The URL can be used to link to this page

052112CCHRAPCWorksession-completeagenda CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, MAY 21, 2012 RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE ******************************************************************************************************* SPECIAL CONCURRENT HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY/ CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M. AGENDA Call to order Roll call 1. Discussion regarding Rental Housing Inventory & Needs Assessment (HRA Memo No. 27, Council Memo No. 60) Notes: __________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ Adjournment ******************************************************************************************************* HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Office of Executive Director May 17, 2012 HRA Memorandum No. 27 Council Memorandum No. 60 Housing and Redevelopment Authority Commissioners The Honorable Mayor City of Richfield and Members of the City Council Subject: Rental Housing Inventory & Needs Assessment (Worksession Agenda Item No. 1) Dear Commissioners and Council Members: In December 2011 the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) approved a contract with Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. to conduct a study of the City's rental housing. On April 16, 2012 Jay Demma of Stantec Corporation presented the study's findings at a special concurrent worksession of the HRA, City Council and Planning Commission. At the worksession, a number of comments and questions were raised. Subsequently, Mr. Demma has revised the report to address those comments and questions. Comments and questions within the scope of work of the Stantec contract include: • Restate affordability benchmark from the Metropolitan Council (p. 5-6; p. 29-31; p. 50-52; p. 60). • Clarify when single family rental and condominium rental units are included in the report. Identify the numbers of bedrooms for single family rental properties. (p. 11; p. 17-19; p. 59) • Provide breakdown of mix of housing across affordability levels (p. 18—Table 3A; p. 29-31; p. 58-59). • Identify healthy vacancy rate for rental housing market (p. 28). Comments and questions raised at the worksession that were outside of the scope of the current contract with Stantec are listed below. To address these items, an additional scope of work and contract would be needed. • Review additional information regarding current rental properties. i.e. inspections reports, public safety reports, updated unit information, mobile home information • Evaluate options to rehabilitate existing rental stock and to add supply of two and three bedroom rental housing stock. What tools and strategies are other communities using? • Evaluate cyclical trends in the housing market. • Identify specific housing code tools that may or may not be used. • Evaluate community support and tolerance of rental housing. • Evaluate housing density compared to other communities. • Evaluate the levels of rental properties by type i.e. one bedroom units A revised copy of the Rental Housing Inventory and Needs Assessment is attached for yo eview. Re. ec Ily submivd_, •tev . Deg . .... tive Director SLD:tjs Attachment Copy: Planning Commission Rental Housing Inventory and Needs Assessment City of Richfield, Minnesota May 2012 Stantec Stantec Consulting Services inc. (60,4 2335 Highway 36 West St Paul MN 55113 Tel: (651)636-4600 Fax:(651)636-1311 Stantec May 15,2012 Julie Urban and Michelle Lewis Housing Specialists City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield,MN 55423 Re: Rental Housing Inventory and Needs Assessment Dear Ms. Urban and Ms. Lewis: Stantec is pleased to present the Richfield Rental Housing Inventory and Needs Assessment.The inventory presents detailed data on the condition and supply of Richfield's rental housing stock. Based on the analysis of the City's current supply of rental housing,there is an immediate need for rental housing at both ends of the affordability spectrum.On the one end would be upscale,amenity-rich properties that would appeal to young professionals and early retirees who currently must search outside the City for such options. On the other end of the spectrum would be subsidized units with two or more bedrooms for very low-income families,which are essentially non-existent in Richfield.Additional findings are included in the report. We greatly appreciated working with the City of Richfield on this Important study. If you have any additional questions about the study or the report,I can be reached directly by email at jay.demmaastantec.com or by phone at 651-967-4551. Sincerely, STANTEC CONSULTIN SERVICES INC. ay Demma Project Manager CITY OF RICHFIELD — RENTAL HOUSING INVENTORY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 7 Characteristics of Rental Housing Stock 10 Structure Type 10 Unit Type 17 Year Built 20 Market Rate Rents 22 Amenities and Features 24 Rent History 26 Vacancy History 28 Affordability 29 Subsidized Rental Units 32 Market Rate Senior Housing 34 Rental Housing Construction/Demolition 35 Characteristics of Renter Households 36 Age of Households 36 Household Size 38 Household Type 40 Length of Residence 42 Income 43 Rent Burden 49 Socio-Economic Trends 50 Housing Conditions 53 Property Manager Interviews 53 Windshield Survey 54 Gap Analysis 58 Rental Housing Need 58 New Rental Housing Development in Neighboring Communities 59 Metropolitan Council Affordable Housing Requirements 60 Housing Strategies 61 City of Richfield,MN 4� Pa e i Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 y: ntec 193802154 This page intentionally left blank. City of Richfield,MN v�r M�� Page 11 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 iK' ��GZ. 193802154 CITY OF RICHFIELD — RENTAL HOUSING INVENTORY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT Executive Summary INTRODUCTION This report Is a detailed inventory of the City of Richfield's rental housing stock. It was prepared in response to changing housing conditions brought on by the recent recession in which longstanding patterns of increasing home ownership rates and home value appreciation gave way to unforeseen trends in home value depreciation and home foreclosures.The result was a major shift in demand from homeownership to renting. Recognizing that these new patterns of housing tenure will greatly impact Richfield's housing stock,the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority(HRA)decided to conduct a detailed Inventory of the rental portion of its housing stock to better understand its current condition and how best to position the City for future growth and change. Significant portions of this study are an update to a detailed inventory of both owned and rented housing conducted in 2004. DATA SOURCES The majority of data presented in this report comes from the US Census. Although the US Census is an invaluable resource, it does not always capture the type of information needed for a thorough rental inventory. Therefore,where appropriate,data was also collected from a number of other primary and secondary sources including the City of Richfield, Hennepin County Tax Assessor,fieldwork conducted by Siantec, Housing Link, apartment websites,Twin City Senior Housing Guide, and Marquette Advisors. CHARACTERISTICS OF RENTAL HOUSING STOCK Richfield's rental housing stock was analyzed based on a number of variables including structure type, unit type,year built,current rents,vacancy,affordability,and recent gains/losses.To help understand how Richfield's rental stock stacks up against other comparable communities,additional data was collected and analyzed for a number of peer communities and compared against Richfield's current situation.The following are key findings from this analysis.The body of the report Includes more detailed findings along with tables,charts,and maps. • The number of rented single-family homes in Richfield has significantly increased over the last eight to 10 years • Over two-thirds of Richfield's rental units have one bedroom,which is a very high proportion of one bedroom units • Almost all (97%)of the subsidized units in Richfield have one bedroom • There is only one subsidized,general-occupancy two-bedroom unit in Richfield,which essentially means there are no units available in Richfield to very low-Income families with children • Over 75%of Richfield's rental housing stock was built in the 1960s. No other peer community has such a large proportion of its rental housing built in one decade, much less a decade that occurred more than 40 years ago. • Less than 10%of the City's rental stock was built within the last 10 years • Due to Richfield's large proportion of older,one-bedroom units,the overall average rent is below $800. However,when compared to older rental stock throughout the Metro Area, Richfield's rents are comparable. City of Richfield,MN Stan Page 1 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 rte/ L 193802154 • Modern amenities and features such as Fitness center,walk-in closets,and in-unit washer/dryers are found in only a small number of properties. This is not surprising since these features only began to be regularly included in apartment construction within the last 10 to 15 years. • Although Richfield has rents that are,on average, below the Metro Area average and well below their peer communities, nearly 70%of the City's rental stock, including almost all of its two and three- bedroom units,would not be affordable to households with annual incomes below$28,000. • Richfield has very few subsidized units; less than 1%of its general occupancy(non-senior) rental stock is subsidized. In contrast,Its peer communities have an average of 6.4%of their rental stock as subsidized units CHARACTERISTICS OF RENTER HOUSEHOLDS The renter household base of Richfield was also analyzed to better understand the nature of changing housing needs among typical renter populations.Variables analyzed included age of households, household size, household type, length of residence, income, and rent burden.These data were also collected and analyzed for Richfield's peer communities. Below are key findings of the analysis.The body of the report includes more detailed findings supported with tables and charts. • Renter households In Richfield increased by 311 (6.4%) between 2000 and 2010,while owner households decreased by-566(-5.6%) • The profile of renter households in Richfield is aging rapidly. • The age profile of Richfield renters is very similar to that of the Metro Area,despite a rental housing stock that skews heavily toward one-bedroom units • There are over 200 renter households in Richfield with four or more persons living in units with two bedrooms or less • Relative to its peer communities, Richfield has a large proportion of renter households with three or more persons.This is evidence that Richfield's rental housing stock has very few if any empty bedrooms,whereas many of its peer communities have a significant number of empty bedrooms. • Nearly 28%of Richfield's renter households have children.This is a higher proportion than the Metro Area and one of the highest among its peer communities. • Richfield's rental stock is accommodating more and more households with children,even though much of the rental stock was not built to be marketed to families with children. Between 2000 and 2010,the number of renter households with children increased by 460. During that same time, renter households without children decreased by-159. • Richfield has 2,749 renter households with annual incomes below$35,000.This is 53%of all renter households. • Among older low-income households, homeownership is far more prevalent,which suggests that as these homeowners transition to rental housing,they will