-31
-28
-20
-27
23
53
49
6
16
4
-6
-5
6
31
41
52
23
18
165
5
-21
-11
12
36
20
15
11
0
68
$11,867
$2,939
$10,333
$12,417
$8,062
$5,155
$13,419
2015
2020
$11,221
24
TABLE D-8
KNOXVILLE MARKET AREA
2015 & 2020
Age of Householder
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Total
<25
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 -74
75+
675
502
521
687
1,087
645
603
106
74
4,900
61
34
23
30
19
16
7
4
1
196
102
33
51
112
181
58
68
14
6
625
60
42
45
108
189
112
149
14
7
727
105
48
68
114
231
158
146
26
3
900
142
94
74
121
252
153
137
23
30
1,028
104
79
107
112
153
102
60
11
25
753
102
171
152
89
62
46
35
13
1
671
$50,944
$26,000
$51,083
$61,454
$59,538
$55,821
$45,725
$28,196
638
393
416
628
1,159
820
667
146
82
4,950
56
24
17
26
20
18
5
4
1
172
98
27
40
105
205
78
74
21
8
657
56
29
31
89
188
131
159
18
8
709
84
32
46
85
206
171
147
29
3
804
123
60
47
105
259
183
147
33
30
988
107
67
95
120
199
166
86
22
30
892
115
154
138
98
82
74
48
18
1
728
$56,168
$27,934
$54,514
$67,889
$66,503
$62,535
$55,092
$31,110
-37
-109
-105
-58
71
175
64
40
8
50
-5
-10
-6
-4
1
2
-2
0
0
-24
Change 2015- 2020
-4
-4
-6
-13
-11
-14
-7
-19
24
-1
20
19
6
9
7
4
2
1
32
-18
-21
-16
-21
-29
-25
13
1
3
0
-96
-19
-34
-26
-16
6
29
10
10
0
-40
3
-12
-12
8
46
64
26
11
5
139
13
-17
-14
9
20
27
13
5
0
57
$5,224
$1,934
$6,965
$6,714
$9,367
$2,914
$3,431
2015
2020
$6,435
25
TABLE D-9
PLEASANTVILLE MARKET AREA
2015 & 2020
Age of Householder
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Total
<25
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 -74
75+
117
157
106
207
384
236
240
45
55
1,545
9
14
4
4
10
5
2
0
0
48
16
12
12
20
73
35
26
9
12
215
14
17
10
36
69
50
72
3
4
275
21
20
16
41
77
63
65
9
11
323
23
17
16
39
72
56
42
3
24
292
20
28
24
41
62
21
22
15
3
236
14
49
24
26
21
6
11
6
1
158
$59,445
$27,049
$63,121
$70,605
$68,923
$65,305
$51,214
$30,938
109
121
84
193
402
283
326
55
67
1,640
9
11
3
3
11
7
3
0
0
48
17
10
10
21
82
47
37
11
14
250
9
11
6
30
64
54
90
4
4
272
15
12
11
33
67
67
76
9
11
303
22
10
10
35
80
71
61
3
32
324
17
18
18
39
68
27
35
18
4
245
18
48
24
33
30
10
24
9
2
199
$67,431
$37,025
$67,982
$80,590
$78,379
$76,210
$57,915
$38,027
-8
-36
-22
-14
18
48
86
10
12
95
0
-3
-1
-1
1
2
1
0
0
-0
Change 2015- 2020
1
-5
-2
-6
-2
-4
1
-6
9
-5
12
4
11
18
2
1
2
0
35
-3
-6
-8
-5
-8
-10
4
12
0
0
-20
-1
-7
-6
-4
8
15
19
0
8
33
-3
-10
-6
-2
6
6
13
3
1
9
4
-1
0
7
9
4
13
3
1
41
$7,986
$9,976
$9,456
$10,905
$6,701
$7,089
$4,861
2015
2020
$9,985
26
TABLE D-10
MELCHER-DALLAS MARKET AREA
2015 & 2020
Age of Householder
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Total
<25
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 -74
75+
82
106
54
217
171
110
74
3
3
820
1
4
2
14
5
5
0
0
0
31
13
10
5
37
23
19
4
0
0
110
12
5
3
30
35
27
31
0
0
142
10
7
10
34
45
21
13
1
0
141
26
13
5
41
31
21
20
0
2
158
11
25
11
32
26
14
5
0
0
122
10
43
19
29
6
5
2
2
1
116
$45,612
$41,824
$44,501
$62,547
$53,107
$47,001
$40,416
$27,020
79
87
46
195
185
133
86
4
3
818
2
2
1
10
6
5
0
0
0
26
12
8
6
34
25
23
4
0
0
112
10
4
2
23
34
30
32
0
0
135
9
6
7
29
45
22
17
1
0
134
24
8
4
35
32
27
22
0
2
153
10
22
10
33
35
20
8
0
0
138
11
38
17
31
8
8
3
3
1
119
$50,640
$44,999
$47,282
$69,149
$56,704
$53,279
$46,214
$30,067
-3
-20
-8
-21
14
23
12
1
-0
-2
1
-2
-1
-3
1
-0
0
0
0
-5
Change 2015- 2020
-0
-1
-2
-1
1
-1
-3
-7
2
-1
4
3
-0
2
0
0
0
0
1
-7
-1
-1
-3
-6
-1
1
4
-0
0
-7
-2
-5
-1
-6
2
6
2
0
-0
-4
-0
-3
-1
2
10
6
3
0
0
16
2
-5
-2
2
2
3
1
1
-0
3
$5,028
$3,175
$3,597
$6,278
$5,798
$3,047
$2,781
2015
2020
$6,602
27
TABLE D-11
SOUTHEAST MARKET AREA
2015 & 2020
Age of Householder
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000+
Total
Median Income
Total
<25
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 -74
75+
81
56
65
127
150
58
77
31
5
650
0
4
3
9
3
1
1
2
0
22
3
7
6
17
24
13
13
1
1
84
5
4
4
12
23
6
21
9
0
83
18
7
7
27
32
17
13
15
0
136
21
10
7
26
42
12
19
2
2
140
19
6
15
27
23
8
7
1
2
107
16
19
25
9
5
1
4
1
0
78
$49,457
$40,360
$57,612
$66,424
$55,174
$52,394
$40,876
$26,062
72
42
51
114
149
67
101
39
5
640
1
3
1
5
4
1
1
3
0
18
2
5
4
15
21
15
17
1
1
80
5
3
3
11
20
6
25
14
0
86
10
5
3
18
24
16
13
16
0
104
16
6
5
27
47
17
28
2
2
151
16
4
11
27
26
10
9
2
2
105
23
17
25
11
8
2
7
2
0
95
$54,655
$46,454
$65,480
$81,066
$64,938
$57,920
$46,778
$27,097
-9
-14
-14
-13
-1
9
23
8
-0
-10
1
-1
-2
-3
1
-0
-0
1
0
-3
Change 2015- 2020
-1
-0
-2
-1
-2
-1
-2
-1
-3
-3
1
1
4
4
-0
4
-0
0
-4
3
-8
-2
-4
-9
-8
-1
-0
1
0
-32
-4
-4
-1
1
5
5
9
-0
-0
11
-3
-2
-4
-1
3
3
3
1
-0
-1
7
-1
0
2
4
1
4
1
0
17
$5,198
$6,094
$9,764
$5,526
$5,902
$1,035
$7,868
2015
2020
$14,642
28
Tenure by Household Income
Table D-12 shows household tenure by income for Marion County in 2014. Data is an estimate
from the American Community Survey. Household tenure information is important to assess
the propensity for owner-occupied or renter-occupied housing options based on household
affordability. As stated earlier, the Department of Housing and Urban Development determines
affordable housing as not exceeding 30% of the household’s income. It is important to note
that the higher the income, the lower percentage a household typically allocates to housing.
Many lower income households, as well as many young and senior households, spend more
than 30% of their income, while middle-aged households in their prime earning years typically
allocate 20% to 25% of their income.
•
Typically, as income increases, so does the rate of homeownership. This can be seen in
Marion County, where the homeownership rate steadily increases from 39.6% of households with incomes below $15,000 to 98.4% of households with incomes above $100,000.
•
A portion of renter households that are referred to as lifestyle renters, or those who are
financially-able to own but choose to rent, have household incomes above $50,000 (about
28% of the County’s renters in 2014). Households with incomes below $15,000 are typically
a market for deep subsidy rental housing (about 25% of the County’s renters in 2014).
Tenure by HH Income
Marion County (2014)
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
36.1%
41.4%
26.2%
17.1%
13.3%
6.8%
1.6%
82.9%
86.7%
93.2%
98.4%
$50K to
$74.9K
$75K to
$99.9K
$100K to
$149.9K
$150K+
60.4%
63.9%
58.6%
$15K to
$24.9K
$25K to
$34.9K
73.8%
39.6%
Less than
$15K
Renter-Occupied
$35K to
$49.9K
Owner-Occupied
29
TABLE D-12
TENURE BY HOUSEHOLD INCOME
MARION COUNTY
2014
Income
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149,999
$150,000+
Total
Median Income
Income
OwnerOccupied
PELLA MARKET AREA
RenterPct.
Occupied
68
187
179
424
819
903
607
284
3,471
18.2%
53.3%
45.0%
61.3%
77.5%
79.3%
92%
100.0%
70.1%
$76,720
64
74
49
131
118
109
38
25
608
Median Income
$52,117
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149,999
$150,000+
Total
Median Income
Pct.
81.8%
46.7%
55.0%
38.7%
22.5%
20.7%
8.3%
0.0%
29.9%
$38,956
MELCHER-DALLAS MARKET AREA
OwnerRenterOccupied
Pct.
Occupied Pct.
Less than $15,000
$15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149,999
$150,000+
Total
Income
305
164
219
268
238
235
55
0
1,484
52.5%
81.3%
62.8%
85.6%
86.1%
100.0%
78%
100.0%
79.6%
OwnerOccupied
51,372
68,817
81,261
125,253
194,011
145,119
141,608
77,543
884,984
$64,199
58
17
29
22
19
0
11
0
156
47.5%
18.7%
37.2%
14.4%
13.9%
0.0%
22.4%
0.0%
20.4%
$21,964
KNOXVILLE MARKET AREA
OwnerRenterOccupied
Pct.
Occupied
245
337
335
568
854
788
543
175
3,845
42.4%
61.7%
62.2%
77.6%
89.1%
94.5%
95.9%
94.6%
77.8%
$62,313
333
209
204
164
105
46
23
10
1,094
Pct.
57.6%
38.3%
37.8%
22.4%
10.9%
5.5%
4.1%
5.4%
22.2%
$25,637
SOUTHEAST MARKET AREA
OwnerRenterOccupied
Pct.
Occupied
39
88
85
110
80
58
61
26
547
51.3%
91.7%
90.4%
94.8%
84.2%
76.3%
100%
100.0%
85.5%
$42,744
37
8
9
6
15
18
0
0
93
105
93
104
148
273
202
223
93
1,241
63.6%
68.9%
59.8%
82.7%
80.8%
92.2%
92.1%
100.0%
80.3%
$57,146
Pct.
48.7%
8.3%
9.6%
5.2%
15.8%
23.7%
0.0%
0.0%
14.5%
$22,669
PLEASANTVILLE MARKET AREA
OwnerRenterOccupied
Pct.
Occupied
Pct.
OwnerOccupied
60
42
70
31
65
17
19
0
304
36.4%
31.1%
40.2%
17.3%
19.2%
7.8%
7.9%
0.0%
19.7%
$27,407
MARION COUNTY
RenterPct.
Occupied
521
779
752
1,381
2,144
2,060
1,472
603
9,712
$64,793
39.6%
63.9%
58.6%
73.8%
82.9%
86.7%
93.2%
98.4%
75.6%
793
440
531
491
442
316
108
10
3,131
Pct.
60.4%
36.1%
41.4%
26.2%
17.1%
13.3%
6.8%
1.6%
24.4%
$29,869
IOWA
Pct.
37.0%
52.1%
61.0%
69.7%
78.6%
86.8%
93%
94.6%
71.8%
RenterOccupied
87,448
63,255
51,876
54,403
52,827
22,001
11,010
4,424
347,244
Pct.
63.0%
47.9%
39.0%
30.3%
21.4%
13.2%
7.2%
5.4%
28.2%
$29,226
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau - American Community Survey; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC
30
HH Income by Submarket- 2014
$90,000
Owner-Occupied
$80,000
$0
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Melcher-Dallas
$22,669
$10,000
$21,964
$27,407
$25,637
$20,000
$38,956
$30,000
$42,744
$40,000
$52,117
$50,000
$57,146
$62,313
$60,000
$76,720
$70,000
Renter-Occupied
Southeast
Tenure by Age of Householder
Table D-13 shows 2000 and 2010 tenure data for each of the submarkets in Marion County
from the U.S. Census Bureau. This data is useful in determining demand for certain types of
housing since housing preferences change throughout an individual’s life cycle.
The following are key findings from Table D-13.
•
In 2000, 75.6% of all households in Marion County owned their housing. By 2010, that
percentage decreased slightly to 75.2%.
•
In 2010, Melcher-Dallas submarket had the highest ownership rate at 85.5% while Pella
submarket had the lowest ownership rate (72.4%).
•
As households progress through their life cycle, housing needs change. Typically, the
proportion of renter households decreases as households age out of their young-adult
years. This pattern is apparent in Marion County as 83.1% of households age 15 to 24,
38.7% of age 25 to 34 households, and 33.6% of 65 and older households rented their
housing in 2010.
31
Household Tenure by Age of Householder
Percentage of Renters
2010
100.0
90.0
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
Marion County
Pct.
Iowa
15-24
25-34
35-44 Age 45-54
55-64
65-74
32
TABLE D-13
TENURE BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER
MARION COUNTY
2000 & 2010
Knoxville Market Area
Pella Market Area
2010
2000
Age
No.
Pct.
No.
2000
Pct.
No.
Pleasantville Market Area
2010
Pct.
No.
2000
Pct.
No.
Melcher-Dallas Market Area
2010
Pct.
No.
2000
Pct.
No.
Southeast Market Area
2010
Pct.
No.
2000
Pct.
No.
Marion County
2010
Pct.
No.
Iowa
2000
Pct.
No.
2010
Pct.
No.
2000
Pct.
No.
2010
Pct.
No.
Pct.
15-24
Own
Rent
Total
55
203
258
21.3
78.7
100.0
32
157
189
16.9
83.1
100.0
97
167
264
36.7
63.3
100.0
61
133
194
31.4
68.6
100.0
10
24
34
29.4
70.6
100.0
17
27
44
38.6
61.4
100.0
9
12
21
42.9
57.1
100.0
17
17
34
50.0
50.0
100.0
16
12
28
57.1
42.9
100.0
17
9
26
65.4
34.6
100.0
187
418
605
30.9
69.1
100.0
144
343
487
29.6
70.4
100.0
15,311
59,125
74,436
20.6
79.4
100.0
14,484
57,638
72,122
20.1
79.9
100.0
25-34
Own
Rent
Total
438
301
739
59.3
40.7
100.0
469
296
765
61.3
38.7
100.0
449
251
700
64.1
35.9
100.0
385
266
651
59.1
40.9
100.0
143
64
207
69.1
30.9
100.0
150
54
204
73.5
26.5
100.0
74
27
101
73.3
26.7
100.0
73
23
96
76.0
24.0
100.0
64
29
93
68.8
31.2
100.0
60
22
82
73.2
26.8
100.0
1,168
672
1,840
63.5
36.5
100.0
1,137
661
1,798
63.2
36.8
100.0
102,001
80,687
182,688
55.8
44.2
100.0
107,397
83,407
190,804
56.3
43.7
100.0
35-44
Own
Rent
Total
775
189
964
80.4
19.6
100.0
655
158
813
80.6
19.4
100.0
745
242
987
75.5
24.5
100.0
576
197
773
74.5
25.5
100.0
249
54
303
82.2
17.8
100.0
226
58
284
79.6
20.4
100.0
136
31
167
81.4
18.6
100.0
123
20
143
86.0
14.0
100.0
131
21
152
86.2
13.8
100.0
78
22
100
78.0
22.0
100.0
2,036
537
2,573
79.1
20.9
100.0
1,658
455
2,113
78.5
21.5
100.0
178,858
62,426
241,284
74.1
25.9
100.0
144,288
52,747
197,035
73.2
26.8
100.0
45-54
Own
Rent
Total
721
132
853
84.5
15.5
100.0
856
201
1,057
81.0
19.0
100.0
713
222
935
76.3
23.7
100.0
781
219
1,000
78.1
21.9
100.0
208
24
232
89.7
10.3
100.0
284
47
331
85.8
14.2
100.0
151
6
157
96.2
3.8
100.0
137
22
159
86.2
13.8
100.0
118
11
129
91.5
8.5
100.0
146
23
169
86.4
13.6
100.0
1,911
395
2,306
82.9
17.1
100.0
2,204
512
2,716
81.1
18.9
100.0
182,590
40,596
223,186
81.8
18.2
100.0
194,528
52,041
246,569
78.9
21.1
100.0
55-64
Own
Rent
Total
486
61
547
88.8
11.2
100.0
704
120
824
85.4
14.6
100.0
538
116
654
82.3
17.7
100.0
762
172
934
81.6
18.4
100.0
188
16
204
92.2
7.8
100.0
226
21
247
91.5
8.5
100.0
105
4
109
96.3
3.7
100.0
144
11
155
92.9
7.1
100.0
101
4
105
96.2
3.8
100.0
117
12
129
90.7
9.3
100.0
1,418
201
1,619
87.6
12.4
100.0
1,953
336
2,289
85.3
14.7
100.0
128,186
21,429
149,615
85.7
14.3
100.0
184,322
35,774
220,096
83.7
16.3
100.0
65-74
Own
Rent
Total
398
93
491
81.1
18.9
100.0
473
90
563
84.0
16.0
100.0
469
104
573
81.8
18.2
100.0
515
109
624
82.5
17.5
100.0
114
16
130
87.7
12.3
100.0
181
21
202
89.6
10.4
100.0
101
10
111
91.0
9.0
100.0
98
5
103
95.1
4.9
100.0
93
6
99
93.9
6.1
100.0
91
7
98
92.9
7.1
100.0
1,175
229
1,404
83.7
16.3
100.0
1,358
232
1,590
85.4
14.6
100.0
113,506
19,069
132,575
85.6
14.4
100.0
119,375
20,641
140,016
85.3
14.7
100.0
75-84
Own
Rent
Total
293
181
474
61.8
38.2
100.0
288
185
473
60.9
39.1
100.0
354
104
458
77.3
22.7
100.0
342
114
456
75.0
25.0
100.0
107
27
134
79.9
20.1
100.0
77
21
98
78.6
21.4
100.0
80
10
90
88.9
11.1
100.0
69
14
83
83.1
16.9
100.0
58
10
68
85.3
14.7
100.0
54
11
65
83.1
16.9
100.0
892
332
1,224
72.9
27.1
100.0
830
345
1,175
70.6
29.4
100.0
86,011
22,525
108,536
79.2
20.8
100.0
84,024
20,990
105,014
80.0
20.0
100.0
85+
Own
Rent
Total
102
101
203
50.2
49.8
100.0
96
158
254
37.8
62.2
100.0
113
40
153
73.9
26.1
100.0
123
87
210
58.6
41.4
100.0
32
7
39
82.1
17.9
100.0
30
14
44
68.2
31.8
100.0
23
5
28
82.1
17.9
100.0
27
5
32
84.4
15.6
100.0
22
1
23
95.7
4.3
100.0
14
1
15
93.3
6.7
100.0
292
154
446
65.5
34.5
100.0
290
265
555
52.3
47.7
100.0
24,956
12,000
36,956
67.5
32.5
100.0
32,217
17,703
49,920
64.5
35.5
100.0
TOTAL
Own
Rent
Total
3,268
1,261
4,529
72.2
27.8
100.0
3,573
1,365
4,938
72.4
27.6
100.0
3,478
1,246
4,724
73.6
26.4
100.0
3,545
1,297
4,842
73.2
26.8
100.0
1,051
232
1,283
81.9
18.1
100.0
1,191
263
1,454
81.9
18.1
100.0
679
105
784
86.6
13.4
100.0
688
117
805
85.5
14.5
100.0
603
94
697
86.5
13.5
100.0
577
107
684
84.4
15.6
100.0
9,079
2,938
12,017
75.6
24.4
100.0
9,574
3,149
12,723
75.2
24.8
100.0
831,419
317,857
1,149,276
72.3
27.7
100.0
880,635
340,941
1,221,576
72.1
27.9
100.0
33
Household Type
Table D-14 shows a breakdown of the type of households present in Marion County in 2000 and
2010. The data is useful in assessing housing demand since the household composition often
dictates the type of housing needed and preferred. The following key points are summarized
from Table D-14.
34
•
Family households were the most common type of household in the County, representing
approximately 70.9% of all households in 2000 and 69.6% of all households in 2010. Married couples without children comprised 34.6% of all households in 2000 and 35.1% in 2010.
Married couple families with children comprised 26.6% of all the Marion County households
in 2000, dropping to 23.5% in 2010.
•
Married couple families without children are generally made up of younger couples that
have not had children and older couples with adult children that have moved out of the
home. There is also a growing national trend toward married couples choosing delay childbirth, delaying children, or choosing not to have children entirely as birthrates have noticeably decreased. Older couples with adult children often desire multifamily housing options
for convenience reasons but older couples in rural areas typically hold onto their singlefamily homes until they need services. Married couple families with children typically generate demand for single-family detached ownership housing. Other family households, defined as a male or female householder with no spouse present (typically single-parent
households), often require affordable housing.
•
Non-family households made up 29.1% of all households in 2000, increasing to 30.4% in
2010. The percentage of people living alone increased from 25.6% in 2000 to 26.4% in
2010. Roommates and unmarried couples comprised 3.5% of Marion County households in
2000, compared to 3.9% in 2010.
•
Between 2000 and 2010, Other family households experienced the largest increase as a
percentage (20.7%). Other families include single-parents and unmarried couples with children. With only one income, these families are most likely to need affordable or modest
housing, both rental and for-sale.
•
According to the 2015 National Association of Realtors (NAR) Home Buyer and Seller Generational Trends, approximately 65% of all homebuyers were married couples, 9% were singles, 7% were unmarried couples, and 2% were other.
35
TABLE D-14
HOUSEHOLD TYPE
MARION COUNTY
2000 & 2010
Total HH's
2000
2010
Married w/o Child
2000
2010
Family Households
Married w/ Child
2000
2010
Other *
2000
2010
Non-Family Households
Living Alone
Roommates
2000
2010
2000
2010
Number of Households
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
Marion County
4,529
4,724
1,283
784
697
12,017
4,938
4,842
1,454
805
684
12,723
1,652
1,510
448
296
253
4,159
1,801
1,598
478
311
273
4,461
1,325
1,134
360
195
178
3,192
1,364
952
368
163
139
2,986
300
559
134
95
88
1,176
372
686
183
91
88
1,420
1,102
1,326
300
177
166
3,071
1,235
1,404
348
205
162
3,354
150
195
41
21
12
419
166
202
77
35
22
502
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
36.5
32.0
34.9
37.8
36.3
34.6
36.5
33.0
32.9
38.6
39.9
35.1
29.3
24.0
28.1
24.9
25.5
26.6
27.6
19.7
25.3
20.2
20.3
23.5
6.6
11.8
10.4
12.1
12.6
9.8
7.5
14.2
12.6
11.3
12.9
11.2
24.3
28.1
23.4
22.6
23.8
25.6
25.0
29.0
23.9
25.5
23.7
26.4
3.3
4.1
3.2
2.7
1.7
3.5
3.4
4.2
5.3
4.3
3.2
3.9
Percent of Total
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
Marion County
Change
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
Marion County
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
409
118
171
21
-13
706
9.0
2.5
13.3
2.7
-1.9
5.9
149
88
30
15
20
302
9.0
5.8
6.7
5.1
7.9
7.3
39
-182
8
-32
-39
-206
2.9
-16.0
2.2
-16.4
-21.9
-6.5
72
127
49
-4
0
244
24.0
22.7
36.6
-4.2
0.0
20.7
133
78
48
28
-4
283
12.1
5.9
16.0
15.8
-2.4
9.2
16
7
36
14
10
83
10.7
3.6
87.8
66.7
83.3
19.8
* Single-parent families, unmarried couples with children.
36
HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
Introduction
The variety and condition of the housing stock in a community provides the basis for an attractive living environment. Housing functions as a building block for neighborhoods and goods
and services. We examined the housing market in each Marion County submarket by reviewing
data on the age of the existing housing supply; examining residential building trends since 2000;
and reviewing housing data from the American Community Survey.
Residential Construction Trends 2000 to Present
Maxfield Research obtained data on the number of new construction housing units built in
Marion County from 2000 through 2014 from the U.S Census Bureau. Table HC-1 displays the
number of units of new residential construction in Marion County.
•
Between 2000 and 2014, Marion County has averaged 97 single family units and nearly 21
multi-family units. Building permit trends have fluctuated over the last 14 years which
peaked in 2000 (238 new construction units) and bottomed out in 2011 (38 new construction units).
•
Since 2011, the number of new construction units has increased each year reaching 125
new construction units in 2014.
•
Between 2000-2006 Marion County averaged 180 new construction residential units per
year, reflecting the housing boom occurring across the country during this time. The ensuing recession saw new construction residential units drop to an average of 64 per year from
2007-2014.
•
Multi-family units were at, or near, zero through much of the late 2000s. Since 2010, a
small number of multi-family units were added to Marion County each year. In 2014, multifamily units saw a large influx, with 58 units.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC
37
TABLE HC-1
NEW CONSTRUCTION RESIDENTIAL HOUSING UNITS
MARION COUNTY
2000 to 2014
2000
Single-Family
Two Family
Homes
188
10
104
6
Three and
Four Family
0
Five units
or more
40
Total Housing
Units
233
238
0
123
2002
168
6
0
0
174
2003
153
6
0
6
165
2004
124
10
0
0
134
2005
160
10
0
0
170
2006
128
18
0
0
146
2007
93
2
0
0
95
2008
64
0
0
0
64
2009
39
0
0
0
39
2010
44
0
0
0
44
2011
34
4
0
0
38
2012
37
6
0
0
43
2013
57
8
0
0
65
2014
67
34
8
16
125
Total
1,460
120
8
185
1,773
2001
Source: US Census Bureau; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
New Construction Residential Units, Marion County , 2000-2014
240
Multi-Family
220
Single Family
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Year
38
Table HC-2 shows the number of units of new residential construction in Pella and Knoxville
from 2000-2014 per building permits data supplied by the individual city.
•
Between 2000 and 2014, Pella averaged 21 units of new construction single family homes
and 19 units of multi-family new construction on an annual basis.
•
In the City of Pella, units of new residential construction fell to a low of nine in 2009, the
year generally considered to be the worst of the recession. Residential construction has
since rebounded, reaching 67 in 2013, bolstered by the construction of 40 multi-family
units.
•
Areas within two miles of the city limits of Pella, commonly referred to as the Two Mile
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, are subject to subdivision review by the city. State law permits
subdivision review of areas within two miles of city limits in order to ensure consistency of
planned land uses. Through agreements with Marion and Mahaska Counties, the building
and zoning regulations of the City of Pella area also applied to the two mile area.
•
Knoxville averaged over six single family new construction units and over seven multi-family
new construction units from 2000-2014.
•
Construction of new single family units in Knoxville has experienced a decline since 2007.
39
TABLE HC-2
NEW CONSTRUCTION RESIDENTIAL HOUSING UNITS
CITY OF PELLA AND CITY OF KNOXVILLE
2000 to 2014
Year
2000
Single
Family
Pella
MultiFamily SF 2-mile
36
58
Single
Family
Total
0
94
15
Knoxville
MultiFamily
Total
0
15
2001
21
98
0
119
10
1
11
2002
21
4
0
25
6
3
9
2003
23
8
4
35
15
1
16
2004
26
10
13
49
7
1
8
2005
40
10
19
69
13
2
15
2006
38
20
13
71
10
22
32
2007
22
2
7
31
3
18
21
2008
7
4
3
14
4
4
8
2009
7
2
0
9
4
0
4
2010
11
4
4
19
5
12
17
2011
11
8
6
25
3
0
3
2012
9
8
3
20
2
50
52
2013
23
40
4
67
1
0
1
2014
26
8
4
38
2
0
2
Source: City of Pella; City of Knoxville; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
40
120
City of Pella New Construction Residential Units, 2000-2014
SF 2-mile
Multi-Family
Single Family
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
City of Knoxville New Construction Residential Units, 2000-2014
55
50
Multi-Family
Single Family
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
41
American Community Survey
The American Community Survey (“ACS”) is an ongoing statistical survey administered by the
U.S. Census Bureau that is sent to approximately 3 million addresses annually. The survey
gathers data previously contained only in the long form of the decennial census. As a result,
the survey is ongoing and provides a more “up-to-date” portrait of demographic, economic,
social, and household characteristics every year, not just every ten years. The most recent ACS
highlights data collected between 2010 and 2014. It should be noted that all ACS surveys are
subject to sampling error and uncertainty. The ACS reports margins of errors (MOEs) with
estimates for most standard census geographies. Due to the MOE, 2014 ACS data may have
inconsistencies with previous 2010 Census data.
Tables HC-3 through HC-9 show key data from the American Community Survey for Marion
County. For a comparison, information for Marion County is broken down by submarket.
Housing Units by Occupancy Status & Tenure
Tenure is a key variable that analyzes the propensity for householders to rent or own their
housing unit. Tenure is an integral statistic used by numerous governmental agencies and
private sector industries to assess neighborhood stability. Table HC-3 shows historic trends in
2010 by each county submarket.
•
Marion County has a slightly higher proportion of owner-occupied units, 68.8%, compared
to the state of Iowa, 65.9%. Within Marion County, the Melcher-Dallas submarket has the
highest proportion of owner-occupied housing units at 78%. Typically, the more rural an
area, the higher propensity toward ownership.
•
The number of vacant housing units in the Knoxville (9.2%) and Southeast (10.2%) submarkets exceeds the proportion of vacant housing units in the state of Iowa, 8.6%. A housing
unit is vacant if no one is living in it at the time of enumeration, including units occupied by
people who have a usual residence elsewhere.
•
The proportion of renter occupied units in Marion County (22.6%) falls below the proportion of the state of Iowa as a whole (25.5%). The proportion of renter occupied units is particularly low in the Melcher-Dallas submarket, only 13.3% of housing units are renteroccupied.
42
TABLE HC-3
HOUSING UNITS BY OCCUPANCY STATUS & TENURE
MARION COUNTY
2010
Year/Occupancy
Knoxville
No.
Pct.
Owner Occupied
Renter Occupied
Vacant
Total
3,545
1,297
491
5,333
66.5%
24.3%
9.2%
100.0%
Melcher-Dallas
No.
Pct.
688
117
77
882
78.0%
13.3%
8.7%
100.0%
Pct.
Pella
3,573
1,365
442
5,380
Pct.
66.4%
25.4%
8.2%
100.0%
Pleasantville
Pct.
Pct.
1,191
263
103
1,557
76.5%
16.9%
6.6%
100.0%
Southeast
No.
Pct.
577
107
78
762
75.7%
14.0%
10.2%
100.0%
Total Marion
No.
Pct.
9,574
3,149
1,191
13,914
68.8%
22.6%
8.6%
100.0%
State of Iowa
No.
Pct.
880,635
340,941
114,841
1,336,417
65.9%
25.5%
8.6%
100.0%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau-American Community Survey; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND CONSULTING, LLC.
43
Age of Housing Stock
The following graph shows the age distribution of the housing stock based on data from the
U.S. Census Bureau and the American Community Survey (5-Year). Table HC-4 includes the
number of housing units built in Marion County, prior to 1940 and during each decade since.
•
The greatest percentage of homes in Marion County by decade, 22%, was built prior to
1940.
•
The Melcher-Dallas submarket has the highest proportion of housing stock built prior to
1940, at 43.5% of the total housing stock.
•
Additions to the housing stock fell to 3.8% in the 1940s. Beginning in the 1950s, additions
to the housing stock increased to 9.0% and have remained between 9.0% and 15.7% each
decade.
•
Approximately 28% of the housing stock in Marion County has been built since 1990. The
Pella and Pleasantville submarkets exceed the county proportion of housing stock built
since 1990, at 34% and 32% of the housing stock respectively.
Housing Units Built by Decade
Marion County
2014
Knoxville
<1940
MelcherDallas
1940s
1950s
Pella
1960s
Pleasantville
1970s
1980s
Southeast
1990s
Marion
County
2000s
2010s
State of Iowa
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
44
TABLE HC-4
AGE OF HOUSING STOCK (OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS)
MARION COUNTY
2014
Year Structure Built
Knoxvi l l e
Mel cher-Da l l a s
Pel l a
Pl ea s a ntvi l l e
Southea s t
Marion County Total
State of Iowa
Tota l
Uni ts
Med. Yr.
Bui l t
4,939
764
4,955
1,545
640
12,843
1,232,228
1969
1953
1977
1988
1971
1973
1967
<1940
No.
Pct.
1,116
332
931
253
191
2,823
316,652
22.6%
43.5%
18.8%
16.4%
29.8%
22.0%
25.7%
1940s
No.
Pct.
213
24
191
48
14
490
72,632
4.3%
3.1%
3.9%
3.1%
2.2%
3.8%
5.9%
1950s
Pct.
No.
461
80
321
245
53
1,160
136,352
9.3%
10.5%
6.5%
15.9%
8.3%
9.0%
11.1%
1960s
Pct.
No.
585
67
585
109
29
1,375
132,971
11.8%
8.8%
11.8%
7.1%
4.5%
10.7%
10.8%
1970s
Pct.
No.
858
104
694
235
126
2,017
184,001
17.4%
13.6%
14.0%
15.2%
19.7%
15.7%
14.9%
1980s
Pct.
No.
490
39
548
157
91
1,325
90,121
9.9%
5.1%
11.1%
10.2%
14.2%
10.3%
7.3%
1990s
Pct.
No.
637
48
873
234
59
1,851
135,972
12.9%
6.3%
17.6%
15.1%
9.2%
14.4%
11.0%
2000s
Pct.
No.
554
68
801
246
77
1,746
148,032
11.2%
8.9%
16.2%
15.9%
12.0%
13.6%
12.0%
2010 or l a ter
No.
Pct.
25
2
11
18
0
56
15,495
Sources : U.S. Cens us Burea u - Ameri ca n Communi ty Survey; Ma xfi el d Res ea rch a nd Cons ul ti ng, LLC
45
0.5%
0.3%
0.2%
1.2%
0.0%
0.4%
1.3%
Housing Units by Structure and Occupancy or (Housing Stock by Structure Type)
Table HC-5 shows the housing stock in Marion County by type of structure and tenure based on
the 2014 ACS.
•
The dominant housing type in Marion County is the single-family detached home, representing 80.8% of all housing units in the County. As a comparison, approximately 75% of all
homes in Iowa are single-family detached.
•
The Southeast submarket has a higher proportion of owner- and renter-occupied mobile
home units, 15.7% and 24.7% respectively, compared to all other submarkets.
•
The Knoxville and Pella submarkets have the greatest variety of renter-occupied housing
types. Knoxville and Pella also house the majority of the county’s renter-occupied units at a
combined 82%.
•
The highest proportion of rental unit type within Marion County are attached and detached
single units, accounting for 45% of all rentals. The proportion is particularly high in the
Melcher-Dallas submarket, where single unit detached structures account for 94% of rentals.
Marion County Owner Occupied Single-Family Detached, 2014
90.4%
86.0%
92.6%
88.0%
89.6%
90.0%
93.4%
92.0%
92.5%
94.0%
95.0%
96.0%
82.0%
80.0%
83.5%
84.0%
78.0%
76.0%
46
TABLE HC-5
HOUSING UNITS BY STRUCTURE & TENURE
MARION COUNTY
2014
Units in Structure
1, detached
1, attached
2
3 to 4
5 to 9
10 to 19
20 to 49
50 or more
Mobile home
Boat, RV, van, etc.
Total
OwnerOccupied
Knoxville
RenterPct.
3,556 92.5%
22
0.6%
10
0.3%
8
0.2%
1
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
248
6.4%
0
0.0%
3,845 100%
Occupied
OwnerPct.
433 39.6%
31
2.8%
39
3.6%
230 21.0%
130 11.9%
83
7.6%
63
5.8%
28
2.6%
57
5.2%
0
0.0%
1,094 100%
Occupied
Melcher-Dallas
RenterPct.
568 93.4%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
40
6.6%
0
0.0%
608 100%
Occupied
146
0
0
7
3
0
0
0
0
0
156
Pella
Renter-
OwnerPct.
94%
0%
0%
4%
2%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
100%
Occupied
Pct.
3,297 95.0%
51
1.5%
18
0.5%
0
0.0%
29
0.8%
0
0.0%
14
0.4%
13
0.4%
49
1.4%
0
0.0%
3,471 100%
Occupied
434
133
211
54
198
196
158
100
0
0
1,484
Pct.
29%
9%
14%
4%
13%
13%
11%
7%
0%
0%
100%
Owner-
Pleasantville
Renter-