require units with affordable rents. • For Richfield's largest age group of renters,those 25 to 34,the median household income is about $36,000,which is well below the Metro Area median for this age group and near the bottom of its peer communities. • Increases in Richfield's renter and owner incomes tended to lag behind its peer communities between 2000 and 2010. Richfield had the second lowest rate of increase among its renters and the third lowest rate of increase among its owners. • 45%of Richfield's renter households have incomes below$35,000 and spend more than 30%of their income toward housing.This is higher than the Metro Area rate and one of the highest rates among its peer communities. City of Richfield,MN Page 2 �Q Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 SOCIO-ECONOMIC TRENDS Forecasted population, household,and employment growth from the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota State Demographer was analyzed to gauge the impact future growth trends will have on the demand for rental housing In Richfield. Below are Important findings.Tables displaying forecasted growth for Richfield and Its peer communities are included in the body of the report. • According to the Metropolitan Council, Richfield's population is expected to increase about 10% in both the 2010s and the 2020s,which is a sharp change from recent decades when decreasing household size resulted in overall declines in population • The Metropolitan Council also forecasts that Richfield will add approximately 1,500 new households each decade • Richfield is not expected to capture a significant share of the area's employment growth over the next 20 years. However,the adjacent communities of Bloomington and Edina are expected to add nearly 20,000 jobs in the 2010s and another 13,000 jobs in the 2020s. Many of the people hired for those new jobs would certainly consider Richfield as a possible location for housing if there is adequate supply and choice for them to choose from. HOUSING CONDITIONS Due to the quantitative focus of the analysis,qualitative data was collected as well in the form of property manager interviews and a windshield survey in order to provide some additional perspective and context to the facts and figures presented in previous sections. PROPERTY MANAGER INTERVIEWS The property manager interviews were intended to gain insight and feedback about important issues and concerns regarding the marketability of their properties and the potential role the City could play in assisting them to keep their properties as marketable as possible. A list of relevant comments Is provided in the body of the report. Below is a summary of the important findings from the interviews. • Managers have generally favorable views of how the City is rental housing issues and needs • The rental market is very strong right now(low vacancies) • Properties near high-traffics streets need more pedestrian crossings • Many managers are challenged by language and cultural barriers;would like to see City-sponsored "how-to"classes on appliance usage, housekeeping basics,etc. • Managers generally have a low awareness of grants or other programs to help with rehabilitation/modernization WINDSHIELD SURVEY Northwest Richfield: the biggest opportunity to help maintain marketability of the apartments in this neighborhood would be to continue improving the pedestrian connections along Penn Avenue so that the businesses along the corridor can continue to serve as an amenity for nearby apartment residents. Northcentral Richfield: centered on the intersection of Lyndale Avenue and West 66th Street,this neighborhood has over 800 rental units with the widest range of types and ages; old, new,senior, general-occupancy, low-rise,and high-rise. Lots of nearby amenities and recent redevelopment will continue to enhance the marketability of this neighborhood. Northeast Richfield: rental stock consists mostly of smaller buildings scattered along East 66th Street. For the most part,these properties have varying degrees of maintenance and upkeep. However,there is no major concentration of buildings in any one block or intersection. Therefore, it would be difficult to strategically employ area-wide public investments in the hopes of attracting significant new private City of Richfield,MN "f �Q � Page 3 �i•• .xQ Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 investment. Therefore,any public intervention needed to improve the rental housing stock will likely need to occur on a project-by-project basis. Southeast Richfield: with over 1,000 apartment units,southeast Richfield has the second largest concentration of rental units in the City. However,nearly all of the units are situated along either I-494 or Highway 77.The decentralized nature of ownership among properties along Highway 77 make the area susceptible to a downward trend toward disinvestment if a handful of properties begin to exhibit clear signs of deferred maintenance. The apartments along I-494 are much larger and have more amenities and are often professionally managed,though they are challenged by sound issues and numerous barriers to pedestrian movement. Southcentral Richfield: the rental stock in this area is mostly contained in two large, apartment developments: Mainstreet Village and Lynwood Gardens. The biggest benefit to maintaining the condition of the rental stock in this neighborhood will be to continue building upon the recent changes that have occurred at 77th and Lyndale Avenue,such as better streetscape and pedestrian connections,which have served to attract a new mix of businesses to the area. Southwest Richfield: this area has the largest concentration of apartments with over 1,300 units. Much of the stock is located In three large apartment complexes,though there are a number of smaller buildings located along Oliver and Penn Avenue just north of 76th Street.The larger apartment complexes are In relatively good condition with visible signs of regular maintenance.The best opportunity to enhance the marketability of these properties will be to either create better pedestrian connections across 76th or to help property owners integrate more amenities within their developments. GAP ANALYSIS(NEEDS ASSESSMENT) Based on the preceding sections that addressed the condition of the current rental stock and renter household base,a gap analysis was prepared to identify where need was strongest.The following is a summary of the main findings. 1. Two-and Three-Bedroom Units Richfield is sorely lacking in two-and three-bedroom rental units.Although one-bedroom units are an important unit type that remains in strong demand (unlike studio units), most newer apartment projects now have a unit mix that is more evenly balanced or even tilted toward more two-bedroom and larger units.Therefore,in order for Richfield to diversify its supply of rental housing it should look for ways to increase the number of two-bedroom units either through new construction or perhaps rehabilitation of existing units. • 2. Newer Properties with Modern Amenities and Features Richfield has only one general-occupancy rental property less than 30 years old. It is the only rental property that features a full complement of modern features and amenities including a fitness center, walk-in closets, In-unit washer/dryers,and underground parking.This lack of newer rental options with modem amenities and features is limiting the City's ability to retain longtime residents and attract new, younger residents who want more modem rental housing, particularly young professionals who work along I-494 or in Downtown Minneapolis. City of Richfield,MN S�}}'�. }}pp/��+ Page 4 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 JIGI IIC 193802154 3. Subsidized Units Appropriate for Families Although the City has a large supply of older,affordably priced market rate units, many of which accept Section 8 vouchers,there is a limited supply of two-and three-bedroom units that would be appropriate for families,especially units that are restricted to very low-income households. As a matter of fact,the study revealed that Richfield does not have any.project-based, subsidized units with two-or more bedrooms available to families. 4. Senior Housing (All Types) Although Richfield is experiencing an influx of younger families into both its owner-occupied and rental housing stock,there remains a substantial number of older households living In single-family residences throughout the City who would like to stay in the community, but either can't afford the transition into market rate senior housing or there is not units available among the existing supply. The problem is most acute for older households in need of subsidized or at least affordable senior housing. However, subsidized senior housing is not the only type of senior housing needed. Given the fact that the oldest members of the baby boom generation are beginning to retire,they represent the first wave of a group that will swell the demand for senior housing of all types for years to come. The challenge moving forward will not be in identifying the need,that will be apparent, but in designing housing styles and types that appeal to a new generation of older adults. IMPACT OF NEW RENTAL DEVELOPMENT A review of pending and proposed rental projects was performed to gauge the impact new development may have on the ability of Richfield to meet its rental housing needs. The following is a brief summary of the number of projects and units currently in the development pipeline in Richfield, Bloomington, and Edina. • Within Richfield,there have been several recent proposals for new rental housing,one of which is currently under construction. If all three were to be constructed, it would total close to 300 new units with a mix of both market rate and affordable rents. • In Bloomington,there are three active projects,two of which are under construction,totaling more than 750 units. In Edina,there are currently two proposals for new apartments,which combined would be more than 460 units. The potential impact of these new developments on Richfield's ability to accommodate new rental housing will be temporary and short-term in nature. Real estate development is cyclical. The current wave of development will eventually saturate the market. However,when one looks at the condition of Richfield's supply of rental housing, it is clear that the strategies required to address current and future needs have to be long term, perhaps spanning several real estate cycles. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS The Metropolitan Council incentivlzes the production of new affordable housing throughout the metro area through participation in the Livable Communities Act(LCA),a program that sponsors$15 million in grants to eligible communities each year. The primary requirement for eligibility Is the establishment of affordable and life-cycle housing goals.The most current goals for Richfield for 2011 through 2020 are 497 to 765 new affordable units.These units are not required to be income-restricted, but they must meet affordability goals in which rents do not exceed certain income-based thresholds. City of Richfield,MN V Page 5 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 For purposes of the LCA program,the Metropolitan Council defines affordable housing in a report titled Determining Affordable Housing Need In the Twin Cities 20112020 as the following: a housing unit is affordable if it is priced at or below 30% of gross Income of a household earning 60%of the Twin Cities median family income($50,340 in 2012 for a family of four). The 60% Income threshold is determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)and is the cutoff for tax-credit housing development,the main program for new affordable rental housing construction nationwide. HOUSING STRATEGIES Potential strategies were identified that could assist the City In addressing its rental housing needs. The strategies span everything from regulatory policies to financing programs and were culled from a variety of sources including the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency(MHFA), Urban Land Institute, PolicyLink.org, HousingPolicy.org,and several other affordable/rental housing advocacy groups. Descriptions of the strategies are detailed in the body of the report. City of Richfield,MN StQnt� Page e 6 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 CITY OF RICHFIELD — RENTAL HOUSING INVENTORY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT Introduction PURPOSE OF STUDY In 2004,the City of Richfield's Housing and Redevelopment Authority(HRA) prepared a detailed inventory of the City's owned and rented housing stock. The report was titled Richfield's Housing Assets: Opportunity at Every Door. It Included in-depth analysis of housing data from the 2000 US Census, Hennepin County property tax records, and the City of Richfield. Many of the findings included in the study were instrumental in guiding HRA housing strategies over the next several years, particularly with respect to single-family homeownership and Improvement programs. When the Recession hit In 2008,the for-sale housing market radically changed as longstanding patterns of increasing home ownership rates and home value appreciation gave way to unforeseen trends in home value depreciation and home foreclosures.The result was a major shift in demand from homeownership to renting. Recognizing that these new patterns of housing tenure will greatly impact Richfield's housing stock,the HRA decided to update the rental portion of the 2004 inventory to better understand the current condition of their rental stock and how best to position the City for future growth and change. REPORT FORMAT This report is broken Into six major sections or chapters. The first two sections address characteristics of Richfield's rental housing stock and renter household base. These sections mostly consist of data from the US Census and other relevant secondary sources. It should provide the reader with a solid foundation of objective data with which to assess the City's current rental housing situation.The third section is a brief review of the socio-economic trends affecting the demand for rental housing in Richfield and its neighboring communities. The fourth section steps beyond the quantitative analysis presented in the first three sections by providing the reader with qualitative data about Richfield's rental stock. It includes a summary of findings from Interviews with apartment property managers regarding important issues and concerns as well as results of a windshield survey of neighborhoods where rental housing is most concentrated. The concluding sections of the report build upon the previous four sections. There is a gap analysis, which is an assessment of the types of rental housing Richfield is in need of in order to provide a full continuum of rental housing choice for its residents. This is followed by the final section which provides a list of suggested tools and policies that will assist the City of Richfield in pursuing its rental housing goals for the future. DATA RESOURCES The majority of data presented in this report is secondary data from the US Census,which primarily came from several datasets.The first dataset is the 2010 US Census,which was part of the Census Bureau's decennial counting of all persons and households.The data in this dataset is captured through what had been known until recently as the"short form."Where data was available from this dataset, it was collected and used in the study. More detailed socio-economic data that used to be collected decennially in the form of the"long form"has been replaced by the American Community Survey,which is a rolling 1-,3-,and 5-year survey of a statistically significant sample of the US population. For this study,the 2006-2010 American Community Survey was used for many variables. City of Richfield,MN +"� (��}�+ Page 7 antes Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 "� St 193802154 In addition to the US Census,other data sources included the City of Richfield,Hennepin County, Marquette Advisors(Apartment Trends),Twin Cities Senior Housing Guide, Housing Link, and apartment websites.Although these sources generally augmented the US Census data, in many cases they were valuable in either filling in holes not covered by or to corroborate the Census data. Although Stantec judges these sources to be reliable,it is impossible to authenticate all data.The analyst does not guarantee the data and assumes no liability for any errors in fact,analysis,or judgment.The secondary data used in this study are the most recent available at the time of the report preparation. The objective of this report Is to gather,analyze,and present as many market components as reasonably possible within the time constraints agreed upon.The conclusions contained in this report are based on the best judgments of the analysts; Stantec makes no guarantees or assurances that the projections or conclusions will be realized as stated. It is Stantec's function to provide our best effort in data aggregation,and to express opinions based on our evaluation. USE OF COMPARISON COMMUNITIES In many instances throughout this report, data is presented for a list of neighboring and peer communities for comparison purposes.These comparisons help illuminate how Richfield"stacks"up against its neighbors and peers with respect to its rental housing stock. Peer communities are generally considered to be those that developed at the same time Richfield did and share a similar proximity to the central cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Presumably,these communities are dealing with similar rental housing and demographic issues as Richfield. - The map on the following page displays where these communities are located in relation to Richfield. City of Richfield,MN Page 8 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 ^� Stantec 193802154 ._ ai, .. > a) . I . t.s.s.\.._ i •o� ) a _ m ! • c I a .. . : i : .0. 1 T. • • • a :, . . $ .. . ..... I. F a . •. , . ... • i . , . , . ++4�a � ' �' Q. I��I••• 11=n•1111 •`■ w 1 d 1 ••• V I v 1 •LL 10r—__ • . ` ... 1 ��• 1 !n V 10,..... • '1 1 • C .•• - 1 j Y• la•li Et a•m• li.am,...„m..me••m,......•.∎••Pam..∎.• 0 s 4f �••■•• • m0• VII • .0 0: 1• t-••1 . ••�: : 4'f d ` ` 1 1 CA O U) 1 ii • 1 T L., � 1 'El ..i� 1• r 1• 1 1 !C i •.a..1 . .1 ,. 1 CO 1 :_ : r1 ' 1• t • „ 0 I 0 1....1 II ID .� • a CD • m E.-- c i 13 W r 1 I °— 1 +� la I / •--.„:„„ft.• • i I- to ` • i -a ail •�- N ,•l p 1 0-,x--1,_ . ••4 „c 1 •,' I _ l o I II v '�..o :.♦ r • w In 0 l_ ' tC •2 1 0� O Oft 2.�..s 01- !.!C . f0 • L ) V / U 5 1 i 0 "" C II I e'• \ )L I v, ay • CITY OF RICHFIELD — RENTAL HOUSING INVENTORY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT Characteristics of Rental Housing Stock STRUCTURE TYPE Structure type refers to the number of units in a building. It is important to track structure type because of the differences between larger and smaller buildings. For example, larger buildings often have more amenities available to residents due to their economies of scale. Their size often makes it financially feasible for their owners to have them professionally managed, which can aid in property upkeep, tenant screening, and troubleshooting. In contrast, smaller properties tend to have fewer amenities and may or may not be professionally managed. However, the personal attention given by many"mom and pop" property owners can sometimes far exceed the standards of larger property owners. Table 1 presents data from three different sources on the total number of rental units in Table 1: Richfield Rental Units by Structure Type Richfield and their structure type. For US Census Data comparison purposes, data from a previous year Rental Units Rental Units Change 2000-2010 is presented as well to illustrate the kind of Structure Type 2000 Census 2010 Census Number Percent change that has taken place in recent years. 1,detached unit 407 727 320 78.6% Although each data set is slightly different due 1,attached unit 135 275 140 103.7% to the timing and methodology of data 2 units 123 125 2 1.6% 3 or 4 units 107 119 12 11.2% collection, each one emphasizes two important 5 or more units 4,411 4,440 29 0.7% findings: Total Units 5,183 5,686 503 9.7% Sources:2000 US Census;US Census,American Community Survey 2006- • The vast majority of Richfield's rental 2010 5-year Estimate housing is located in buildings with 5 or City of Richfield Data more units 2004 Rental 2012 Rental Change 2004-2012 The number of rented single-family homes Structure Type Licensing Licensing Number Percent • 1, detached unit 91 456 365 401.1% has significantly increased over the last 1,attached unit 55 13 -42 -76.4% eight to 10 years 2 units 124 187 63 50.8% Note about Table 1 Data Sources: 3 or 4 units 108 86 22 20.4% As previously noted the differences among 5 or more units 4,748 4,710 38 0.8% the data sources used in Table 1 are Total Units 5,126 5,452 326 6.4% Sources:City of Richfield,Rental Licensing Report January 2012;2004 primarily related to timing and methodology. Richfield's Housing Assets report First, the US Census data is from 2000 and Note:includes licensed units that are part of condominium and cooperative 2010, which is slightly older than the City of associations Richfield data. Second,the 2010 US Census Hennepin County Data data is a statistical sample of the population, 2004 Non- 2011 Non- which has a margin of error. This margin of Homestead Homestead Change 2004-2011 error may also explain some of the Structure Type Property Property Number Percent differences in the data. Third,the US Census 1, detached unit 333 723 390 117.1% data is self reported, which often introduces 1, attached unit 3 1 -2 -66.7% some degree of error. Finally, the 2 units 79 174 95 120.3% differences may simply reveal something 3 or 4 units N/A N/A N/A N/A notable about the City's rental stock, namely 5 or more units N/A N/A N/A N/A that there may be a significant number of Total Units N/A N/A N/A N/A rental properties that are not licensed. Sources:Hennepin County Tax Assessor Database;2004 Richfield's Housing Assets report City of Richfield,MN Page a 10 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 Stantec 193802154 The following three maps display where within Richfield licensed and non-homesteaded residential properties are located. These maps help visualize where concentrations of rental housing, both multifamily and single-family, exist within the City. It should be noted that condominium and cooperative units that are licensed as rental units or have a non-homestead tax status were unable to be mapped because Hennepin County recognizes these units as individual properties. The problem in mapping these units, therefore, comes as a result of having to lay on top of one another units with a different rental status or homestead status. As a result, in the interest of avoiding confusion, it was decided to not map these units. City of Richfield,MN ..,y �}' } Page 11 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 - nt& 193802154 • y-- S-3AV NOlNI'l0 S 3AV'NO1NIl0 - - -- -. - --- - •'- "-----,'� __ _ ...S 3AV NO1NI10 - -- • may.. -.-- .. W 1 z - _ F __ --_• W_T ——_ .. • �o — _ S3 1 uri. f `m_ 0NZ G_ 1 ___..- _ -.. ..___._ --. - -- _.- 3A S .. _ ... r. • �_` ... " - ---vi ---- S 3AV SN3A31S.-- W- - ,- - - - ... - • e -- ..----- - T - --- S3AVSN 31 I _S-3AV 1SL S3AV 1S1. S,3AV ISL ,-_ -• _-T, S:3AV 1Sl. I : 3 • - • rn - -----� --.-- .. . -- --- -- -S 3Atl131�001N. _ -_ .. .. _. I .+F - • - .