Occupied
Pct.
1,112 89.6%
37
3.0%
0
0.0%
3
0.2%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
89
7.2%
0
0.0%
1,241 100%
Occupied
173
20
14
17
53
23
0
0
4
0
304
OwnerPct.
57%
7%
5%
6%
17%
8%
0%
0%
1%
0%
100%
Occupied
Southeast
RenterPct.
457 83.5%
0
0.0%
4
0.7%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
86 15.7%
0
0.0%
547 100%
Occupied
Marion County Total
OwnerRenterPct.
52 55.9%
0
0.0%
2
2.2%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
16 17.2%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
23 24.7%
0
0.0%
93 100%
Occupied
Pct.
8,990 92.6%
110
1.1%
32
0.3%
11
0.1%
30
0.3%
0
0.0%
14
0.1%
13
0.1%
512
5.3%
0
0.0%
9,712 100%
Occupied
State of Iowa
Pct.
1,238 39.5%
184
5.9%
266
8.5%
308
9.8%
384 12.3%
318 10.2%
221
7.1%
128
4.1%
84
2.7%
0
0.0%
3,131 100%
Pct.
Pct.
90.4%
3.6%
0.4%
0.4%
0.3%
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
3.9%
0.0%
100%
35.1%
4.5%
6.7%
10.4%
11.6%
12.1%
11.1%
5.8%
2.5%
0.0%
100%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau - American Community Survey; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
47
Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Mortgage Status
Table HC-6 shows mortgage status from the American Community Survey for 2014 (5-Year).
Mortgage status provides information on the cost of homeownership when analyzed in conjunction with mortgage payment data. A mortgage refers to all forms of debt where the
property is pledged as security for repayment of debt. A first mortgage has priority claim over
any other mortgage or if it is the only mortgage. A second (and sometimes third) mortgage is
called a “junior mortgage,” a home equity line of credit (HELOC) would also fall into this category. Finally, a housing unit without a mortgage is owned free and clear and is debt free.
•
Approximately 63% of Marion County homeowners have a mortgage, on par with the state
average of 62%. About 10% of homeowners with mortgages in Marion County also have a
second mortgage, home equity loan or both.
•
In the Southeast submarket 52.8% of housing units have no mortgage, this is the highest
proportion with in Marion County. The proportion of housing units without a mortgage in
all submarkets is between 35% and 38%, this is consistent with the proportion in the state
of Iowa (38%).
Mortgage Status
Marion County, 2014
38.25%
61.7%
63.0%
36.95%
35.5%
35.2%
20.0%
37.7%
30.0%
36.6%
40.0%
47.2%
52.8%
64.5%
64.8%
50.0%
62.3%
60.0%
63.4%
70.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Knoxville
MelcherDallas
Pella
Pleasantville Southeast
Units w/mortgage
Marion Co
Iowa
Units w/o mortgage
48
TABLE HC-6
OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS BY MORTGAGE STATUS
MARION COUNTY
2014
Knoxville
Melcher-Dallas
Pella
Pleasantville
Southeast
Total Marion County
Iowa
Mortgage Status
No.
Housing units without a mortgage
1,409
36.6
229
37.7
1,222
35.2
440
35.5
289
52.8
3,589
37.0
38.3
Housing units with a mortgage/debt
Second mortgage only
Home equity loan only
Both second mortgage and equity loan
No second mortgage or equity loan
2,436
52
259
40
2,085
63.4
1.4
6.7
1.0
54.2
379
2
25
0
352
62.3
0.3
4.1
0.0
57.9
2,249
83
356
0
1810
64.8
2.4
10.3
0.0
52.1
801
60
72
0
669
64.5
4.8
5.8
0.0
53.9
258
5
28
0
225
47.2
0.9
5.1
0.0
41.1
6,123
202
740
40
5,141
63.0
2.1
7.6
0.4
52.9
61.7
2.9
7.1
0.4
51.4
Total
3,845
100.0
608
100.0
3,471
100.0
1,241
100.0
547
100.0
9,712
100.0
100.0
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
Pct.
49
Owner-Occupied Housing Units by Value
Table HC-7 presents data on housing values summarized by nine price ranges. Housing value
refers to the estimated price point for which the property would sell if the property were for
sale. For single-family and townhome properties, value includes both the land and the structure. For condominium units, value refers to only the unit.
•
The median owner-occupied home value in Marion County was $135,800, which is higher
than the median home value for the state of Iowa, $126,300.
•
Median values in Marion County range from a low of $84,165 in the Southeast submarket to
a high of $177,323 in the Pella submarket.
•
Owner-occupied housing value varies greatly by submarket. In the Knoxville, MelcherDallas and Southeast submarkets the highest proportion of home are valued in the $50,000
to $99,999 range. The highest proportion of homes in the Pleasantville submarket are valued in the $100,000 to $149,999 range and in the $150,000-$199,999 range for the Pella
submarket.
50
TABLE HC-7
OWNER-OCCUPIED UNITS BY VALUE
MARION COUNTY
2014
Knoxville
Home Value
No.
Less than $50,000
$50,000-$99,999
$100,000-$149,999
$150,000-$199,999
$200,000-$249,999
$250,000-$299,999
$300,000-$399,999
$400,000-$499,999
Greater than $500,000
Total
384
1,333
914
681
221
130
140
10
32
3,845
Median Home Value
Pct.
10.0
34.7
23.8
17.7
5.7
3.4
3.6
0.3
0.8
100.0
$112,017
Melcher-Dallas
Pct.
No.
104
299
97
54
9
26
3
0
16
608
17.1
49.2
16.0
8.9
1.5
4.3
0.5
0.0
2.6
100.0
$88,242
Pella
Pct.
115
321
652
1,090
552
235
299
76
131
3,471
Pleasantville
Pct.
3.3
9.2
18.8
31.4
15.9
6.8
8.6
2.2
3.8
100.0
$177,323
Pct.
86
282
360
215
147
33
85
7
26
1,241
Pct.
6.9
22.7
29.0
17.3
11.8
2.7
6.8
0.6
2.1
100.0
$137,663
Southeast
No.
156
161
124
63
5
12
14
5
7
547
Pct.
28.5
29.4
22.7
11.5
0.9
2.2
2.6
0.9
1.3
100.0
$84,165
Total Marion
No.
845
2,396
2,147
2,103
934
436
541
98
212
9,712
Pct.
8.7
24.7
22.1
21.7
9.6
4.5
5.6
1.0
2.2
100.0
$135,800
Iowa
Pct.
11.6%
25.0%
23.2%
16.9%
9.2%
5.6%
4.8%
1.6%
2.1%
100.0
$126,300
51
52
Renter-Occupied Units by Contract Rent
Table HC-8 presents information on the monthly housing costs for renters called contract rent
(also known as asking rent). Contract rent is the monthly rent agreed to regardless of any
utilities, furnishings, fees, or services that may be included.
•
Of the Marion County submarkets, Pella has the highest number of renter-occupied units
(1,484), while the Southeast submarket has the lowest number with 93 units.
•
The median contract rent for Marion County was $529. Median rents within the submarkets ranged from $327 in the Southeast submarket to $630 in the Pella submarket.
•
In the Southeast submarket, 32.3% of renters pay no cash rent, this is significantly higher
than the state of Iowa, where no cash rent rentals make up only 6.6% of renter-occupied
units. Typically, units may be owned by a relative or friend who lives elsewhere whom allow occupancy without charge. Other sources may include caretakers or ministers who may
occupy a residence without charge.
•
In the Pella submarket, 33.4% of renter-occupied units paid a contract rent greater than
$750, compared to 20.3% in the state of Iowa. In Knoxville and Pleasantville, only 5.9% and
3.6%, respectively, of renters paid more than $750 in rent. No renters in the Melcher-Dallas
and Southeast submarkets paid greater than $750 in rent.
53
TABLE HC-8
RENTER-OCCUPIED UNITS BY CONTRACT RENT
MARION COUNTY
2014
Contract Rent
No Cash Rent
Cash Rent
$0 to $249
$250-$499
$500-$749
$750-$999
$1,000+
Total
Median Contract Rent
Knoxville
No.
Pella
Melcher-Dallas
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pleasantville
Pct.
No.
Southeast
Pct.
No.
Total Marion
Pct.
No.
Iowa
Pct.
No.
Pct.
11
1.0
21
13.5
57
3.8
64
21.1
30
32.3
183
5.8
22,775
6.6
1083
147
381
490
30
35
1,094
99.0
13.4
34.8
44.8
2.7
3.2
100.0
135
12
122
1
0
0
156
86.5
7.7
78.2
0.6
0.0
0.0
100.0
1427
115
238
577
342
155
1,484
96.2
7.7
16.0
38.9
23.0
10.4
100.0
240
10
113
106
11
0
304
78.9
3.3
37.2
34.9
3.6
0.0
100.0
63
19
30
14
0
0
93
67.7
20.4
32.3
15.1
0.0
0.0
100.0
2,948
303
884
1,188
383
190
3,131
94.2
9.7
28.2
37.9
12.2
6.1
100.0
324,469
23,976
108,502
121,233
42,161
28,597
347,244
93.4
6.9
31.2
34.9
12.1
8.2
100.0
$500
$389
$630
$467
$327
$529
$547
Marion County Percent of Renters Paying Cash Rent, 2014
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Knoxville
Melcher-Dallas
Pella
Pleasantville
Cash Rent
Southeast
Total Marion
Iowa
No Cash Rent
54
55
Mobility in the Past Year
Table HC-9 shows the mobility patterns of Marion County residents within a one-year time
period (per 2014, the most current year available).
•
The majority of residents in Marion County (84.4%) did not move within the year.
•
Of the residents that moved within the last year, approximately 29.3% moved from outside
of Marion County but within Iowa and 57% moved from within Marion County.
•
The Pella submarket had the greatest number of people move within the county (1,276),
followed closely by the Knoxville submarket where 1,130 people moved within the county.
•
In Melcher-Dallas 43.4% of people who moved were 35-44, and 57.1% of people who
moved in the Southeast submarket were 45-54.
Age of People that Moved in Last Year
Marion County, 2014
60.0%
Knoxville
Melcher-Dallas
Pella
Pleasantville
Southeast
Marion Co
55.0%
50.0%
45.0%
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75+
56
TABLE HC-9
MOBILITY IN THE PAST YEAR BY AGE FOR CURRENT RESIDENCE
MARION COUNTY
2014
Not Moved
Same House
Within Same County
Moved
Different County Same State
No.
Pct.
Different State
Abroad
Age
No.
Knoxville
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75+
Total
2541
548
1109
1360
1598
1518
1048
944
10,666
83.6%
66.3%
76.8%
88.0%
95.7%
95.5%
90.7%
97.6%
87%
341
232
249
150
34
39
81
4
1,130
11.2%
28.1%
17.2%
9.7%
2.0%
2.5%
7.0%
0.4%
9.2%
137
28
36
36
26
7
12
11
293
4.5%
3.4%
2.5%
2.3%
1.6%
0.4%
1.0%
1.1%
2.4%
20
18
50
0
12
25
5
4
134
0.7%
2.2%
3.5%
0.0%
0.7%
1.6%
0.4%
0.4%
1.1%
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
4
13
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.8%
0.4%
0.1%
Melcher-Dallas
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75+
Total
215
93
85
156
295
300
156
132
1,432
76.5%
59.6%
48.3%
84.8%
100.0%
98.7%
100.0%
93.6%
84.6%
5
35
63
151
0
4
0
9
267
1.8%
22.4%
35.8%
82.1%
0.0%
1.3%
0.0%
6.4%
15.8%
53
28
12
24
0
0
0
0
117
18.9%
17.9%
6.8%
13.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
6.9%
8
0
16
4
0
0
0
0
28
2.8%
0.0%
9.1%
2.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Pella
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75+
Total
2,878
810
1,149
1,300
1,610
1,480
844
1,007
11,078
86.8%
40.7%
76.7%
84.7%
91.8%
94.1%
94.3%
89.2%
80.9%
297
514
91
151
75
38
14
96
1,276
9.0%
25.8%
6.1%
9.8%
4.3%
2.4%
1.6%
8.5%
9.3%
89
433
176
29
22
32
37
26
844
2.7%
21.7%
11.7%
1.9%
1.3%
2.0%
4.1%
2.3%
6.2%
53
201
79
55
46
22
0
0
456
1.6%
10.1%
5.3%
3.6%
2.6%
1.4%
0.0%
0.0%
3.3%
0
34
4
0
0
0
0
0
38
0.0%
1.7%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
Pleasantville
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75+
Total
729
240
342
377
539
450
312
245
3,234
83.3%
54.2%
72.8%
94.3%
95.9%
99.3%
94.5%
89.1%
84.9%
60
186
34
3
3
3
15
24
328
6.9%
42.0%
7.2%
0.8%
0.5%
0.7%
4.5%
8.7%
8.6%
82
8
84
20
18
0
3
6
221
9.4%
1.8%
17.9%
5.0%
3.2%
0.0%
0.9%
2.2%
5.8%
4
9
10
0
2
0
0
0
25
0.5%
2.0%
2.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.7%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Southeast
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75+
Total
324
89
123
146
248
235
195
94
1,454
94.5%
100.0%
87.9%
95.4%
78.5%
97.1%
100.0%
98.9%
92.4%
10
0
8
7
53
3
0
1
82
2.9%
0.0%
5.7%
4.6%
16.8%
1.2%
0.0%
1.1%
5.2%
2
0
9
0
15
4
0
0
30
0.6%
0.0%
6.4%
0.0%
4.7%
1.7%
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
2.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
6,687
1,780
2,808
3,339
4,290
3,983
2,555
2,422
27,864
85.1%
50.8%
75.3%
87.5%
93.3%
95.7%
93.6%
92.9%
84.4%
713
967
445
311
165
87
110
134
2,932
9.1%
27.6%
11.9%
8.1%
3.6%
2.1%
4.0%
5.1%
8.9%
363
497
317
109
81
43
52
43
1,505
4.6%
14.2%
8.5%
2.9%
1.8%
1.0%
1.9%
1.6%
4.6%
85
228
155
59
60
47
5
4
643
1.1%
6.5%
4.2%
1.5%
1.3%
1.1%
0.2%
0.2%
1.9%
7
34
4
0
0
0
9
4
58
0.1%
1.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
0.2%
591,974
181,860
293,041
316,275
385,537
370,164
228,880
212,589
2,580,320
86.1%
58.0%
75.3%
87.1%
91.3%
94.0%
95.2%
92.6%
84.9%
59,474
67,533
55,218
27,331
21,861
12,746
6,425
11,866
262,454
8.6%
21.5%
14.2%
7.5%
5.2%
3.2%
2.7%
5.2%
8.6%
19,983
37,997
22,881
9,457
8,010
5,688
2,658
3,076
109,750
2.9%
12.1%
5.9%
2.6%
1.9%
1.4%
1.1%
1.3%
3.6%
13,385
23,231
15,721
8,512
6,210
4,565
1,855
1,788
75,267
1.9%
7.4%
4.0%
2.3%
1.5%
1.2%
0.8%
0.8%
2.5%
3,018
3,161
2,469
1,659
863
756
486
355
12,767
0.4%
1.0%
0.6%
0.5%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.4%
Total Marion Co
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75+
Total
Iowa
Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 64
65 to 74
75+
Total
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
57
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
Employment Trends
Employment characteristics are an important component in assessing housing needs in any
given market area. These trends are important to consider since job growth can generally fuel
household and population growth as people generally desire to live near where they work.
Long commute times have encouraged households to move closer to major employment
centers.
Resident Labor Force
Table E-1 presents resident employment data for Marion County from 2000 through November
2015. Resident employment data is calculated as an annual average and reveals the work force
and number of employed persons living in the County. It is important to note that not all of
these individuals necessarily work in Marion County. The data is obtained from the Iowa
Department of Workforce Development, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
•
Resident employment in Marion County has decreased by about 352 people between 2000
and 2014 (-2.1%). The number of individuals in the labor market also decreased, but at a
lower rate (-0.3%) than resident employment.
•
Marion County’s unemployment rate has been much lower than the U.S. unemployment
rate between 2000 and 2014. However, Marion County’s unemployment rate is comparable to Iowa’s unemployment rate. Average unemployment rate in Marion County over this
time period is 4.3%, which is slightly lower than the average in Iowa (4.5%) and much lower
than the average in the U.S. (6.4%).
•
Marion County’s unemployment rate was significantly lower than the nation during the
Great Recession. The unemployment rate rose to 6.0% in the State of Iowa and 5.9% in
Marion County in 2010. However, as of 2014, the unemployment rate has fallen to 4.0%,
below the State and nation at 4.4% and 6.2%, respectively.
•
The natural rate of unemployment is considered to range from about 4.5% to 6.5% depending on the specific industry, season, and the rate of inflation, and the overall labor force participation rate. Marion County’s unemployment rate peaked at 6.6% in 2009, when the
United States had an unemployment rate of 9.3%.
58
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
TABLE E-1
RESIDENT EMPLOYMENT (ANNUAL AVERAGE)
MARION COUNTY
2000 - 2015
Total
Marion Co.
Iowa
U.S.
Labor
Total
Total
Unemployment
Unemployment
Unemployment
Year
Force
Employment
Unemployed
Rate
Rate
Rate
2000
17,581
17,193
389
2.2%
2.6%
4.0%
2001
17,737
17,148
589
3.3%
3.3%
4.7%
2002
17,588
16,827
762
4.3%
4.0%
5.8%
2003
16,968
16,187
782
4.6%
4.5%
6.0%
2004
17,024
16,299
724
4.3%
4.5%
5.6%
2005
17,599
16,905
697
4.0%
4.3%
5.1%
2006
17,896
17,272
622
3.5%
3.7%
4.6%
2007
17,814
17,179
637
3.6%
3.7%
4.6%
2008
17,808
17,088
719
4.1%
4.2%
5.8%
2009
17,488
16,320
1,169
6.6%
6.4%
9.3%
2010
17,601
16,557
1,043
5.9%
6.0%
9.6%
2011
17,169
16,231
938
5.4%
5.5%
8.9%
2012
17,025
16,202
823
4.8%
5.0%
8.1%
2013
17,315
16,538
777
4.5%
4.7%
7.4%
2014
17,534
16,841
694
4.0%
4.4%
6.2%
2015*
17,366
16,792
576
3.3%
3.8%
5.3%
Change 2010 - 2014
No.
-67
284
-349
Pct.
-0.4%
1.7%
-50.3%
*2015 is an average of the first 11 months of 2015, the most recent data available.
Sources: Iowa Department of Workforce Development, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
59
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
The Labor Force Participation Rate measures the portion of the population that is in the labor
force. Data for the State of Iowa was collected via the Bureau of Labor Statistics website. Data
was not available at the County level. People who are not actively seeking employment and are
not employed are not considered to be unemployed. The chart below shows the Iowa Labor
Force Participation Rate compared to the average annual employment rate. The LFPR varied
from a high of 70.0% in 2002 to a low of 65.5% in 2012.
The Labor Force Participation Rate ultimately provides additional context to analyze the unemployment rate. When the unemployment rate and the labor force participation rate move
downward together it may mean that people who were currently unemployed have stopped
looking for work, and have left the labor force. This occurs from 2009 through 2012.
60
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
67.4%
67.3%
66.3%
66.1%
65.5%
64.0%
66.9%
65.0%
4.0%
63.0%
3.0%
2.0%
Unemployment Rate
69.4%
5.0%
67.7%
66.0%
68.6%
67.0%
67.6%
68.0%
68.1%
69.0%
69.4%
6.0%
69.7%
70.0%
70.0%
7.0%
69.6%
71.0%
69.3%
Labor Force Participation Rate
Avg. Annual Participation Rate
vs. Avg. Annual Unemployment Rate
Iowa, 2000 to 2015
1.0%
0.0%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Avg. Annual Participation Rate
Unemployment Rate
*2015 Avg. Annual Unemployment Rate is Preliminary. Data is not seasonally adjusted.
Covered Employment by Industry
Table E-2 shows an average weekly wage comparison between Marion County and Iowa. Data
is sourced from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Table E-3 presents covered employment in
the County for 2014. Covered employment data is calculated as an annual average and reveals
the number of jobs in the County, which are covered by unemployment insurance. Most farm
jobs, self-employed persons, and some other types of jobs are not covered by unemployment
insurance and are not included in the table. The data is obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau.
•
The average weekly wage in Marion County grew by over 28% between 2004 and 2014,
compared to 32% for the State of Iowa. The average annual growth following a similar
trend with 2.9% in Marion County, slightly higher than the State of Iowa with 3.0%.
•
As of 2014, the average weekly wage was $810 in Marion County and $818 in the State of
Iowa. Comparatively, the average weekly wage was $629 in Marion County in 2004, compared to $617 in the State of Iowa.
•
Marion County’s largest employment numbers are in the Manufacturing industry. As a
percentage, Manufacturing is about 38% of the employment total.
61
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
•
The second largest employment numbers are in the Educational Services, healthcare, and
social assistance sector, which represents over 21% of the employment total.
•
Manufacturing has the highest average wage ($58,003), followed by the Financial Activities
sector with average annual wages of $51,674. Financial Activities, however, only accounted
for 2.1% of total employment.
•
The lowest wages were found in the Leisure and Hospitality sector ($10,408). This industry
accounted for 7.4% of total employment as well.
TABLE E-2
AVERAGE WEEKLY/ANNUAL WAGE
MARION COUNTY & IOWA
2001 to 2014
Marion County
Iowa
Year
Weekly
Annual
Weekly
Annual
2001
$559
$29,071
$555
$28,837
2002
$571
$29,686
$571
$29,668
2003
$588
$30,586
$591
$30,708
2004
$629
$32,707
$617
$32,097
2005
$648
$33,717
$636
$33,070
2006
$660
$34,298
$660
$34,320
2007
$703
$36,546
$687
$35,738
2008
$718
$37,327
$711
$36,964
2009
$682
$35,469
$715
$37,158
2010
$708
$36,838
$734
$38,146
2011
$736
$38,288
$754
$39,204
2012
$760
$39,513
$776
$40,343
2013
$781
$40,598
$791
$41,107
2014
$810
$42,128
$818
$42,538
Average Annual Change
2.9%
3.0%
Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
62
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
Average Weekly Wage
Marion County, 2001 - 2014
$850
$818
Marion County
$800
Weekly Wage
$810
Iowa
$750
$715
$700
$682
$650
$600
$550
$500
$559
$555
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
TABLE E-3
COVERED EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY
MARION COUNTY
2014
Marion County Total
Employment
Iowa
Avg. Wage
Employment %
Avg. Wage
Agriculture
ND
N/A
ND
1.2%
$37,167
Natural Resources and Mining
148
0.9%
$40,021
1.4%
$38,659
Construction
603
3.6%
$45,552
4.9%
$51,966
Manufacturing
6,326
38.1%
$58,003
14.1%
$54,417
Trade, Transportation and Utilities
2,213
13.3%
$31,550
20.8%
$36,655
Information
116
0.7%
$36,140
1.7%
$50,808
Financial Activities
392
2.4%
$51,674
6.8%
$64,995
Professional and Business Services
670
4.0%
$36,274
9.0%
$46,430
Education and Health Services
3,916
23.6%
$35,294
23.6%
$39,007
Leisure and Hospitality
1,356
8.2%
$10,408
9.1%
$14,727
Other Services
324
2.0%
$29,832
2.9%
$28,794
Public Administration
533
3.2%
$34,769
4.4%
$46,643
$42,128
100.0%
$42,538
Total
16,597 100.0%
63
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
Existing Business Mix by NAICS
Table E-4 presents business data in Marion County from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Quarterly
Census on Employment and Wages in 2014. The data is characterized based on the six-digit
North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The NAICS is the standard used by
Federal statistical agencies in classifying business establishments for the purpose of collecting,
analyzing, and publishing statistical data related to the U.S. business economy.
The Trade Transportation and Utilities industry has the highest number of businesses in the
County with 234 establishments, accounting for 19.5% of all businesses in 2014. The Education
and Health Services sector and Professional and Business Services were tied for second with
11.5% of all businesses in Marion County, with 138 establishments each.
TABLE E-4
COVERED EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY BY ESTABLISHMENTS
MARION COUNTY
2014
Marion County Total
No. of Establishments
Agriculture, Foresty, Hunting and Fishing
16
1.3%
19
1.6%
Construction
101
8.4%
Manufacturing
44
3.7%
Wholesale Trade
72
6.0%
Retail Trade
121
10.1%
234
19.5%
Information
17
1.4%
83
6.9%
138
11.5%
138
11.5%
94
7.8%
Other Services
99
8.3%
24
2.0%
1,200
100.0%
Total
64
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
2014 Employment: Percentage of Businesses
Other Services
Information
Retail Trade
Wholesale Trade
Manufacturing
Construction
Agriculture
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
2014 Employment: Percentage of Employees
Other Services
Information
Retail Trade
Wholesale Trade
Manufacturing
Construction
Agriculture
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
65
EMPLOYMENT
Commuting Patterns
Proximity to employment is often a primary consideration when choosing where to live, since
transportation costs often account for a considerable proportion of households’ budgets.
Tables E-5 and E-6 highlight the commuting patterns of workers in Marion County in 2013 (the
most recent data available), based on Employer-Household Dynamics data from the U.S. Census
Bureau. Table E-5 shows commuting patterns by place and by county. Home destination is
defined as where workers live who are employed in the selection area. Work destination is
defined as where workers are employed who live in the selection area.
•
As the Table E-5b illustrates, Pella is the top home destination for workers in the County
with a 19.4% share, while many are commuting from Knoxville (10.5%) and Oskalooska in
neighboring Mahaska County (5.9%).
•
About 36% of the workers in Marion County reside within ten miles of their place of employment while nearly 13.4% travel greater than 50 miles. Approximately 33% of workers in
the County travel 10 to 24 miles for employment and 19% commute a distance ranging from
25 to 50 miles.
•
Roughly 31% of the workers living in Marion County have jobs in Pella, while many are
choosing other locations such as Knoxville (14.1%) and Des Moines (11.4%).
•
About 39% of Marion County’s residents travel less than ten miles to their place of employment, while 6% have a commute distance greater than 50 miles. Over 29% commute
between 10 to 24 miles and 26% travel 25 to 50 miles.
•
Roughly 59% of the workers living in Marion County have jobs in Marion County, while
some are choosing other locations such as Polk County (20.8%), Mahaska County (3.4%),
and Jasper County (2.8%).
66
EMPLOYMENT
TABLE E-5
COMMUTING PATTERNS
MARION COUNTY
2013
Home Destination
Work Destination
Place of Residence
Count
Share
Place of Employment
Count
Share
Pella city, IA
Knoxville city, IA
Oskaloosa city, IA
Pleasantville city, IA
Ottumwa city, IA
Newton city, IA
Des Moines city, IA
New Sharon city, IA
Melcher-Dallas city, IA
Albia city, IA
All Other Locations
3,400
1,838
995
430
264
256
235
208
191
178
9,420
19.5%
10.6%
5.7%
2.5%
1.5%
1.5%
1.3%
1.2%
1.1%
1.0%
54.1%
Pella city, IA
Knoxville city, IA
Des Moines city, IA
West Des Moines city, IA
Oskaloosa city, IA
Ankeny city, IA
Ames city, IA
Pleasantville city, IA
Newton city, IA
Urbandale city, IA
All Other Locations
4,849
2,183
1,757
523
348
286
242
236
215
215
4,617
31.3%
14.1%
11.4%
3.4%
2.2%
1.8%
1.6%
1.5%
1.4%
1.4%
29.8%
County of Residence
Count
Share
County of Employment
Count
Share
Marion County, IA
Mahaska County, IA
Jasper County, IA
Polk County, IA
Wapello County, IA
Monroe County, IA
Warren County, IA
Lucas County, IA
Appanoose County, IA
Poweshiek County, IA
All Other Locations
9,105
2,137
941
758
485
411
331
187
146
146
2,768
52.3%
12.3%
5.4%
4.4%
2.8%
2.4%
1.9%
1.1%
0.8%
0.8%
15.9%
Marion County, IA
Polk County, IA
Mahaska County, IA
Jasper County, IA
Dallas County, IA
Story County, IA
Warren County, IA
Marshall County, IA
Poweshiek County, IA
Wapello County, IA
All Other Locations
9,105
3,219
529
431
372
311
311
148
148
107
790
58.9%
20.8%
3.4%
2.8%
2.4%
2.0%
2.0%
1.0%
1.0%
0.7%
5.1%
15,471
6,037
4,444
4,023
967
100.0%
39.0%
28.7%
26.0%
6.3%
Distance Traveled
Total Primary Jobs
Less than 10 miles
10 to 24 miles
25 to 50 miles
Greater than 50 miles
Distance Traveled
17,415
6,214
5,585
3,270
2,346
100.0%
35.7%
32.1%
18.8%
13.5%
Total Primary Jobs
Less than 10 miles
10 to 24 miles
25 to 50 miles
Greater than 50 miles
Home Destination: Where workers live who are employed in the selection area
Work Destination: Where workers are employed who live in the selection area
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau Local Employment Dynamics, Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
67
EMPLOYMENT
Inflow/Outflow
Table E-6 provides a summary of the inflow and outflow of workers in the County. Outflow
reflects the number of workers living in the County but employed outside of the County while
inflow measures the number of workers that are employed in the County but live outside.
•
Marion County is an importer of workers, as the number of workers coming into the County
(inflow) exceeded the employment number of residents leaving the County for work (outflow). Approximately 8,310 workers came into the County for work while 6,366 workers
left, for a net difference of +1,944.
•
The two major cities in Marion County are importers of workers. In Pella, 6,567 workers
came into the City for work while 2,129 left, for a net difference of +4,438. In Knoxville,
2,726 came into the City for work while 2,235 left, for a net difference of +491. In Pleasantville, 96.3% of residents are employed outside of the city.
•
Only the Knoxville and Pella Submarkets are net importers of jobs in Marion County, bringing in 1,514 workers and 2,962 workers, respectively. The Pleasantville, Melcher-Dallas, and
Southeast submarkets are all exporters of workers.
TABLE E-6
WORKER INFLOW AND OUTFLOW
SUBMARKETS IN MARION COUNTY
2013
Knoxville Submarket
No.
Pct.
Pella Submarket
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
Living in the Selection Area
Living and Employed in the Selection Area
Living in the Selection Area but Employed Outside
5,409
2,115
3,294
100.0%
39.1%
60.9%
6,545
3,358
3,187
100.0%
51.3%
48.7%
1,733
67
1,666
100.0%
3.9%
96.1%
Employed in the Selection Area
Employed and Living in the Selection Area
Employed in the Selection Area but Living Outside
6,923
2,115
4,808
100.0%
30.6%
69.4%
9,507
3,358
6,149
100.0%
35.3%
64.7%
506
67
439
100.0%
13.2%
86.8%
No.
Pct.
Southeast Submarket
No.
Pct.
Marion County
No.
Pct.
Living in the Selection Area
Living and Employed in the Selection Area
Living in the Selection Area but Employed Outside
913
60
853
100.0%
6.6%
93.4%
847
59
788
100.0%
7.0%
93.0%
15,471
9,105
6,366
100.0%
58.9%
41.1%
Employed in the Selection Area
Employed and Living in the Selection Area
Employed in the Selection Area but Living Outside
206
60
146
100.0%
29.1%
70.9%
273
59
214
100.0%
21.6%
78.4%
17,415
9,105
8,310
100.0%
52.3%
47.7%
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau Local Employment Dynamics, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
68
EMPLOYMENT
Marion County Employment Inflow/Outflow
2013
-8,000
-6,000
-4,000
-2,000
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
Knoxville
Pella
Pleasantville
Melcher-Dallas
Southeast
Marion County
Marion County
1,944
Southeast
-574
Melcher-Dallas
-707
Pleasantville
-1,227
Pella
2,962
Knoxville
1,514
Inflow
8,310
214
146
439
6,149
4,808
Outflow
-6,366
-788
-853
-1,666
-3,187
-3,294
Net
69
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
Marion County Inflow/Outflow/Interior Flow
70
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
County of Residence of Marion County Employees
Resident Profile
Table E-7 compares characteristics of employed residents living in Marion County in 2013.
Information on monthly earnings, age, race and ethnicity, educational attainment and job
classification is provided.
•
Marion County has a high concentration of high-income earners. Approximately 35% of
Marion County employees earned between $1,251 and $3,333 a month, while 37% earned
more than $3,333.
•
About 55% of employees fall into the 30 to 54 age group, while 24% are age 55 and older.
The remaining 20% are age 29 and younger.
•
Some college or Associate’s Degree is the most common worked educational level, which
represents 29% of Marion County’s total. High school education is the second most common educational level, which accounts for 25% of Marion County’s total.
71
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
TABLE E-7
RESIDENT PROFILE
MARION COUNTY
2013
Marion County
No.
Pct.
Total Jobs
Total All Jobs
Iowa
Pct.
17,415
100.0%
Monthly Earnings
$1,250 per month or less
$1,251 to $3,333 per month
More than $3,333 per month
4,112
4,801
8,502
23.6%
27.6%
48.8%
26.7%
35.4%
37.9%
Worker Ages
Age 29 or younger
Age 30 to 54
Age 55 or older
3,559
9,625
4,231
20.4%
55.3%
24.3%
24.4%
53.1%
22.5%
Worker Race and Ethnicity
White Alone
Black or African American Alone
American Indian or Alaska Native Alone
Asian Alone
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Alone
Two or More Race Groups
16,917
115
37
254
9
83
97.1%
0.7%
0.2%
1.5%
0.1%
0.5%
94.4%
2.9%
0.3%
1.5%
0.1%
0.7%
Ethnicity
Not Hispanic or Latino
Hispanic or Latino
17,189
226
98.7%
1.3%
96.0%
4.0%
924
4,367
5,020
3,545
3,559
5.3%
25.1%
28.8%
20.4%
20.4%
6.4%
22.8%
25.8%
20.5%
24.4%
Worker Educational Attainment
Less than high school
High school or equivalent, no college
Some college or Associate degree
Bachelor's degree or advanced degree
Educational attainment not available (workers aged 29 or younger)
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
72
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
Primary Employers
A significant portion of the employment growth in Marion County will be generated by the
largest employers in the County. The table below lists some of the primary employers in
Marion County along with a description of their primary industry. Table E-8 shows the primary
employers in Marion County in 2015 based on data provided by Marion County Economic
Development. The majority of primary employers in Marion County are located in the Pella
Submarket. Employers in the Manufacturing sector represent the plurality of the largest
employers in the County.
TABLE E-8
PRIMARY EMPLOYERS
MARION COUNTY
2015
Employer
Pella Corporation
Vermeer Corporation
3M
Pella Regional Health Center
Central College
Weiler
Pella Community School District
Knoxville Community School District
Knoxville Raceway
Hormel
Christian Opportunity Center
Knoxville Hospital & Clinics
Pleasantville Community Schools
Precision Pulley & Idler (PPI)
Smokey Row
ICE Technologies
Jaarsma Bakery
LDJ Manufacturing
Van Gorp Corporation
Two Rivers Coop
De Jong Greenhouses
Heritage Lace, Inc.
Lely USA
Martin Marietta Aggregates
Town Crier Ltd.
Type of Business
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Hospital
Higher Education
Manufacturing
School
School
Tourism
Manufacturing
Special Needs
Hospital
School
Manufacturing
Retail/Dining
Information Technologies
Retail
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Agriculture Co-op
Wholesale Greenhouse
Dutch Lace
Manufacturing
Mining/Rock/Sand
Manufacturing
City
Pella
Pella
Knoxville
Pella
Pella
Knoxville
Pella
Knoxville
Knoxville
Knoxville
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Clay Twp
Pella
Submarket
Pella
Pella
Knoxville
Pella
Pella
Knoxville
Pella
Knoxville
Knoxville
Knoxville
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Pella
Knoxville
Pella
Sources: Marion County Economic Development Corporation, Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
73
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
Employer Survey
Maxfield Research surveyed representatives of the largest employers in Marion County during
December 2015 and January 2016. The questions covered topics such as recent trends in job
growth, recruitment of new employees, employee turnover. In addition, representatives were
asked their opinion about issues related to housing in the area. Specifically, they were asked
whether the current supply of housing in the area matches the needs of their workforce. The
following points summarize the findings of this survey process.
•
Employers reported a high percentage of employees (50% to 70%) living in the community
or county. Commuters were reported as traveling from Oskaloosa, Monroe, Newton, Altoona, Ottumwa, Indianola and Des Moines.
•
No employers reported plans to contract their employment base and many expressed the
potential for future growth.
•
Some employers reported that during the initial relocation for new employees, employees
struggle to find available rentals and therefore seek rental housing in other communities. A
lack of available rental housing was reported at all sizes and price points. Further, employers suggested that some of their commuters might consider relocating if there was a greater
quantity or variety of rentals.
•
Short term and pet-friendly rentals were two specific types of rental housing that was
repeatedly mentioned by employers as scarce.
•
Other employers reported that new hires did not routinely experience difficulty when
securing a rental.
•
Many employers attributed the current shortage of rentals and short-term rentals to the
increased demand for these units generated by hydroelectric construction project.
•
Several employers reported that Positively Pella is a helpful and valuable service for employees transitioning to Pella. In addition, companies have often found themselves in the
position of helping new hires locate and secure housing.
•
Employers reported that their workforce consisted mainly of buyers or perspective buyers.
However, due to a low inventory of entry level and mid-range housing within the range affordable to employees, $125,000 to $275,000, employees are unable buy housing in the
community. These employees are locating in surrounding communities where the rental
and for sale market offer more affordable prices.
•
The employees living locally tend to represent opposite ends of the income spectrum.
Employees on the lower end of the income range and those in the top 5% are living locally,
74
EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
while those in the middle range are choosing to commute due to the housing stock availability and affordability in surrounding areas.
Employers largely reported that a lack of entry level and mid-range housing negatively impacts
recruitment and retention. Employees turn down positions, or leave positions, for positions
where they can reduce or eliminate their commutes.
75
RENTAL MARKET ANALYSIS
Introduction
The following section of the report analyzes current market conditions for general occupancy
rental housing in Marion County. Topics covered include rental housing data from the American Community Survey and detailed information on individual rental developments in Marion
County. Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC identified and surveyed larger rental properties
(generally 8 units or more) in Marion County. In addition, interviews were conducted with real
estate agents, developers, rental housing management firms, and others in the community
familiar with Marion County’s rental housing stock.
For purposes of our analysis, we have classified rental projects into two groups, general occupancy and senior (age restricted). All senior projects are included in the Senior Rental Analysis
section of this report. The general occupancy rental projects are divided into three groups,
market rate (those without income restrictions), affordable (those receiving tax credits in order
to keep rents affordable), and subsidized (those with income restrictions based on 30% allocation of income to housing).
Overview of Rental Market Conditions
Maxfield Research utilized data from the American Community Survey (ACS) to summarize
rental market conditions in Marion County. The ACS is an ongoing survey conducted by the
United States Census Bureau that provides data every year rather than every ten years as
presented by the decennial census. We use this data because these figures are not available
from the decennial census.
Table R-1 on the following page presents a breakdown of median gross rent and monthly gross
rent ranges by number of bedrooms in renter-occupied housing units from the 2010-2014 ACS
in Marion County, broken down into five submarkets, in comparison to Marion County and
Iowa. Gross rent is defined as the amount of the contract rent plus the estimated average
monthly cost of utilities (electricity, gas, and water and sewer) and fuels (oil, coal, wood, etc.) if
these are paid by the renter.
•
Marion County has slightly lower rents when compared to Iowa. The median gross rent in
the County is at $664 which is 4% lower than the median rent of $689 in Iowa. Rural communities often have lower rents than metropolitan areas due to wage rates and the age of
rental properties in rural areas.
•
Two bedroom or more units are the most common rental unit type in Marion County,
representing 46% of all occupied rental units in the County. In the State of Iowa, two bedroom or more units are most common (41%).
76
TABLE R-1
BEDROOMS BY GROSS RENT, RENTER-OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS
MARION COUNTY
2014
Pella MA
#
Total:
1,484
Median Gross Rent
$775
No Bedroom
Less than $200
$200 to $299
$300 to $499
$500 to $749
$750 to $999
$1,000 or more
No cash rent
1 Bedroom
Less than $200
$200 to $299
$300 to $499
$500 to $749
$750 to $999
$1,000 or more
No cash rent
2 Bedrooms
Less than $200
$200 to $299
$300 to $499
$500 to $749
$750 to $999
$1,000 or more
No cash rent
3 or More Bedrooms
Less than $200
$200 to $299
$300 to $499
$500 to $749
$750 to $999
$1,000 or more
No cash rent
47
0
0
0
47
0
0
0
340
52
36
89
67
68
28
0
762
0
13
21
298
156
264
10
335
0
0
0
4
119
165
47
% of
Total
100%
Knoxville MA
#
1,094
% of
Total
100%
$588
3%
0%
0%
0%
3%
0%
0%
0%
23%
4%
2%
6%
5%
5%
2%
0%
51%
0%
1%
1%
20%
11%
18%
1%
23%
0%
0%
0%
0%
8%
11%
3%
32
0
0
0
4
0
28
0
332
33
11
168
120
0
0
0
435
39
27
35
260
63
10
1
295
21
0
5
146
76
37
10
Pleasantville MA Melcher-Dallas MA
#
304
% of
Total
100%
$586
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
0%
30%
3%
1%
15%
11%
0%
0%
0%
40%
4%
2%
3%
24%
6%
1%
0%
27%
2%
0%
0%
13%
7%
3%
1%
3
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
78
0
0
43
22
0
0
13
98
0
0
16
46
33
0
3
125
0
0
0
33
44
0
48
#
156
% of
Total
100%
$536
1%
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
26%
0%
0%
14%
7%
0%
0%
4%
32%
0%
0%
5%
15%
11%
0%
1%
41%
0%
0%
0%
11%
14%
0%
16%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
27
3
0
14
5
0
0
5
112
0
6
12
78
0
0
16
17
0
0
17
0
0
0
0
Southeast MA
Marion County
Iowa
% of
Total
% of
Total
% of
Total
#
93
100%
$555
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
17%
2%
0%
9%
3%
0%
0%
3%
72%
0%
4%
8%
50%
0%
0%
10%
11%
0%
0%
11%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
29
4
7
1
2
0
0
15
24
1
5
2
3
3
0
10
40
0
0
11
13
7
4
5
#
3,038
100%
$664
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
31%
4%
8%
1%
2%
0%
0%
16%
26%
1%
5%
2%
3%
3%
0%
11%
43%
0%
0%
12%
14%
8%
4%
5%
82
0
0
3
51
0
28
0
777
88
47
314
214
68
28
18
1,407
39
46
84
682
252
274
30
772
21
0
22
183
239
202
105
100%
$689
3%
0%
0%
0%
2%
0%
1%
0%
26%
3%
2%
10%
7%
2%
1%
1%
46%
1%
2%
3%
22%
8%
9%
1%
25%
1%
0%
1%
6%
8%
7%
3%
3%
0%
0%
1%
1%
0%
0%
0%
26%
1%
3%
8%
10%
3%
2%
0%
41%
0%
1%
4%
17%
12%
5%
2%
30%
0%
0%
2%
7%
8%
9%
4%
Sources: 2010-2014 American Community Survey; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC
77
Renter-Occupied Housing Units
By Number of Bedrooms
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
23%
51%
27%
11%
41%
72%
40%
25%
30%
46%
41%
43%
26%
32%
3BR+
2BR
23%
3%
30%
3%
26%
1%
17%
0%
31%
26%
26%
1BR
0%
3%
3%
No BR
•
Approximately 25% of the renter-occupied housing units in Marion County have three
bedrooms compared to 30% in Iowa. One-bedroom units comprise 26% of Marion County’s
renter-occupied housing supply and units while only 3% of the renter-occupied units have
no bedrooms/studio units.
•
Monthly gross rents in one-bedroom units in Marion County range from less than $200 to
over $1,000 with over 40% renting for between $300 and $499 per month. Approximately
28% have gross monthly rents between $500 and $749.
•
Nearly 50% of the two-bedroom units in Marion County have gross monthly rents ranging
from $500 to $749, and 18% have a rental rate range of $750 to $999.
•
Roughly 31% of the units with three or more bedrooms in Marion County rent for between
$750 and $999 per month. Nearly 26% have a rental rate range of $1,000 or more per
month.
•
About 62% of the units without a bedroom in Marion County have gross monthly rents
between $500 and $749 per month.
78
Gross Rent by Number of Bedrooms
Marion County
3+BR
Less than $200
$200 to $299
2BR
$300 to $499
$500 to $749
1BR
$750 to $999
$1,000 or more
No cash rent
No BR
0%
•
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Roughly 1% of the one-bedroom units, 1% of the two-bedroom units, and 3% of the units
with three or more bedrooms were reported as having no cash rent. These units may be
owned by friends or relatives who live elsewhere and who allow occupancy at no charge.
Rent-free houses or apartment units may be provided to compensate caretakers, ministers,
tenant farmers, or other.
Rental Trends in the Des Moines Core Area
Table R-2 shows inventory levels, vacancy rates, and asking rents for the Des Moines area as of
4th Quarter 2015. Information is sourced from Reis Reports, national provider of real estate
trends, analytics, and market research.
On the following page are key points from Table R-2.
•
A large percentage of the existing inventory in Des Moines area was built in the 1970s
(35%). However, 26% of the existing inventory was built in the 1980s.
•
Asking rents have increased based on year built and range from $684 before the 1970s to
$1,179 in the 2010s. Price per square foot averages are higher in smaller unit types such as
studios/efficiencies and one-bedrooms.
•
Vacancy rates have ranged from 3.5% to 12.7%. Overall, the average vacancy rate is 5.4%.
The overall vacancy rate includes new projects during lease-up; hence driving the vacancy
rate up as these projects have not yet reached stabilized occupancy.
79
TABLE R-2
CHARACTERISTICS OF EXISTING INVENTORY
DES MOINES CORE AREA
4th Quarter 2015
Pct.
Inventory
Year Built
Before 1970
1970-1979
1980-1989
1990-1999
2000-2009
After 2009
Total Inventory
12%
35%
26%
11%
4%
11%
100%
Asking
Rent
Unit Types
Studio
1BR
2BR
3BR
Vacancy
Rate
4.6%
5.0%
3.5%
4.7%
4.9%
12.7%
5.4%
Avg.
SF
$628
$723
$840
$1,031
Asking
Rent
$684
$731
$806
$866
$1,085
$1,179
$812
Avg. Rent
PSF
494
676
935
1,231
$1.27
$1.07
$0.90
$0.84
Sources: Reis Reports; Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC
Des Moines Core Area
Vacancy and Asking Rent
2005 to 2015
9.0
$1,400
8.0
7.0
$1,200
6.0
$1,000
5.0
$800
4.0
$600
3.0
$400
2.0
$200
1.0
0.0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Asking Rent
2011
2012
2013
Vacancy Rate
2014
$0
2015
80
$1.20
Asking Rent PSF in Des Moines Core Area
4th Quarter 2015
$1.07
PSF Average
$1.00
$0.90
$0.84
2BR
Unit Type
3BR
$0.80
$0.60
$0.40
$0.20
$0.00
1BR
General-Occupancy Rental Projects
Our research of Marion County’s general occupancy rental market included a survey of twentyfive market rate apartment properties (8 units and larger) and fifteen affordable/subsidized
communities in December 2015 and January 2016. These projects represent a combined total
of 869 units, including 537 market rate units and 332 affordable/subsidized units. Although we
were able to contact and obtain up-to-date information on many rental properties, there were
several projects we were unable to reach or did not wish to participate. In these circumstances,
we identified the properties as unavailable and those properties will not be included in our
average rent or vacancy rate calculations.
At the time of our survey, eighteen market rate units and twenty-two affordable/subsidized
units were vacant, resulting in an overall vacancy rate of 5.3%. The overall market rate vacancy
rate of 5.3% is similar to the industry standard of 5% vacancy for a stabilized rental market,
which promotes competitive rates, ensures adequate choice, and allows for unit turnover.
Table R-3 summarizes information on market rate projects, while Table R-4 summarizes information affordable and subsidized projects.
81
Market Rate
•
Shady Creek Apartments, in Pella, constructed in 1999, is the newest market rate rental
complex surveyed in Marion County.
•
Eighteen vacancies were found at the time of the rental survey, resulting in a vacancy rate
of 4.3% as of January 2016. The vacancy rate only includes properties that participated in
the rental survey.
•
Nearly 51% of the market rate units in Marion County are two-bedroom units. The unit
breakout by unit type is summarized below. Nearly 97% of the unit mix consisted of oneand two-bedroom units.
o Efficiency units:
12 | 3%
o One-bedroom units: 185 | 45.6%
o Two-bedroom units: 208 | 51.2%
o Three-bedroom units: 1 | 0.2%
•
The following is the monthly rent ranges for each unit type:
o Efficiency units:
$325
o One-bedroom units: $350 to $675
o Two-bedroom units: $410 to $800
o Three-bedroom units: $850
•
The average rent for one-bedroom units is approximately $473, while two-bedroom units
are around $651.
•
The average price per square foot for one-bedroom units is about $0.78, while twobedroom units are around $0.74. Overall, the average price per square foot is $0.75. These
average PSF rents are higher than other rural, Iowa counties that tend to average around
$0.65 PSF.
82
TABLE R-3
MARKET-RATE GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL DEVELOPMENT SURVEY RESPONSES
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
Year
Built
Units/
Vacant
Monthly
Rent
Rent per
Square Foot
Shady Creek
210 E Jefferson
Pella
1999
24
0
0.0%
24 - 2BR
842 - 880
$490 - $650
$0.58 - $0.74
On-site management, controlled entry, central AC,
dishwashers, patio/balcony, laundry hook-ups,
walk-in closets in some units, extra storage space,
water/sewer/trash included, garage parking
available for an additional $50
Highpoint
340 E 13th St
Pella
1999
100
0
0.0%
12 - 1 BR
88 - 2 BR
830
1020 - 1130
$650
$750 - $850
$0.78
$0.74 - $0.75
Clubhouse, fitness room, pool, patios/balconies,
laundry hook-ups, extra storage space,
water/sewer/trash included, some units have walkin closets and dishwashers
Grandview
906 Hazel St
Pella
1995
22
3
13.6%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Only provided vacancy rates; patios/balconies,
underground parking
Hallcrest Apartments
409 E 15th St
Pella
1990
8
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
No response; patio/balcony
Beverly Apartments
406 W 4th St
Pella
1980
8
1
12.5%
8 - 1BR
N/A
$400
N/A
No vouchers being used at this property, but
management would consider, AC, common laundry,
water/sewer/trash included, detached garage
Praire Village of Pella
1000 Hazel St
Pella
1977
60
0
0.0%
60 - 1BR
600
$525
$0.88
Octagon Heights
703 E Oskaloosa St
Pella
1977
18
0
0.0%
16 - 1BR
1 - 2BR
1 - 3BR
N/A
N/A
N/A
$450 - $675
$800
$850
N/A
N/A
N/A
All utilities included for 1BR, 2BR and 3BR pay gas;
AC, dishwashers, walk-in closets, common laundry,
water/sewer/trash included
Noord Plaats
1349 Main St
Pella
1975
18
N/A - 1BR
N/A - 2BR
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
No response; detached garage
1004 Main St
Pella
1975
18
3
16.7%
N/A - 1BR
N/A - 2BR
N/A
N/A
$475
N/A
N/A
N/A
Only provided vacancy rates; attached garage
Property Name/Location
Unit Mix
Unit Size
Amenities/Comments
PELLA
Rent includes water, sewer, trash. Window AC
units; on site laundry
CONTINUED
83
TABLE R-3
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
(continued)
Year
Built
Units/
Vacant
1974
Midtown Apartments
808 Liberty St
Pella
1971
1010 Washington St
Pella
1970
22
0
0.0%
1015 Broadway St
Pella
1970
8
0
Lindhome Apartments
1117 & 1119 2nd St E
Pella
1967
304 Central Dr
Pella
1972
PELLA
1015 E 1st
Pella
Pella Total
Unit Mix
Unit Size
Monthly
Rent
Rent per
Square Foot
8
0
0.0%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
16
2
12.5%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Amenities/Comments
Only provided vacancy rates
Only provided vacancy rates; detached garage
N/A
N/A
$325
$350
N/A
N/A
Balcony, common patios, accepts vouchers
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Only provided vacancy rates
9
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
No response
8
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
No contact information
347
12 - EFF
10 - 1 BR
9
3.0%
CONTINUED
84
TABLE R-3
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
(continued)
Year
Built
Units/
Vacant
107,109,111 N 4th Street
Knoxville
1960
12
1
8.3%
1 - 1BR
11 - 2BR
410 S. 6th Street
Knoxville
1964
8
0
0.0%
4 - 1BR
4 - 2BR
209 E. Pleasant Street
Knoxville
1974
8
1
12.5%
8 - 1BR
Northridge
1718 Doleres St
Knoxville
1974
24
24 - 2BR
Larhardt Apartments
1309 W Larson St
Knoxville
1976
16
Prairie Village of Knoxville
502 East Reno Street
Knoxville
1977
37
Unit Mix
Unit Size
Monthly
Rent
Rent per
Square Foot
Amenities/Comments
500
600
$400
$410 - $430
$0.80
$0.68 - $0.72
Mix of resident types, though mostly singles
a few familes and veterans. 12-Plex
500
550 - 600
$400 - $450
$425 - $450
$0.80 - $0.90
$0.75 - $0.77
a few familes and veterans. 8- Plex
550 600
$385 - $425
$0.70 - $0.71
a few familes and veterans. 8-Plex
N/A
N/A
N/A
Manager did not wish to participate.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Did not wish to participate.
600
$500
$0.83
Did not wish to participate.
KNOXVILLE
Knoxville Total
105
N/A
37 - 1BR
1
3.6%
40
CONTINUED
85
TABLE R-3
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
(continued)
Year
Built
Units/
Vacant
1979
16
3
18.8%
4 - 1BR
12 - 2BR
Pleasant Village Apartments
301 Jasper St.
Pleasantville
1980/
2004
48
3
6.3%
20 - 1BR
28 - 2BR
508 E Monroe, 103 s Columbus
Pleasantville
1975
9
1
11.1%
1 - 1BR
8 - 2BR
107 E Jasper
Pleasantville
1975
12
1
8.3%
4 - 1BR
8 - 2BR
PLEASANTVILLE
609 E Jasper
Pleasantville
Pleasantville Total
85
Unit Mix
8
Monthly
Rent
Rent per
Square Foot
$400 - $450
$500 - $550
$1.13 - $1.33
$1.00 - $1.00
$400
$500
$0.62
$0.63
300 - 400
500 - 550
$425
$500 - $550
$1.42
$1.00 - $1.00
300 - 400
500 - 550
$400 - $450
$500 - $550
$1.13 - $1.33
$1.00 - $1.00
Unit Size
300 - 400
500 - 550
650
800
Amenities/Comments
Typically Full. Resident profile is varied.
Typically 97% occupied.
Typically Full. Resident profile is varied.
Mostly workers, a few families.
9.4%
CONTINUED
86
TABLE R-3
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
(continued)
Year
Built
Units/
Vacant
Unit Mix
Unit Size
Monthly
Rent
Rent per
Square Foot
Amenities/Comments
MELCHER-DALLAS
None
Melcher-Dallas Total
0
0
0
0
537
18
SOUTHEAST
None
Southeast Total
Total of All Market Rate GO
4.3%
Note: Properties that did not provide vacant unit counts are excluded from vacancy rate calculations.
87
TABLE R-4
AFFORDABLE/SUBSIDIZED GENERAL OCCUPANCY RENTAL DEVELOPMENT SURVEY RESPONSES
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
Year
Built
Units/
Vacant
Unit Mix
Unit Size
Contract Rent/
Rent Range
Rent per
Square Foot
Amenities/Comments
PELLA
Affordable
Mill Farm
1123 W 16th St
Pella
2014
32
0
0.0%
16 - 2BR
16 - 3 BR
970 - 990
1,100 - 1,120
$395 - $580
$420 - $750
$0.41 - $0.59
$0.38 - $0.67
Energy star rated units, community
garden, AC, dishwashers, patios, walk-in
closets, common laundry, garage parking
Shady Creek
210 E Jefferson
Pella
1999
24
1
4.2%
15 - 1BR
9 - 2BR
742
842 - 880
$415 - $525
$490 - $650
$0.56 - $0.71
$0.58 - $0.74
On-site management, controlled entry,
central AC, dishwasher, patio, walk-in
closets, laundry hook ups, playground,
extra storage, garage parking
Meadow Wood
410 E 15th St N
Pella
1994
30
0
0.0%
16 - 1 BR
14 - 2 BR
755 - 865
1,020 - 1,060
$0.66 - $0.57
$0.71 - $0.68
Basketball court, playground, limited
access, on-site maintenance and
management, AC, dishwasher, patio,
walk-in closets, playground, garage
Market Area Totals
86
1
$495
$720
1.2%
Subsidized
Burbank Village
408 E 13th St
Pella
1986
Market Area Totals
24
4
17%
24
12 - 1 BR
12 - 2 BR
4
600
720
30% of Income
30% of Income
USDA Rural Development Sec. 515, AC,
laundry, playground
16.7%
CONTINUED
88
TABLE R-4
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
Year
Built
Units/
Vacant
Unit Mix
Villas at Fox Pointe
1801 Madelyn Drive
2015
50
0
0.0%
8 - 2 BR
16 - 3 BR
26 - 4 BR
Madison Heights
2000 West Madison Street
1997
24
0
0.0%
6 - 1BR
14 - 2BR
4 - 3BR
Contract Rent/
Rent Range
Rent per
Square Foot
945
1,357
1,750
$699
$799
$899
$0.74
$0.59
$0.51
3 - 30% AMI units
39 - 60% AMI units
8 - Market Rate units
58 names on waiting list.
AC, dishwasher, patio/balcony, laundry
in unit, community room, fitness center
620
840
900
$385
$455
$570
$0.62
$0.54
$0.63
LIHTC project.
Waiting list is 4 months to 1 year
depending on type of unit needed.
Low turnover.
AC, dishwasher, patio/balcony, common
laundry, playground
Knoxville Public Housing Duplexes
KPH is currently working with HUD
to determine new 4BR rents.
1 year wait list.
AC in some units, patio/balcony, walk-in
KPH is currently working with HUD
to determine new 4BR rents.
1 year wait list.
AC in some units, patio/balcony, walk-in
USDA Rural Development Sec. 515
Unit Size
Amenities/Comments
KNOXVILLE
Affordable
Market Area Totals
74
0
0.0%
Subsidized
Valley View
410 North 7th Street
Various
16
1
6.3%
12 - 3BR TH
4 - 4BR TH
1,200
1,400
Max rent $537
Max rent TBD
30% of Income
$0.45
N/A
Various Locations
Various
32
3
9.4%
12 - 2BR TH
15 - 3BR TH
5 - 4BR TH
750
1,200
1,400
Max Rent $442
Max Rent $537
Max Rent TBD
$0.59
$0.45
N/A
Knoxville Park Apartments I
1007 Kermit Drive
1986
16 - 1BR
600
Max rent $739
30% of Income
$1.23
Knoxville Park Apartments II
1211 Gebhardt Street
1974
16
0
0.0%
24
3
12.5%
24 - 2BR
720
Max rent $829
30% of Income
$1.15
Oak View Apartments II
1017 Levin Drive
1980/
1982
20
N/A
20 - 1BR
N/A
30% of Income
N/A
Market Area Totals
108
Property manager declined to share
vacancies, AC, common laundry
7 6.5%
CONTINUED
89
TABLE R-4
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
(continued)
Year
Built
Units/
Vacant
Unit Mix
Unit Size
Contract Rent/
Rent Range
Rent per
Square Foot
Amenities/Comments
PLEASANTVILLE
Subsidized
Pleasantville Park
200 N Columbus St
1976
Market Area Totals
8
1
12.5%
8
4 - 1 BR
4 - 2 BR
1
600
720
Max Rent $661
Max Rent $793
30% of Income
$0.91
$1.10
USDA Rural Development Sec. 515, AC,
dishwasher, patio/balcony, common
laundry, playground
$0.55
$0.62
$0.73
1BR units are Age 62+. 2BR and 3BR units
are Section 42. AC, patio/balcony,
laundry hool-ups, playground, extra
storage
USDA Rural Development Sec. 515. AC,
dishwashers, patio/balcony, common
laundry, playground
12.5%
MELCHER-DALLAS
Subsidized
CIRHA Duplexes
Various Locations
1984
12
4
33.3%
6 - 1BR
5 - 2BR TH
1 - 3BR TH
Melcher Park Apartments II
502 East Center Street
1975
10
2
20.0%
4 - 1 BR
6 - 2 BR
Market Area Totals
22
6
650 - 700
800 - 850
850 - 900
600
720
$372
$509
$639
Max Rent is $560
Max Rent is $690
30% of Income
$0.93
$0.96
27.3%
CONTINUED
90
TABLE R-4
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
(continued)
Year
Built
Units/
Vacant
Unit Mix
Unit Size
Contract Rent/
Rent Range
Rent per
Square Foot
Amenities/Comments
SOUTHEAST
Subsidized
Bussey Park Apartments
309 Marion Street
1977
10
3
30.0%
4 - 1BR
6 - 2BR
Market Area Totals
10
3
30.0%
Total of All Sub./ Aff.
332
22
6.6%
600
720
Max Rent $661
Max Rent $793
30% of Income
$1.10
$1.10
91
Select Rental Developments in Marion County
The following are photographs of select rental projects in Marion County:
Rental development in Pella
Rental development in Pella
Rental development in Knoxville
Rental development in Knoxville
Rental development Pleasantville
Rental development Melcher-Dallas
92
Affordable/Subsidized
•
There are fifteen income-restricted projects in Marion County with 322 total units. As of
January 2016, there were twenty-two vacancies. Typically, subsidized and affordable rental
properties should be able to maintain vacancy rates of 3% or less in most housing markets.
•
Villas at Fox Pointe and Mill Farm, located in Knoxville and Pella, are the largest subsidized/affordable projects in Marion County. Both developments are considered affordable
as most of their tenants occupy 50% and 60% AMI (Area Median Income) units.
•
Central Iowa Regional Housing Authority covers the following counties: Boone, Dallas,
Jasper, Madison, Marion, and Story. However, the CIRHA does not include Knoxville or Pella. Knoxville and Pella have their own housing authorities.
•
The average affordable rent in Pella is $551, while the average affordable rent in Knoxville is
$712. Knoxville’s average affordable rent is higher due to their large volume of 2BR, 3BR,
and 4BR units, which command higher rents.
•
Overall, average affordable rent is $625 per month.
Property Manager/Property Owner Interviews
Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC spoke with property managers to obtain information on
local rental availability, price and characteristics. In addition, some property managers provided their perspective on the local rental market.
•
Turnover at many apartments is primarily driven by residents purchasing homes or leaving
the area for employment opportunities. Many tenants will stay in a unit for longer lease
terms.
•
Rental units with roommates increased during the recession. As the market has recovered,
single renters are becoming more prevalent; apartment complexes are seeing single renters
living in two bedroom units.
•
Several property managers in Pella mentioned that Positively Pella provided a helpful
referral service by listing their available rentals.
•
A few property managers mentioned the Red Rock Hydroelectric Project had increased
rental housing demand with the creation of the construction jobs. The construction project
has brought in about 150 to 200 temporary construction jobs.
•
Generally, many interviewees stated the rental housing stock in Marion County is older and
there has been nominal upgrading of the properties through the years.
93
•
Numerous owners and landlord's mentioned they fill vacant units via “word of mouth
referrals” versus marketing to fill vacancies.
•
Some interviewees in Knoxville mentioned the new Villas at Fox Pointe project was marketed strongly in the Des Moines area. As a result, the project attracted many residents from
outside Marion County whereas many existing residents in Marion County were unable to
obtain a unit in this new project.
•
Single-family rentals are popular in Marion County; especially among professionals moving
to Marion County for employment. Most single-family or duplex rentals in Pella rent from
$1,200 or more per month and including parking and washer and dryers. Smaller singlefamily homes in Knoxville can rent from $600; but most of the rentals fall between $750 and
$1,200 per month. Very few single-family rentals allow pets.
•
Property managers mentioned that tax-credit properties that have a higher balance of
market rate units are typically received better in the marketplace and community versus a