- W S3AV 1130SIV18--- _ I co _ -- -- - S 3Atl-l'130SI\g8 - - - • 3 3 • F_ - y U) 3 .. - 'S-3AV HlaOM1N3M --- --- ■ -S 3AV-H1aOM1N3M---- 3 ti -- Z -- - S 3Atl Hla0i1AlN3M- p ---- __-.. N M c --S.3AVAanesa11d • --- --- :---=..-S3AVXan9S11Ild-- __. . N 3 S 3AV AanBSllld- _ - - --_ = _ _- b N 3 � S 3Atl1NVStl3'ld==3 -_ - -_---- -____-- -= S 3AV 1NtlSV3ld --- t- - -- -t- r . .--. -SHl1 OVObIIVa S 3AV1NVStl3ld co • N- S-S_30 ONV JO . . -3"-"-"� -_ :... S-3AV`ONtlaO --- --_ _ W ; 0_ .e - -- . .—.. f- ...__S 3AV ONtla•J-- S 3AV-ONVi 1 F-..N._ r-._ 3- _.. - .. _ ry) - _ U) r • -S3AV:131aaVH.x_'. -- __ J. .. ...- -v'-i---- ~ ~ 1 N _F. '� ___. - -- - = S.3AV 131aaVH.-- N- --.. ..._. _ ' _�.. 1 �. - s3Atl0�31jaV0 � Irr I- -- pR.. 0 SAKE _: S3Ad"•JanBS'JQd $ • ▪ - -._-_ ,.. WOD - .r - --- --S 3AV 3lVONAT---- 1 .01-- to - . O� y' -1 3.-- -- _- �y� _ - _ -S 3AV HOIda1V -. __ . V) �� p 1 ��"--•-'p �e"� .. -m.. :_ .._ S 3AV 1NVAa8 • ill •1 0 _ S 3AV XVd-l00 I - - - -- 4 S 3AV 1NOdna - O •' __ ---- S-3AV NOS2131A13 -_ - _. -• -S 3AV-NOSa314:13- - - 1 _ --- S 3Atl1NOW3aj - • - • - - --+• 5,3AV,O21VNIO •' _ S 3AV::::::81Alnif 1 V) r ._ -- - - _ 5 3Atl i 1 • -- - `�;__... ---N �- - 0-- �3.5SV10-109WnH._,F-- y) a,0.3aOHS 3Htl� MS£IMH 31V1Sa31N1 S • . .__.� __.--... ..- .---- . . .----00/-- _ _�._..--_ .- __ _ - S 3AVlOIO I 3 --- -- -S 3AV 9NIAaI---N - tO------ - -S,3AV`ONIANI- BWnH 1 Z _- -- .. - • __ _ �- S 3AV-S3WVf -- • _ • _S-3AV S3W Vf _S-3AV S3WVf• • y- - - _ - S-3AV XONH�-:. -- ��,0 ---- S3AV XONN-=- .- - S SAV XONN •I _ • ▪ 12_`._..._.. .S3AVNV001 ___--- -- _ _ •� ___ N •N-_ __ S 3AV NVOHOW ,- - - --- ' _'_� -_ .--5 3AV NVONOIN -- ---r-_.._._._.__ n'- _A ce N Ip •Z 1 __ . -- --- S3AVNO1M3N- �� - . S-3A`dNO1M3N-- __. __ _ S3AVN01M3N _ ._. ..._ - AVN3Al10 . - V - __ ---- - - -- -...- __ S3AVa3All0. _ S-3 --- __. - - --- 1 T -- _ — t-■!-_ F- 3 _ 'S 3AV NN3d , Z ;- I -. _P.-J- ._ " �4p ----- - _S3AV'N33nD 1-` f -- N33(10 - --- - - S3AV-N33nD O' y F ■ -- _.s 3AV 113ssna_ -- - _ VI s 3nvn�3ssna x - s3nv.la3ssna. . sr w' S-3AVNVOIa3HS---- ____- - S3AV NVO113HS ,-.. - 3 •3 - S ---0 ----y -----x -- S-3AV-SVWOHl... - - S 3Atl StlWOH1 =. -- ji 3.__' 3ntl SVWOHl x-- . -_s.3ntl:NOldn ---- ..__ . 1 - �. S 3Atl NOldn -- -- -. -_ 1 - S3AV 1N30NIA - - - 3 N S=3AV1N30NIA - ._ :F+ - S 3AV 1N30NIA 1 tn " : ".S-3AV Naf9HSVM .__ - S 3AV Nan8HSVM y - _n r _ _. 5 3AV NanBHSVM . 1 ma.•-••r•:-••am••am••∎••--••mg.•..•••a••—••—••IMM•SSAV'SSXa3X:,—.•—••—••—••■ _•-•r••—..•—••MP••■•__•I•M••1••••�••.1.S3AV•S3xa3X••—• W .._ ___. • y-S-3AV-N01N11O- S3AVNO1NIl� - -,'„ _�. -'--. --- ._. - w.. - _- S-3n`o':NOlNllO' - - - 1 2 W- r 1. 1 2 N-; F s 3Ab aE w - w Wit S 3AV-°NZ ...,y 1 ~ , 2 _ S 3AV ONZ _ . . N ,. F -• - S3AtlSN3A31S. '..� w _.. . . - -_ _ �-- - _ .x ! [ - - I S3AV156-. AV1SI� m - _. . . S'3AV156; S3 m —�— --1 ' $�3Atl1SL • - �i I 3 — T � ■ • N I• z [. .. _ --- -,�— ■ N __ - - - - S-3AV 13IlOOIN 1- �_ F • r ,S 3A1f.1"130SIV18�-' .-- - x - - - S 3AV 11 031V19 - I co • S 3AV H.LH M1N3 (/) y • m ;r ti_--S 3AV.H1NOM1N3M - -` AA-�� Z-` -_-- �. p - ---._- n CI _.. - _ .._ Z ---- ,AV AanBSllld . . . . - -_ S 3nV AanBSllld:. -._ ._ �... 3---� 3A SA3AV 1NVSF/3-ld -- - ..F_-. S 3AV 1NVSV3ld -- _ ---- -'2.�� III; -- - - - 11 - SV31 ea s c �1a1°tloa tla • CO y 2 S-3AV ONVLIO 1; -y-. i ! _-- - S 3AV;ONVaJ Fx SJ3Atl ONVaJ` _ VL I lAy 3A V TNtlSt/ N I 3- - ° 3_ Atl. S3 ON. ■ W .- - 1 J F �` F ;1▪ 3-S-3AV-131aaVH H rim- _-. S,3AV131aaVH Q_. 3 m ▪ N " S 3AV 4131daVJ n F Ili •• V 40k' •- - f • WOOD K��R�f , s 3hv oanesonv. 3 3AV 31VONA I -- -" ' NOIa 5 : n S 3AV01tl 1 z° p pi' & m - S3AV1NVAa UJ 1 __DJC /.._ 9 -' ��\ C - _-. -.S-3AV-XtldIO3- . I 1. Y et -3ne 110dn0: I - :.. ---_ S 3A`d:NOSa3W3, _ �_.: S 3AV_N bSa3W3- • • I r■ • 3 _s 3 he°avalo f s,3nv_°ada10 ~ `i''-t— -'-� -.3— S 3AV 1 1 p N ._ - 3 3nV I09wnH nv�° I "' IT 3- _ 1 y -- F:._ In -. aO aLOHS 3)4V1 SSAMH 31V1Sa31N1 S 3 1O9WfH i -T � M _ 11 S 3AV ialoawnH- 1 3 __ S 3Atl NIAa4- O S 3AV J,NIAL11• p I• -. S 3Atl-s3wVr _ _ - S-3AV S3wVr�- J_ - -3nd s3wtr • • 3 J�0 P 1' n_ --- - S 3AV XONN- - ,�� _ "S.3ntl XONN- S 3AV XONN- - • 1 °ar r 1L . 3- 3 - III 1 g1• !o --- -S 3AV NV`J0712,: ` _,.— _.... S:3AV_NV0,01 .- - -----�n_ _1... •to _.. C6 3 i — _. _._ - N_._... -i�__- -_ .._ _ I- ....Z 0 y - 1 O S-3AV NVOLIOW�'- -- -` �_ 1- . -•S 3AV-NV•JaOW n --- I _ y S 3AV.NO 3N O LM S-3AV NO1/N3N I._ S.3Ab NO1M3N 1 ___ _. k` - - S'3AV a3A110... - -- - - 1 J ---r 3AI-1 � - i x i. Fo� '1 . _ -� __ x $3Ad.NN3d n - ■■ 3 no.3-1. 1 -__1-- ' _ 3AV-N3InO ._. �... _....5.3 tl-N33nO NO z 1 `- s_3AV:"113SSna_ _. _ 113ssn21 --_ _7 13SSIla-. v---- N I s-3ntl I Q F. ---S- AV-NVOIa3HS--- .- ^ S 3/1tl N6°I,a3H � n -" 3 — 'F1 3'.r[ -1F--: -� _ _-� 3 ° ntl Ntl 1a3F -S-3AV SV■OHl - r z " 3AV NOldn -- �.-1 � S 3AV NOldn 1� 3 • --: S 3AV 1N33N1n a S 3AV"1N3ONIn --- - _ • r L -- - S-3AVNLIn9HSVM.- 1 ._ S 3Atl Na1l9HSVM _. L S 3AV NanBHSVM y 1 S'3AV'S3Xa3X••m••�•••■••∎••∎•. -. -_ S'3AtlAS3Xa3X ,'- 1 y—S 3AV-IN01NI10 S3Ab ' , -.'-_ .-�---_:_____--4- _ w1_ • 0_ W N01NIlD i — r I N S13ndN01Nl10 •▪ m ✓ 2 -- T-- t - - f. I tD- - - -7_,_ - _ _ - - ._. 1 H� y : 4 1 S 3AVKCY / — ./ Z %/ S-3AV 0 Z • o - . %% - _ 1 1 1,1 -:- - -_- - S 3/�F/-SN3A31S, _ f - -- - `s A r S 3Atl SN3A31S- - -_ - 1 S=3AV 1S[L.- S_3AV1SL_ - S 3AV tSL _ o•_- .-'// -�_- __/-j----- , 2�0 - --- S3AV IS I.----- - -. -- •• ! 3 - - S-3AV 13ll0OIN. 7 • N �S`3AV1130SIV18/= - co i CO • S3nVH m 3 3 1 s3nvll�aslt�s- -S 3AV H.LNONaN3M- - - INOMLN3M ,1 c- - -__-_.-o__ S 3AV-H1a0MjN3M- ---__ --- 3 w z =S. AV=Aa 9S111d — 3 S 3AV_Aan8s111d- Aan8S1IId__re ^ T %S; - - --- -- I -x S-3TV-INVSV3id _r S 3 S 3AV 1NVSV31d nV 1 ......y _... ,".._..�. . - 3 / - S 3AV 1NVS`d3 , �� ....:� SAal aV0 IIVa .- I N rr%SI' 3- s 3 F,---S-3AV 0NV2i�J� r- w: T` 1 ,G3 „�. - . 3-._ __._. S3/1V,0NF6a°J ..._..� S 3AH4Ntla'S-... 'S -ONVi S3AV-131aaVH-= -_.. //x a --- --mow'--. y.- I ti �� / m - - x S 3AV 131aaVH o_ Ali _$_ • -- •i :!f %!S' • /77/a- ,, ;S 3AV-01313VJ r r ' r E OR j �! l_//_,./. / � KS S_ xv 6anasenV - - S 3AV31V• l� �p 1 3,,--. 5 ^ , 3AVH31a01V S I w OQ = m S_3AV1NVAa o � aL_ S3AVXVdiO0_ 1 _ -I ,- i i • - -1). S-3AV.iN0dn0 I /, -- S-3AV NOSa3W3 -,, - �;, /- S 3AV NOSa3W3: r 1 _ _ • -- S3AV.1N0W3ad- -- I - . . / S . 3 3- - s-3ntl aavalo-- 1 ° 3nb 021V2110 s 3ntl 2 x— �l / r I - _ 1- ._ - r- 3 s3AVia1OBWnH_ ,, T MSC AMH 31b1Sa31Nl S 3AV 1a1O8WnH w `'l x H_ 0HS3HV7 1 3-- 5-3nV JNIAaI- -T_ / _ ^° F - 7 S 3AV 1O1O8WnH 3a -- -- S3AV°NI/WI-_- -__ -_A. } N- - - S 3AV-S3WVC ---- [_-- T- T S 3AVN4!•J0l ' - . SAVNV01 -- N_. / In____ ._N _. 3 CO_- - ---- . S.3AV-NVJa0W .:"`._. _ _"- ` :`------S 3AVNVONOW - -__. ^--- ::^- _ -- n _.__ .."/ – _ -�o ..r'- S-3AVNO1M3N� _ -- S 3AV N01M3N_ _ _ _., -,., ------ ---r- - S-3AV N01M3N •! / / - --- r 3AVa3All0 - N -T- - - / S 3AV a3N1O-- - - i ------ N -_ S-3AV NN3d- T �� / o __ . � -- JS AV 33nO 3� --S n —�- -�r-- - - S 3A V N33nO- r omF - S -- 0z 3 -S 3AV 113SSOa m ✓ _ , �__ 3AV 113SSn a ...._ 1- S-3AVNV01a3HS--- S3nvN-VOIa3HS - -- - "' - ✓ F. Sri /-., 1 - - ,J-� !•./.. f - N .3---S 3AV.SVW0 11 1) - - - /_ [! S-3AV SVWOH1 r/ S 3ndStl _ IN S 3AV NOldn/ r / ,S 3Ad1N30NIA / AV_N ldn- - 0 ONIA ---- ��- - - ,S 3A.LN30NIA--- S-3AV 1N3 / 2F � 11/- / /, 1 - . _S3AV NanBHSVM - - r 1 `� _- - -_-- -_-- ' S 3nV an HS - - ... y ^ 77 --- - - - - S 3AV NanBHSVM - ^ ' _- -_ - N 8- VM r - Culled from a variety of sources,Table 2 and Figure 1 provide more detailed data on the structure type of rental properties broken down by age/disability and income restrictions. Income restricted or subsidized properties are any property that restricts tenancy to low-income households (often those earning less than 50% of the area median income,though the percentage can differ based on the subsidizing program) and in return receives grants,tax-credits, or other subsidies that help cover any debt, maintenance, or operating costs. It should also be noted that Table 2 does not include data on condominium or cooperative units that are rented since information such as rent and number of bedrooms is too difficult to collect. Furthermore, these units are much more likely to drop out of the rental market as soon as the for-sale market improves. The most important findings from Table 2 are: • There is a roughly equal distribution of rental units among small, medium, and large building types • Nearly all of the restricted (i.e., senior) housing in Richfield is located in large buildings (50+ units) Table 2: Richfield Rental Units by Structure Type(Properties with 3 or More Units) Number of Units Sturcture Type General Occupancy Restricted (Age or Disabled) (i.e., Buildings with...) Total Units Market Rate Subsidized Market Rate Subsidized 3 or 4 units 86 86 5 to 9 units 208 208 10 to 19 units 1,396 1,349 36 11 20 to 49 units 1,360 1,330 30 50 or more units 1,680 1,121 409 150 Total Units 4,730 4,094 0 445 191 Percentage of Units Sturcture Type General Occupancy Restricted (Age or Disabled) (i.e., Buildings with...) Total Units Market Rate Subsidized Market Rate Subsidized 3or4units 1.8% 2.1% 5 to 9 units 4.4% 5.1% 10 to 19 units 29.5% 33.0% 8.1% 5.8% 20 to 49 units 28.8% 32.5% 15.7% 50 or more units 35.5% 27.4% 91.9% 78.5% Total Units 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% Sources:City of Richfield, Rental licensing Report January 2012;Housing Link;apartment websites; Rent in Richfield Report(1999) Note:does not include units that are part of condominium or cooperative associations Figure 1: Richfield Rental Units by Structure Type(Properties with 3 or More Units) Buildings with 3 or 4 units 5 to 9 units 86 1,396 1,360 1,680 20 to 49 units 50 or more units 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 Total Rental Units Sources:Cityof Richfield,Rental Licensing ReportJanuary 2012;aparbnent websites;Rent in Richfield Report(1999) City of Richfield,MN �}� }}p/+ Page 15 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 �/lli�in`GZ. 193802154 A note about subsidized housing and Section 8 vouchers: Table 2, and several subsequent tables, present data on the number of subsidized units in Richfield. For purposes of this study, subsidized housing is defined as rental housing that has a financial subsidy attached to a specific property that restricts tenancy to low- or moderate-income households. Section 8 vouchers, in contrast, are a form of rental assistance that is tied to a household and not a property. Vouchers provide greater housing choice for low-income households by allowing them to choose among market rate properties that are qualified to accept such vouchers. Households with a Section 8 voucher are not required to locate within a specific community. Therefore, data on Section 8 vouchers are not included in the analysis of Richfield's rental housing stock because they are not tied to a specific property. This is an important distinction because even though Richfield may have a number of rental properties that accept Section 8 vouchers, these properties are not obligated to accept households with Section 8 vouchers. These properties, therefore, are at risk of losing their"affordable"status should the owner increase rents or simply prefer renting to households without a voucher. As a point of clarification, the Richfield HRA has a contract with the Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)to administer up to 233 Section 8 vouchers. Typically, Richfield has between 250 and 300 households that receive Section 8 vouchers. Thus, the number of households that"port in"to Richfield from other administrating divisions slightly outnumbers those that"port out"to other communities. Currently, there are 205 households on the Richfield HRA waiting list for Section 8 vouchers. The Richfield HRA also funds and administers another rental assistance program called Kids @Home to help support families with children in Richfield schools. As of April 2012, there are 27 households that partake in the Kids @Home program. STRUCTURE TYPE:COMMUNITY COMPARISON According to Figure 2, Figure 2: Distribution of Rental Units by Structure Type Richfield has a greater 100°i° - proportion of rental units in 90% buildings with 5 to 49 units 45 than compared to its peer 50+Unit Building communities. However, its 70% t 20 49 Unit Buildin structure type profile is very 60% g similar to the rental housing s 50% - 5 19 Unit Building stock of the entire metro ■2 4 Unit Building area. I -Single-Family* -- - Other** a Q`4\�\ac-c s' .