stand-alone affordable project.
•
The downtown areas in Pella and Knoxville also have some housing above commercial
spaces. In many communities, these rental types tend to be more affordable as they are
located in old structures that lack contemporary amenities and features.
94
SENIOR HOUSING ANALYSIS
Introduction
This section provides an assessment of the market support for senior housing (active adult,
congregate, assisted living, and memory care) in Marion County. An overview of the demographic and economic characteristics of the senior population in Marion County is presented
along with an inventory of existing and pending senior housing developments in the County.
Demand for senior housing is calculated based on demographic, economic and competitive
factors that would impact demand for additional senior housing units in the County. Our
assessment concludes with an estimation of the proportion of County demand that could be
captured by senior housing communities located in the Marion County.
Senior Housing Defined
Senior housing is a concept that generally refers to the integrated delivery of housing and
services to seniors. However, as Figure 1 illustrates, senior housing embodies a wide variety of
product types across the service-delivery spectrum. Products range from independent
apartments and/or townhomes with virtually no services on one end, to highly specialized,
service-intensive assisted living units or housing geared for people with dementia-related
illnesses (termed "memory care") on the other end of the spectrum. In general, independent
senior housing attracts people age 65 and over while assisted living typically attracts people age
80 and older who need assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs). For analytical purposes,
Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC classifies market rate senior housing into five categories
based on the level and type of services offered:
FIGURE 1
CONTINUUM OF HOUSING AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
Single-Family Home
Townhome or
Apartment
Congregate Apartments w/ Optional
Services
Age-Restricted Independent Single-Family,
Townhomes, Apartments, Condominiums,
Cooperatives
Assisted Living
Congregate Apartments w/
Intensive Services
Fully Independent
Lifestyle
Nursing Facilities
Memory Care
(Alzheimer's and
Dementia Units)
Fully or Highly
Dependent on Care
Senior Housing Product Type
Source: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
•
Active Adult properties (or independent living without services available) are similar to a
general-occupancy building, in that they offer virtually no services but have age-restrictions
(typically 55 or 62 or older). Residents are generally age 70 or older if in an apartment-style
building. Organized entertainment, activities and occasionally a transportation program
represent the extent of services typically available at these properties. Because of the lack
of services, active adult properties generally do not command the rent premiums of more
95
service-enriched senior housing. Active adult properties can have a rental or owneroccupied (condominium or cooperative) format.
•
Congregate properties (or independent living with services available) offer support services
such as meals and/or housekeeping, either on an optional basis or a limited amount included in the rents. These properties often dedicate a larger share of the overall building area
to common areas, in part, because the units are smaller than in adult housing and in part to
encourage socialization among residents. Congregate properties attract a slightly older target market than adult housing, typically seniors age 75 or older. Rents are also above those
of the active adult buildings. Sponsorship by a nursing home, hospital or other health care
organization is common.
•
Assisted Living properties come in a variety of forms, but the target market for most is
generally the same: very frail seniors, typically age 80 or older (but can be much younger,
depending on their particular health situation), who are in need of extensive support services and personal care assistance. Absent an assisted living option, these seniors would
otherwise need to move to a nursing facility. At a minimum, assisted living properties include two meals per day and weekly housekeeping in the monthly fee, with the availability
of a third meal and personal care (either included in the monthly fee or for an additional
cost). Assisted living properties also have either staff on duty 24 hours per day or at least
24-hour emergency response.
•
Memory Care properties, designed specifically for persons suffering from Alzheimer’s
disease or other dementias, is one of the newest trends in senior housing. Properties consist mostly of suite-style or studio units or occasionally one-bedroom apartment-style units,
and large amounts of communal areas for activities and programming. In addition, staff
typically undergoes specialized training in the care of this population. Because of the greater amount of individualized personal care required by residents, staffing ratios are much
higher than traditional assisted living and thus, the costs of care are also higher. Unlike
conventional assisted living, however, which addresses housing needs almost exclusively for
widows or widowers, a higher proportion of persons afflicted with Alzheimer’s disease are
in two-person households. That means the decision to move a spouse into a memory care
facility involves the caregiver’s concern of incurring the costs of health care at a special facility while continuing to maintain their home.
96
Senior Rental Trends in the Des Moines Core Area
Tables S-1 through S-3 show vacancy rates and asking rents for Des Moines area as of 4th
Quarter 2015. The Des Moines Core Area is generally defined as Interstate 35 and 80 to the
north, 35 to the west, Highway 5 to the south, and highway 65 to the east. Information is
sourced from Reis Reports, national provider of real estate trends, analytics, and market
research.
Table S-1 shows data for independent living in the Des Moines area as of 4th Quarter 2015. The
following are key points from Table S-1.
•
Asking rents have increased based on the year built from $1,628 before 1980s to $3,497 in
the 2010s.
•
Vacancy rates have ranged from 3.3% to 16.3%. Overall, the average vacancy rate is 10.8%.
Generally, a balanced senior housing market should have occupancies around 95% for independent living.
TABLE S-1
CHARACTERISTICS OF INDEPENDENT LIVING
4th Quarter 2015
Vacancy
Rate
Year Built
Before 1980
1980-1989
1990-1998
1999-2000
2001-2009
After 2009
Total Inventory
3.3%
n/a
9.0%
n/a
16.3%
10.9%
10.8%
Asking
Rent
$1,628
n/a
$1,729
$2,595
$2,932
$3,497
$2,498
Source: REIS Reports
97
Independent Living Vacancy Rates by Year Built
4th Quarter 2015- Des Moines Core Area
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
16.3%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
10.9%
9.0%
3.3%
0.0%
0.0%
Before 1980
1980-1989
0.0%
1990-1998
1999-2000
2001-2009
After 2009
Table S-2 shows data for assisted living in the Des Moines area as of 4th Quarter 2015. The
•
Asking rents have fluctuated based on the year built. The lowest asking rents ($3,330) were
in assisted living units that were built between 1990 and 1998. The highest asking rents
($4,714) were in assisted living units that were built between 1999 and 2000.
•
Vacancy rates have ranged from 3.6% to 12.3%. Overall, the average vacancy rate is 11%.
Assisted living equilibrium is considered 93% occupancy.
TABLE S-2
CHARACTERISTICS OF ASSISTED LIVING
4th Quarter 2015
Vacancy
Rate
Year Built
Before 1980
1980-1989
1990-1998
1999-2000
2001-2009
After 2009
Total Inventory
3.6%
n/a
9.5%
4.9%
8.6%
12.3%
11.0%
Asking
Rent
$4,265
$3,600
$3,330
$4,714
$4,375
$3,990
$4,055
98
Assisted Living Vacancy Rates by Year Built
4th Quarter 2015- Des Moines Core Area
20.0%
15.0%
12.3%
9.5%
10.0%
5.0%
8.6%
4.9%
3.6%
0.0%
0.0%
Before 1980
1980-1989
1990-1998
1999-2000
2001-2009
After 2009
Table S-3 shows data for memory care in the Des Moines area as of 4th Quarter 2015. The
•
Asking rents have fluctuated over the last few decades. The highest rents are in the 1980s
($8,796) and range to a low in the 1990s ($5,618).
•
Vacancy rates were unavailable for memory care housing.
TABLE S-3
CHARACTERISTICS OF MEMORY CARE
4th Quarter 2015
Asking
Rent
Year Built
Before 1980
1980-1989
1990-1998
1999-2000
2001-2009
After 2009
Total Inventory
$6,651
$8,796
$5,618
$6,102
$5,778
$4,899
$6,162
99
Memory Care Asking Rents
Des Moines Core Area-4th Quarter 2015
After 2009
$4,899
2001-2009
$5,778
1999-2000
$6,102
1990-1998
$5,618
1980-1989
$8,796
Before 1980
$6,651
$0
$1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000
Supply of Senior Housing in the Marion County
As of January 2016, Maxfield Research and Consulting LLC identified twelve senior housing
developments in Marion County. Combined, these projects contain a total of 374 units. Three
of the projects are subsidized, while the remaining nine are market rate. Table S-4 provides
information on the market-rate senior housing product type by service-level. Information in
the table includes year built, number of units, unit mix, number of vacant units, rents, and
general comments about each project. Table S-5 provides a summary of the senior inventory in
Marion County with unit counts and vacancy rates by service level.
The graphs on the following page show the senior inventory levels and vacancy rates in Marion
County as of January 2016.
100
Marion County Senior Housing Inventory
140
120
117
Units
100
91
80
60
70
61
40
35
20
0
Active Adult Rental Cong. - Opt. Svs.
Assisted Living
Memory Care
Aff./Sub.
Service Level
Marion County Senior Vacancy Rates
Service Level
Aff./Sub.
6.0%
Memory Care
Assisted Living
2.9%
1.7%
Cong. - Opt. Svs.
11.0%
Active Adult Rental
0.0%
3.3%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
Vacancy Rate
101
The following are key points from our survey of the senior housing supply.
Affordable/Subsidized Senior Housing Projects
•
Subsidized senior housing offers affordable rents to qualified lower income seniors and
handicapped/disabled persons. Typically, rents are tied to residents’ incomes and based on
30% of adjusted gross income (AGI), or a rent that is below the fair market rent. For those
households meeting the age and income qualifications, subsidized senior housing is usually
the most affordable rental option available. Affordable projects are typically tax-credit projects that are limited to households earning less than 80% of Marion County’s area median
income.
•
There are a total of 70 active adult subsidized units in Marion County. As of January 2016,
three units were vacant resulting in a vacancy rate of 6.0%. Windsor Ridge, Oak View
Apartments I, and Melcher Park Apartments I are all designated for elderly (62+) and have
income restrictions.
•
Unit features and amenities at Windsor Ridge include beauty salon, library, laundry rooms,
exercise room, craft room, and community room. Local transportation is available and
transit service meals are optional.
Active-Adult Rental
•
There is on active-adult rental development in Marion County for a total of 61 units. Pella
Manor, located on 608 E 2nd Street, was built in the mid to late 1960s.
•
At the time of our survey, there were two vacancies (97% occupied). The majority of the
unit types are one-bedrooms.
•
Unit features and amenities include kitchenette, storage, carport, balcony/patio, laundry
room facilities, business center, woodworking shop, sewing/quilting room, fitness room,
optional meal plan, and recreation room.
Congregate Senior Projects
•
There are two congregate senior rental developments located in Marion County. Fairhaven
East Pella and Vriendschap Village, both located in Pella.
•
As of January 2016, the facilities had ten vacancies (89% occupied). However, management
said they anticipate the units to be filled very soon.
•
Unit features and amenities at Vriendschap Village include chef prepared meals, housekeeping and linen services are available. Scheduled transportation is optional as well.
102
TABLE S-4
SENIOR HOUSING PROJECTS
MARION COUNTY
1st Quarter 2016
Project Name
Submarket
Year
Built
No. of
Units
No.
Vac.
1965/1969
61
2
61
2
Unit Mix
Unit Sizes
(Sq. Ft.)
Entry Fee/Sales Price
Monthly Rents/Fees
360
504
576
912
768
816
1272
$507
$759
$850
$1,579
$1,267
$1,399
$2,195
Comments
Active- Adult Projects
Pella Manor
608 E 2nd Street
Pella
Pella
Total Adult/Few Services Units
Subsidized Active- Adult Projects
EFF
studio
1BR
1BR Suite
1BR deluxe
1BR/2BR
2BR suite
-3
-4
- 20
-7
- 22
-4
-1
Utilies included. Additional services through wesley
life, meal program available, living area, two
bathrooms
3.3%
Windsor Ridge
1210 Eric Dr
Knoxville
Knoxville
2001/2008
42
0
1BR - 42
600
Based on Income
Everything but electric is included. Local meals on
wheels, Beauty salon, library, two laundry rooms,
exercise room, community room, craft room, etc.
Oak View Apartments I
1017 Levin Drive
Knoxville
Knoxville
1980s
20
NA
1BR - 20
N/A
Based on Income
Property owner was unable to provide complete
information. It has been estimated that 20 units
are designated for elderly.
Melcher Park Apartments I
108 Southeast 4th Street
Melcher-Dallas
Melcher-Dallas
1975
8
3
1BR - 4
2BR - 4
N/A
N/A
Based on Income
Based on Income
Water, sewer, and trash are provided. Residents
are provided with an utility allowance.
70
3
270
520
$1,247
$2,025
3 meals a daily, laundry weekly, housekeeping,
activities director. Emergency call. No 24-hour
staff
n/a
n/a
$1,100
$1,800
Optional meals, housekeeping, and linen services.
Scheduled transportation, modern kitchens, all
utilities includes except telephone.
24-hour staff, scheduled transportation, emergency
call system, personal laundry, all utilities paid.
Health and wellness screenings, 3 meals a day, etc.
Total Subsidized Adult/Few Services Units
Congregate Optional Service Projects
Fairhaven East Pella
607 E 3rd Street
Pella
Pella
1980
44
3
Vriendschap Village
2602 Fifield Rd
Pella
Pella
2002
47
7
91
10
Total Adult/Few Services Units
6.0%
studio - 21
1BR - 23
1BR - n/a
2BR - n/a
11.0%
Assisted Living Projects
Friesland Assisted Living
1742 Main Street
Pella
Pella
2013
22
0
studio - 6
1BR - 16
440
570
$3,070
$3,920
Vriendschap Village
2602 Fifield Rd
Pella
Pella
Early 2000s
34
0
private - 34
n/a
n/a
Typically 100 % occupied. 3 meals a day, weekly
housekeeping, 24-hour staff, all utilities includes
except telephone, scheduled transportation, etc.
Homestead of Knoxville
908 S Park Lane Dr
Knoxville
Knoxville
2001
61
2
private - 61
n/a
$3,600
24-hour staff, emergency call system, medication
management, weekly housekeeping, laundry
services, etc.
117
2
Total Assisted Living Units
1.7%
Memory Care Projects
Zeeland Memory Support
1742 Main Street
Pella
Pella
2013
16
1
semi-private - 2
suite - 14
564
318
$4,715
$4,875
24-hour staff, scheduled transportation, emergency
call system, personal laundry, all utilities paid.
Health and wellness screenings, 3 meals a day, etc.
Homestead of Knoxville
908 S Park Lane Dr
Knoxville
Knoxville
2021
12
0
private - 12
n/a
$5,400
24-hour staff, emergency call system, medication
management, weekly housekeeping, laundry
services, etc.
Vriendschap Village
2602 Fifield Rd
Pella
Pella
Early 2000s
7
0
private - 7
n/a
n/a
Typically 100 % occupied. 3 meals a day, weekly
housekeeping, 24-hour staff, all utilities includes
except telephone, scheduled transportation, etc.
35
1
Total Memory Care Units
2.9%
103
Select Marion County Senior Housing Projects
The following are photographs of select senior housing facilities in Marion County:
IL/AL/MC Facility in Pella
AL/MC Facility in Knoxville
Subsidized Active Adult in Knoxville
104
Assisted Living
•
Homestead of Knoxville, in Knoxville, is the largest assisted living facility in Marion County.
There were only two vacancies at the time of our survey (98% occupied).
•
Unit features and amenities at Homestead of Knoxville 24-hour staff, meal program, emergency call system, medication management, weekly housekeeping, and laundry services.
Memory Care
•
Zeeland Memory Support, in Pella, is the largest assisted living facility in Marion County.
•
There was one vacancy at the time of our survey (97% occupied).
•
Unit features and amenities at Zeeland Memory Support include scheduled transportation,
health and wellness screenings, 24-hour staff, meal program, emergency call system, medication management, weekly housekeeping, and laundry services.
Table S-5 shows the unit and vacancy breakdown by service level for each submarket within
Marion County. Vacancy rates are only presented for those properties that participated in the
survey.
TABLE S-5
SENIOR HOUSING SUMMARY BY MARION COUNTY SUBMARKET
JANUARY 2016
Marion County
Pleasantville MA
Melcher-Dallas MA
Southeast MA
Total
8
38.0%
-
70
6.0%
-
-
-
61
3.3%
-
-
-
-
91
11.0%
56
0%
61
3.3%
-
-
-
117
1.7%
Memory Care
Units
Vacancy Rate*
23
4.3%
12
0%
-
-
-
35
2.9%
Total
Units
Vacancy Rate
231
5.6%
135
1.5%
0
-
8
38.0%
0
-
374
4.8%
Product Type
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
-
62
0.0%
-
Active Adult Rental
Units
Vacancy Rate*
61
3.3%
-
Congregate - Optional Services
Units
Vacancy Rate*
91
11%
Assisted Living
Units
Vacancy Rate*
Affordable/Subsidized
Units
Vacancy Rate*
* Vacancy rate includes only participating properties
105
FOR-SALE HOUSING ANALYSIS
Introduction
Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC analyzed the for-sale housing market in Marion County by
analyzing data on single-family and multifamily home sales and active listings, identifying active
subdivisions and pending for-sale developments; and conducting interviews with local real
estate professionals, builders, developers and planning officials.
Home Resales in Marion County
Table FS-1 presents home resale data on single-family and multifamily housing in Marion
County from 2000, 2005, and from 2015. The data was obtained from the Marion County
Assessor and shows the annual number of sales, average and median sales price, and price per
square foot (“PSF”) by Marion County submarket. The table includes only residential transactions and excludes agricultural dwellings. The following are key points observed from our
analysis of this data.
•
Marion County transaction volume has ranged from a low of 236 resales in 2010 to the peak
in 2015 with over 500 resales. All of the submarkets posted increases in resale activity between 2014 and 2015. Historically, there is an average of about 350 resales annually over
the past five years.
•
About 52% of all resales occur in the Pella Submarket annually; while the Knoxville Submarket averages about 32% of transaction volume. Combined, the Pella and Knoxville Submarkets make-up about 84% of real estate sales in Marion County.
Marion County Resales: 2000, 2005, 2010-2015
Number Sold
500
$165,000
$155,000
$145,000
400
Resales
Median Price
$175,000
$135,000
300
$125,000
$115,000
200
Median Price
600
$105,000
$95,000
100
$85,000
0
$75,000
Year
106
TABLE FS-1
HOME RESALES (per MARION COUNTY ASSESSOR)
MARION COUNTY
2000, 2005, 2010 to 2015
Year
Pella Submarket
2000
2005
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Pct. Change
00 to 05
05 to 10
10 to 15
00 to 15
No.
Sold
Avg.
Sold Price
Median
Sold Price
Avg.
Sq. Ft.
Avg.
PSF
188
236
126
128
192
202
208
260
$145,214
$175,424
$173,455
$181,399
$181,273
$190,731
$188,934
$196,746
$129,000
$147,500
$148,750
$161,500
$161,000
$173,100
$170,000
$176,000
1,620
1,502
1,602
1,622
1,578
1,524
1,511
1,528
$90
$117
$108
$112
$115
$125
$125
$129
26%
-47%
106%
38%
21%
-1%
13%
35%
14%
1%
18%
36%
$94,781
$114,095
$142,658
$124,275
$149,467
$149,513
$141,966
$154,725
$88,250
$104,000
$128,500
$122,150
$144,000
$140,000
$138,500
$135,000
20%
25%
8%
63%
18%
24%
5%
53%
$55,667
$70,018
$57,700
$40,857
$59,483
$68,175
$29,905
$78,885
$26,500
$64,900
$46,500
$29,000
$56,950
$50,478
$30,000
$55,000
26%
-18%
37%
42%
145%
-28%
18%
108%
2000
44
2005
43
2010
23
2011
26
2012
32
2013
30
2014
43
2015
44
Pct. Change
00 to 05
05 to 10
10 to 15
00 to 15
-2%
-47%
91%
0%
Southeast Submarket
2000
6
2005
16
2010
5
2011
7
2012
6
2013
12
2014
4
2015
13
Pct. Change
00 to 05
05 to 10
10 to 15
00 to 15
167%
-69%
160%
117%
No.
Sold
Avg.
Sold Price
Median
Sold Price
Avg.
Sq. Ft.
Avg.
PSF
Knoxville SubMarket
2000
137
2005
181
2010
71
2011
98
2012
98
2013
125
2014
111
2015
170
$84,866
$98,604
$95,675
$102,112
$111,611
$107,552
$114,125
$128,143
$75,000
$88,000
$90,000
$84,000
$100,000
$92,000
$108,000
$107,750
1,297
1,354
1,196
1,331
1,370
1,258
1,334
1,308
$65
$73
$80
$77
$81
$85
$86
$98
16%
-3%
34%
51%
17%
2%
20%
44%
$55,516
$69,550
$38,455
$53,667
$80,734
$54,355
$69,367
$59,378
$56,500
$61,000
$37,000
$37,000
$61,750
$53,500
$60,000
$41,155
1,222
1,193
957
1,167
1,276
1,262
1,261
1,343
$45
$58
$40
$46
$63
$43
$55
$44
1,448
1,409
1,437
1,466
1,491
1,430
1,432
1,435
$78
$95
$96
$95
$102
$107
$109
$113
Year
Pct. Change
00 to 05
05 to 10
10 to 15
00 to 15
1,317
1,352
1,519
1,416
1,474
1,597
1,395
1,403
1,273
1,095
1,378
1,092
1,335
1,366
1,052
1,474
$72
$84
$94
$88
$101
$94
$102
$110
$44
$64
$42
$37
$45
$50
$28
$54
32%
-61%
139%
24%
2000
22
2005
21
2010
11
2011
9
2012
16
2013
11
2014
15
2015
18
Pct. Change
00 to 05
05 to 10
10 to 15
00 to 15
-5%
-48%
64%
-18%
25%
-45%
54%
7%
8%
-39%
11%
-27%
Marion County
2000
2005
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
397
497
236
268
344
380
381
505
$112,475
$134,274
$138,309
$138,904
$151,668
$152,298
$155,461
$162,060
$100,282
$115,753
$121,727
$121,701
$135,610
$136,475
$142,581
$141,531
25%
-53%
114%
27%
19%
3%
17%
44%
15%
5%
16%
41%
Pct. Change
00 to 05
05 to 10
10 to 15
00 to 15
Sources: Marion County Assessor; Maxfield Research & Consulting LC
•
The median sales price in Marion County peaked in 2014 at $142,581; however 2015 was
slightly down with a median sales price of $141,531. Sales pricing is up about 16% from
2010 and 2011.
•
Median sales prices in 2015 ranged from $41,155 in the Melcher-Dallas Submarket to
$176,000 in the Pella Submarket. The Pleasantville Submarket had the 2nd highest sales
price at $135,000 in 2015.
107
•
Marion County did not experience a significant decrease in pricing during the Great Recession. Most communities experienced substantial price declines between 2005 and 2010;
however Marion County pricing was up +5% during the recession.
Median Resale Price of Homes by Submarket
$200,000
2000
$180,000
2005
2010
2015
$160,000
Price Sold
$140,000
$120,000
$100,000
$80,000
$60,000
$40,000
$20,000
$0
Submarket
Marion County Resales by Submarket: 2010-2015
300
Pella
250
Knoxville
Pleasantville
200
Melcher-Dallas
Sales
Southeast
150
100
50
0
2010
2011
2012
Year
2013
2014
2015
108
109
Current Supply of Homes on the Market
To more closely examine the current market for available owner-occupied housing in Marion
County, we reviewed the current supply of homes on the market (listed for sale). Table FS-2
homes shows currently listed for sale homes in Marion County by submarket distributed into
nine price ranges. In addition, the table also includes pending listings; or listings where an offer
has been received and the property is scheduled to close. The data was obtained from Realtor
Property Resources (RPR) and Iowa Realty. The listings were obtained in January 2016. Table
FS-4 shows the active listings by home style (i.e. one-story, two-story, etc.)
•
As of January 2016, there were 145 homes listed for sale in Marion County. Only three of
the listings were for multifamily properties; all three of which are located in the Pella Market Area.
•
The median list price in Marion County for a single-family home is $129,900. The median
sale price is generally a more accurate indicator of housing values in a community than the
average sale price. Average sale prices can be easily skewed by a few very high-priced or
low-priced home sales in any given year, whereas the median sale price better represents
the pricing of a majority of homes in a given market. The average priced home in Marion
County is $160,000; about $30,000 more than the median list price.
Marion County Active Listings - Jan. 2016
60
SF
MF
50
40
30
20
10
0
Under $100k
$100k to
$149.9k
$150k to
$199.9k
$200k to
$249.9k
$250k to
$299.9k
$300k to
$399.9k
$400k to
$499.9k
$500k+
110
FOR-SALE MARKET ANALYSIS
TABLE FS-2
HOMES CURRENTLY LISTED FOR-SALE/PENDING HOMES
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
Price Range
< $49,999
$50,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149,999
$150,000 to $199,999
$200,000 to $249,999
$250,000 to $299,999
$300,000 to $399,999
$400,000 to $499,999
$500,000 and Over
Minimum
Maximum
Median
Average
Price Range
< $49,999
$50,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $149,999
$150,000 to $199,999
$200,000 to $249,999
$250,000 to $299,999
$300,000 to $399,999
$400,000 to $499,999
$500,000 to $749,999
Minimum
Maximum
Median
Average
Pella Market Area
Single-Family
Multifamily1
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
0
4
10
5
7
4
14
2
1
47
0.0%
8.5%
21.3%
10.6%
14.9%
8.5%
29.8%
4.3%
2.1%
100%
$79,000
$665,000
$214,900
$245,710
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0.0%
66.7%
33.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100%
$89,000
$139,000
$89,000
$105,667
-0.0%
33.3%
66.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100%
$113,270
$168,000
$147,500
$142,923
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
---------100%
-----
12
26
19
8
2
4
3
0
0
74
16.2%
35.1%
25.7%
10.8%
2.7%
5.4%
4.1%
0.0%
0.0%
100%
-----------
0
-----
$17,900
$352,000
$92,150
$117,124
Southeast Market Area
Single-Family
Multifamily1
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
3
Single-Family
Multifamily1
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
Single-Family
Multifamily1
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
1
2
3
1
0
2
0
0
0
9
-22.2%
33.3%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100%
-----------
0
-----
$40,000
$280,000
$124,900
$139,933
Melcher-Dallas Market Area
Single-Family
Multifamily1
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
1
4
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
9
11.1%
44.4%
33.3%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
$39,900
$195,000
$79,900
$98,884
-----------
0
-----
Marion County Total
Single-Family
Multifamily1
No.
Pct.
No.
Pct.
14
36
36
17
9
10
17
2
1
142
$17,900
$665,000
$129,000
$160,086
9.9%
25.4%
25.4%
12.0%
6.3%
7.0%
12.0%
1.4%
0.7%
100.0%
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0.0%
66.7%
33.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-100.0%
$89,000
$139,000
$89,000
$105,667
14
38
37
17
9
10
17
2
1
145
9.7%
26.2%
25.5%
11.7%
6.2%
6.9%
11.7%
1.4%
0.7%
100.0%
$20
$0
$20
100%
37.2%
13.8%
Sources: Realtor Property Resources (RPR), Iowa Realty, Maxfield Research & Consulting LLC
111
•
Based on a median list price of $129,000, the income required to afford a home at this price
would be about $36,850 to $43,000, based on the standard of 3.0 to 3.5 times the median
income (and assuming these households do not have a high level of debt). A household
with significantly more equity (in an existing home and/or savings) could afford a higher
priced home. About 75% of Marion County households have annual incomes at or above
$36,850.
•
About 36% of the homes for sale in Marion County are priced under $100,000; including
26% priced from $50,000 to $99,999. Another 25% of the listing are priced between
$100,000 and $149,999; resulting in 61% of the active inventory priced under $150,000.
100%
Active Listings by Submarket & Pct.
90%
80%
$500k+
70%
$400k to $499.9k
60%
$300k to $399.9k
50%
40%
$200k to $299.9k
30%
$100k to $199.9k
20%
Under $100k
10%
0%
•
About 13% of the listings are priced between $200,000 and $300,000; whereas 14% are
priced above $300,000.
•
All three of the multifamily for-sale properties are located in the Pella submarket. Two of
the properties are priced between $50,000 and $99,999 while the 3rd listing is priced between $100,000 and $149,999.
•
Approximately 86% of all homes for sale are located in the Knoxville and Pella submarkets.
In fact, over 50% of listings in Marion County are located in the Knoxville submarket.
112
TABLE FS-3
ACTIVE/PENDING LISTINGS BY TYPE & SUBMARKET
January 2016
Submarket
Listings
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Melcher-Dallas
Southeast
Marion County
Product Type
Townhome/Twin
Single-Family
Percent
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Melcher-Dallas
Southeast
Marion County
Total
Condo
47
74
9
9
3
142
2
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
1
50
74
9
9
3
145
94.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
97.9%
4.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.4%
2.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.7%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
•
Single-family listings account for 98% of all homes for sale in Marion County. There were no
for-sale multifamily homes for sale in four of the five submarkets.
Pct. of Listings by Submarket & Type
Marion County
SF
97.9%
MF
2.1%
Southeast
100.0%
0.0%
Melcher-Dallas
100.0%
0.0%
Pleasantville
100.0%
0.0%
Knoxville
0.0%
100.0%
Pella
94.0%
90%
92%
94%
6.0%
96%
98%
100%
113
TABLE FS-4
ACTIVE/PENDING LISTINGS BY HOUSING TYPE
MARION COUNTY
January 2016
Property Type
Single-Family
One story
1.5-story
2-story
Split entry/Bi-level
Total/Avg.
Townhomes/Condos
Condo
Side-by-Side
Total/Avg.
Marion County
Listings
Pct.
Avg. List
Price
Avg. Size
(Sq. Ft.)
Avg. List Price
Per Sq. Ft.
Avg.
Bedrooms
Avg.
Bathrooms
Avg. Age
of Home
MARION COUNTY
82
16
35
9
142
57.7%
11.3%
24.6%
6.3%
100.0%
$141,281
$131,706
$218,086
$163,108
$160,516
1,361
1,676
2,069
1,427
1,575
$104
$79
$105
$114
$102
2.80
2.90
4.00
3.40
3.15
1.60
2.00
2.20
1.80
1.81
1965
1932
1951
1980
1959
1
2
3
33.3%
66.7%
100.0%
$139,900
$89,000
$105,967
1,424
1,768
1,653
$98
$50
$66
2.0
2.00
2.00
2.0
1.00
1.33
1997
1980
1986
$159,388
1,577
$101
3.12
1.80
1959
145
•
One-story homes made up the highest percentage of active single-family listings in Marion
County (58%). Two-story homes accounted for 25% of the inventory while one and one-half
story homes made up 11% of the inventory. Split-level homes accounted for 6% of the inventory in Marion County.
•
Overall, the average list price per square foot (“PSF”) among all active single-family listings
is $102/foot. Split-level homes have the highest PSF costs at $114/PSF; followed closely by