(D\ce 3=> 44°a0e °��cy��4400a COs oye,\\oJ`,g X00 ,\oo ,ae oae 4\-Q `�o �.9 �e C§ �$ * Includes detached and attached single-family units **Includes mobile homes,houseboats,and other"non-permanent"structures Source:US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey City of Richfield,MN �C �}' } Page 16 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 4- JLUII`C. 193802154 UNIT TYPE Unit type (i.e., number of bedrooms) is important to track because it relates closely to the kinds of households that can be accommodated by a community's rental stock. For example, studios and one- bedroom units are best for small households, such as singles or couples without children. However, roommate situations or families with children generally require two or more bedrooms. Table 3 and Figures 3 and 4 present data on the number of Richfield rental units by bedroom size broken down by affordability and age restriction. Relevant findings from these data are: • Over two-thirds of Richfield's rental units have one bedroom, which is a very high proportion of one bedroom units • Almost all (97%) of the subsidized units in Richfield have one bedroom • There are no subsidized, general-occupancy units in Richfield, which essentially means there are no units available in Richfield to very low-income households, especially families with children Table 3: Richfield Rental Units by Bedroom Size(Properties with 3 or More Units) Number of Units General Occupancy Restricted(Age or Disabled) Unit Type Total Units Market Rate Subsidized Market Rate Subsidized Studio Units 93 60 33 One Bedroom Units 3,205 2,754 267 184 Two Bedroom Units 1,353 1,201 145 7 Three+Bedroom Units 79 79 Total Units 4,730 4,094 0 445 191 _ Percentage of Units General Occupancy Restricted(Age or Disabled)_ Unit Type Total Units Market Rate Subsidized Market Rate Subsidized Studio Units 2.0% 1.5% 7.4% One Bedroom Units 67.8% 67.3% 60.0% 96.3% Two Bedroom Units 28.6% 29.3% 32.6% 3.7% Three+Bedroom Units 1.7% 1.9% Total Units 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% Sources:City of Richfield, Rental Licensing Report January 2012;Housing Link;apartment websites;Rent in Richfield Report(1999) Figure 3:Rental Units by Bedroom Size Figure 4:Distribution of Bedroom Types by Affordability and Age (Properties with 3 or More Units) Restriction(Properties with 3 or More Units) 3,500 3205 _-_. __. ___.__. Hoot' 3,000 - • _ - - 910n;, w SOo. ' 2,500 5 70% TO 15 2,000 60% 313R*Units = d - 2BR knits 1,500 . .. 1,353 ._._ m 50% 40% ' 1BR Lln its 1,000 = Studio Units u _0 o. 20% ,. 500 93 79 1q?•, 0 0% Studio Units One Bedroom Two Bedroom Three+ Gen Occ: Gen Occ: Restricted: Restricted: Units Units Bedroom Units Market Subsidized Market Subsidized Sources: City of Richfield,Rental Licensing Reportlanuary 2012;apartment websites; Rental Property Type Rent in Richfield Report(1999) Sources:City ofRichfield.Rental Licensing Report Januar v 2012;Housing Link; apartment.cebsites;Rent in Richfield Report(1999) City of Richfield,MN ,p �}' }p/� Page 17 4_ Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 : ntet 193802154 Recognizing that the recent foreclosure crisis has resulted in a sharp increase in the number of rented single-family homes, additional data was secured from Hennepin County to better understand the unit type breakdown of single-family and duplex rental units, which is summarized in Table 3A. Please note that the data in Table 3A does not correspond directly with the data in Table 1. These data include non- homesteaded single-family and duplex units that are licensed under the City of Richfield's rental licensure program. It does not include homesteaded properties that are licensed by the City of Richfield. These properties typically consist of families that rent to other family members or to boarders. The following are important findings from the table: • The vast majority of single-family and duplex units that are rented have two or more bedrooms • Roughly 80% of the rented single-family homes have three or more bedrooms Table 3A: Rented Single-Family and Duplex Units by Bedroom Size Number of Units Unit Type Total Units Single-Family Duplex Studio Units 0 0 0 One Bedroom Units 11 5 6 Two Bedroom Units 174 61 113 Three Bedroom Units 237 184 53 Four Bedroom Units 73 73 0 Five+Bedroom Units 12 12 0 Total Units 507 335 172 Percentage of Units Unit Type Total Units Single-Family Duplex Studio Units 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% One Bedroom Units 2.2% 1.5% 3.5% Two Bedroom Units 34.3% 18.2% 65.7% Three Bedroom Units 46.7% 54.9% 30.8% Four Bedroom Units 14.4% 21.8% 0.0% Five+Bedroom Units 2.4% 3.6% 0.0% Total Units 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Sources: Hennepin County Tax Assessor Database;City of Richfield, Rental Licensing Report January 2012 City of Richfield,MN :,�, nt& Page 18 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 • i 193802154 UNIT TYPE:COMMUNITY COMPARISON According data from the US Census (Figure 5), which includes single-family as well as multifamily properties, Richfield has the highest proportion of one bedroom units among its peer communities. Therefore, when market conditions increase demand for larger unit types, Richfield's rental housing stock is not as well positioned to capture that demand relative to its peer communities. Figure 5: Distribution of Rental Units* by Unit Type 100% - - 80% - 5BR+ 70% - -- -- -- -- -- - - 5 60% - -- -- -- -- BR re 50% - - -- -- 2BR cy, 40% - - - - -- •1BR c30% - -- -- -- - Studio 20% - - - -- o • 0% . Q-r 0- e,cs 2, eoQ Q,as` (., Hoye oJ\yQ ev )P �, 0 �Q\c, Cam. *Covers all rental units,including attached and detached single-family units Source:US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey City of Richfield,MN y Page 19 4 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 • nfeC 193802154 YEAR BUILT Year built is an important indicator of the condition and marketability of rental properties. Most properties that are more 30 years old will start to exhibit significant wear and tear and require major re-investment in order to keep them up-to-code and energy efficient. Moreover, older properties generally need regular updating in order to keep pace with the tastes and preferences of modern day renters. Table 4 and Figures 6 and 7 present data on the year rental units were constructed broken down by affordability and age restriction. The following are key findings concerning the age of Richfield's rental stock: • Over 75% of Richfield's rental housing stock was built in the 1960s • Less than 10% of the City's rental stock was built within the last 10 years • Market rate senior housing has the newest rental stock with more than 50% of the units being built within the last 10 years Table 4: Richfield Rental Units by Year Built(Properties with 3 or More Units) Number of Units Year General Occupancy Restricted(Age or Disabled) Constructed Total Units Market Rate Subsidized Market Rate Subsidized 2000-present 381 138 243 1990-1999 4 4 1980-1989 210 180 30 1970-1979 335 185 150 _ 1960-1969 3,550 3,517 22 11 1950-1959 242 242 Pre-1950 8 8 Total 4,730 4,094 _ 0 445 191 Percentage of Units Year General Occupancy Restricted(Age or Disabled) Constructed Total Units Market Rate Subsidized Market Rate Subsidized _ 2000-present 8.1% 3.4% 54.6% 1990-1999 0.1% 0.1% 1980-1989 4.4% 40.4% 15.7% 1970-1979 7.1% 4.5% 78.5% 1960-1969 75.1% 85.9% 4.9% 5.8% 1950-1959 5.1% 5.9% Pre-1950 0.2% 0.2% Total 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% Sources:City of Richfield,Rental Licensing Report January 2012;Hennepin County Tax Assessor Database Figure 6:Richfield Rental Units by Year Built Figure 7:Distribution of Richfield Rental Units by Year Built (Properties with 3 or More Units) (Properties with 3 or More Units) 4000 3,550 100% 3500 90% • 3000 8090 2000-present 2500 Ti 0% , 1990-1999 e - E 60% 2000 u 0 1980-1989 ce 50�' •1970-1979 1500 5 40% 1960-1969 1000 2090 ■1950 1959 500 - - -242----- 33.5_- -.210 381 . Pre 1950 10% 0 -- 8 .1111_ -T. 4 Gob c Ne. La 40 Nip ��1c °�� ti?c° eyed Gen Market Subsidized SMenrikoert: Subsidized Qc e 4)' c1 X10 ��O ��c OQi ~ ' ' , Rental Property Type Sources:Cityof Richfield,Rental Licensing ReportJanuary 2012; Sources: City of Richfield.Renral Licensing Repot January 2011: Hennepin Co untyTaxAssessor Database Hennepin County Tan Assessor Database City of Richfield,MN Page 20 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 J;= StUI II 193802154 YEAR BUILT: COMMUNITY COMPARISON According to Figures 8 and 9, Richfield's rental housing stock is dominated by units built in the 1960s. No other peer community has such a large proportion of its rental housing built in one decade, much less a decade that occurred more than 40 years ago. Some of this is attributable to the fact that Richfield was developed rapidly during the decades immediately following World War II. However, its peer communities also experienced significant development during this time as well. The exceptions are Eden Prairie, which developed more recently, and South Minneapolis, which developed before Richfield. Therefore, it could be concluded that Richfield has not been as effective as its peer communities in integrating rental housing into its redevelopment programming. Figure 8: Number of Rental Units by Year Built 12,000 II 10,000 t 2000-present 8,000 + _ 1990-1999 1980-1989 6,000 --.-.-... . 1970-1979 :::: I Qs°r °esc aeaet ae4 °Q aQ�a�° ��a soya, J ye *Covers all rental units,including attached and detached single-family units So urce:U S Cens us,2006-2010 American Community Survey Figure 9: Percentage of Rental Units by Year Built 100% I 2000-present 70% 1990-1999 cu 60% - - 1980-1989 j !:: -% - •1950-1959 20% Pre-1950 0% r�`e\a •c•c)c�`e�`\a �a\ca a\\aa�°Q ��e�°a 8, se °�a,\\a o ae tae aQ ° Q- *Covers all rental units,including.attached and detached single-family units Source:US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey City of Richfield,MN Page 21 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 Stantec 193802154 MARKET RATE RENTS Table 5 and Figures 10 and 11 present data on the number of general-occupancy, market rate rental units by rent ranges broken down by unit type. Rent information was collected from a number of sources and in order to keep comparisons as similar as possible, gross rents were compared, which include estimates for utilities such as heat, electricity, water, and trash removal. Important findings are: • Due to Richfield's large proportion of older, one-bedroom units, the overall average rent is below $800. When compared to older rental stock in the Metro, Richfield's rents are comparable. • The average rent for two-bedroom units is $954 and the average for three-bedroom units is $1,249 • Less than 10% of Richfield's rental stock has rents above $1,000 per month Table 5: Richfield Market Rate Rents by Unit Type(Properties with 3 or More Units) Number of Units Market Rate General Occupancy Properties Gross Monthly Rent Total Units Studio Units 1BR Units 2BR Units 3+BR Units Less than$600 56 56 $600-$699 1,171 1,171 $700-$799 1,330 1,293 37 $800-$899 770 4 216 550 $900-$999 419 418 1 $1,000-$1,199 223 52 137 34 $1,200-$1,399 22 22 $1,400 or more 82 60 22 Total 4,073 60 2,732 1,202 79 Average Rent $784 $603 $745 $954 $1,249 Percentage of Units Market Rate General Occupancy Properties Gross Monthly Rent Total Units Studio Units 1BR Units 2BR Units 3+BR Units Less than$600 1,4% 93.3% $600-$699 28.8% 42.9% $700-$799 32.7% 47.3% 3.1% $800-$899 18.9% 6.7% 7.9% 45.8% $900-$999 10.3% 34.8% 1.3% $1,000-$1,199 5.5% 1.9% 11.4% 43.0% $1,200-$1,399 0.5% 27.8% $1,400 or more 2.0% 5.0% 27,8% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Sources:City of Richfield,rental survey;apartment websites;Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends 4th Q 2011 Note:Gross monthly rent includes estimates for utilities as follows:studio=$35;1BR=$55;28R=$80;3BR+=$120 Figure 10: Richfield Market Rate Gross Rents by Unit Type Figure 11:Average Monthly Quoted Rent by Unit Type for (Properties with 3 or More Units) Smaller(<100 units)and Older(pre-1980)Market Rate Properties 1,400 - $1,200 $1,107 $1,103 1,200 $1,000 1,000 I-- $864 $825 800 3+BR Units d $800 $Boo $696 c 2BR Units $600 4545 ---- $590 Richfield 600 200 1BR Units 400 Studio Units 2 $400 ! MARKET RATE RENTS:COMMUNITY COMPARISON Figures 12 and 13 display the average market rate rent for one- and two-bedroom units in Richfield and its peer communities. In both unit types, Richfield's market rate rent is the second lowest of the communities shown. As mentioned previously, Richfield's relatively low average rent compared to its peer communities is likely due to the fact that so many of its units are more than 40 years old and there are very few newer upscale properties to help raise the overall average rent. Figure 12:Average Market Rate Quoted Rent for One-Bedroom Apartment $1,100 r-_._... $1,000 4_... 