one-story and two-story homes at $104/PSF and $105/PSF respectively. One and one-half
level home have the lowest list price PSF ($79); however these are also the oldest homes
based on year built.
•
Split-levels were the newest single-family housing type; which resulted in the highest costs
PSF. However, there were only nine split-level homes marketing in Marion County. Because of the higher finished square footages, two-story homes have among the highest average list price at $218,086.
•
The three multifamily properties for-sale had an average list price of about $106,000 and
were larger units with an average unit size of 1,650 square feet. As a result, the average PSF
cost was only $66.
114
Listings by Housing Type - Marion County
82
One story
16
Hsg. Type
1.5-story
35
2 story
9
2-level split
3
Condo/TH
0
20
40
80
60
No. of Listings
100
Average List Price by Housing Type - Marion County
Avg. List Price
$70
$141,281
$100,000
$90
$131,706
Avg. List Price
$163,108
$150,000
$105,967
$0
$110
$218,086
$200,000
$50,000
$130
PSF
$50
Per Sq. Ft.
$250,000
$30
$10
-$10
Housing Type
115
Owner-occupied Turnover
Table FS-5 illustrates existing home turnover as a percentage of owner occupied units in Marion
County. Resales are based on historic transaction volume between 2010 and 2015 as obtained
from the Marion County Assessor. Owner-occupied housing units are sourced to the U.S.
Census as of 2010.
As displayed in the table, approximately 3.7% of the Marion County’s owner-occupied housing
stock is sold annually. Turnover rates range from 1.1% in the Pleasantville Market Area to 5.2%
in the Pella Market Area. Typically we find owner-occupied turnover ranges from 3% at the
low-end to 8% at the high-end in many non-Metro communities throughout the Midwest.
TABLE FS-5
OWNER-OCCUPIED TURNOVER
MARION COUNTY
Owner-occupied
Housing Units1
3,573
3,545
688
1,191
577
9,574
Submarket
Pella
Knoxville
Melcher-Dallas
Pleasantville
Southeast
Marion County
1
Owner-occupied housing units in 2010
2
Average of resales between 2010 and 2015
Resales
Turnover
Annual Avg.
186
112
33
13
8
352
2
Pct.
5.2%
3.2%
4.8%
1.1%
1.4%
3.7%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Realtor Property Resources, Maxfield Research & Consulting LLC
Owner-Occupied Annual Turnover
Marion County
Southeast
Pleasantville
3.7%
1.4%
1.1%
Melcher-Dallas
4.8%
Knoxville
3.2%
Pella
0.0%
5.2%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
116
Actively Marketing Subdivisions
Table FS-6 identifies newer subdivisions with available lots in Marion County. The table identifies the number of lots, available lots, typical lot sizes, and assessed and marketing values for
lots and homes. Please note; the table does not include scattered, infill lots or random lots that
may be marketing. Key points from the table follow.
•
There are thirteen active subdivisions in Marion County with available lots. Excluding
Knoxville Estates that has a number of undevelopable lots; there are 224 vacant lots. All of
the actively marketing product targets move-up or executive-level home buyers.
•
Over 80% of the vacant lot inventory is located in the Pella submarket (184 vacant lots).
The Knoxville submarket has only 29 vacant lots (13%) and the Pleasantville submarket only
11 vacant lots (5%).
•
The average assessed home value (home + land) is $317,678 county-wide. However, the
average value is around $190,000 to $195,000 in the Knoxville and Pleasantville submarkets
compared to $337,650 in the Pella submarket. Similarly, the average land assed value is
$17,200 in the Pleasantville submarket, $25,270 in the Knoxville submarket, and increases
substantially to $49,200 in the Pella submarket.
•
Lots marketing across Marion County average $54,800. However, lot prices vary considerable from location to location. Lots marketing in the Pleasantville submarket average just
under $20,000, increasing to $25,270 in the Knoxville submarket, up to $49,200 in the Pella
submarket.
•
There are no actively marketing subdivisions in the Melcher-Dallas or Southeast submarkets. However, there are vacant, infill lots available for new housing.
•
The average lot size across all of the actively marketing subdivision is 0.58 acres; however
that includes a mix of city and rural residential lots. Marketing lots in Knoxville within city
limits average 0.29 acres compared to a mix of city and rural lots in the Pleasantville submarket that average 1.63 acres. Lot sizes in the Pella submarket average 0.53 acres; most
city lots average over 0.40 acres per lot.
•
All of the actively marketing subdivisions are “open builder” subdivisions that allow the lot
buyer to select the builder of their choice to the subdivision. However, subdivisions have
covenants that dictate the design and materials for many of the subdivisions.
117
TABLE FS-6
ACTIVELY MARKETING SINGLE-FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS
MARION COUNTY
4TH QUARTER 2015
Average Assessed Home+Lot Value1
Min
Max
Avg.
Vacant/
Avail. Lots
101
7
0.14 - 3.3
0.55
$15,470 -
Fountain Hills (Plat 1 to 3)
Fountain View Drive
193
87
0.25 - 4.08
0.58
$25,920 - $150,000
Hunters Ridge (Plat 1 to 4)
182nd Ave.
102
42
0.25 - 1.84
0.44
$24,480 - $75,740
North Oaks Plat 2
Oak Hills Circle/Thunder Ridge Rd.
22
21
0.44 - 5.16
1.24
$90,000 -
$90,000
Oakwood Estates (Plat 1 & 2)
West Fourth St.
33
12
0.29 - 0.58
0.37
$34,300 -
Shady Brook Acres
Spring Valley Lane
28
11
0.34 - 0.86
0.52
$22,220 -
Town and Country Lot
E. Park Lane
5
4
0.37 - 0.53
0.43
$40,500 - $40,500
Subtotal (Values based on properties with homes)
484
184
Knoxville Estates
North & South Shore Drive
200
89
Deer Field Place (Plat 1 to 4)
McKay Court & McKay Drive
36
10
Westridge Acres Plat 6
Jackson Way
19
19
Subtotal Excluding Knoxville Estates
255
55
118
29
4
4
0.34 - 0.35
0.35
$10,230 - $10,600
$10,388
Darma Dell Heights
Hayes Drive
13
4
3.16 - 8.87
4.85
$9,290 - $25,770
$16,833
$140,470 - $240,020
$188,371
Rural Residential
Northfield Place Plat 7
Linden St.
16
3
0.22 - 0.41
0.27
$14,770 - $24,150
$17,485
$155,900 - $292,500
$201,230
Lots sold from $20k to $32k
33
11
1.63
$17,218
$195,970
Marion County Total
Marion County Total (minus Knoxville Estates)
772
572
313
224
0.58
$45,398
$317,678
Pella Market Area
Bos Landen (SF detached only)
Bos Landen Drive
Adreons (sf only)
Golf View Drive
1
Average Size of Lots (Acres)
Min
Max
Avg.
Average AsssessedLot/Land Value1
Min
Max
Avg.
No. of
Lots
Subdivision
0.53
n/a
n/a
$158,360 - $709,850
$374,447
Excludes condos and townhomes, SF
is mostly built-out. Located around
golf course
$54,118
$149,470 - $843,820
$359,304
Plat 3 has the most vacant lots at
this time; only a few lots in Plat 1 &
2 remaining. Lots marketing from
$55k to $80k; avg. price is $65k
$41,555
$191,340 - $633,630
$285,638
Outside Pella city limits (Summit
Twp.) but has city services. Lots
marketing in the low $30s to $50k
$90,000
$434,900 - $434,900
$434,900
Outside Pella city limits (Lake Prairie
Twp.). Lots marketing in the low
$90s
$53,360
$43,047
$206,040 - $423,530
$264,175
Pella proper. Lots marketing around
$45k to $50k
$48,040
$30,884
$79,110 - $405,380
$262,465
Many foreclosed lots around 2010.
$427,210 - $427,210
$427,210
Marketing at $55k/lot
$117,020
$52,908
$40,500
$49,209
n/a
$6,190
0.18 - 0.35
0.22
$21,250 - $28,600
0.30 - 1.13
0.55
$260
0.29
-
-
Comments
$37,570
$1,020
$337,647
$14,224
$20,400 - $366,970
$186,584
Homes built from 1966 to 2007.
Outside city limits. Not all lots can
accommodate housing development
$25,270
$145,770 - $306,850
$190,246
Marketing lots on avg. from $25k to
$30k
n/a
Marketing lots Spring 2016. Est.
prices from high $30ks to mid $40s
$485
$25,270
n/a
n/a
$190,246
Excludes previously built-out condos
(12 units)
Lot value and home value based on Marion County Assessor data. Lot/Land Value includes a home on the land
Source: Marion County Assessor, Interviews with builders/developers/Realtors, Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
118
Vacant Lots in Newer Subdivisions
200
180
184
160
Vacant Lots
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
29
11
0
Pella
Pleasantville
Knoxville
Submarket
New Construction Avg. Home + Lot Assessed Values
$400,000
$350,000
Assessed Value
$300,000
$337,647
$317,678
$250,000
$200,000
$190,246
$150,000
$195,970
$100,000
$50,000
$0
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Submarket
Marion Cty.
119
New Construction Avg. Lot Assessed vs. Marketing Values
$70,000
Assessed Value
$60,000
$60,331
$54,798
$50,000
$49,209
$40,000
$45,398
$35,690
$30,000
$25,270
$20,000
$19,286
$17,218
$10,000
$0
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Submarket
Marion Cty.
Agricultural Land Values
Marion County, also known as the “Red Rock Area,” is home to Iowa’s largest lake (Lake Red
Rock) which boasts over 15,000 acres of water and 35,000 acres of land. As a result, the
topography in Marion County is diverse from recreational to agricultural uses. Therefore, the
value of agricultural land in Marion County is lower than other Iowa counties that have less
topographical changes and more fertile soil. Table FS-7 shows farmland values in various
submarkets of Iowa in September 2015. The data was compiled by the Realtors Land Institute
(RLI) which is composed of Realtors who specialize in farm and land sales or appraisals. Key
findings follow.
120
TABLE FS-7
SURVEY OF FARMLAND VALUES
September 2015
Region in Iowa
High Quality
Central
East Central
North Central
Northeast
Northwest
South Central
Southeast
Southwest
West Central
Iowa
$11,109
$11,300
$10,571
$11,096
$12,385
$8,267
$11,015
$9,756
$10,811
$10,701
Crop Land
Medium
Low Quality
Non-tillable
Pasture
Timber
$5,399
$5,261
$5,700
$5,609
$6,383
$3,322
$4,261
$4,972
$5,885
$5,199
$2,748
$2,772
$2,344
$2,844
$2,901
$2,450
$2,281
$3,394
$3,200
$2,770
$2,181
$2,187
$1,945
$2,385
$2,579
$2,269
$1,903
$2,360
$2,538
$2,261
$8,291
$8,199
$8,380
$8,206
$9,373
$6,139
$7,485
$7,505
$8,826
$8,045
Sources: Realtors Land Institute, Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
Survey of Ag Land Values: September 2015
$3,322
$4,000
$8,045
$6,139
$6,000
$8,267
$8,000
Iowa
$10,701
South Central
$10,000
$2,000
$5,199
$12,000
$0
High Quality Crop
Med. Quality Crop
Low Quality Crop
•
As illustrated in the Table and chart, South Central Iowa has agricultural land values on
average about 20% lower than the State of Iowa averages. As of September 2015, cropland
ranges from $3,322 (low quality) to $8,267 (high quality) per acre.
•
The Iowa State University Extension also measures the value of agricultural land throughout
the State. The chart below depicts the average land value per acre in Marion County, South
Central Iowa, and the State of Iowa between 2001 and 2015. According to the Iowa State
University Extension, Marion County has land values higher than the region but lower than
the state. As of 2015, land values in Marion County averaged about $6,700 per acre.
121
$10,000
$9,000
Average Agriculture Land Values per Acre
Maron County, SouthCentral Iowa District, State of Iowa
2001-2015
Marion County
SouthCentral Iowa District
State of Iowa
Price per Acre
$8,000
$7,000
$6,000
$5,000
$4,000
$3,000
$2,000
$1,000
$0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Year
•
The United States Department of Agriculture (“USDA”) also publishes land value statics
across the country. The following chart illustrates farm real estate values by acre at the
state-wide level from 2011 to 2015. As illustrated in the chart, Iowa has the highest value of
farm real estate in the Midwest.
Farm Real Estate - Avg. Value per Acre 2011-2015
$9,000
2011
$8,000
2012
2013
2014
2015
Avg. Value per Acre
$7,000
$6,000
$5,000
$4,000
$3,000
$2,000
$1,000
$0
State
122
Realtor/Builder Interviews
Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC interviewed real estate agents, home builders, developers,
and other professionals familiar with Marion County’s owner-occupied market to solicit their
impressions of the for-sale housing market throughout the county. Key points are summarized
by topic as follows.
Market Overview
•
The housing markets in Marion County have been strong as Realtor sentiment was positive
for the year 2015. Home pricing is trending upwards, days on market is declining, and the
supply has been tight. Most Realtors are optimistic that real estate activity in 2016 will remain positive.
•
The local Multiple Listing Service (“MLS”) in Marion County was recently absorbed the Des
Moines Area Association of Realtors (“DMAAR”). As a result, historical housing data has
moved from the local Marion County MLS to DMAAR and the data has been difficult to abstract. Local Realtors commented on increased competition for Des Moines Area Realtors
who now have access to Marion County listing activity.
•
Realtors commented on the desire for a more diverse housing stock. Marion County is
dominated by the single-family home and there is a need for more maintenance-free housing products that cater to the 55+ demographic and others seeking association maintained
housing (i.e. condos, townhomes, twinhomes, etc.)
•
Long-term mortgage rates remain at historic lows which has benefited both buyers and
sellers. Most Realtors believe interest rates will increase modestly in 2016; however a
large increase would have an impact on real estate sales.
•
Buyers are attracted to Marion County for employment opportunities and the excellent
school districts; among many other factors. The close proximity to the Des Moines Metro
Area is a big plus as many communities have drawn buyers from the Des Moines area who
are seeking more affordable housing and better school choices.
•
Generally, there is a lack of middle-market housing stock in many areas in Marion County.
The entry-level buyers are able to find older homes and the executive-level buyers seek out
new construction. The market lacks good, quality homes that are affordable to the middlemarket, two-income households.
•
Although there are many homes for sale at the lower price points under $75,000; many of
these homes need significant work as they lack updates today’s buyer’s desire. There is
strong demand for remodeling and home improvements in a large proportion of the housing stock.
123
•
Like most areas across the country, Marion County was affected by the real estate downturn and recession of last decade; especially between 2009 and 2011. However the market
has rebounded and the lender-mediated properties were absorbed.
•
There are For-Sale by Owners (FSBO) owners in Marion County that may not be listed on
the MLS. However the number of FSBO properties tend to lean towards the smaller communities.
•
Home pricing varies considerably throughout Marion County communities. Homes for sale
in Pella are priced significantly higher than other Marion County submarkets. Generally, a
similar home priced in Pella vs. another community could easily be priced at least $30,000
higher.
•
Realtors commented that most single-family housing buyers are seeking at least three
bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a two-car garage.
•
Move-in ready homes priced between $85,000 and $150,000 have been in strong demand
and there is a lack of supply for the middle-market product.
•
Interviewees commented on the number of employees who commute into Marion County
for employment. With a more diverse housing stock; Marion County communities have the
potential to capture additional householders who are already commuting into the county
for employment.
New Construction | Lots & Land
•
Numerous interviews mentioned the local builders are all busy and there is generally a lack
of contractors and subcontractors in Marion County. Some builders and trades professionals left the industry during the downturn last decade and the labor force has not bounced
back in the construction sector.
•
Because Marion County is outside the Des Moines area; there are no tract housing developments from larger production builders and economies of scale are not passed along to
the new construction home buyer. As a result, new construction pricing escalates.
•
Due to rising construction, labor, land and infrastructure costs; builders are unable to bring
affordable new construction homes to the market in Marion County. Most interviews suggested new home prices must be priced at least $250,000 or more to account for construction and development costs. Most new construction in Marion County is at least $160 per
square foot (PSF) or more. New construction pricing in Pella is at least $175 PSF or more in
most areas.
124
•
Land developers all stressed the difficulty in bringing lots to the market that are “affordable.” Given today’s infrastructure cost (i.e. curb and gutter, streets, sanitary sewer, etc.)
developers find it difficult to bring a new lot to the market for less than $40,000 today not
even including the raw land costs for the initial acquisition. As a result, new subdivisions in
many communities may require some form of public assistance to deliver new lots.
•
Numerous interviewees mentioned that many land owners in Marion County tend to hold
their land holdings and do not want to sell unless they receive a “bullish” asking price on the
land. As a result, land acquisition can be difficult in submarkets such as Pella which results
in higher overall housing costs for the end consumer.
•
Most of the new homes constructed in Marion County have been build-to-suit for individual
buyer(s). Many builders/developers are not willing to build spec housing because of the
holding risk. However, there have been a few recent spec homes constructed that have
targeted move-up buyers. Many public officials wish there were more spec homes for sale.
•
Many of the new single-family homes desired by buyers are one-level ranch (i.e. rambler or
one-story) style home. Initially this product was popular with older adults; however all age
cohorts are attracted to this product as it allows homeowners to remain in the home longer
and they tend to have higher resale values. At the same time, ranch-style homes require
larger lot sizes and the construction costs are higher given larger foundations and roofs.
•
There is strong demand for lots with walk-out basements; however topography can be
challenging within some communities hence walk-outs may result in non-municipal subdivisions with he needed grade change.
•
Marion County, especially geographies on the western-half of the county, has the potential
to capture demand from the Des Moines Metro Area. Interviewees mentioned the lack of
lot supply in the Pleasantville area and the strong growth potential given its transportation
access and proximity to the Des Moines area.
Planned and Proposed Housing Projects
Maxfield Research interviewed planning staff members in communities in Marion County in
order to identify housing developments under construction, planned, or pending. At the time
of this study, there are no pending for-sale projects in the Marion County communities.
125
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
Introduction
Affordable housing is a term that has various definitions according to different people and is a
product of supply and demand. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), the definition of affordability is for a household to pay no more than 30%
of its annual income on housing (including utilities). Families who pay more than 30% of their
income for housing (either rent or mortgage) are considered cost burdened and may have
difficulty affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care.
Generally, housing that is income-restricted to households earning at or below 80% of Area
Median Income (AMI) is considered affordable. However, many individual properties have
income restrictions set anywhere from 30% to 80% of AMI. Rent is not based on income but
instead is a contract amount that is affordable to households within the specific income restriction segment. Moderate-income housing, often referred to as “workforce housing,” refers
to both rental and ownership housing. Hence the definition is broadly defined as housing that is
income-restricted to households earning between 50% and 120% AMI. Figure 1 below summarizes income ranges by definition.
FIGURE 1
AREA MEDIAN INCOME (AMI) DEFINITIONS
Definition
Extremely Low Income
AMI Range
0% - 30%
Very Low Income
31% - 50%
Low Income
51% - 80%
Moderate Income | Workforce Housing
50% - 120%
Note: Emmet County 4-person AMI = $63,000 (2015)
Naturally-Occurring Affordable Housing (i.e. Unsubsidized Affordable)
Although affordable housing is typically associated with an income-restricted property, there
are other housing units in communities that indirectly provide affordable housing. Housing
units that were not developed or designated with income guidelines (i.e. assisted) yet are more
affordable than other units in a community are considered “naturally-occurring” or “unsubsidized affordable” units. This rental supply is available through the private market, versus
assisted housing programs through various governmental agencies. Property values on these
units are lower based on a combination of factors, such as: age of structure/housing stock,
location, condition, size, functionally obsolete, school district, etc. Because of these factors,
housing costs tend to be lower.
126
According to the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, the privately unsubsidized housing stock supplies three times as many low-cost affordable units than assisted
projects nationwide. Unlike assisted rental developments, most unsubsidized affordable units
are scattered across small properties (one to four unit structures) or in older multifamily
structures. Many of these older developments are vulnerable to redevelopment due to their
age, modest rents, and deferred maintenance.
Because many of these housing units have affordable rents, project-based and private housing
markets cannot be easily separated. Some households (typically those with household incomes
of 50% to 60% AMI) income-qualify for both market rate and project-based affordable housing.
Rent and Income Limits
Table HA-1 shows the maximum allowable incomes by household size to qualify for affordable
housing and maximum gross rents that can be charged by bedroom size in Marion County.
These incomes are published and revised annually by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and also published separately by the Iowa Finance Authority based on the
date the project was placed into service. Fair market rent is the amount needed to pay gross
monthly rent at modest rental housing in a given area. This table is used as a basis for determining the payment standard amount used to calculate the maximum monthly subsidy for
families at financially assisted housing.
Table HA-2 shows the maximum rents by household size and AMI based on income limits
illustrated in Table HA-1. The rents on Table HA-2 are based on HUD’s allocation that monthly
rents should not exceed 30% of income. In addition, the table reflects maximum household size
based on HUD guidelines of number of persons per unit. For each additional bedroom, the
maximum household size increases by two persons.
127
TABLE HA-1
HUD INCOME AND RENT LIMITS
MARION COUNTY - 2015
Income Limits by Household Size
1 pph
2 phh
3 phh
4 phh
5 phh
6 phh
7 phh
8 phh
30% of median
$12,750
$14,580
$16,380
$18,210
$19,680
$21,120
$22,590
$24,030
50% of median
$21,250
$24,300
$27,300
$30,350
$32,800
$35,200
$37,650
$40,050
60% of median
$25,500
$29,160
$32,760
$36,420
$39,360
$42,240
$45,180
$48,060
80% of median
$34,000
$38,880
$43,680
$48,560
$52,480
$56,320
$60,240
$64,080
100% of median
$42,500
$48,600
$54,600
$60,700
$65,600
$70,400
$75,300
$80,100
120% of median
$51,000
$58,320
$65,520
$72,840
$78,720
$84,480
$90,360
$96,120
Maximum Gross Rent
EFF
1BR
2BR
3BR
4BR
30% of median
50% of median
$318
$531
$364
$607
$409
$682
$455
$758
$492
$820
60% of median
$637
$729
$819
$910
$984
80% of median
$850
$972
$1,092
$1,214
$1,312
100% of median
$1,062
$1,215
$1,365
$1,517
$1,640
120% of median
$1,275
$1,458
$1,638
$1,821
$1,968
Fair Market Rent
Fair Market Rent
EFF
1BR
2BR
3BR
4BR
$444
$552
$747
$930
$998
Sources: Novogradac, HUD, Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
128
TABLE HA-2
MAXIMUM RENT BASED ON HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND AREA MEDIAN INCOME
MARION COUNTY - 2015
HHD Size
Unit Type1
Studio
1BR
2BR
3BR
4BR
1
Min
Max
1
1
2
3
4
1
2
4
6
8
30%
Min.
$319
$319
$365
$410
$455
-
50%
Max.
Min.
$319
$365
$455
$528
$601
$531
$531
$608
$683
$759
-
Maximum Rent Based on Household Size (@30% of Income)
60%
80%
Max.
Min.
$531
$608
$759
$880
$1,001
$638
$638
$729
$819
$911
Max.
-
$638
$729
$911
$1,056
$1,202
Min.
$850
$850
$972
$1,092
$1,214
Max.
-
$850
$972
$1,214
$1,408
$1,602
100%
Min.
$1,063
$1,063
$1,215
$1,365
$1,518
Max.
-
$1,063
$1,215
$1,518
$1,760
$2,003
120%
Min.
$1,275
$1,275
$1,458
$1,638
$1,821
Max.
-
$1,275
$1,458
$1,821
$2,112
$2,403
One-bedroom plus den and two-bedroom plus den units are classified as 1BR and 2BR units, respectively. To be classified as a bedroom, a den must have a window and closet.
Note: 4-person Marion County AMI is $60,700 (2015)
Sources: HUD, Novogradac, Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
129
Housing Cost Burden
Table HA-3 shows the number and percentage of owner and renter households in Marion
County’s submarkets pay 30% or more of their gross income for housing. This information was
compiled from the American Community Survey 2013 estimates. The Federal standard for
affordability is 30% of income for housing costs. There are likely a number of households that
elect to pay slightly more than 30% of their gross income to select the housing that they
choose. Moderately cost-burdened is defined as households paying between 30% and 50% of
their income to housing; while severely cost-burdened is defined as households paying more
than 50% of their income for housing.
Higher-income households that are cost-burdened may have the option of moving to lower
priced housing, but lower-income households often do not. The figures focus on owner households with incomes below $50,000 and renter households with incomes below $35,000.
Key findings from Table HA-3 follow.
•
About 15% of owner households and 41% of renter householders are estimated to be
paying more than 30% of their income for housing costs in Marion County. Compared to
the Iowa average, the percentage of cost burdened households is lower in Marion County
for renter and owners. Iowa cost burdened households are 19% for owner households and
45% for renter households.
•
The number of cost burdened households in Marion County increases proportionally based
on lower incomes. About 72% of renters with incomes below $35,000 are cost burdened
and 34% of owners with incomes below $50,000 are cost burdened. A significantly higher
portion of Pella Submarket renter’s with incomes below $35,000 are cost burdened (82%)
compared to the rest of Marion County.
•
Median contract rents in Marion County($664) are similar to the State of Iowa average
($673). The median contract rent in Pella Submarket ($775) is significantly higher than both
the State of Iowa and Marion County.
130
TABLE HA-3
HOUSING COST BURDEN
MARION COUNTY MARKET AREA
2013
Pella
No.
Owner Households
All Owner Households
Cost Burden 30% or greater
1
No.
Pct.
14.7%
3,747
564
842
305
1,436
517
Renter Households w/ incomes <$35,000
Median Contract Rent
Pct.
3,495
513
Owner Households w/ incomes <$50,000
Renter Households
All Renter Households
Knoxville
1
588
458
$775
Pleasantville
No.
Pct.
15.2%
1,154
183
36.7%
1,493
509
37.8%
1,171
511
81.8%
779
497
Melcher-Dallas
No.
Pct.
16.0%
665
124
35.2%
443
140
45.2%
246
94
66.7%
154
94
$587
$586
Southeast
No.
Pct.
18.6%
561
89
32.3%
341
120
51.1%
135
34
74.6%
93
34
$536
Marion County
No.
Pct.
15.9%
9,622
1,473
35.2%
308
77
30.6%
81
22
47.2%
52
16
$555
Iowa
No.
Pct.
15.4%
885,942
164,171
18.6%
25.0%
3,427
1,151
34.3%
334,094
131,582
39.9%
40.7%
3,069
1,178
41.4%
340,605
140,999
45.1%
48.5%
1,666
1,099
71.5%
203,484
131,705
70.8%
$664
$673
American Community Survey 2013
Note: Calculations exclude households not computed.
Sources: American Community Survey, 2009-2013 estimates; Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
131
131
132
132
Housing Vouchers
In addition to subsidized apartments, “tenant-based” subsidies, like Housing Choice Vouchers,
can help lower income households afford market-rate rental housing. The tenant-based
subsidy is funded by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and is managed by the Knoxville Public Housing Agency and Central Iowa Regional Housing Authority
depending on where a person resides in Marion County. Under the Housing Choice Voucher
program (also referred to as Section 8) qualified households are issued a voucher that the
household can take to an apartment that has rent levels with Payment Standards. The household then pays approximately 30% of their adjusted gross income for rent and utilities, and the
Federal government pays the remainder of the rent to the landlord. The maximum income
limit to be eligible for a Housing Choice Voucher is 50% AMI based on household size, as shown
in Table HA-1.
Currently, Marion County is served by two public housing authorities: the Knoxville Public
Housing Agency in Knoxville which serves the Cities of Knoxville and Pella, and the Central Iowa
Regional Housing Authority (CIRHA), which serves Marion County outside of Knoxville and Pella.
CIRHA currently administers 1,008 vouchers across Boone County, Dallas County, Jasper County, and Marion County. Currently, 10 vouchers are administered by CIRHA within Marion
County. The Knoxville Public Housing Agency in Knoxville currently administers 263 vouchers
across Knoxville and Pella. The wait list for CIRHA is indefinitely open, and is about 6 months
long, while the Knoxville Public Housing waitlist is approximately 1 year long.
133
Housing Costs as Percentage of Household Income
Housing costs are generally considered affordable at 30% of a households’ adjusted gross
income. Table HA-4 on the following page illustrates key housing metrics based on housing
costs and household incomes in Marion County. The table estimates the percentage of Marion
County householders that can afford rental and for-sale housing based on a 30% allocation of
income to housing. Housing costs are based on averages in Marion County.
The housing affordability calculations assume the following:
For-Sale Housing