51,01 o°1c• $900 j $955 $912 $877 S $800 $sza 0 • • $700 O1 $703 10 i $600 • • $500 $400 Q\e oa Q`#e• Qocs.4 �oQ�tb o.csCs e�`oP� o��ca\a�ae a cQ`Z> J`yQ1' ,a`ca a 00 \�5 a e' o Sources:Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends 4th Quarter 2011 Note:Rents are quoted rents and have not been adjusted to indude utilities if not already included in rent Figure 13:Average Market Rate Quoted Rent for Two-Bedroom Apartment $1,400 T $1,300 I- t'c $1,200 r-- • - • 51 19., s. $1,100 $1,077 $1,093 C $1,000 - 51,017 S $970 $971 d $900 - d• $800 - 5870 • $894 I ▪ $700 $600 - aQ\a oa�� \a QoyaS�&o�\c��c z��oP`aa�oQ� o��ca1 ecQ`a`��e oJ\yQav �a\ca ec4,> Sources:Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends 4th Quarter 2011 Note:Rents are quoted rents and have not been adjusted to include utilities if not already included in rent City of Richfield,MN (��n}p/� Page 23 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 I, .i�u1 IIGZ. 193802154 AMENITIES AND FEATURES Apartment amenities and features desired by renters change over time. What was a key feature that helped market a property 40 years ago may not be as important of a marketing feature today. Table 6 and Figure 14 display some of the common features and amenities desired by today's rental market and prevalence of these features among Richfield's rental stock broken down by price range. Below are key findings from the data: • Higher rent units tend to have more features and amenities. For example, 100% of the units with rent above $1,400 per month have each of the features and amenities included in Table 6. In contrast, less than 2% of the units with rents below $700 per month have any of the features and amenities in Table 6. • Pool is the most common amenity with over 50% of the rental units having access to a pool • Fitness center, walk-in closets, and in-unit washer/dryers are found in only a small number of properties. This is not surprising since these features only began to be regularly included in apartment construction within the last 10 to 15 years. Table 6:Apartment Amenities and Features by Rent Range (Market Rate Properties with 3 or More Units) Number of Units Amenity/Feature Average Gross Total Covered Fitness Walk-in In-Unit Community Monthly Rent Units Pool Parking Center Closets W/D Room Less than$600 56 $600-$699 1,171 23 23 23 $700-$799 1,330 1,026 230 $800-$899 770 258 206 96 206 $900-$999 419 419 419 90 276 $1,000-$1,199 223 , 223 223 90 172 56 146 $1,200-$1,399 22 22 22 22 $1,400 or more 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 Total 4,073 2,053 1,205 262 395 138 710 Percentage of Units Amenity/Feature _ Average Gross Total Covered Fitness Walk-in In-Unit Community Monthly Rent Units Pool Parking Center Closets W/D Room Less than$600 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% $600-$699 100.0% 2.0% 2.0% 0.0% 2.0% 0.0% 0,0% $700-$799 100.0% 77.1% 17.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% $800-$899 100.0% 33.5% 26.8% 0.0% 12.5% 0.0% 26.8% $900-$999 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 21.5% 0.0% 0.0% 65.9% $1,000-$1,199 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 40.4% 77.1% 25.1% 65.5% $1,200-$1,399 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% $1,400 or more 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Total 100.0% 50.4% 29.6% 6.4% 9.7% 3.4% 17.4% Sources:City of Richfield,annual rental survey;apartment websites;Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends 4th Q 2011 Note:Gross monthly rent includes estimates for utilities as follows:studio=$35; 1BR=$55;2BR=$80;3BR+=$120 City of Richfield,MN �}�/�}p/+ Page 24 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 J_� ./�u�1`G�. 193802154 Figure 14: Presence of Select Apartment Amenities and Features among Richfield's Market Rate Rental Housing Stock(Properties with 3 or More Units) 60% _...__.. 50% -- A c 7 40% -- ------- w 0 of 30% - 20% - a 10% ROW 0% .L- — .—. .. _ . Pool Covered Fitness Walk-in In-Unit Community Parking Center Closets W/D Room Apartment Amenity/Feature Sources:apartment websites;Stantec fieldwork City of Richfield,MN Pa e 25 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 ` --. Stantec 193802154 RENT HISTORY Table 7 and Figure 15 display the overall rent of market rate units in Richfield and Metro Area from 2001 to 2011. Over the 10-year span, the average monthly rent in Richfield increased $19 or 2.5%. Smaller unit types, studios and one-bedroom units fared somewhat better increasing 4.4% and 3.1% while larger unit types, two- and three-bedroom units, actually experienced a slight decline in rent. This is in contrast to the Metro Area which had an overall increase of nearly 11% in rent during this time. Some of this can be explained by the fact that the Metro Area rent would include all the newer properties built during this time, which almost always skew toward the top of the market causing the overall average rent to increase even if there were no appreciable inflation. Richfield, however, did not have any new apartment buildings open between 2001 and 2011 (Oaks on Pleasant opened in 2000). Therefore, any increases in the overall average rent are almost entirely due to inflationary effects on existing units. Table 7:Average Market Rate Rent by Unit Type 2001 to 2011 Richfield '01-'11 Change Number of Bedrooms 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 $ % Studio Units $591 $579 $586 $581 $531 $582 $593 $593 $604 $622 $617 $26 4.4% One Bedroom Units $682 $658 $649 $641 $636 $639 $658 $679 $672 $684 $703 $21 3.1% Two Bedroom Units $895 $888 $879 $863 $874 $853 $862 $904 $912 $885 $894 -$1 -0.1% Three+Bedroom Units $1,261 $1,222 $1,193 $1,179 $1,186 $1,187 $1,197 $1,222 $1,210 $1,210 $1,249 -$12 -1.0% All Units $763 $739 $730 $720 $722 $716 $749 $761 $777 $769 $782 $19 2.5%_ Metro Area '01-11 Change Number of Bedrooms 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 $ % Studio Units $569 $578 $555 $583 $595 $605 $628 $649 $671 $664 $685 $116 20.4% One Bedroom Units $733 $734 $734 $733 $735 $751 $778 $788 $789 $787 $811 $78 10.6% Two Bedroom Units $913 $918 $926 $927 $928 $947 $976 $982 $980 $985 $1,003 $90 9.9% Three+Bedroom Units $1,218 $1,217 $1,219 $1,230 $1,224 $1,255 $1,285 $1,271 $1,274 $1,268 $1,291 $73 6.0% All Units $837 $841 $845 $849 $851 $871 $899 $906- $906 $908 $927 $90 10.8% Source:Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends Report 4th Quarter 2001 thru 4th Quarter 2011 Note:Rents are quoted rents and have not been adjusted to include utilities if not already included in rent Figure 15:Average Market Rate Rent for All Rental Units 2001 to 2011 $950 - $927 $900 $850 Ir $800 $782 0 $750 • • - - $700 $650 $600 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Richfield Metro Area Source:Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends Report 4th Quarter 2001 thru 4th Quarter 2011 Note:Rents are quoted rents and have not been adjusted to include utilities if not already included in rent City of Richfield,MN Cnler Page 26 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 ' I 193802154 RENT HISTORY:COMMUNITY COMPARISON Figures 16 and 17 compare the change in average rent from 2001 to 2011 for one- and two-bedroom apartments in Richfield and each of its peer communities. From the figures, it is apparent that Richfield did not have the same rent increases as many of its peer communities. However, not all peer communities experienced the kinds of rate increases as Edina, Golden Valley, or St. Louis Park. Communities such as Bloomington, Maplewood, and Roseville also experienced rent increases far below the metro average, which suggests that these communities were undergoing similar market effects as Richfield. Figure 16:Average One-Bedroom Rent in 2001 and 2011 $1,100 $1,000 , c $900 Z $800 + •2001 •2011 S $700 - - - $600 - $500 . •• Q. eJ soQ cf, °,Ix'L °ye yQ �oP P �a o\a e �� o" Source:Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends Report 4th Quarter 2001 thru 4th Quarter 2011 Note:Rents are quoted rents and have not been adjusted to include utilities if not already included in rent Figure 17:Average Two-Bedroom Rent in 2001 and 2011 $1,300 1 i $1,200 i c $1,100 r I $1,000 t 2001 c I •2011 E $900 • $800 - - - $700 \r�`��a `cA`q��Qia\`\� �a`•a Ja\\e\ °.e \¢ °a �a�ca, oy�S\e �SQaj� oP�ea Q \oot° ao \azc Z a� 5° Q- �oJ e�c Source:Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends Report 4th Quarter 2001 thru 4th Quarter 2011 Note:Rents are quoted rents and have not been adjusted to include utilities if not already included in rent City of Richfield,MN C}'M}p/� Page 27 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 J1.Q�1`G"�, 193802154 VACANCY HISTORY Table 8 and Figure 18 show vacancy history of market rate units by unit type from 2001 to 2011 for Richfield and the Metro Area. Although Richfield's vacancy history over the last 10 years has been somewhat more volatile (due to a smaller universe of units) than the Metro Area experience, it has generally followed the metro area trend in which vacancy rates moved above 5% in the early part of the decade then declined toward the middle of the decade only to be followed by a sharp rise due to the recession and now settling into a period of historic lows. Below are important findings from the data: • A healthy rental housing market is characterized by an overall vacancy rate around 5%. This"wiggle" room in the market has several benefits: 1) it helps keep rents from rising too quickly and becoming a burden on households; 2) it helps reduce overcrowding, which can lead to rapid wear-and-tear on units; 3) it allows a certain amount of turnover in a timely manner so that landlords can adequately maintain their properties and make necessary improvements; and 4) a 5% vacancy rate is low enough that it assures adequate cash flow so that landlords have the capital to reinvest. When the vacancy rate drops well below 5%, some landlords will definitely benefit in the short term by raising rents appreciably without losing tenants. However, this is likely to result in overcrowding, creating a huge burden on some households, or pushing other households out of the market altogether by forcing them to search for housing in other communities. • Units with three or more bedrooms have always seemed to be in high demand in Richfield. Even during periods of an overall soft market, these unit types have never had a vacancy rate above 5.6%. This is likely due to the fact that Richfield has so few three-bedroom units. Table 8:Vacancy History by Unit Type 2001 to 2011 Richfield Number of Bedrooms 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Studio Units 18.2% 0.0% 6.7% 6.7% 5.0% 6.7% 0.0% 13.3% 20.0% 14.3% 0.0% One Bedroom Units 8.3% 5.6% 8.4% 6.2% 10.5% 6.3% 3.9% 1.4% 8.5% 4.5% 2.4% Two Bedroom Units 8.2% 8.1% 6.3% 4.0% 6.6% 6.6% 1.7% 2.5% 7.0% 3.5% 3.4% Three+Bedroom Units 4.2% 5.6% 5.6% 2.8% 0.0% 1.4% 2.3% 0.0% 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% All Units 8.2% 6.4% 7.7% 5.5% 9.0% 6.2% 3.0% 3.7% 7.9% 4.1% 2.6% Metro Area Number of Bedrooms 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Studio Units 2.7%_ 5.7% 6.7% 6.7% 5.3% 3.4%_ 4.1% 4.4% 6.5% 4.3% 2.2% One Bedroom Units 4.2% 6.0% 7.3% 6.2% 5.2% 3.9% 3.7% 4.3% 7.0% 3.7% 2.6% Two Bedroom Units 3.9% 7.2% 8.2% 8.2% 6.8% 5.1% 4.4% 5.3% 7.4% 3.9% 3.0% Three+Bedroom Units 4.2% 7.4% 6.6% 9.0% 8.6% 7.5% 5.6% 5.5% 7.0% 4.0% 3.3% All Units 4.0% 6.6% 7.6% 7.3% 6.1% 4.7% 4.2% 4.9% 7.3% 3.8% 2.8% Source:Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends Report 4th Quarter 2001 thru 4th Quarter 2011 Figure 18:Vacancy History for All Rental Units 2001 to 2011 10% 9% - 8% r - - ---. 