10% down payment with good credit score

Closing costs rolled into mortgage

30-year mortgage at 3.625% interest rate

Private mortgage insurance (equity of less than 20%)

Homeowners insurance for single-family homes and association dues for townhomes

Owner household income per 2014 ACS
Rental Housing

Background check on tenant to ensure credit history

30% allocation of income

Renter household income per 2014 ACS
Because of the down payment requirement and strict underwriting criteria for a mortgage, not
all households will meet the income qualifications as outlined above.
•
About 89% of existing owner households could afford to buy an entry-level home ($85,000)
in Marion County. Furthermore, about 55% of existing owner households could afford to
purchase a home of $150,000.
•
About 73% of existing renter households can afford to rent a one-bedroom unit in Marion
County ($400/month). The percentage of renter income-qualified households decreases to
65% that can afford an existing two-bedroom unit ($550/month). About 60% of renters
could afford to rent a one-bedroom apartment for $650 per month within a new development.
134
TABLE HA-4
MARION COUNTY MARKET AREA HOUSING AFFORDABILITY - BASED ON HOUSEHOLD INCOME
For-Sale (Assumes 10% down payment and good credit)
Price of House (Blended Marion County Avg.)
Pct. Down Payment
Total Down Payment Amt.
Estimated Closing Costs (rolled into mortgage)
Cost of Loan
Interest Rate
Number of Pmts.
Monthly Payment (P & I)
(plus) Prop. Tax
(plus) HO Insurance/Assoc. Fee for TH
(plus) PMI/MIP (less than 20%)
Subtotal monthly costs
Entry-Level
$85,000
10.0%
$8,500
$2,550
$79,050
Single-Family
Move-Up
$150,000
10.0%
$15,000
$4,500
$139,500
Executive
$300,000
10.0%
$30,000
$9,000
$279,000
3.625%
360
-$361
-$113
-$28
-$34
-$536
3.625%
360
-$636
-$200
-$50
-$60
-$947
3.625%
360
-$1,272
-$400
-$100
-$121
-$1,893
Housing Costs as % of Income
New Townhome/Twinhome
Entry-Level
Move-Up
Executive
$75,000
$150,000
$250,000
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
$7,500
$15,000
$25,000
$2,250
$4,500
$7,500
$69,750
$139,500
$232,500
3.625%
360
-$318
-$100
-$100
-$30
-$548
3.625%
360
-$636
-$200
-$100
-$60
-$997
3.625%
360
-$1,060
-$333
-$100
-$101
-$1,594
30%
30%
30%
30%
30%
30%
$21,457
$37,866
$75,731
$21,933
$39,866
$63,776
Pct. of ALL Marion County HHDS who can afford1
No. of Marion County MA HHDS who can afford1
83.9%
10,776
68.8%
8,836
34.3%
4,409
83.5%
10,726
66.9%
8,587
47.4%
6,086
Pct. of Marion County MA owner HHDs who can afford2
No. of Marion County MA owner HHDs who can afford2
No. of Marion County MA owner HHDS who cannot afford2
89.4%
8,685
1,027
76.0%
7,384
2,328
41.7%
4,053
5,659
89.1%
8,653
1,059
74.1%
7,200
2,512
54.9%
5,336
4,376
Minimum Income Required
Rental (Market Rate)
Existing Rental
2BR
$400
$550
$4,800
$6,600
1BR
Monthly Rent (Blended Marion County Avg.)
Annual Rent
Housing Costs as % of Income
Minimum Income Required
Pct. of ALL Marion County HHDS who can afford
No. of Marion County HHDS who can afford1
1
Pct. of Marion County MA renter HHDs who can afford2
No. of Marion County MA renter HHDs who can afford2
No. of Marion County MA renter HHDS who cannot afford2
1
2
3BR
n/a
n/a
$650
$7,800
New Rental
2BR
$800
$9,600
1BR
3BR
$950
$11,400
30%
30%
n/a
30%
30%
30%
$16,000
$22,000
n/a
$26,000
$32,000
$38,000
89.2%
11,458
83.4%
10,714
n/a
n/a
79.6%
10,228
74.3%
9,548
68.8%
8,836
73.3%
2,294
837
64.8%
2,030
1,101
n/a
n/a
n/a
58.9%
1,845
1,286
56.1%
1,756
1,375
40.5%
1,269
1,862
Based on 2015 household income for ALL households
Based on 2014 ACS household income by tenure (i.e. owner and renter incomes. Owner incomes = $64,793 vs. renter incomes = $29,869)
135
HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS
Introduction
Previous sections of this study analyzed the existing housing supply and the growth and demographic characteristics of the population and household base in Marion County. This section of
the report presents our estimates of housing demand in the County from 2015 through 2025.
Demographic Profile and Housing Demand
The demographic profile of a community affects housing demand and the types of housing that
are needed. The housing life-cycle stages are:
1. Entry-level householders
• Often prefer to rent basic, inexpensive apartments
• Usually singles or couples in their early 20’s without children
• Will often “double-up” with roommates in apartment setting
2. First-time homebuyers and move-up renters
• Often prefer to purchase modestly-priced single-family homes or rent
more upscale apartments
• Usually married or cohabiting couples, in their mid-20's or 30's, some
with children, but most are without children
3. Move-up homebuyers
• Typically prefer to purchase newer, larger, and therefore more expensive single-family homes
• Typically families with children where householders are in their late
30's to 40's
4. Empty-nesters (persons whose children have grown and left home) and never-nesters (persons who never have children)
• Prefer owning but will consider renting their housing
• Some will move to alternative lower-maintenance housing products
• Generally couples in their 50's or 60's
5. Younger independent seniors
• Prefer owning but will consider renting their housing
• Will often move (at least part of the year) to retirement havens in the
Sunbelt and desire to reduce their responsibilities for upkeep and
maintenance
• Generally in their late 60's or 70's
136
6. Older seniors
• May need to move out of their single-family home due to physical
and/or health constraints or a desire to reduce their responsibilities
for upkeep and maintenance
• Generally single females (widows) in their mid-70's or older
Demand for housing can come from several sources including: household growth, changes in
housing preferences, and replacement need. Household growth necessitates building new
housing unless there is enough desirable vacant housing available to absorb the increase in
households. Demand is also affected by shifting demographic factors such as the aging of the
population, which dictates the type of housing preferred. New housing to meet replacement
need is required, even in the absence of household growth, when existing units no longer meet
the needs of the population and when renovation is not feasible because the structure is
physically or functionally obsolete.
The following graphic provides greater detail of various housing types supported within each
housing life cycle. Information on square footage, average bedrooms/bathrooms, and lot size is
provided on the subsequent graphic.
Housing Demand Overview
The previous sections of this assessment focused on demographic and economic factors driving
demand for housing in Marion County. In this section, we utilize findings from the economic
and demographic analysis to calculate demand for new general occupancy housing units in the
County. In addition, we present housing demand for each submarket in the County.
Housing markets are driven by a range of supply and demand factors that vary by location and
submarket. The following bullet points outline several of the key variables driving housing
demand.
137
DEMOGRAPHICS & HOUSING DEMAND
Age
Cohort
Student
Housing
18-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75-79
80-84
85+
18 - 24
Rental
Housing
1st-time
Home Buyer
Move-up
Home Buyer
2nd
Home Buyer
Empty Nester/
Downsizer
Senior
Housing
18-34
25-39
30-49
40-64
55-74
65-79
55+ & 65+
138
TYPICAL HOUSING TYPE CHARACTERISTICS
Target Market/
Unit/Home
Demographic
Characteristics
Lot Sizes/
Units Per Acre1
Entry-level single-family
First-time buyers: Families,
couples w/no children, some
singles
1,200 to 2,200 sq. ft.
2-4 BR | 2 BA
80'+ wide lot
2.5-3.0 DU/Acre
Move-up single-family
Step-up buyers: Families,
couples w/no children
2,000 sq. ft.+
3-4 BR | 2-3 BA
80'+ wide lot
2.5-3.0 DU/Acre
Executive single-family
Step-up buyers: Families,
2,500 sq. ft.+
3-4 BR | 2-3 BA
100'+ wide lot
1.5-2.0 DU/Acre
Small-lot single-family
First-time & move-down buyers:
Families, couples w/no children,
empty nesters, retirees
1,700 to 2,500 sq. ft.
3-4 BR | 2-3 BA
40' to 60' wide lot
5.0-8.0 DU/Acre
Entry-level townhomes
First-time buyers: Singles,
1,200 to 1,600 sq. ft.
2-3 BR | 1.5BA+
6.0-12.0 DU/Acre
Move-up townhomes
First-time & step-up buyers:
Singles, couples, some families,
empty-nesters
1,400 to 2,000 sq. ft.
2-3 BR | 2BA+
6.0-8.0. DU/Acre
Executive townhomes/twinhomes
Step-up buyers: Empty-nesters,
retirees
2,000+ sq. ft.
3 BR+ | 2BA+
4.0-6.0 DU/Acre
Detached Townhome
Step-up buyers: Empty-nesters,
retirees, some families
2,000+ sq. ft.
3 BR+ | 2BA+
4.0-6.0 DU/Acre
Condominums
First-time & step-up buyers:
Singles, couples, empty-nesters,
retirees
800 to 1,700 sq. ft.
1-2 BR | 1-2 BA
Low-rise: 18.0-24.0 DU/Acre
Mid-rise: 25.0+ DU/Acre
Hi-rise: 75.0+ DU/Acre
Apartment-style rental housing
Singles, couples, single-parents,
some families, seniors
675 to 1,250 sq. ft.
1-3 BR | 1-2 BA
Townhome-style rental housing
Single-parents, families
w/children, empty nesters
900 to 1,700 sq. ft.
2-4 BR | 2BA
8.0-12.0 DU/Acre
Student rental housing
College students, mostly
undergraduates
550 to 1,400 sq. ft.
1-4BR | 1-2 BA
Senior housing
Retirees, Seniors
550 to 1,500 sq. ft.
Suites - 2BR | 1-2 BA
Varies considerably based on
senior product type
Both
Rental Housing
For-Sale Housing
Housing Types
1
Dwelling units(DU) per acre expressed in net acreage (minus right-of-way)
Demographics
Demographics are major influences that drive housing demand. Household growth and formations are critical (natural growth, immigration, etc.), as well as household types, size, age of
householders, incomes, etc.
Economy & Job Growth
The economy and housing market are intertwined; the health of the housing market affects the
broader economy and vice versa. Housing market growth depends on job growth (or the
prospect of); jobs generate income growth which results in the formation of more households.
Historically low unemployment rates have driven both existing home purchases and new-home
139
purchases. Lack of job growth leads to slow or diminishing household growth, which in-turn
relates to reduced housing demand. Additionally, low income growth results in fewer move-up
buyers which results in diminished housing turnover across all income brackets.
Consumer Choice/Preferences
A variety of factors contribute to consumer choice and preferences. Many times a change in
family status is the primary factor for a change in housing type (i.e. growing families, emptynest families, etc.). However, housing demand is also generated from the turnover of existing
households who decide to move for a range of reasons. Some households may want to moveup, downsize, change their tenure status (i.e. owner to renter or vice versa), or simply move to
a new location.
Supply (Existing Housing Stock)
The stock of existing housing plays a crucial component in the demand for new housing. There
are a variety of unique household types and styles, not all of which are desirable to today’s
consumers. The age of the housing stock is an important component for housing demand, as
communities with aging housing stocks have higher demand for remodeling services, replacement new construction, or new home construction as the current inventory does not provide
the supply that consumers seek.
Pent-up demand may also exist if supply is unavailable as householders postpone a move until
new housing product becomes available.
Housing Finance
Household income is the fundamental measure that dictates what a householder can afford to
pay for housing costs. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD), the definition of affordability is for a household to pay no more than 30% of its annual
income on housing (including utilities). Families who pay more than 30% of their income for
housing (either rent or mortgage) are considered cost burdened and may have difficulty affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care.
The ability of buyers to obtain mortgage financing was increasingly challenging after the housing bust and ensuing Great Recession as lenders overcorrected from the subprime mortgage
crisis. As a result, many borrowers remained on the sidelines as lenders enforced tight lending
requirements, thereby increasing the demand for rental housing. Lenders have slowly loosened requirements, however underwriting standards are still difficult for many potential home
buyers.
140
Mobility
It is important to note that demand is somewhat fluid between submarkets and will be impacted by development activity in nearby areas, including other communities outside Marion
County. Demand given for each submarket may be lower or higher if proposed and/or planned
developments move forward.
For-Sale Housing Market Demand Analysis
Tables DMD-1 and DMD-2 present our demand calculations for general occupancy for-sale
housing in Marion County between 2015 and 2025. This analysis identifies potential demand
for general occupancy for-sale housing that is generated from both new households and
turnover households. The following points summarize our findings.
•
Because the 65 and older cohort is typically not a target market for new general occupancy
for-sale housing, we limit demand from household growth to only those households under
the age of 65. According to our projections, Marion County is expected to add 71 households under age 65 between 2015 and 2025. The majority of household growth in Marion
County is expected from the age 65 and over population.
•
Based on household tenure data from the US Census, we expect that between 72.2% of the
demand (Knoxville submarket) to 84.2% of the demand (Melcher-Dallas submarket) will be
for owner-occupied housing units. Therefore, demand from new household formation is
estimated at 176 owner-occupied households.
•
As of 2015, there are approximately 7,055 owner households under the age of 65 in the
County. Based on household turnover data from the 2014 American Community Survey, we
estimate that between 26.8% and 60.8% of these under-65 owner households will experience turnover between 2015 and 2025 (turnover rate varies by submarket). This estimate
results in anticipated turnover of approximately 3,800 existing households by 2025.
•
We then estimate the percent of existing owner households turning over that would prefer
to purchase new housing. Throughout the United States, approximately 8% of all home
sales were for new homes over the past three years while slightly over 5% of Midwest sales
were for new homes. Considering the age of Marion County’s housing stock, we estimate
that 10% of the households turning over will desire new housing. This estimate results in
demand from existing households for 388 new residential units in the County between 2015
and 2025.
141
TABLE DMD-1
DEMAND FOR ADDITONAL FOR-SALE HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2025
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast MA
DEMAND FROM NEW HOUSEHOLD GROWTH
Household growth under age 65, 2015 to 2025
(times) % propensity to own¹
101
74.5%
-99
72.2%
124
81.4%
-23
84.2%
-32
82.6%
71
(Equals) Demand from new household growth
75
0
101
0
0
176
DEMAND FROM EXISTING HOUSEHOLDS
Total owner households under age 65, 2015
(times) % of owner turnover 2015-2025²
(times) % desiring new owner housing
2,676
60.8%
10.0%
2,544
55.2%
10.0%
944
61.0%
10.0%
498
26.8%
10.0%
393
35.0%
10.0%
7,055
(Equals) Demand from existing households
163
140
58
13
14
388
TOTAL MARKET DEMAND
Total demand from new HH growth and turnover
238
140
159
13
14
564
30.0%
20.0%
20.0%
10.0%
10.0%
340
176
198
15
15
(Plus) Demand from outside Submarket
(Equals) Total demand potential for ownership housing
Proportion Single-family vs. Multifamily
No. of Single-family vs. Multifamily Units
70%
238
30%
102
70%
123
30%
53
90%
178
10%
20
90%
13
10%
1
90% # 10%
14
2
Marion County
Total
744
76%
566
24%
177
¹ Based on percent owner households under age 65 in 2010
² Based on household turnover and mobility data (2010 American Community Survey, Five Year Estimates)
³ Includes twinhomes, townhomes, detached townhomes, condos, etc.
142
•
Total demand from household growth and existing household turnover between 2015 and
2025 equates to 564 new for-sale housing units.
•
Next, we estimate that a portion of the total demand for new for-sale units in Marion
County will come from people currently living outside of the five submarkets. A portion of
this market will be former residents of the area, such as “snow-birds” heading south for the
winters. Adding demand from outside Marion County to the existing demand potential, results in a total estimated demand for 744 for-sale housing units by 2025.
•
Based on land available, building trends, the existing housing stock, and demographic shifts
(increasing older adult population), we project 76% of the for-sale owners in Marion County
will prefer traditional single-family product types while the remaining 24% will prefer a
maintenance-free multi-family product (i.e. twin homes, townhomes, detached townhomes, or condominiums). This results in demand for 566 single-family units and 177 multifamily units in Marion County through 2025.
General-Occupany For-Sale Housing Demand
2015-2025
250
238
Single-family
Multifamily
13
14
Housing Units
200
178
150
100
123
102
50
53
20
0
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
1
Melcher-Dallas
0
Southeast
Submarket
143
Rental Housing Demand Analysis
Table DMD-2 presents our calculation of market rate general-occupancy rental housing demand
for Marion County. This analysis identifies potential demand for rental housing that is generated from both new households and turnover households.
•
According to our projections, Marion County is expected to decrease by 695 households
between 2015 and 2025. Because the 65 and older cohort is typically not a target market
for new general-occupancy market rate rental housing, we limit demand from household
growth to only those households under the age of 65.
•
We identify the percentage of households that are likely to rent their housing based on
2010 tenure data. The propensity to rent ranges from 15.8% to 27.8% based on the submarket. After adjusting household growth by renters, there is growth of 49 new renter
households in Marion County.
•
Secondly, we calculate demand from existing households under the age of 65 in Marion
County that could be expected to turnover between 2015 and 2025. As of 2015, there are
over 2,300 renter households under the age of 65 in the County. Based on household turnover data from the 2014 American Community Survey, we estimate that between 76.4%
(Melcher-Dallas submarket) and 96.3% (Pella submarket) of these under-65 renter households will experience turnover between 2015 and 2025 (turnover rate varies by submarket).
This estimate results in anticipated turnover of approximately 2,100 existing households
over the next ten years.
•
We then estimate the percent of existing renter households turning over that would prefer
to rent in a new rental development. Considering the age of Marion County’s housing
stock, we estimate that 20% of the households turning over in Marion County will desire
new rental housing. This estimate results in demand from existing households for 425 new
residential rental units between 2015 and 2025.
•
Combining demand from household growth plus turnover results in total demand in the
County for 474 rental units between 2015 and 2025.
•
Like for-sale housing, we estimate that 10% to 30% of the total demand for new rental
housing units in Marion County will come from people currently living outside of one of the
four submarkets. As a result, we find demand for 629 renter households based on household growth and existing households alone between 2015 and 2025.
144
TABLE DMD-2
DEMAND FOR ADDITONAL RENTAL HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion County
DEMAND FROM NEW HOUSEHOLD GROWTH
Household growth under age 65, 2015 to 2025
(times) % propensity to rent¹
101
25.5%
-99
27.8%
124
18.6%
-23
15.8%
-32
17.4%
71
(Equals) Demand from new household growth
26
0
23
0
0
49
DEMAND FROM EXISTING HOUSEHOLDS
Total renter households under age 65, 2015
(times) % of renter turnover 2015-2025²
(times) % desiring new rental housing
1,020
96.3%
20.0%
931
88.1%
20.0%
209
93.8%
20.0%
84
76.4%
20.0%
73
86.4%
20.0%
2,317
(Equals) Demand from existing households
196
164
39
13
13
425
TOTAL MARKET DEMAND
Total demand from new HH growth and turnover
222
164
62
13
13
474
30.0%
20.0%
20.0%
10.0%
10.0%
(Equals) Total demand potential for rental housing
317
205
78
14
14
629
Percent Market Rate3
Number
55%
175
40%
82
45%
35
33%
5
42%
6
64%
302
Percent Affordable3
Number
25%
79
30%
62
35%
27
30%
4
18%
3
37%
175
Percent Subsidized3
Number
20%
63
30%
62
20%
16
37%
5
40%
6
32%
151
(Plus) Demand from outside Submarket
¹ Based on percent renter households under age 65 in 2010
3
Based on the pricing of current rental product and household incomes of area renters (i.e. exludes owner incomes)
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
145
•
Based on a review of renter household incomes and sizes and monthly rents at existing
properties, we estimate that 33% to 55% of the total demand will be for market rate housing. Through 2025, demand exists for 302 market rate rental units in Marion County.
•
We estimate that 18% to 35% of the total demand in Marion County will be for affordable
housing and 20% to 40% will be for subsidized housing. The percentage breakdown varies
by submarket based on renter incomes and current rental rates.
General-Occupancy Rental Housing Demand
2015-2025
200
Market Rate
180
Housing Units
160
Affordable
Subsidized
175
140
120
100
80
60
79
40
82
63
62 62
35
20
0
Pella
Knoxville
27 16
Pleasantville
5
4
5
Melcher-Dallas
6
3
6
Southeast
Submarket
146
Senior Housing Demand Analysis
Tables DMD-3 and DMD-7 shows demand calculations for senior housing in Marion County by
submarket from 2015 and 2020. Demand methodology employed by Maxfield Research &
Consulting, LLC utilizes capture and penetration rates that blend national senior housing trends
with local market characteristics, preferences and patterns. Our demand calculations consider
the following target market segments for each product types:
Market Rate Active Adult Rental and Ownership Housing: Target market based includes age
55+ older adult and senior households with incomes of $35,000 or more and senior homeowners with incomes between $25,000 and $34,999.
Affordable/Subsidized Independent Housing: Target market based includes age 55+ older
adult and senior households with incomes of $35,000 or less.
Congregate Housing: Target market base includes age 65+ seniors who would be financially
able to pay for housing and service costs associated with congregate housing. Income-ranges
considered capable of paying for congregate housing are the same as for active adult housing.
Assisted Living Housing: Target market base includes older seniors (age 75+) who would be
financially able to pay for private pay assisted living housing (incomes of $40,000 or more and
some homeowners with incomes below $40,000).
Memory Care Housing: Target market base includes age 65+ seniors who would be financially
able to pay for housing and service costs associated with memory care housing. Income ranges
considered capable of paying for memory care housing ($60,000 or more) are higher than other
service levels due to the increased cost of care.
Existing senior housing units are subtracted from overall demand for each product type.
147
TABLE DMD-3
DEMAND FOR MARKET RATE ACTIVE ADULT RENTAL HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2015
Households age 55-64
(times) % income qualified¹
(times) HO factor $25k-$35k
(plus) Homeowners w/incomes $25k-35k2
(times) potential capture rate
(equals) demand potential
987
81.8%
6.1%
60
0.5%
4
1,028
69.8%
5.9%
61
0.5%
4
292
80.8%
5.0%
15
0.5%
1
158
72.5%
2.9%
5
0.5%
1
140
73.0%
4.3%
6
0.5%
1
2,605
653
75.3%
6.8%
44
5.5%
29
753
61.5%
11.7%
88
5.5%
30
236
69.5%
9.1%
21
5.5%
10
122
62.1%
8.4%
10
5.5%
5
107
62.8%
13.2%
14
5.5%
4
1,871
Households age 75+
754
48.3%
9.5%
72
16.5%
72
671
36.7%
15.8%
106
16.5%
58
158
44.9%
11.5%
18
16.5%
15
116
38.1%
13.4%
16
16.5%
10
78
24.1%
26.6%
21
16.5%
7
1,777
(Equals) Demand potential from Marion Cty.
106
92
26
15
12
251
(plus) Demand from Outside Marion Cty./Submarket)
(Equals) total Demand Potential
25%
141
15%
109
10%
29
5%
16
5%
12
Percent Owner-Occupied
Number
(minus) Existing and Pending Units3
(equals) Total Owner-Occupied Demand
35%
49
0
49
25%
27
0
27
20%
6
0
6
20%
3
0
3
20%
2
0
2
88
0
88
Percent Renter-Occupied
Number
(equals) Total Renter-Occupied Demand
65%
92
58
34
75%
81
0
81
80%
23
0
23
80%
13
0
13
80%
10
0
10
219
58
161
CONTINUED
148
TABLE DMD-3 CONT.
DEMAND FOR MARKET RATE ACTIVE ADULT RENTAL HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2020
1,003
86.4%
5.2%
52
0.5%
5
988
73.1%
4.8%
47
0.5%
4
324
83.2%
4.6%
15
0.5%
1
153
69.4%
2.7%
4
0.5%
1
151
75.4%
3.9%
6
0.5%
1
2,619
818
76.6%
5.7%
47
5.5%
37
892
65.4%
9.7%
87
5.5%
37
245
72.6%
8.2%
20
5.5%
11
138
61.6%
8.0%
11
5.5%
5
105
62.9%
12.2%
13
5.5%
4
2,198
Households age 75+
822
50.1%
5.0%
41
16.5%
75
728
39.6%
11.1%
81
16.5%
61
199
48.9%
8.6%
17
16.5%
19
119
35.5%
11.2%
13
16.5%
9
95
27.9%
22.6%
21
16.5%
8
1,963
(Equals) Demand potential from Marion Cty.
116
102
31
15
13
277
25%
155
15%
120
10%
35
5%
16
5%
14
Percent Owner-Occupied
Number
(equals) Total Owner-Occupied Demand
35%
54
0
54
25%
30
0
30
20%
7
0
7
20%
3
0
3
20%
3
0
3
97
0
97
Percent Renter-Occupied
Number
(equals) Total Renter-Occupied Demand
65%
101
58
43
75%
90
0
90
80%
28
0
28
80%
13
0
13
80%
11
0
11
242
58
184
¹ Based on households earning $35,000+ in 2015. 2020 calculations are based on households earning $40,000+ due to inflation.
2
Estimated homeowners with incomes between $25,000 and $34,999 in 2015. Incomes between $30,000 and $39,999 in 2020.
3
Existing and pending units are deducted at market equilibrium (95% occupancy).
149
TABLE DMD-4
DEMAND FOR SUBSIDIZED/AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2015
987
18.2%
2.0%
1,028
30.2%
2.0%
292
19.2%
2.0%
158
27.5%
2.0%
140
27.0%
2.0%
2,605
653
24.7%
10.0%
753
38.5%
10.0%
236
30.5%
10.0%
122
37.9%
10.0%
107
37.2%
10.0%
1,871
Households age 75+
754
51.7%
20.0%
671
63.3%
20.0%
158
55.1%
20.0%
116
61.9%
20.0%
78
75.9%
20.0%
1,777
98
120
26
20
17
280
25%
130
15%
141
10%
29
5%
21
5%
17
339
Percent Subsidized²
Number
(equals) Total Subsidized Demand
22%
29
0
29
29%
41
59
0
21%
6
0
6
18%
4
8
0
35%
6
0
6
86
67
41
Percent Affordable²
Number
(equals) Total Affordable Demand
78%
102
0
102
71%
100
0
100
79%
23
0
23
82%
17
0
17
65%
11
0
11
253
0
253
(Equals) Demand potential from Marion County Residents
CONTINUED
150
TABLE DMD-4 CONT.
DEMAND FOR SUBSIDIZED/AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2020
1,003
13.6%
2.0%
988
26.9%
2.0%
324
16.8%
2.0%
153
30.6%
2.0%
151
24.6%
2.0%
2,619
818
23.4%
10.0%
892
34.6%
10.0%
245
27.4%
10.0%
138
38.4%
10.0%
105
37.1%
10.0%
2,198
Households age 75+
822
49.9%
20.0%
728
60.4%
20.0%
199
51.1%
20.0%
119
64.5%
20.0%
95
72.1%
20.0%
1,963
(Equals) Demand potential
104
124
28
22
18
296
25%
139
15%
146
10%
31
5%
23
5%
19
358
Percent Subsidized²
Number
(equals) Total Subsidized Demand
22%
30
0
30
29%
42
59
0
21%
7
0
7
18%
4
8
0
35%
7
0
7
90
67
44
Percent Affordable²
Number
(equals) Total Affordable Demand
78%
108
0
108
71%
104
0
104
79%
25
0
25
82%
19
0
19
65%
13
0
13
268
0
268
¹ Based on households earning $35,000 and under in 2015. Households earning $40,000 and under in 2020.
3
151
TABLE DMD-5
DEMAND FOR CONGREGATE RENTAL HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2015
653
75.3%
6.8%
44
1.5%
8
753
61.5%
11.7%
88
1.5%
8
236
69.5%
9.1%
21
1.5%
3
122
62.1%
8.4%
10
1.5%
1
107
62.8%
13.2%
14
1.5%
1
1,871
Households age 75+
754
48.3%
9.5%
72
11.0%
48
671
36.7%
15.8%
106
11.0%
39
158
44.9%
11.5%
18
11.0%
10
116
38.1%
13.4%
16
11.0%
7
78
24.1%
26.6%
21
11.0%
4
1,777
56
47
13
8
6
25%
75
15%
55
10%
14
5%
8
5%
6
87
0
0
55
0
14
0
8
0
6
(Equals) Total Congregate Demand
1.5%
11.0%
129
83
CONTINUED
152
TABLE DMD-5 CONT.
DEMAND FOR CONGREGATE RENTAL HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2020
818
76.6%
5.7%
47
1.5%
10
892
65.4%
9.7%
87
1.5%
10
245
72.6%
8.2%
20
1.5%
3
138
61.6%
8.0%
11
1.5%
1
105
62.9%
12.2%
13
1.5%
1
2,198
Households age 75+
822
50.1%
5.0%
41
11.0%
50
728
39.6%
11.1%
81
11.0%
41
199
48.9%
8.6%
17
11.0%
13
119
35.5%
11.2%
13
11.0%
6
95
27.9%
22.6%
21
11.0%
5
1,963
60
51
16
8
6
25%
80
15%
60
10%
17
5%
8
5%
7
87
0
0
60
0
17
0
8
0
7
(Equals) Total Congregate Demand
1.5%
11.0%
140
92
¹ Based on households earning $35,000+ in 2015. 2020 calculations are based on households earning $40,000+ due to inflation.
2
Estimated homeowners with incomes between $25,000 and $34,999 in 2015. Incomes between $30,000 and $39,999 in 2020.
3
153
TABLE DMD-6
DEMAND FOR ASSISTED LIVING RENTAL HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2015
People age 75-79
(times) % needing assistance¹
406
25.5%
365
25.5%
105
25.5%
62
25.5%
48
25.5%
986
25.5%
People age 80-84
328
33.6%
297
33.6%
69
33.6%
50
33.6%
35
33.6%
779
33.6%
People age 85+
394
51.6%
322
51.6%
84
51.6%
44
51.6%
24
51.6%
868
51.6%
417
359
93
55
36
961
55.0%
51.5%
16
134
40.0%
51.0%
52.9%
13
110
40.0%
58.0%
50.0%
4
31
40.0%
54.0%
51.2%
2
17
40.0%
48.0%
45.9%
1
9
40.0%
36
0
54
44
12
7
4
121
25%
72
44
15%
52
48
10%
14
0
5%
7
0
5%
4
0
92
28
4
14
7
4
56
(Equals) Number needing assistance
(times) Percent Income-Qualified²
(times) Percent Living Alone
(plus) Proportion of demand from couples (12%)3
(equals) Total Age-Income Qualified market needing assistance
(times) Potential penetration rate4
(Equals) Demand potential from Marion Cty. Residents
(Equals) Total Assisted Living Demand
CONTINUED
154
TABLE DMD-6 CONT.
DEMAND FOR ASSISTED LIVING RENTAL HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2020
People age 75-79
464
25.5%
434
25.5%
159
25.5%
69
25.5%
68
25.5%
1,194
25.5%
People age 80-84
366
33.6%
314
33.6%
87
33.6%
48
33.6%
36
33.6%
851
33.6%
People age 85+
408
51.6%
336
51.6%
85
51.6%
45
51.6%
30
51.6%
904
51.6%
452
390
114
57
45
1,057
56.0%
51.5%
18
148
40.0%
53.0%
52.9%
15
124
40.0%
60.0%
50.0%
5
39
40.0%
51.0%
51.2%
2
17
40.0%
50.0%
45.9%
1
12
40.0%
41
0
40.0%
59
50
15
7
5
136
25%
79
44
15%
58
48
10%
17
0
5%
7
0
5%
5
0
92
35
10
17
7
5
75
(Equals) Number needing assistance
(times) Percent Living Alone
(plus) Proportion of demand from couples (12%)3
(equals) Total Age-Income Qualified market needing assistance
(times) Potential penetration rate4
(Equals) Demand potential from Marion Cty. Residents
(Equals) Total Assisted Living Demand
¹ The percentage of seniors unable to perform or having difficulting with ADLs, based on the publication Health, United States, 1999 Health and Aging Chartbook, conducted by
² Includes households with incomes of $40,000 or more (who could afford monthly rents of $3,000+ per month) plus 40% of the estimated owner households with incomes
³ The 2009 Overview of Assisted Living (a collaborative project of AAHSA, ASHA, ALFA, NCAL & NIC) found that 12% of assisted living residents are couples.
4
We estimate that 60% of the qualified market needing assistance with ADLs could either remain in their homes or reside at less advanced senior housing with the assistance of
a family member or home health care, or would need greater care provided in a skilled care facility.
5
Existing and pending units at 93% occupancy. We exclude 15% of units to be Elderly Waiver.
155
TABLE DMD-7
DEMAND FOR MEMORY CARE RENTAL HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2015
People age 65-74
(times) Dementia incident rate¹
1,094
2.0%
1,245
2.0%
371
2.0%
199
2.0%
182
2.0%
3,091
2.0%
People age 75-84
733
19.0%
662
19.0%
174
19.0%
112
19.0%
84
19.0%
1,765
19.0%
People age 85+
394
42.0%
322
42.0%
84
42.0%
44
42.0%
24
42.0%
868
42.0%
327
286
76
44
30
762
45.0%
25.0%
43.0%
25.0%
48.0%
25.0%
38.0%
25.0%
39.0%
25.0%
25.0%
37
31
9
4
3
84
25%
49
18
15%
36
10
10%
10
0
5%
4
0
5%
3
0
28
31
26
10
4
3
75
(Equals) Total senior population with dementia
(times) Potential penetration rate
(Equals) Demand Potential from Marion County
(Equals) Total Memory Care Demand
CONTINUED
156
TABLE DMD-7 CONT.
DEMAND FOR MEMORY CARE RENTAL HOUSING
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
Pella MA
Knoxville MA
Pleasantville
MA
MelcherDallas MA
Southeast
MA
Marion
County
2020
People age 65-74
1,386
2.0%
1,502
2.0%
398
2.0%
229
2.0%
185
2.0%
3,700
2.0%
People age 75-84
831
19.0%
748
19.0%
246
19.0%
116
19.0%
104
19.0%
2,045
19.0%
People age 85+
408
42.0%
336
42.0%
85
42.0%
45
42.0%
30
42.0%
904
42.0%
357
313
90
46
36
842
48.0%
25.0%
47.0%
25.0%
51.0%
25.0%
40.0%
25.0%
41.0%
25.0%
25.0%
43
37
12
5
4
99
25%
57
18
15%
43
10
10%
13
0
5%
5
0
5%
4
0
28
39
33
13
5
4
94
(Equals) Total senior population with dementia
(times) Potential penetration rate
(Equals) Demand Potential from Marion County
(Equals) Total Memory Care Demand
¹ Alzheimer's Association: Alzheimer's Disease Facts & Figures (2007)
² Includes seniors with income at $60,000 or above plus 25% of homeowners with incomes below this threshold (who will spend dow assets, including homeequity, in order to live in memory care housing. Households with incomes at $65,000+ for 2020 calculations due to inflation.
3
Existing and pending units at 93% occupancy. We exclude 15% of the units to be Elderly Waiver.
157
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Marion County Demand Summary
The housing demand calculations in Tables DMD-1 through DMD-7 indicate that between 2015
and 2025 there are 742 for-sale housing units, 630 rental units, and 855 senior units will be
needed in Marion County to satisfy the housing demand for current and future residents.
Combined, this equals a total of about 2,225 new housing units over the next decade. About
43% of the total demand is projected to be within the Pella Submarket while the Knoxville
Submrket is projected to account for 32% of the county demand. Together, the Pella and
Knoxville Submarkets account for 75% of all demand in Marion County. Summary demand
tables for general occupancy and senior housing are broken down by submarket in Tables DMD8 and DMD-9.
Marion County Demand by Submarket: 2015-2025
1,200
1,000
966
Units
800
709
600
400
390
200
0
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Submarket
83
79
Melcher-Dallas
Southeast
We recommend maintaining a single-family lot supply of at least three years to provide
adequate consumer choice but not prolonged developer carrying costs. With an average of
about 97 new single famiy housing units built annually between 2000 and 2014 (see Table HC1), this equates to a lot supply of about 975 lots needed through 2025 based on historic trends.
However, production of new single family housing was nealry 150 unis per year during the first
half of last decade prior to the recession; before decreasing to about 48 new single family units
per year between 2010 and 2014. About one-half of all new single-family units constructed in
the County since 2000 have been located in the City of Pella and Knoxville.
Table DMD-8 shows the demand for 566 single-family units in Marion County through 2025;
nearly two-thirds of demand is found in the Pella and Knoxville submartkets; however strong
growth is anticipated for the Pleasantville submarket given its location to the Des Moines area.
158
TABLE R-1
GENERAL OCCUPANCY EXCESS DEMAND SUMMARY
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2025
2015 to 2025
Submarket
Single-family
FOR-SALE
Multifamily
Total
Market Rate
238
123
178
13
14
566
102
53
20
1
0
176
340
176
198
14
14
742
175
82
35
5
6
303
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Melcher-Dallas
Southeast
Marion County
RENTAL
Affordable
Subsidized
79
62
27
4
3
175
63
62
16
5
6
152
Total
317
206
78
14
15
630
General-Occupancy Demand: 2015-2025
350
Single-family
300
For-Sale MF
Rental
317
250
238
206
Units
200
178
150
100
102
123
78
50
53
0
Pella
Knoxville
20
13 1 14
14 0 15
Pleasantville
Melcher-Dallas
Southeast
Submarket
159
TABLE R-2
SENIOR HOUSING EXCESS DEMAND SUMMARY
MARION COUNTY
2015 to 2020
2015
ACTIVE ADULT
Submarket
Subs. Rental
Aff. Rental
SERVICE-ENHANCED**
MR Owner
MR Rental
Total
Cong./IL
Assisted
Living
Memory Care
Total
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Melcher-Dallas
Southeast
29
0
6
0
6
102
100
23
17
11
49
27
6
3
2
34
81
23
13
10
214
208
58
33
29
0
55
14
8
6
28
4
14
7
4
31
26
10
4
3
59
85
38
19
13
MARION COUNTY
41
253
87
161
542
83
57
74
214
2020
SERVICE-ENHANCED**
ACTIVE ADULT
Submarket
Subs. Rental
Aff. Rental
MR Owner
MR Rental
Total
Cong./IL
Assisted
Living
Memory Care
Total
Pella
Knoxville
Pleasantville
Melcher-Dallas
Southeast
30
0
7
0
7
108
104
25
19
13
54
30
7
3
3
43
90
28
13
11
235
224
67
35
34
0
60
17
8
7
35
10
17
7
5
39
33
13
5
4
74
103
47
20
16
MARION COUNTY
44
269
97
185
595
92
74
94
260
** Service-enhanced demand is calculated for private pay seniors only; additional demand could be captured if Elderly Waiver and other sources of
non-private payment sources are permitted.
Sources: Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC
160
161
162
Marion County Demand by Type: 2015-2025
Hsg. Type
Senior Total
855
Rental Total
630
For-Sale MF
176
For-Sale SF
566
0
200
400
Units
600
800
1,000
Based on the vacant lot supply among active subdivisions, existing lots will need to be platted in
all submarkets to meet future demand over the next decade.
Table R-3 showed a vacancy rate of about 4.0% among the general-occupancy rental market in
Marion County. However, there are no newer market rate apartment products in Marion
County and the existing rental stock is older and lacks features and amenties today’s renters
seek. With a strong retal market, we find that new rental units should be added in the shortterm to satisfy potential household growth and accommodate employees working at local
businesses. We found demand for 630 general-occupancy rental units in Marion County
through 2025.
Finally, senior housing demand is significant across Marion County due to the aging of the
population and growing baby boom generation. County-wide, demand exists for about 595
active adult units and 260 service-intensive units in 2020. However, due to economies of scale,
it could be difficult to develop stand-alone facilities for the various service levels in each county
submarket that would be financially feasible (i.e. Melcher-Dallas and Southeast).
163
Marion Cty. General-Occup. Rental & Senior Demand 2015-2025
SR Sub
44
Hsg. Type
SR AFF
269
SR MR
542
GO Sub
152
GO Aff
175
GO MR
303
0
100
200
300
Units
400
500
600
164
Marion County Projected General Occupancy Demand, 2015 – 2025
Marion County Projected Senior Demand, 2015 – 2025
165
Pella Submarket– Summary of Demographic and Housing Condition Findings
Key demographic and housing market findings for the Pella submarket from the housing study
are highlighted below. For a comparison, figures for Marion County are shown as well.
Demographic and Housing Characteristics Summary
Pella Submarket
Marion County
Demographics
Population (2010 & 2020)
Pct. Population Under 18 (2015 & 2020)
Pct. Population 65+ (2015 & 2020)
Median Age (2015 & 2020)
13,942
23.6%
15.6%
36
|
|
|
|
14,611
23.1%
18.0%
37
33,309
23.6%
17.0%
39.3
|
|
|
|
34,416
23.3%
19.3%
40.0
Households (2010 & 2020)
Household Growth (2010 & 2020)
Avg. HH Size (2010 & 2020)
4,938 | 5,300
362
2.82 | 2.76
12,723 | 13,348
625
2.62 | 2.58
Median Household Income (2014)
Homeownership Rate (2010)
$64,037
72.4%
$55,419
75.2%
Number of single-family units permitted (2004-2014)
Number of multifamily units permitted (2004-2014)
Median age of housing stock (2014)
Housing stock built before 1950
Housing stock built between 1950 and 1990
Housing stock built after 1990
401
284
1977
1,122 23%
2,148 43%
1,685 34%
1,460
1,438
1973
3,313 26%
5,877 46%
3,653 28%
Employment
Total Employees (2013)
Average Annual Wage (2014)
9,507
$26,333
17,534
$42,128
$176,000
$207,346
3,348 | 96.5%
$177,323
$141,531
$119,903
9,100 | 93.7%
$135,800
For-Sale Housing
Median resale price of existing homes (2015)
Median list price of actively marketing homes (Jan. 2016)
Owner-occupied one-unit structures (2014)