6% \ -_ Richfield g 5% -t I� - Metro Area ■70 m 4% - Equilibrium 3% 2% 1% - 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Source:Marquette Pdvisors,Apartment Trends Report 9th Quarter 2001 thru 9th Quarter 2011 City of Richfield,MN (�}��}p� Page 28 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 ; Stan t& 193802154 AFFORDABILITY Table 9 and Figure 19 builds upon data in Table 5 and Figure 10 by presenting rent breakdowns with the corresponding income and wages needed to afford those rents. Although Richfield has rents that are, on average, below the Metro Area average and well below their peer communities, nearly 70%of the City's rental stock, including almost all of its two and three-bedroom units, would not be affordable to households with annual incomes below $28,000. If annual incomes were translated to hourly wages, this would mean 70% of the City's rental units are not affordable to those with wages below $13.46, which is nearly double the Federal level for minimum wage ($7.25). Affordability, as defined here, is based on the assumption that housing costs should not be more than 30% of gross income to allow for other household needs, such as food, clothing, and healthcare. For example, if monthly housing costs (i.e., gross rent) are $750 per month this would translate to an annual cost($750 x 12 months) of$9,000. Therefore, if a household should be spending no more than 30% of their income on housing, they would need an annual income of at least $30,000 to afford such a rent. Table 9: General Occupancy Rental Units by Income Affordability and Unit Type (Properties with 3 or More Units) Number of Units Minimum Annual Minimum Hourly General Occupancy Properties Gross Monthly Income Needed to Wage Needed Total Studio 3+BR Rent Afford Rentl (40hr/week)2 Units Units 1BR Units 2BR Units Units Less than$500 N/A3 N/A3 11 0 10 1 0 Less than$600 $24,000 $11.54 67 56 10 1 0 Less than$700 $28,000 $13.46 1,238 56 1,181 1 0 Less than$800 $32,000 $15.38 2,568 56 2,474 38 0 Less than$900 $36,000 $17.31 3,338 60 2,690 588 0 Less than$1,000 $40,000 $19.23 3,757 60 2,690 1,006 1 Less than$1,200 $48,000 $23.08 3,980 60 2,742 1,143 35 Less than$1,400 $56,000 $26.92 4,002 60 2,742 1,143 57 No rent limit $64,000 $30.77 4,084 60 2,742 1,203 79 Percentage of Units Minimum Annual Minimum Hourly General Occupancy Properties Gross Monthly Income Needed to Wage Needed Total Studio 3+BR Rent Afford Rentl (40hr/week)2 Units Units 1BR Units 2BR Units Units Less than$500 N/A3 N/A3 0.3% 0,0% 0.4% 0.1% 0.0% Less than$600 $24,000 $11.54 1.6% 93.3% 0.4% 0.1% 0.0% Less than$700 $28,000 $13.46 30.3% 93.3% 43.1% 0.1% 0.0% Less than$800 $32,000 $15.38 62.9% 93.3% 90.2% 3.2% 0.0% Less than$900 $36,000 $17.31 81.7% 100.0% 98.1% 48.9% 0.0% Less than$1,000 $40,000 $19.23 92.0% 100.0% 98.1% 83.6% 1.3% Less than$1,200 $48,000 $23.08 97.5% 100.0% 100.0% 95.0% 44.3% Less than$1,400 $56,000 $26.92 98.0% 100.0% 100.0% 95.0% 72.2% No rent limit $64,000 $30.77 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 'Income levels are based on the assumption that housing costs should not be more than 30%of gross income to allow for other household needs,such as food,clothing,and healthcare.For example,if monthly housing costs(i.e.,gross rent)are$750 per month this would translate to an annual cost($750 x 12)of$9,000.Therefore,if a household should be spending no more than 30%of their income on housing,this would mean they need an annual income of at$30,000 to afford rent. 2 This is a translation of annual income into hourly wages,which is calculated as annual income divided by the number of hours worked per year(2,080)based on a standard work week(40 hours). 'The only units available to households who could not pay more than$500 in rent are subsidized units,which typically allow sliding fee scales based on income.Therefore,these units are indicated in the table as not requiring an income or wage threshold. Sources:City of Richfield,annual rental survey;apartment websites;Marquette Advisors,Apartment Trends 4th Quarter 2011 Note:Gross monthly rent includes estimates for utilities as follows:studio=$35;1BR=$55;2BR=$80;3BR+=$120 City of Richfield,MN Page Page 29 4-: I Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 Figure 19: General Occupancy Rental Units by Income Affordability and Unit Type (Properties with 3 or More Units) 4,500 4,000 ..__- __ 3,500 3,000 --- 3+BR Units Y1 2,500 E 26R Units 2,000 w 1BR Units 1,500 - y Studio Units 1,000 500 0 n/a* $24,000 $28,000 $32,000 $36,000 $40,000 $48,000 $56,000 $64,000 Minimum Annual Income Needed to Afford Rent Sources:Gty of Richfield,annual rental survey;apartment websites;Marquette Advisors, Apartment Trends 4th Q 2011 *Units in this category are subsidized units and do not require an income or wage threshold for affordability. AFFORDABILITY:COMMUNITY COMPARISON Table 9A displays the number and percentage of rental units that are affordable in Richfield and its peer communities based on income thresholds defined by the Met Council as very low, low, moderate, and middle income. The data in Table 9A is entirely from the US Census. This is important to note because this particular data set from the US Census is self-reported and is from 2010. Therefore, it may differ from rent data previously presented in this report. Furthermore, this data set would also include senior housing units, which typically have higher rents because of the provision of services that are often included in the rent. The following are key findings from the table: • Slightly less than 9% of Richfield's rental units are affordable to 2-person households with incomes below 30% of the area median income. This is below the Metro Area percentage of 14.6%. The only other peer communities with a lower percentage are Eden Prairie (5.4%) and St. Louis Park(7.0%). • Due largely to its concentration of older, one-bedroom units, however, Richfield has a relatively high proportion (70%) of rental units that are affordable to 2-person households with incomes at or below 50% of the area median income. The Metro Area rate is 59%, and the closest peer community is Roseville with 65%. City of Richfield,MN } Page 30 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 `4: ftl'C 193802154 Table 9A: Number of Rental Units by Income Affordability Categories Number of Units Maximum Rent Number of Units at or Below Qualifying Rent _ for 2-Person Bloom- Eden Golden Maple- Mpls(S St.Louis Metro Income Categories' Household2 Richfield ington Prairie Edina Valley Hopkins wood of 42nd) Roseville Park Area _ Very Low Income(<30%of AMI) $504 or less 424 962 320 462 341 691 341 600 594 581 45,531 Low Income(<50%of AMI) $840 or less 3,414 5,263 1,681 1,299 897 2,832 2,267 2,882 3,111 4,019 182,036 Moderate Income(<80%of AMI) $1,343 or less _4,443 9,607 5,115 3,969 1,431 4,466 3,662 5,209 4,300 7,228 281,809 Middle Income(<100%of AMI) $2,098 or less 4,878 10,208 5,788 4,756 1,644 4,965 3,842 5,638 4,638 8,138 307,025 High Income(100%or more of AMI) No Rent Limit 4,898 10,293 5,921 5,004 1,808 5,007 3,842 5,668 4,791 8,264 311,393 Percentage of Units Maximum Rent Percentage of Units at or Below Qualifying Rent for 2-Person Bloom- Eden Golden Maple- Mpls(S St.Louis Metro Income Categories' Household2 Richfield ington Prairie Edina Valley Hopkins wood _of 42nd'Roseville Park Area Very Low Income(<30%of AMI) $504 or less 8.7% 9.3% 5.4% 9.2% 18.9% 13.8% 8.9% 10.6% 12.4% 7.0% 14.60/0 Low Income(<50%of AMI) $840 or less 69.7% 51.1% 28.4% 26.0% F 49.6% 56.6% 59.0% 50.8% 64.9% 48.6% 58.5% Moderate Income(<80%of AMI) $1,343 or less 90.7% 93.3% 86.4% 79.3% 79.2% 89.2% 95.3% 91.9% 89.8% 87.5% 90.5% Middle Income(<1000/0 of AMI) $2,098 or less 99.6% 99.2% 97.8% 95.0% 90.9% 99.2% 100.0% 99.5% 96.8% 98.5% 98.6% High Income(100%or more of AMI) No Rent Limit 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 'Income categories are based on affordability defnitions from the Met Council/MHFA.AMI=area median incorre.The 2012 AMI for the Twin Cities Metro Area is$67,120 for a 2-person household and$83,900 for a 4-person household. 2 Rent is based on the assumption that households should not be paying more than 30%of adjusted gross income for housing.Therefore,for a 2-person household with an income of$33,560, which is approximately 50%of AMI,they should be paying no more than$840 in rent because that would be 30%of adjusted gross incorre($33,560 x 30%=$10,068/12rrnnths=$840). Source:US Census,American Community Survey 2006-2010 • City of Richfield,MN . �+ a } Page 31 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 Stdntec 193802154 SUBSIDIZED RENTAL UNITS Richfield has three rental properties (with three or more units)that are classified as subsidized in which the building owner restricts residency to low-income households in return for grants, tax-credits, or other subsidies that help cover debt and operating costs due to the lack of income generated by rent from tenants. According to Housing Link, a non-profit that tracks the availability and production of subsidized housing, the following is a list of Richfield's subsidized properties: • Richfeld Towers (7717 Chicago Ave)— 150 units (Age 62+) • Robert Will Community Housing (6345 Pleasant)— 11 units (Disabled residents only) • Sheridan Court(2500 66th St W)—30 units (Disabled residents only) • Red Fox Run (11 E 68th St)— 5 units • Tasks Unlimited Lodges (6733 Lyndale) -4 units • Two scattered sites, no address provided Red Fox Run,Tasks Unlimited Lodges, and the two scattered sites are not included in the analysis because they are single-family homes, duplexes, or group homes. Table 10 and Figures 20 and 21 present data on subsidized rental units in Richfield and its peer communities. Richfield has very few subsidized units; less than 1% of its general occupancy (non-senior) rental stock is subsidized. In contrast, Maplewood has over 500 subsidized units accounting for more than 15% of its general occupancy rental stock. If Richfield were to increase the number of its subsidized units to meet the average of its peer communities (6.4%), it would need to add nearly 300 units. Table 10: Subsidized Rental Units by Peer Community (Properties with 3 or More Units) General-Occupancy(non-senior) Senior(age-restricted) Subsidized Total Subsidized Total Community