Median home value of owner-occupied units (2014)
General Occupancy Rental Housing
Renter-occupied one-unit structures (2014)
Renter-occupied 10+ unit structures (2014)
Median contract rent for renter-occupied units (2014)
567 | 38.2%
454 | 30.6%
$630
1,422 | 45.4%
667 | 21.3%
$529
Senior Housing
Distribution of senior housing by type
Affordable/Subsidized Active Adult
Market Rate Active Adult
Congregate
Assisted Living
Memory Care
0
61
91
56
23
/
/
/
/
/
0.0%
26.4%
39.4%
24.2%
10.0%
70
61
91
117
35
/
/
/
/
/
18.7%
16.3%
24.3%
31.3%
9.4%
166
Pella Submarket Recommendations
The Pella submarket accounted for 83% of Marion County’s population growth and 58% of the
County’s household growth over the last decade. The majority of this growth occurred in Pella
and within the two-mile jurisdictional boundary. Over this decade, growth rates have slowed as
projections indicate a 5% population growth rate (+669 persons) and a 7.3% household growth
rate (+362 households).
The Pella submarket is projected to account for 48% of all the general occupancy housing
demand in the Marion County between 2015 and 2025 – or 657 of 1,372 total units. Generaloccupancy demand is rather evenly distributed between for-sale and rental housing products.
Demand was found for over 300 senior housing units, accounting for about one-third of the
Pella Market Area demand.
Pella Submarket Projected General Occupancy Demand, 2015 – 2025
Pella Submarket Projected Senior Demand, 2020
.
Note: Because households are mobile and are willing to seek out various housing products in adjacent communities, these demand figures may experience fluctuations
167
For-Sale Housing: Home prices in the Pella submarket on average are about 25% higher than
the Marion County average sales price ($176,000 vs. $141,500 in 2015). The Pella submarket
also accounts for about one-half of all resales in Marion County. The Pella submarket has the
most subdivisions marketing and has a vacant lot inventory of 184 lots among actively marketing subdivisions. Based on the demand for 238 single-family homes and 102 multifamily
homes, the current lot supply will not be able to accommodate all future demand. New lots will
need to be platted later this decade to accommodate growth beyond 2020. The Pella submarket will continue to be the leader in new for-sale housing activity in Marion County over the
next decade.
Rental Housing: The existing rental housing product in the Pella submarket is older and lacks
many contemporary features and amenities today’s tenants desire. Demand was found for 317
new rental units over the next ten years - 55% of which is for market rate product and the
remaining 45% for affordable/subsidized product. The Pella submarket is poised to capture
one-half of Marion County’s total rental housing demand through 2025. Demand could be met
through traditional multifamily housing construction or attached townhome product.
Senior Housing: About 62% of the existing senior housing product in Marion County is located
in the Pella submarket today. By 2020, there is demand for about 310 senior housing units in
this submarket, the majority will be active adult product type given the number of serviceintensive housing projects already constructed in Pella. Affordable, active-adult senior housing
was in the highest demand in the Pella submarket comprising 35% of all senior housing units.
The Pella submarket would also benefit from a senior ownership product such as a senior
cooperative.
168
Knoxville – Summary of Demographic and Housing Condition Findings
Key demographic and housing market findings for the Knoxville submarket from the housing
study are highlighted below. For a comparison, figures for Marion County are shown as well.
Knoxville Submarket
Marion County
Demographics
Pct. Population 65+ (2015 & 2020)
Median Age (2015 & 2020)
11,917
23.4%
18.8%
42
|
|
|
|
12,000
22.9%
21.6%
43
33,309
23.6%
17.0%
39.3
|
|
|
|
34,416
23.3%
19.3%
40.0
Avg. HH Size (2010 & 2020)
4,938 | 5,300
108
2.46 | 2.42
12,723 | 13,348
625
2.62 | 2.58
$62,228
73.2%
$55,419
75.2%
100
114
1969
1,329 27%
2,394 48%
1,216 25%
1,460
1,438
1973
3,313 26%
5,877 46%
3,653 28%
Employment
6,923
$31,938
17,534
$42,128
$107,750
$92,150
3,578 | 93.1%
$112,017
$141,531
$119,903
9,100 | 93.7%
$135,800
For-Sale Housing
464 | 42.4%
174 | 15.9%
$500
1,422 | 45.4%
667 | 21.3%
$529
Senior Housing
Congregate
Assisted Living
Memory Care
62
0
0
61
12
/
/
/
/
/
45.9%
0.0%
0.0%
45.2%
8.9%
70
61
91
117
35
/
/
/
/
/
18.7%
16.3%
24.3%
31.3%
9.4%
169
Knoxville Submarket Recommendations
The Knoxville submarket is the second largest submarket in Marion County with a population of
about 11,900 persons as of 2015 (37% of Marion County). However, the Knoxville submarket
has smaller household sizes than the Pella submarket and as a result has nearly identical
household numbers. Population is projected to rather flat this decade, however household
growth is projected to grow by 2.2% (+108 households). Nearly all of the growth is projected to
lie within Knoxville Township.
About 710 new housing units are projected for the Knoxville submarket; driven mostly by
existing households and changing household preferences and demographics. Demand was
calculated for about 380 general-occupancy units, of which over 200 are for rental units.
About 60% of the rental demand is for affordable or subsidized rental housing. Due to the
aging of the population, senior housing makes up 46% of all housing demand.
Knoxville Submarket Projected General Occupancy Demand, 2015 – 2025
Knoxville Submarket Projected Senior Demand, 2020
Note: Because households are mobile and are willing to seek out various housing products in adjacent communities, these demand figures may experience fluctuations.
170
For-Sale Housing: The median sales price in the Knoxville submarket was $107,750 in 2015,
about 24% less than the median sales price in Marion County. However, the Knoxville submarket has been very active this past year as the number of resales was at its highest point since
the peak in 2005. Demand was calculated for 123 single-family units and 53 multifamily units
over the next ten years. Although there are only 29 vacant lots actively marketing in Knoxville,
the lot supply should meet short-term demand based on the average of about five homes or
less annually. New lots will be needed after 2020, but could be sooner should lot absorption
increase with the new Westridge Acres plat. Lots actively marketing in Knoxville have list
prices about one-half of lots in the Pella submarket. Even with lower land costs, new construction pricing in Knoxville has been averaging near $200,000 and is not affordable to many
households.
There is strong demand for middle-market new construction homes priced from $150,000 to
$175,000; however thus far this product has been near impossible to develop given infrastructure costs and increasing construction costs. Due to the aging of the population, there is also
strong demand for maintenance-free housing types.
Rental Housing: Similar to other Marion County submarkets, the rental stock in Knoxville is
dated as the majority of market rate rental housing was constructed in the 1960s and 1970s.
As a result, rents are rather affordable and the rental housing product lacks amenities. Demand
was calculated for 82 market rate units and over 120 affordable/subsidized units. Because
subsidized housing is nearly impossible to develop today due to lack of federal funding, all of
the affordable demand would be for tax credit housing.
Senior Housing: The Knoxville submarket has the highest senior housing demand of the five
submarkets in the county. Over the next five years, demand was calculated for 327 senior
housing units. Demand was strong for all service-levels; from active adult to memory care
senior housing. Demand was strongest for affordable active adult, market rate active adult,
and independent senior housing. New senior housing could be developed either stand-along or
as a larger campus setting.
171
Pleasantville – Summary of Demographic and Housing Condition Findings
Key demographic and housing market findings for the Pleasantville submarket from the housing
Pleasantville
Marion County
Demographics
Pct. Population 65+ (2015 & 2020)
Median Age (2015 & 2020)
3,753
25.6%
15.8%
40
|
|
|
|
4,225
25.0%
17.3%
40
33,309
23.6%
17.0%
39.3
|
|
|
|
34,416
23.3%
19.3%
40.0
Avg. HH Size (2010 & 2020)
1,454 | 1,640
186
2.58 | 2.58
12,723 | 13,348
625
2.62 | 2.58
$53,074
81.9%
$55,419
75.2%
N/A
N/A
1988
301 19%
746 48%
498 32%
1,460
1,438
1973
3,313 26%
5,877 46%
3,653 28%
Employment
506
$31,327
17,534
$42,128
$135,000
$124,900
1,149 | 92.6%
$137,663
$141,531
$119,903
9,100 | 93.7%
$135,800
For-Sale Housing
193 | 63.5%
23 | 7.6%
$467
1,422 | 45.4%
667 | 21.3%
$529
Senior Housing
Congregate
Assisted Living
Memory Care
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
/
/
/
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
70
61
91
117
35
/
/
/
/
/
18.7%
16.3%
24.3%
31.3%
9.4%
172
Pleasantville Submarket Recommendations
Although the Pleasantville submarket accounts for only 12% of Marion County’s population, the
submarket is the fastest growing. The Pleasantville submarket accounted for 29% of the
County’s growth last decade is projected to account for 43% of the growth through 2025.
Pleasantville is located on the westernmost portion of the County and is strategically aligned in
close proximity to the Des Moines Metro Area via Highway 5. As a result, Pleasantville has
strong growth opportunities to attract commuters to the community who work in the Des
Moines area.
About 71% of the demand in the Pleasantville submarket will be for general-occupancy housing,
mostly for-sale housing. Senior housing is projected to account for about 29% of the housing
demand in this submarket.
Pleasantville Submarket Projected General Occupancy Demand, 2015 – 2025
Pleasantville Submarket Projected Senior Demand, 2020
173
For-Sale Housing: The Pleasantville submarket has the second highest resale values in Marion
County – a median sales price of $135,000 in 2015. There is strong future demand for new
subdivisions in Pleasantville on the northwest side of town with easy access to Highway 5.
Most of the existing subdivisions have been built out in Pleasantville so there is pent-up demand for new subdivisions within the municipal limits. In order for Pleasantville to realize the
projected population and household growth, new lots should be platted immediately.
Rental Housing: Demand was estimated for 78 new rental units across all affordability levels
through 2025. It may be difficult to realize demand in Pleasantville because of economies of
scale and the suppressed rents. Therefore, new townhome style apartments may be more
economical to develop than traditional multifamily housing.
Senior Housing: Presently there are no residential-based senior housing facilities in the submarket. Nearly 115 senior units will be demanded by 2020 in the Pleasantville submarket.
Demand is spread across most service levels; however demand is not high enough to cover a
stand-alone development. Therefore, service levels would have to be combined in effort to
reduce construction costs across multiple service levels. A catered living concept, or a hybrid
independent/assisting living concept may be best suited for the Pleasantville submarket.
174
Melcher-Dallas – Summary of Demographic and Housing Condition Findings
Key demographic and housing market findings for the Melcher-Dallas submarket from the
housing study are highlighted below. For a comparison, figures for Marion County are shown as
well.
Marion County
Demographics
Pct. Population 65+ (2015 & 2020)
Median Age (2015 & 2020)
1,991
23.8%
17.9%
41
|
|
|
|
1,980
25.7%
19.7%
41
33,309
23.6%
17.0%
39.3
|
|
|
|
34,416
23.3%
19.3%
40.0
Avg. HH Size (2010 & 2020)
805 | 818
13
2.47 | 2.42
12,723 | 13,348
625
2.62 | 2.58
$47,689
85.5%
$55,419
75.2%
N/A
N/A
1953
356 47%
290 38%
118 15%
1,460
1,438
1973
3,313 26%
5,877 46%
3,653 28%
Employment
206
$32,389
17,534
$42,128
For-Sale Housing
$41,155
$79,900
568 | 93.4%
$88,242
$141,531
$119,903
9,100 | 93.7%
$135,800
146 | 93.6%
0 | 0.0%
$389
1,422 | 45.4%
667 | 21.3%
$529
Senior Housing
Congregate
Assisted Living
Memory Care
8
0
0
0
0
/
/
/
/
/
100.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
70
61
91
117
35
/
/
/
/
/
18.7%
16.3%
24.3%
31.3%
9.4%
175
Melcher-Dallas Recommendations
The Melcher-Dallas submarket comprises about 6% of Marion County’s population in 2015.
Projections through 2025 indicate a slow population decline yet stable households given a
declining household size. The Melcher-Dallas has the lowest general-occupancy demand
among all submarkets with the addition of only 28 new units over the next ten years. These
units will be evenly spread between the for-sale and rental market. There was also demand for
55 senior housing units; most were found in the active adult service levels.
Melcher-Dallas Submarket Projected General Occupancy Demand, 2015 – 2025
Melcher-Dallas Projected Senior Demand, 2020
176
For-Sale Housing: Melcher-Dallas housing values are the lowest in Marion County – posting a
median resale value of $41,155 in 2015. Demand was found for only 14 new for-sale units over
the next ten years. Due to the lack of demand, there is no demand to justify platting new
subdivisions. Therefore, for-sale demand will result from existing infill or scattered lots in the
submarket.
Rental Housing: Similar to the for-sale demand, demand was found for only 14 rental units in
the Melcher-Dallas submarket. Due to economies of scale needed, new multifamily construction will not be possible in this submarket and any new rental housing developed would need to
be small townhome or quad-style construction. The majority of rental housing in this submarket is found from the older existing single-family housing stock.
Senior Housing: Senior demand was the lowest of all submarkets posting a demand of 50 units
across all service levels. Demand was highest for affordable rental senior housing at 19 units.
Consequently, senior housing development would be very difficult to support in this submarket
given small number of seniors. Therefore, most seniors will likely relocate to other Marion
County submarkets or relocate to be closer to family.
177
Southeast – Summary of Demographic and Housing Condition Findings
Key demographic and housing market findings for the Southeast submarket from the housing
Southeast
Marion County
Demographics
Pct. Population 65+ (2015 & 2020)
Median Age (2015 & 2020)
1,706
20.9%
17.8%
44
|
|
|
|
1,600
20.4%
19.9%
45
33,309
23.6%
17.0%
39.3
|
|
|
|
34,416
23.3%
19.3%
40.0
Avg. HH Size (2010 & 2020)
648 | 640
-44
2.49 | 2.50
12,723 | 13,348
625
2.62 | 2.58
$42,166
84.4%
$55,419
75.2%
N/A
N/A
1971
205 32%
299 47%
136 21%
1,460
1,438
1973
3,313 26%
5,877 46%
3,653 28%
Employment
273
$25,047
17,534
$42,128
For-Sale Housing
$55,000
$147,500
457 | 83.5%
$84,165
$141,531
$119,903
9,100 | 93.7%
$135,800
52 | 55.9%
16 | 17.2%
$327
1,422 | 45.4%
667 | 21.3%
$529
Senior Housing
Congregate
Assisted Living
Memory Care
0
0
0
0
0
/
/
/
/
/
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
70
61
91
117
35
/
/
/
/
/
18.7%
16.3%
24.3%
31.3%
9.4%
178
Southeast Submarket Recommendations
The Southeast submarket is the smallest submarket in Marion County with a population of
1,625 as of 2015, or 4.8% of Marion County’s population. The rural submarket experienced a
decline in population and households last decade and this trend is projected to continue
through 2025. Demand exists for 79 total housing units over the next decade; nearly two-thirds
of the demand is for senior housing.
Southeast Submarket Projected General Occupancy Demand, 2015 – 2025
Southeast Submarket Projected Senior Demand, 2020
179
For-Sale Housing: Historically there have been few resales in the Southeast submarket, averaging around ten transactions annually. The median sales price in 2015 was $55,000; significantly
lower than the $141,500 median sales price for Marion County. Demand was projected for 14
new housing units, none of which are multifamily units.
Rental Housing: Demand was calculated for 15 new rental housing units over the next ten
years. Because of the nominal demand, new rental housing will be driven by the single-family
market or townhome style rentals.
Senior Housing: There are no senior options currently in the Southeast submarket. Demand
was calculated for 50 senior housing units in the submarket spanning all service levels. Due to
the absence of demand, senior housing will not be economically viable in the Southeast submarket. Therefore, Southeast submarket seniors will be required to utilize home health
services or relocate to other Marion County submarkets for senior housing services.
180
Recommended Housing Products by Submarket
Based on the finding of our analysis and demand calculations, Tables DMD-8 and DMD-9
provided a summary of housing demand county and submarket through 2025. Demand exists
in Marion County for a variety of product types. The following section summarizes housing
concepts and housing types that will be demanded from various target markets. It is important
to note that not all housing types will be supportable in all communities and that the demand
illustrated in Tables DMD-8 and DMD-9 may not directly coincide with housing development
due to a variety of factors (i.e. economies of scale, infrastructure capacity, land availability,
etc.).
Due to the size of the Southeast and Melcher-Dallas submarkets and declining populations; it
will be especially difficult to develop any multifamily housing products in these submarkets due
to the density and economies of scale needed to be financially viable. Therefore, the lesser
populated communities will experience additional challenges due density requirements. In
addition, there is likely to be cross-over demand and mobility between submarkets as new
housing product is developed. Table R-1 outlines the submarkets most likely to experience new
housing based on housing demand and the number of units needed to be supportable.
Because of the strong growth in the population over age 55, there will strong demand in lowmaintenance and association-maintained housing products; both for-sale and rental. In fact,
90% of population growth over the next five years is within the 55+ demographic, further
driving the need for more diverse housing types.
Finally, there are very few housing programs or incentives from local or county jurisdictions to
stimulate housing development or enhancing the existing housing stock. All communities in
Marion County can benefit from reinvestment in the existing owner and rental housing stock.
Examples of housing programs are outlined in the Challenges and Recommendations section.
181
TABLE R-3
HOUSING RECOMMENDATIONS BY MARION COUNTY SUBMARKET
2015 to 2025
Housing Type/Program
Pella
Submarket
Knoxville
Submarket
Pleasantville
Submarket
Melcher-Dallas
Submarket
Southeast
Submarket
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
For-Sale Housing
Single-family1
Entry-level 2
Move-up
Executive
Twinhomes/Townhomes/Detached Townhomes
Entry-level 2
x
Move-up
x
x
x
Market Rate Rental Housing
Apartment-style
Townhome-style
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
3
Affordable Rental Housing
Apartment-style
Townhome-style
Senior Housing
Market Rate
Active Adult - For-Sale
Active Adult - Rental
Congregate/Independent
Assisted Living
Memory Care
Catered Living
Affordable Senior Housing
Active Adult
1
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
A portion of demand will be met by the existing lot supply
2
Entry-level single-family will be very difficult to develop without financial assistance. The majority of entrylevel demand will be met by the existing housing stock/resale market.
3
Affordability subject to income guidelines per Iowa Finance Authority. See Table HC-1 for Marion County income
Catered living is a hybrid concept of congregate and assisted living service levels. Catered living would absorb
demand from both independent and assisted living seniors
4
Note: Although all of the submarkets show housing demand for a variety of housing types; it will not be feasible
due to the economies of scale needed for new development. Therefore, recommedations are based on the
demand and density needed to be feasible.
182
CHALLENGES & OPPORTUNITIES
Challenges and Opportunities
The following were identified as the greatest challenges and opportunities for developing the
recommended housing types (in no particular order – sorted alphabetically).
•
Affordable Housing. Tables HA-1 and HA-2 identified Marion County Area Median Incomes
(“AMI”) and the fair market rents by bedroom type. The average contract rent in Marion
County is $664 per month and our assessment of market rate rents found an average of
about $595 per month. For comparison, the newest product in Marion County is Villas at
Fox Pointe in Knoxville that is an affordable housing development with income guidelines
has rents starting at $700. Because of the older rental housing stock in the County, the
new affordable housing developments are actually higher than non-restricted, market rate
projects in Marion County. As a result, the majority of rental housing units in the County
are considered “affordable” and are mostly fulfilled by existing, older rental product in the
marketplace.
•
Age of Rental Housing Stock. The Rental Market Analysis section of the report identified
the newest market rate general occupancy housing product is the Shady Creek, a 24-unit
project in Pella. The Overall market rate general occupancy rental housing stock in Marion
County has a median year built of 1975. Most of the rental housing stock lacks the contemporary amenities many of today’s renters seek. Many renters today seek the following unit
amenities: in-unit laundry, walk-in closets, balconies/patios, oversized windows, and individually controlled heating and air-conditioning. Community amenities tenants desire today
include: community rooms with kitchens and big screen TV’s, fitness centers, Wi-Fi, extra
storage, and the inclusion of environmentally responsible design and features. Most of
these features and amenities are not offered in current rental housing products in Marion
County.
Market Rate Units by Decade Built by Submarket
200
Pella Units
180
Knoxville Units
Pleasantville Units
160
140
Units
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1960s
1970s
1980s
Decade
1990s
2000s
2010s
183
•
Aging Population. As illustrated in Table D-4, there is significant growth in the Marion
County senior population, especially among seniors ages 65 to 74 (+20% growth through
2020). In addition, Table D-7 shows market area homeownership rates are very high for s
younger seniors (85%), but levels off among seniors ages 75+. High homeownership rates
among younger seniors indicate there could be lack of senior housing options, or simply
that many seniors prefer to live in their home and age in place. Aging in place tends to be
higher in rural vs. urban settings as many rural seniors do not view senior housing as an alternative retirement destination but a supportive living option only when they can no longer live independently. Rural areas also tend to have healthier seniors and are more resistant to change. Because of the rising population of older adults, demand for alternative
maintenance-free housing products should be rising. In addition, demand for home health
care services and home remodeling programs to assist seniors with retrofitting their existing
homes should also increase.
•
Builder/Developer/Construction Labor Force. Table E-3 showed that 3.6% of Marion
County jobs were in the construction industry, compared to 4.9% in the State of Iowa. The
construction sector is quite broad and includes all construction-related jobs and is not representative of the new home market for residential housing. According to our research and
interviews, the licensed contractor pool for new homes and remodeling is low. Many skilled
workers left the industry last decade during the Great Recession and these jobs have not
been replaced in Marion County. Interviewees stated the existing contractors in Marion
County are very busy and many are at full capacity. As a result, construction laborers from
outside Marion County would be required to meet the demand for new housing types.
•
Construction and Labor Costs Escalating. The previous section discussed the skilled worker
shortage within the construction trade sector in Marion County. According to the National
Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo builder sentiment index, the lack of qualified labor and subcontractors is the #1 issue with builders today. Nearly 75% of builder’s responded that labor shortages are their top concern in 2016. In addition, builders are concerned about rising material costs, shovel-ready land for development, and the heightened
concerns about the slowdown in the global economy and the potential impact on the U.S.
market. Because of these headwinds, builders expect construction costs to increase.
The National Association of Home Builders (“NAHB”) routinely conducts a survey of construction costs that make-up the price of a typical single-family home. The survey is conducted by emailing a sample of builders across the country that identifies eight subcategories for each of the major stages of construction. The following chart shows the rise in new
home construction over the past twenty years. A recent separate NAHB survey conducted
in July 2015 indicated labor costs are up 3.3% this year, material costs are up 4.5%, and subcontracting costs are up 5%.
184
Avg. Price of New SF Homes in US: 1995 to 2015
$500,000
$450,000
$400,000
$350,000
Price
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
1995
1998
2002
2004
2007
Year
2009
2011
2013
2015
Many newly constructed homes in Marion County have been ranch or rambler style homes
that feature one-level living and a full basement. Many buyers prefer this housing type as it
allows householders to age in place and they have a high resale value. However, ranch style
homes typically require a larger lot width resulting in increased land premiums. Furthermore, ranch style homes require larger foundations, expanded roofing system, and electrical and plumbing systems that are more expensive than a two-story home. Ranch or rambler homes can command a new construction premium of about 30%; thereby furthermore
driving up the cost of new construction.
•
Data Collection/Participation Rate. One of the key challenges for the housing assessment
was obtaining data from rental property owners and/or property managers. Many of the
rental properties in Marion County lack up-to-date contact information and many properties do not have a website or social media presence. Maxfield Research contacted each
property in the County on multiple occasions to obtain information such as number of units,
unit types, rents, vacancies, etc. to determine the rental trends in each submarket.
Maxfield Research has a typical success rate of about 90% of the properties when conducting comprehensive housing studies for governmental organizations. However, many property owners or property managers did not elect to participate in the countywide housing
study. Therefore, we have identified each property to the best of our ability and have excluded non-participating properties for the vacancy averages and pricing averages.
•
Developers Carrying Costs. Due to lower absorption trends throughout Marion County
since the Great Recession, it is difficult to develop new single-family lots where the developer can make a profit on the land. Developing land has historically been a profitable side
of the housing business, yet is also risky if the lot inventory goes unsold and there are carrying costs. Due to raw land costs, entitlements, and the cost to develop infrastructure, de-
185
velopers will be cautious given the lot price they could achieve. Prolonged carrying costs
due to slow lot absorption are deterrents for builders and developers who must absorb project development costs until the lots are sold.
As a result, the newer subdivisions in Marion County will either have to target the move-up
and executive-level buyers as lot costs will need to be at least $45,000 just to break even on
the development costs of those lots. Alternatively, public assistance in the form of a publicprivate partnership will be needed to bring down infrastructure costs so builders can bring a
more affordable lot and home to the marketplace.
•
Economies of Scale. Economies of scale refers to the increase in efficiency of production as
the number of goods being produced is increased. Typically, companies or organizations
achieving economies of scale lower the average cost per unit through increased production
since fixed costs are shared over an increased number of goods. In the housing development industry, generally the more units that are constructed the greater the efficiency. For
example, larger homebuilders negotiate volume discounts in materials and subcontractors,
are more efficient in the land entitlement process, leverage the power of technology, and
have greater access and lower costs of capital. Because of this, construction costs in other
Iowa communities such as within the Des Moines area are lower.
BUILDER TYPES & CHARACTERISTICS
Production Builder
Typically built on land owned by the
builder/developer. Most production
builders develop all of the homes within the
subdivisions they plat and develop
Custom Builder
Built on land purchased by the home buyer
or builder. Most custom buiders do not
develop the land/lots
Spec Builder
Built on land purchased by the builder.
Builder "speculates" they will build and sell
a home prior to finding a buyer
Home Plans
Stock floor plans; however buyers have
home style and upgrade options that have
been pre-selected by builder
One-of-a-kind house. Site specific and
customized for a specific client.
Home plan per builder. If home sells early
during construction phase; buyers have
some ability to customize the home
Volume
Varies based on builder. There are national
and regional production builders
Typically less than 20 or 25 per yer
Varies
Pricing
Generally build for a variety of price points
from entry-level, move-up, and executive
Tend to cater to move-up or exectuve-level
buyers
Varies. Most spec homes are entry-level or
modest homes. However, spec homes can
range across all price points
Advantages
Lower costs per square foot, homes can be
built quicker, fewer decisions for home
owners
Personal service, more creative control,
customizable, more flexible, buyer may
have more land options
Lower cost floor plans provides economies
of scale. Homes can also be completed
relatively fast
Disadvantages
Few modifications or change orders, fewer
options, lot selection based on availability
of builder
Price per square foot is higher, more time
to build, signficantly more decision time
needed from buyers
Most of the decisions have already been
made and buyer may have fewer options
Land
Source: Maxfield Research and Consulting, LLC
The same principle applies to jurisdictions in Marion County; larger communities will more
easily attract and support larger housing developments than more rural areas. Lesserpopulated communities throughout County will face more challenges than the larger juris-
186
dictions such as Pella and Knoxville. The graphic below shows the characteristics of builders
based on production levels.
•
Financing Barriers/Infrastructure Costs and Private/Public Partnerships. One of the key
challenges facing housing development in rural communities is financing. Finding banks to
finance projects is difficult as most lenders require substantial equity contributions from the
developer. As discussed in the previous bullet (Developers’ Carrying Costs), developers are
typically required to upfront residential subdivisions and pay for the cost of water, sewer,
curb and gutter, utilities, etc. Because of the substantial cost to fund improvements, most
builders/developers do not have the assets or equity to fund the project and lenders have
conservative underwriting standards. Furthermore, private investors seek targeted returns
on investment and liquidity that cannot be guaranteed as lot absorption/takedowns is an
unknown factor. Many local jurisdictions do not have the necessary tools today to fund infrastructure costs.
Because of this barrier, we recommend exploring other private/public partnerships to entice housing development. Private/public partnerships are a creative alliance formed to
achieve a mutual purpose and goal. Partnerships between local jurisdictions, the private
sector, and nonprofit groups can help communities develop housing products through collaboration that otherwise may not materialize. Private sector developers can benefit
through greater access to sites, financial support, and relaxed regulatory processes. Public
sectors have increased control over the development process, maximize public benefits,
and can benefit from and increased tax base.
A number of communities have solved housing challenges through creative partnerships in
a variety of formats. Many of these partnerships involve numerous funding sources and
stakeholders. Because of the difficulty financing infrastructure costs in Marion County, it
will likely require innovative partnerships to stimulate housing development. Because Marion County is home to so many major employers, a private/public partnership for housing
development would be beneficial to the employers and their employees. Employers have a
need for housing interns, relocated workers, new hires, etc. and would be excellent partners for establishing a fund to spur housing development in Marion County. Other communities have established non-profit development groups that have been instrumental in developing the infrastructure needed to support new housing development. The non-profit is
normally comprised of local businesses, professionals, etc. and partnered with a governmental agency.
•
Infill Lots. Infill refers to a parcel(s) of land which is surrounded by land that has already
been developed. Infill development is new construction located on underutilized or vacant
lots usually located in established neighborhoods of a community. Infill development can
be challenging as enough parcels of land that are permissible land uses are typically required to be assembled to allow for a feasible building(s). Many times the challenge is assembling all of the parcel owners to agree to sell and in a time frame that makes economic
sense to the buyer.
187
Several Marion County communities are centered around a central Downtown square that
is walkable to neighborhood housing. As a result, infill lots are desirable and command a
premium; especially in the City of Pella. Many of the infill lots in Pella have been targeted
by move-up buyers desiring new construction in established neighborhoods which has resulted in high acquisition costs for infill properties.
Many communities have infill programs that are designed to enhance older neighborhoods
or provide affordable homes for low- and moderate-income households. Infill programs are
designed to facilitate the development of vacant lots in older neighborhoods that suit the
character of the neighborhood. Some cities provide pre-approved floor plans that meet
building criteria on smaller lots sizes. Other communities have infill programs that provide
incentives to encourage developers to build affordable housing within targeted neighborhoods. Such incentives include free land for qualified builders/developers, deferred or
waived impact fees, and funding assistance. Infill programs will be beneficial for most Marion County communities; however, because of the high land costs in Pella infill programs
may be difficult to initiate.
•
Land Availability/Supply. During the course of the study many interviewees stated land
acquisition is especially challenging in the Pella submarket. Many land owners simply have
no desire to sell or they have been “bullish” on asking prices. In addition, values for agricultural and pasture land are still moderately-strong (although down from their peak). Because of higher land acquisition costs, the total development costs of any housing project
are escalated and passed along to the end-consumer (i.e. tenant, buyer, etc.) resulting in
decreased affordability. Demand could be higher if land was more accessible and priced
accordingly.
•
Land Banking/Land Acquisition. Land Banking is a program of acquiring land with the
purpose of developing at a later date. After a holding period, the land can be sold to a developer (often at a price lower than market) with the purpose of developing housing. Marion County municipalities should consider establishing a land bank to which private land may
be donated and public property may be held for future housing development.
Similarly, land acquisition is a tool used by many governmental authorities to set aside land
for a variety of public purposes; including new development/redevelopment, infrastructure
projects, recreation, conservation, etc. Many local governments consider land acquisition
and land banking as a strategy for stimulating private sector development.
•
Housing Resources & Programs. Many communities and local Housing and Redevelopment
Authorities (HRAs) offer programs to promote and preserve the existing housing stock. In
addition, there are various regional and state organizations that assist local communities
enhance their housing stock. The following bullet points outline a variety of resources
available:
188
State/National Resources:
Iowa Finance Authority (“IFA”) – The Iowa Finance Authority is a housing finance agency designed to assist low-to-moderate income households in the State of Iowa. The organization
provides numerous programs for both the single-family and multifamily sectors, financing
assistance, energy efficiency programs, fix-up funds, and other research to support the production of affordable housing across Iowa.
http://www.iowafinanceauthority.gov/
USDA Rural Development – Housing support is available through the “Housing and Community Assistance” program that is part of USDA Rural Development. The program is designed
to improve housing options in rural communities and operates a variety of programs including: homeownership assistance, housing rehabilitation and preservation, rental assistance,
loan administration, energy efficiency, etc.
http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/IA_Home.html
Local/Regional Resources:
Central Iowa Regional Housing Authority (“CIRHA”) – The Central Iowa Regional Housing Authority includes the counties of Boone, Dallas, Jasper, Madison, Marion, and Story. However, CIRHA does not have authority over the Cities of Knoxville and Pella. The organization
operates a number of housing services including the section 8 housing choice voucher program, public housing programs, rent-to-own programs, financial planning assistance, etc.
http://www.cirhahome.org/
Habitat for Humanity of Marion County, IA (“HFHMCI”) – The local Habitat for Humanity
chapter for Marion Count is located in Knoxville. On average, about two to three homes per
year are either completed or renovated in Marion County. Since the inception of the organization in 1997, over 50 homes have been constructed or rehabbed. The majority of homes
that been completed have been in Knoxville (25 homes) and Pella (16 homes). Applicants
for the program must contribute at least 250 sweat equity hours to the construction of the
home, attend homeowner education and budgeting classes, and they must have incomes
that range between 30% and 80% of Area Median Income (“AMI”) in Marion County. According to the organization, the obstacles to constructing more Habit homes is funding,
finding volunteers, finding sites, and the lack of qualified subcontractors in the area.
http://hfhmci.org/
Knoxville Public Housing Agency - The Knoxville Public Housing Agency serves low-income
residents in the Cities of Knoxville and Pella. The agency currently manages 48 duplex units
in the City of Knoxville, and administers 263 vouchers. The waiting list is currently one year
long, but varies depending on the unit type.
Phone: (641) 828-7371
189
Iowa Community Action Association (“ICAA”)– Marion County is served by the IMPACT
Community Action Partnership that serves Boone, Jasper, Marion, and rural Polk and Warren Counties. Community Action organization are centered around eliminating poverty by
providing a variety of services such as housing assistance, emergency food shelf, utility assistance, chore services, etc.
http://iowacommunityaction.org/about/marion_county.cfm
http://www.impactcap.org/
In addition to the resources available at the state and regional-level, communities in Marion
County can explore a toolbox of housing programs that would aid in the enhancement of
the county’s housing stock. The following is a sampling of potential programs that could be
explored (some of these examples would qualify as programs under the Renovation of
Housing Stock bullet point):
o Architectural Pro Bono Assistance: Local architects and/or architectural students volunteer their time to design site plans for non-profit developers or governmental agencies
to provide a baseline for developers and funders.
o Construction Management Services – Assist homeowners regarding local building codes,
reviewing contractor bids, etc.
o Density Bonuses – Since the cost of land can be a significant barrier to housing affordability, increasing densities can result in lower housing costs by reducing the land costs
per unit. Communities can offer density bonuses as a way to encourage higher-density
residential development while also promoting an affordable housing component.
o Historic Preservation – Encourage residents to preserve historic housing stock in neighborhoods with turn-of-the-century character through restoring and preserving architectural and building characteristics. Typically funded with low interest rates on loans for
preservation construction costs.
o Home Fair – Provide residents with information and resources to promote improvements to the housing stock. Typically offered on a weekend in early spring where home
owners can meet and ask questions to architects, landscapers, building contractors,
lenders, building inspectors, Realtors, etc.
o Home-Building Trades Partnerships – Partnership between local Technical Colleges or
High Schools that offer building trades programs. Affordability is gained through reduced labor costs provided by the school. New housing production serves as the “classroom” for future trades people to gain experience in the construction industry. This
program is contingent on proximity to these programs.
o Home Sale Point of Sale - City ordinance requiring an inspection prior to the sale or
transfer of residential real estate. The inspection is intended to prevent adverse conditions and meet minimum building codes. Sellers are responsible for incurring any costs
for the inspection. Depending on the community, evaluations are completed by city inspectors or 3rd party licensed inspectors.
o Home Energy Loans – Offer low interest home energy loans to make energy improvements in their homes.
190
o Household and Outside Maintenance for the Elderly (H.O.M.E.) Program – Persons 60
and over receive homemaker and maintenance services. Typical services include house
cleaning, grocery shopping, yard work/lawn care, and other miscellaneous maintenance
requests.
o Land Banking – Land Banking is a program of acquiring land with the purpose of developing at a later date. After a holding period, the land can be sold to a developer (often
at a price lower than market) with the purpose of developing affordable housing.
o Land Trust - Utilizing a long-term 99-year ground lease, housing is affordable as the land
is owned by a non-profit organization. Subject to income limits and targeted to workforce families with low-to-moderate incomes. If the family chooses to sell their home,
the selling price is lower as land is excluded.
o Mobile Home Improvements – Offer low or no-interest loans to mobile home owners
for rehabilitation. Establish income-guidelines based on family size and annual gross incomes.
o Realtor Forum - Typically administered by local governments with partnership by local
school board. Inform local Realtors about school district news, current development
projects, and other marketing factors related to real estate in the community. In addition, Realtors usually receive CE credits.
o Redevelopment Credit – remove a substandard home with new construction
o Remodeling Advisor – Partner with local architects and/or builders to provide ideas and
general cost estimates for property owners
o Rental Collaboration – Local government organizes regular meetings with owners, property managers, and other stakeholders operating in the rental housing industry. Collaborative, informational meetings that includes city staff, updates on economic development and real estate development, and updates from the local police, fire department,
and building inspection departments.
o Rental License – Licensing rental properties in the communities. Designed to ensure all
rental properties meet local building and safety codes. Typically enforced by the fire
marshal or building inspection department. Should require annual license renewal.
o Rent to Own - Income-eligible families rent for a specified length of time with the endgoal of buying a home. The HRA or other public agency saves a portion of the monthly
rent that will be allocated for a down payment on a future house.
o Senior Housing Regeneration Program - Partnership between multiple organizations
that assists seniors transitioning to alternative housing options such as senior housing,
condominiums, townhomes, etc.
o Tax Abatement: A temporary reduction in property taxes over a specific time period on
new construction homes or home remodeling projects. Encourages new construction or
rehabilitation through property tax incentives.
o Tax Increment Financing (TIF): Program that offers communities a flexible financing tool
to assist housing projects and related infrastructure. TIF enables communities to dedicate the incremental tax revenues from new housing development to help make the
housing more affordable or pay for related costs. TIF funds can be used to provide a direct subsidy to a particular housing project or they can also be used to promote afford-
191
able housing by setting aside a portion of TIF proceeds into a dedicated fund from other
developments receiving TIF.
o Waiver or Reduction of Development Fees – There are several fees developers must pay
including impact fees, utility and connection fees, park land dedication fees, etc. To
help facilitate affordable housing, some fees could be waived or reduced to pass the
cost savings onto the housing consumer.
•
Job Growth/Employment/Outflow of Marion County Workers. Historically, low unemployment rates have driven both existing home purchases and new-home purchases. Lack
of job growth leads to slow or diminishing household growth, which in-turn relates to reduced housing demand. Table E-1 showed Marion County has an unemployment rate of
3.3%, lower than the State of Iowa at 3.8%. Marion County’s unemployment rate peaked at
6.6% in 2009 at height of the Great Recession. However, the unemployment rate has come
down annually since 2009. Generally, a 4% to 5% unemployment rate is considered full
employment.
Marion County’s labor force peaked in 2006 with nearly 17,890 workers. As of 2015, the
labor force was down to 17,366 (-3%). The labor force participation rate is about 67.4% in
the State of Iowa today; below historical averages but above the low of 65.5% during the
Great Recession. A declining labor force is significant as local employers need access to
qualified workers to fill positions, especially in an employment environment like Marion
County that leans heavily on the manufacturing sector which accounts for 38% of all jobs in
the county and has very strong wages.
Marion County is also a major importer of workers; posting a net positive 1,900 jobs. Both
Pella and Knoxville benefit from a strong employment base which results in an influx of
workers coming to these communities for employment opportunities. Marion County
communities have an excellent opportunity to capture a portion of these workers who are
community from outside Marion County. According to many of our employer interviews,
Marion County lacks adequate housing to meet the needs of the local workforce. The local
housing stock must be able to accommodate a higher percentage of area workers. Furthermore, additional job creation from Marion County employers could result in an even
greater need for housing opportunities in the County.
•
Millenials. The Millennials (generally defined as persons born in the 1980 and 1990s) are
now bigger than the Baby Boom generation and have begun impacting real estate development. The 80 million Millenials have begun to influence real estate as they have started to
form new households. However, many Millennials’ are delaying home ownership due to
high student loan debt and social changes (i.e. delayed marriage, delayed childbearing, delayed careers, etc.). The median first-time homebuyer is now age 33 (an older Millennial)
which is up from age 30 about a decade ago.
Although Millennial’s have favored more urban locations and are typically renters today,
survey’s show they are not that different in their preferences from other generations.
192
Many millennial’s have indicated they still desire to live in outside urban areas, however
they desire communities with amenities such as parks, walking trails, shopping, proximity to
jobs, and entertainment. Once Millennial’s start having kids, many will begin households
that will shift from renters to buyers. Due to Marion County’s strong employment and
proximity to Des Moines, many communities have the opportunity to attract Millenials.
However, today’s Millenials desire home preferences and amenities that are not within the
older housing stock. Therefore, builders and/or developers should offer more diverse housing products and floor plans that will be attractive to this up and coming demographic.
•
Mortgage Rates. Mortgage rates play a crucial part in housing affordability. Lower mortgage rates result in a lower monthly mortgage payment and buyers receiving more home
for their dollar. Rising interest rates often require homebuyers to raise their down payment
in order to maintain the same housing costs. Mortgage rates have remained at historic lows
over the past several years coming out of the Great Recession. Although the Federal Reserve raised interest rates in December 2015 for the first time since 2008, mortgage rates
have remained at historic lows because of the global financial market distress as investors
have sought shelter in the bond market. The Federal Reserve had anticipated rate increased throughout 2016; but may hold back due to the state of the economy. The current
low rates averaging about 3.625% on a 30-year fixed mortgage bode well for the housing
market in Marion County. Should the Federal Reserve increase rates throughout the year;
they would likely be small increments and would not have a major impact on mortgage
rates.
The following chart illustrates historical mortgage rate averages as compiled by Freddie
Mac. The Freddie Mac Market Survey (PMMS) has been tracking mortgage rates since 1971
and is the most relied upon benchmark for evaluating mortgage interest market conditions.
The Freddie Mac survey is based on 30-year mortgages with a loan-to-value of 80%.
193
Historic 30-year Mortgage Rates 1972 to 2015
18.00%
16.00%
14.00%
12.00%
10.00%
8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
2014
2012
2010
2008
2006
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
0.00%
•
Multifamily Development Costs. It will be challenging to construct new market rate
multifamily product given achievable rents and development costs. According to a proforma developed by Maxfield Research based on the 2016 National Building Cost Manual, construction hard costs in Marion County (utilizing construction averages in the Des Moines area) will likely average about $100 per square foot (gross). After accounting for land costs
and soft costs, the total unit cost would result in total development costs of upwards to
$135,000 per unit to develop based on a 24-unit multifamily concept. Based on an average
unit size of 875 square feet, the average rent to break-even would be approximately $1,200
per month or about $1.35 PSF. These rents are nearly double of the existing rental stock in
Marion County that averages $0.75 PSF. Based on these costs, it will be difficult to develop
stand-alone multifamily housing structures by the private sector based on achievable rents.
As a result, a private-public partnership or other financing programs will likely be required
to spur development.
•
Political Will. A number of interviewees stated there has been a reluctance to change in
some communities in Marion County from elected/government officials and a reactive approach to planning and development. Housing issues have taken a back seat according to
many interviews and little has been enacted to stimulate housing development. Individual
communities have provided few incentives to encourage the production of new housing.
The comprehensive housing study is the first step in recognizing the challenges; however,
the political will must be executed by local leaders to encourage planning and housing development. The consequences of “doing nothing” could hinder economic development initiates as the workers in Marion County must have adequate housing.
194
•
Rental Housing Resources. Maxfield Research found the rental housing stock throughout
the county was limited, an older housing stock, and numerous interviewees all stressed the
need for quality rental housing. However, the ability to find rental housing options in Marion County can be a difficult process. Because many properties are older and owned by individual property investors or smaller property management firms, it is very challenging to
find available properties with vacancies. Although the Pella and Knoxville Chamber of
Commerce do have a rental property list and post listings on their website, there is not a
comprehensive rental resource guide for prospective renters seeking housing. In addition,
Many Realtors commented they receive multiple phone calls on a daily basis from prospective renters seeking housing. Furthermore, many of the employers interviewed mentioned
they have had to assist employees with their housing search because of the low inventory
of rental properties.
Maxfield Research recommends a one-stop rental resource guide (i.e. “newcomers resource
guide”) that will provide detailed information regarding rental properties in the County.
The rental resource guide should contain a list of apartments and offer key information on
what services and amenities are available to householders seeking a rental property in the
County that meets their needs. The resource guide can be administered from a variety of
organizations such as city or county staff, visitor’s center, chamber of commerce, or other
economic development related organizations.
•
Renovation of Existing Housing Stock (both owner and rental). As illustrated in the Housing Characteristics section of this report, about 22% of the housing stock in Marion county
was built pre-1940, with the next highest decade in the 1990s (14.4%). The Melcher-Dallas
and Southeast submarket have the oldest housing stocks with 43.5% and 30% (respectively)
of their housing stock constructed prior to 1940. About 14% of Marion County’s housing
stock was built since 2000, however the majority of this is within ownership housing. Because of the older housing stock, many housing units in throughout Marion County become
affordable through a combination of factors such age of structure, condition, square footage, functionally obsolete, etc. Housing units that are older with low rents or low market
values are considered “naturally occurring affordable housing” as the property values on
these units are low.
Maxfield Research & Consulting, LLC conducted a windshield survey of all the communities
in Marion County home’s and found most of the homes were in good condition in the Pella
submarket; but other Marion County submarkets had a much higher percentage of older
homes with deferred maintenance. Since Marion County’s housing stock is older, the demand for remodeling and replacement and demolition needs will continue to increase as
today’s consumer’s desire updated features and amenities. Realtors commented that many
of the entry-level homes selling for under $100,000 need updating. In addition, Realtors
commented on the desire for “turn-key or move in ready” homes. As a result, the demand
for new construction is very high as buyers are seeking more amenitized and contemporary
homes; however, builders cannot deliver an entry-level new home that is affordable. Because builders are unable to bring more affordable new homes to the market, Maxfield Re-
195
search recommends encouraging housing programs that will enhance the existing housing
stock. Examples of housing programs are located in the section titled “Housing Resources
and Programs” located previously.
•
Single Family Rental Housing (i.e. Shadow Rental Inventory). Shadow rentals are generally
considered nontraditional rentals that were previously owner-occupied single-family
homes, townhomes, condominiums, etc. Based on interviews with Realtors and property
managers, the demand for single family rentals is very high throughout Marion County; especially among professionals relocating to for employment. A large percentage of renters
have sought out single-family homes versus traditional multifamily rental developments.
Based on housing unit data outlined in Table HC-5, about 46% of the rental units in Marion
County are located in single-family homes or townhomes. In the Melcher-Dallas, Pleasantville, and Southeast submarkets the vast majority of rental housing is located in detached housing units.
Although most of these properties are well-maintained; some of these properties in the
more rural areas of Marion County are unregulated and deferred maintenance is evident.
We recommend local municipalities have a policy to license single family rental units to
keep track of rental properties and help maintain and preserve the market value of the
property and neighborhood. We recommend requiring an application and very nominal fee
in return for educating property owners in regards to their role as a landlord and having a
tenant in their property. Owners should be presented with materials on nuisance and code
ordinances that could potentially occur on a property. Finally, local municipalities should
more actively follow-up with those single-family rental properties with nuisance and code
compliance issues. In many communities, the local fire department or volunteer fire department loosely monitor the single-family rental market.
196
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
197
APPENDIX
Definitions
Absorption Period – The period of time necessary for newly constructed or renovated properties to achieve the stabilized level of occupancy. The absorption period begins when the first
certificate of occupancy is issued and ends when the last unit to reach the stabilized level of
occupancy has signed a lease.
Absorption Rate – The average number of units rented each month during the absorption
period.
Active adult (or independent living without services available) – Active Adult properties are
similar to a general-occupancy apartment building, in that they offer virtually no services but
have age-restrictions (typically 55 or 62 or older). Organized activities and occasionally a
transportation program are usually all that are available at these properties. Because of the
lack of services, active adult properties typically do not command the rent premiums of more
service-enriched senior housing.
Adjusted Gross Income “AGI” – Income from taxable sources (including wages, interest, capital
gains, income from retirement accounts, etc.) adjusted to account for specific deductions (i.e.
contributions to retirement accounts, unreimbursed business and medical expenses, alimony,
etc.).
Affordable housing – The general definition of affordability is for a household to pay no more
than 30% of their income for housing. For purposes of this study we define affordable housing
that is income-restricted to households earning at or below 80% AMI, though individual properties can have income-restrictions set at 40%, 50%, 60% or 80% AMI. Rent is not based on
income but instead is a contract amount that is affordable to households within the specific
income restriction segment. It is essentially housing affordable to low or very low-income
tenants.
Amenity – Tangible or intangible benefits offered to a tenant in the form of common area
amenities or in-unit amenities. Typical in-unit amenities include dishwashers, washer/dryers,
walk-in showers and closets and upgraded kitchen finishes. Typical common area amenities
include detached or attached garage parking, community room, fitness center and an outdoor
patio or grill/picnic area.
Area Median Income “AMI” – AMI is the midpoint in the income distribution within a specific
geographic area. By definition, 50% of households earn less than the median income and 50%
earn more. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) calculates AMI
annually and adjustments are made for family size.
Assisted Living – Assisted Living properties come in a variety of forms, but the target market for
most is generally the same: very frail seniors, typically age 80 or older (but can be much younger, depending on their particular health situation), who are in need of extensive support serMAXFIELD RESEARCH & CONSULTING, LLC
198
APPENDIX
vices and personal care assistance. Absent an assisted living option, these seniors would
otherwise need to move to a nursing facility. At a minimum, assisted living properties include
two meals per day and weekly housekeeping in the monthly fee, with the availability of a third
meal and personal care (either included in the monthly fee or for an additional cost). Assisted
living properties also have either staff on duty 24 hours per day or at least 24-hour emergency
response.
Building Permit – Building permits track housing starts and the number of housing units authorized to be built by the local governing authority. Most jurisdictions require building permits for
new construction, major renovations, as well as other building improvements. Building permits
ensure that all the work meets applicable building and safety rules and is typically required to
be completed by a licensed professional. Once the building is complete and meets the inspector’s satisfaction, the jurisdiction will issue a “CO” or “Certificate of Occupancy.” Building
permits are a key barometer for the health of the housing market and are often a leading
indicator in the rest of the economy as it has a major impact on consumer spending.
Capture Rate – The percentage of age, size, and income-qualified renter households in a given
area or “Market Area” that the property must capture to fill the units. The capture rate is
calculated by dividing the total number of units at the property by the total number of age, size
and income-qualified renter households in the designated area.
Comparable Property – A property that is representative of the rental housing choices of the
designated area or “Market Area” that is similar in construction, size, amenities, location and/or
age.
Concession – Discount or incentives given to a prospective tenant to induce signature of a
lease. Concessions typically are in the form of reduced rent or free rent for a specific lease
term, or free amenities, which are normally charged separately, such as parking.
Congregate (or independent living with services available) – Congregate properties offer
support services such as meals and/or housekeeping, either on an optional basis or a limited
amount included in the rents. These properties typically dedicate a larger share of the overall
building area to common areas, in part, because the units are smaller than in adult housing and
in part to encourage socialization among residents. Congregate properties attract a slightly
older target market than adult housing, typically seniors age 75 or older. Rents are also above
those of the active adult buildings, even excluding the services.
Contract Rent – The actual monthly rent payable by the tenant, including any rent subsidy paid
on behalf of the tenant, to the owner, inclusive of all terms of the lease.
Demand – The total number of households that would potentially move into a proposed new or
renovated housing project. These households must be of appropriate age, income, tenure and
size for a specific proposed development. Components vary and can include, but are not
199
APPENDIX
limited to: turnover, people living in substandard conditions, rent over-burdened households,
income-qualified households and age of householder. Demand is project specific.
Density – Number of units in a given area. Density is typically measured in dwelling units (DU)
per acre – the larger the number of units permitted per acre the higher the density; the fewer
units permitted results in lower density. Density is often presented in a gross and net format:
•
•
Gross Density – The number of dwelling units per acre based on the gross site acreage.
Gross Density = Total residential units/total development area
Net Density - The number of dwelling units per acre located on the site, but excludes
public right-of-ways (ROW) such as streets, alleys, easements, open spaces, etc.
Net Density = Total residential units/total residential land area (excluding ROWs)
Detached housing – a freestanding dwelling unit, most often single-family homes, situated on
its own lot.
Effective Rents – Contract rent less applicable concessions.
Elderly or Senior Housing – Housing where all the units in the property are restricted for
occupancy by persons age 62 years or better, or at least 80% of the units in each building are
restricted for occupancy by households where at least one household member is 55 years of
age or better and the housing is designed with amenities, facilities and services to meet the
needs of senior citizens.
Extremely low-income – person or household with incomes below 30% of Area Median Income, adjusted for respective household size.
Fair Market Rent – Estimates established by HUD of the Gross Rents needed to obtain modest
rental units in acceptable conditions in a specific geographic area. The amount of rental income
a given property would command if it were open for leasing at any given moment and/or the
amount derived based on market conditions that is needed to pay gross monthly rent at
modest rental housing in a given area. This figure is used as a basis for determining the payment standard amount used to calculate the maximum monthly subsidy for families on at
financially assisted housing.
Fair Market Rent
Marion County – 2015
Fair Market Rent
Fair Market Rent
EFF
1BR
2BR
3BR
4BR
$444
$552
$747
$930
$998
200
APPENDIX
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Ratio of the floor area of a building to area of the lot on which the
building is located.
Foreclosure – A legal process in which a lender or financial institute attempts to recover the
balance of a loan from a borrower who has stopped making payments to the lender by using
the sale of the house as collateral for the loan.
Gross Rent – The monthly housing cost to a tenant which equals the Contract Rent provided for
in the lease, plus the estimated cost of all utilities paid by tenants. Maximum Gross Rents for
Marion County can be shown on the following page.
Gross Rent
Marion County – 2015
Maximum Gross Rent
EFF
1BR
2BR
3BR
4BR
30% of median
50% of median
$318
$531
$364
$607
$409
$682
$455
$758
$492
$820
60% of median
$637
$729
$819
$910
$984
80% of median
$850
$972
$1,092
$1,214
$1,312
100% of median
$1,062
$1,215
$1,365
$1,517
$1,640
120% of median
$1,275
$1,458
$1,638
$1,821
$1,968
Household – All persons who occupy a housing unit, including occupants of a single-family, one
person living alone, two or more families living together, or any other group of related or
unrelated persons who share living arrangements.
Household Trends – Changes in the number of households for any particular areas over a
measurable period of time, which is a function of hew households formations, changes in
average household size, and met migration.
Housing Choice Voucher Program – The federal government's major program for assisting very
low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled to afford decent, safe, and sanitary housing
in the private market. A family that is issued a housing voucher is responsible for finding a
suitable housing unit of the family's choice where the owner agrees to rent under the program.
Housing choice vouchers are administered locally by public housing agencies. They receive
federal funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to administer the voucher program. A housing subsidy is paid to the landlord directly by the public housing agency on behalf of the participating family. The family then pays the difference between
the actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program.
201
APPENDIX
Housing unit – House, apartment, mobile home, or group of rooms used as a separate living
quarters by a single household.
HUD Project-Based Section 8 – A federal government program that provides rental housing for
very low-income families, the elderly, and the disabled in privately owned and managed rental
units. The owner reserves some or all of the units in a building in return for a Federal government guarantee to make up the difference between the tenant's contribution and the rent. A
tenant who leaves a subsidized project will lose access to the project-based subsidy.
HUD Section 202 Program – Federal program that provides direct capital assistance and operating or rental assistance to finance housing designed for occupancy by elder household who
have incomes not exceeding 50% of Area Median Income.
HUD Section 811 Program – Federal program that provides direct capital assistance and operating or rental assistance to finance housing designed for occupancy of persons with disabilities
who have incomes not exceeding 50% Area Median Income.
HUD Section 236 Program – Federal program that provides interest reduction payments for
loans which finance housing targeted to households with income not exceeding 80% Area
Median Income who pay rent equal to the greater or market rate or 30% of their adjusted
income.
Income limits – Maximum households income by a designed geographic area, adjusted for
household size and expressed as a percentage of the Area Median Income, for the purpose of
establishing an upper limit for eligibility for a specific housing program. See Incomequalifications.
Inflow/Outflow – The Inflow/Outflow Analysis generates results showing the count and characteristics of worker flows in to, out of, and within the defined geographic area.
Low-Income – Person or household with gross household incomes below 80% of Area Median
Income, adjusted for household size.
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit – A program aimed to generate equity for investment in
affordable rental housing authorized pursuant to Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code. The
program requires that a certain percentage of units built be restricted for occupancy to households earning 60% or less of Area Median Income, and rents on these units be restricted
accordingly.
Market analysis – The study of real estate market conditions for a specific type of property,
geographic area or proposed (re)development.
202
APPENDIX
Market rent – The rent that an apartment, without rent or income restrictions or rent subsidies, would command in a given area or “Market Area” considering its location, features and
amenities.
Market study – A comprehensive study of a specific proposal including a review of the housing
market in a defined market or geography. Project specific market studies are often used by
developers, property managers or government entities to determine the appropriateness of a
proposed development, whereas market specific market studies are used to determine what
house needs, if any, existing within a specific geography.
Market rate rental housing – Housing that does not have any income-restrictions. Some
properties will have income guidelines, which are minimum annual incomes required in order
to reside at the property.
Memory Care – Memory Care properties, designed specifically for persons suffering from
Alzheimer’s disease or other dementias, is one of the newest trends in senior housing. Properties consist mostly of suite-style or studio units or occasionally one-bedroom apartment-style
units, and large amounts of communal areas for activities and programming. In addition, staff
typically undergoes specialized training in the care of this population. Because of the greater
amount of individualized personal care required by residents, staffing ratios are much higher
than traditional assisted living and thus, the costs of care are also higher. Unlike conventional
assisted living, however, which deals almost exclusively with widows or widowers, a higher
proportion of persons afflicted with Alzheimer’s disease are in two-person households. That
means the decision to move a spouse into a memory care facility involves the caregiver’s
concern of incurring the costs of health care at a special facility while continuing to maintain
their home.
Migration – The movement of households and/or people into or out of an area.
Mixed-income property – An apartment property contained either both income-restricted and
unrestricted units or units restricted at two or more income limits.
Mobility – The ease at which people move from one location to another. Mobility rate is often
illustrated over a one-year time frame.
Moderate Income – Person or household with gross household income between 80% and 120%
of the Area Median Income, adjusted for household size.
Multifamily – Properties and structures that contain more than two housing units.
Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing – Although affordable housing is typically associated
with an income-restricted property, there are other housing units in communities that indirectly provide affordable housing. Housing units that were not developed or designated with
income guidelines (i.e. assisted) yet are more affordable than other units in a community are
203
APPENDIX
considered “naturally-occurring” or “unsubsidized affordable” units. This rental supply is
available through the private market, versus assisted housing programs through various governmental agencies. Property values on these units are lower based on a combination of
factors, such as: age of structure/housing stock, location, condition, size, functionally obsolete,
school district, etc.
Net Income – Income earned after payroll withholdings such as state and federal income taxes,
social security, as well as retirement savings and health insurance.
Net Worth – The difference between assets and liabilities, or the total value of assets after the
debt is subtracted.
Pent-up demand – A market in which there is a scarcity of supply and as such, vacancy rates are
very low or non-existent.
Population – All people living in a geographic area.
Population Density – The population of an area divided by the number of square miles of land
area.
Population Trends – Changes in population levels for a particular geographic area over a
specific period of time – a function of the level of births, deaths, and in/out migration.
Project-Based rent assistance – Rental assistance from any source that is allocated to the
property or a specific number of units in the property and is available to each income eligible
tenant of the property or an assisted unit.
Redevelopment – The redesign, rehabilitation or expansion of existing properties.
Rent burden – gross rent divided by adjusted monthly household income.
Restricted rent – The rent charged under the restriction of a specific housing program or
subsidy.
Saturation – The point at which there is no longer demand to support additional market rate,
affordable/subsidized, rental, for-sale, or senior housing units. Saturation usually refers to a
particular segment of a specific market.
Senior Housing – The term “senior housing” refers to any housing development that is restricted to people age 55 or older. Today, senior housing includes an entire spectrum of housing
alternatives. Maxfield Research Inc. classifies senior housing into four categories based on the
level of support services. The four categories are: Active Adult, Congregate, Assisted Living and
Memory Care.
204
APPENDIX
Short Sale – A sale of real estate in which the net proceeds from selling the property do not
cover the sellers’ mortgage obligations. The difference is forgiven by the lender, or other
arrangements are made with the lender to settle the remainder of the debt.
Single-family home – A dwelling unit, either attached or detached, designed for use by one
household and with direct street access. It does not share heating facilities or other essential
electrical, mechanical or building facilities with another dwelling.
Stabilized level of occupancy – The underwritten or actual number of occupied units that a
property is expected to maintain after the initial lease-up period.
Subsidized housing – Housing that is income-restricted to households earning at or below 30%
AMI. Rent is generally based on income, with the household contributing 30% of their adjusted
gross income toward rent. Also referred to as extremely low income housing.
Subsidy – Monthly income received by a tenant or by an owner on behalf of a tenant to pay the
difference between the apartment’s contract/market rate rent and the amount paid by the
tenant toward rent.
Substandard conditions – Housing conditions that are conventionally considered unacceptable
and can be defined in terms of lacking plumbing facilities, one or more major mechanical or
electrical system malfunctions, or overcrowded conditions.
Target population – The market segment or segments of the given population a development
would appeal or cater to.
Tenant – One who rents real property from another individual or rental company.
Tenant-paid utilities – The cost of utilities, excluding cable, telephone, or internet necessary for
the habitation of a dwelling unit, which are paid by said tenant.
Tenure – The distinction between owner-occupied and renter-occupied housing units.
Turnover – A measure of movement of residents into and out of a geographic location.
Turnover period – An estimate of the number of housing units in a geographic location as a
percentage of the total house units that will likely change occupants in any one year.
Unrestricted units – Units that are not subject to any income or rent restrictions.
Vacancy period – The amount of time an apartment remains vacant and is available on the
market for rent.
205
APPENDIX
Workforce housing – Housing that is income-restricted to households earning between 80%
and 120% AMI. Also referred to as moderate-income housing.
Zoning – Classification and regulation of land use by local governments according to use categories (zones); often also includes density designations and limitations.
206

Comprehensive Housing Study

Transcription

Similar documents

September 2015 Newsletter

connection - Marion County, FL

Firehouse hosts Great Big Home Show

September 2015 Edition - Adams Woodcrest Newsletter

Busch Realty`s Newsletter

WELCOME TO CAESARS PALACE

“Lucky” 13th Annual Golf Classic Thursday, July 16

MCS Community Connections Feb. 2016

Summer 2011 - Marion Palace Theatre

on your alamo rentals.