Units Units %Sub. Units Units %Sub. Richfield 41 4,857 0.8% 150 595 25.2% Bloomington 803 10,946 7.3% 432 998 43.3% Eden Prairie 395 5,932 6.7% 128 675 19.0% Edina 154 4,803 3.2% 308 1,187 25.9% Golden Valley 127 1,553 8.2% 202 620 32.6% Hopkins 125 4,952 2.5% 237 519 45.7% Maplewood 514 3,394 15.1% 379 894 42.4% Mpls(S of 42nd) 505 5,543 9.1% 50 50 100.0% Roseville 367 4,393 8.4% 230 907 25.4% St. Louis Park 467 8,637 5.4% 304 830 36.6% Total 3,498 _ 55,010 6.4% 2,420 7,275 33.3% *To be considered subsidized housing,the property must have a subsidy attached to it,such as HUD Sections 232 or 42(Low-Income Housing Tax Credits)and restrict tenancy based on household income.Also,transitional forms of housing,such as homeless or emergency shelters,are not considered subsidized housing.Properties that accept Section 8 vouchers are not considered subsidized if they can rent the same unit to a non-"income qualified"household. Sources:Housing Link;Twin Cities Senior Housing Guide;US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey As a point of clarification, the conclusions drawn from Table 10 are not meant to indicate an optimal or desired amount of subsidized housing for Richfield. Instead, they are presented here to illustrate how Richfield compares with its peer communities in the provision of subsidized housing. Ultimately, the desired amount of subsidized housing within a community is a policy decision that rests with local City of Richfield,MN nv�' }p/+ Page 32 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 ./LUI uI 193802154 leaders. With that being said, though, the Metropolitan Council has put in place a program for incentivizing the construction of new affordable housing by apportioning a goal for the number of new units to be constructed in each community through 2020. For Richfield, the Metropolitan Council has set this goal between 497 and 765 new affordable units through 2020. Additional discussion of the Metropolitan Council's program for incentivizing construction of affordable housing units is in a following section of this report. Figure 20: Subsidized Rental Units by Peer Community (Properties with 3 or More Units) 900 800 700 600 500 400 w.. 300 200 -- 100 0 �r�`\a c�c iz<6 �a`ca Ja� oQ� \� oa �t"3> oy�s\� \yQa� Q- 0�oocc �ae� o\aoc •2. \�aQ o Q moo, C� Q�e 5ti General Occupancy Senior Sources:Housing Link;Twin Cities Senior Hosing Guide;US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey Figure 21: Prevalence of Subsidized Rental Units by Peer Community (Properties with 3 or More Units) 50% 45% i /0 40% 1 35% O w 25% 15% L. a. 10% 5% 0% 4• <t>o cA�o cQ<t> <a`cx ��a\\off Q� o oa oc` s\e J\yQa�• 0�° kao o\a eQ General Occupancy Senior Sources:Housing Link;Twin Cities Senior Noising Guide;US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey City of Richfield,MNnt� Page 33 i Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 , 193802154 MARKET RATE SENIOR HOUSING Richfield has three market rate senior housing rental properties offering a full range of services: Village Shores, Mainstreet Village, and the Pines. Table 11 presents data on the number of market rate senior units broken down by unit type. Table 11 also indicates whether the rental property provides a level of service geared toward a population that is active and independent versus those requiring assisted living services. Senior housing has evolved considerably over the last 30 years into a highly diversified set of living arrangements that provide varying levels of service. Rental rates at properties that cater to residents needing the highest level of service short of a nursing home can be extremely expensive. As evidenced in the table below, some units can exceed $3,500 per month. Much of this expense, however, is related to the provision of services, such as food, housekeeping, and personal care. Table 11: Market Rate Senior Housing Units by Rent Range Number of Units Gross Monthly Rent Total Units Studio Units 1BR Units 2BR Units Less than $1,000 0 $1,250-$1,499 132 132 $1,500-$1,749 99 39 60 s $1,750-$1,999 65 65 $2,000-$2,499 4 4 r $2,500-$2,999 15 15 g J $3,000-$3,499 31 10 21 $3,500 or more 59 59 Total 405 29 251 125 Percentage of Units Gross Monthly Rent Total Units Studio Units 1BR Units 2BR Units Less than $1,000 0.0% $1,250-$1,499 32.6% 52.6% $1,500-$1,749 24.4% 15.5% 48.0% s $1,750-$1,999 16.0% 52.0% $2,000-$2,499 1.0% 13.8% N :> $2,500-$2,999 3.7% 51.7% g J $3,000-$3,499 7.7% 34.5% 8.4% $3,500 or more 14.6% 23.5% Total _ 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Sources:Twin Cities Senior Housing Guide;apartment websites city of Richfield,MN (}'�1}per Page 34 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 4, Stan IL ' 193802154 RENTAL HOUSING CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION Since 1990 Richfield has had a net gain of 82 rental units. During that time, though, numerous redevelopment projects in various locations have resulted in the demolition of nearly 400 rental units. Balancing out the demolitions, however, has been the construction of new rental units, most of which occurred in 2000. Currently, the Lyndale Plaza project is under construction and when completed will be the City's first rental project in 12 years. Table 12: Rental Housing Units Constructed/Demolished 1990 to 2012 Rental Rental Units Units Net Year Lost Gained Change Redevelopment Projects 1990 0 0 0 1991 0 0 0 1992 29 0 -29 77th St expansion 1993 29 0 -29 77th St expansion 1994 32 0 -32 New Ford Town; Shops at Lyndale&Meridian Crossings 1995 32 0 -32 New Ford Town; Shops at Lyndale&Meridian Crossings 1996 31 0 -31 New Ford Town; Shops at Lyndale&Meridian Crossings 1997 11 0 -11 Shops at Lyndale&Meridian Crossings 1998 11 0 -11 Shops at Lyndale&Meridian Crossings 1999 15 0 -15 Shops at Lyndale&Meridian Crossings; Interstate 35W expansion 2000 4 377 373 Woodlake Centre; Lyndale Gateway East; 66th St Bridge at Cedar Ave 2001 89 0 -89 Interchange West(Best Buy) 2002 0 0 0 2003 60 0 -60 18th Ave south of 66th St&Cedar Ave 2004 3 0 -3 Lyndale Gateway West(Kensington Park) 2006 30 0 -30 Crosstown expansion; Cedar Point Commons 2007 12 0 -12 Cedar Point Commons 2008 0 0 0 2009 1 0 -1 Municipal Center 2010 0 0 0 2011 0 0 0 2012 0 94 94 Lyndale Plaza Total 389 471 82 Source:City of Richfield Figure 22: Rental Housing Units Constructed/Demolished 1990 to 2012 400 350 300 _.._.... 250 200 150 -..... y 100 50 • 0 WIFE'III -50 -100 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 01 O O O O O O O O O 0, O 0, 0, 01 0, 0,, 01 01 O O O O O O O O O O O -- .'- N N N N N Ni N N N N N N Units Lost Units Gained Source:City of Richfield City of Richfield,MN � nl� Page 35 ,1i Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 CITY OF RICHFIELD — RENTAL HOUSING INVENTORY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT Characteristics of Renter Households AGE OF HOUSEHOLDS Householder age is a key determinant of whether one rents or owns their housing. Renting is more prevalent among younger and older households. Younger households typically rent their housing because they do not have enough savings to afford homeownership or because they have yet to start families and want the flexibility to easily relocate for better work opportunities. Older households often transition from owning to renting because they desire a more maintenance-free lifestyle due to aging or splitting their time between two homes while in retirement. Table 13 and Figures 23 through 25 present data on the age breakdown of owner and renter households. Tracking the change in tenure is important because the rental stock of the City is mostly stagnant, while the demographics are much more fluid. Below are important considerations of the data: • Renter households in Richfield increased by 311 (6.4%) between 2000 and 2010, while owner households decreased by -566 (-5.6%). Part of this can be explained by the sharp increase in the number of rented single-family homes in Richfield between 2000 and 2010. • The profile of renter households in Richfield is aging rapidly. For example, the number of renter households under 25 and age 35 to 44 declined significantly in the last 10 years, while all other age groups increased, especially the groups 55 to 64 and over age 85, which saw major increases in the number of renters. Some of that growth can be explained by the impact of the Baby Boom generation and lengthening life spans. However, when one looks at the"split"between renters and owners within each age group, every age group over 35 increased its share of renters between 2000 and 2010, which indicates that renting is becoming more prevalent among older age groups. • The age profile of Richfield renters is very similar to that of the Metro Area, which suggests that despite a rental housing stock that skews heavily toward one-bedroom units, the household base of the City appears to match the broader, regional profile. Some peer communities, however, do deviate notably from the Metro Area profile. Edina and Golden Valley, for example, have much older renter households than the Metro Area, while St. Louis Park tends to have a much younger renter profile than the Metro Area. This skewing probably is related to the proportion of senior and upscale apartments in each community. Figure 23: Richfield Households by Age and Tenure 2010 Figure 24:Age Distribution of Renter Households 2010 2,500 35% 2,000 Owner 30% Metro Renter ° d 25% -Richfield co e 1,500 • 0 S 20% d w p 1,000 ---- ill-- - - o� 15% •- -- - -- X e 10% 500 .. -- i 0 y 5% awl d 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85+ 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85+ Source:2010 USCensus Age of Householder Age of Householder Source:2000 US Census;2010 US Census City of Richfield,MN , C}'f1}per Page 36 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 �/ JL 11`G\. 193802154 Table 13: Richfield Households by Age of Householder and Tenure 2000 and 2010 Number of Households 2000 2010 Number Change 2000-2010 Percenta.e Change 2000-2010 Age of Householder Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total 15 to 24 years 117 790 907 86 546 632 -31 -244 -275 -26.5% -30.9% -30.3% 25 to 34 years 1,431 1,463 2,894 1,502 1,531 3,033 71 68 139 5.0% 4.6% 4.8% 35 to 44 years 2,228 1,032 3,260 1,499 928 2,427 -729 -104 -833 -32.7% -10.1% -25.6% 45 to 54 years 1,971 645 2,616 1,976 793 2,769 5 148 153 0.3% 22.9% 5.8%, 55 to 64 years 1,331 329 1,660 1,854 570 2,424 523 241 764 39.3% 73.3% 46.0% 65 to 74 years 1,306 213 1,519 1114 252 1,366 -192 39 -153 -14.7% 18.3% -10.1% 75 to 84 years 1,484 276 1,760 992 277 1,269 -492 1 -491 -33.2% 0.4% -27.9% 85 years and over 316 141 457 595 303 898 279 162 441 88.3% 114.9% 96.5% Total 10,184 4,889 15,073 9,618 5,200 14,818 -566 311 -255 -5.6% 6.4% -1.7% Distribution of Age Groups among Owners and Renters 2000 2010 Percentage Change 2000-2010 Age of Householder Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total 15 to 24 years 1.1% 16.2% 6.0% 0.9% 10.5% 4.3% -0.3% -5.7% -1.8% 25 to 34 years 14.1% 29.9% 19.2% 15.6% 29.4% 20.5% 1.6% -0.5% 1.3% 35 to 44 years 21.9% 21.1% 21.6% 15.6% 17.8% 16.4% -6.3%_ -3.3% -5.2% 45 to 54 years 19.4% 13.2% 17.4% 20.5% 15.3% 18.7% 1.2% 2.1% 1.3% 55 to 64 years 13.1% 6.7% 11.0% 19.3% 11.0% 16.4% 6.2% 4.2% 5.3% 65 to 74 years 12.8% 4.4% 10.1% 11.6% 4.8% 9.2% -1.2% 0.5% -0.9% 75 to 84 years 14.6% 5.6% 11.7% 10.30/0 5.3% 8.6% -4.3% -0.3% -3.1% 85 years and over 3.1% 2.9% 3.0% 6.2% 5.8% 6.1% 3.1% 2.9% 3.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.00/0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Percentage Split between Owners and Renters within each Age Group 2000 2010 Percentage Change 2000-2010 Age of Householder Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total 15 to 24 years 12.9% 87.1% 100.0% 13.6% 86.4% 100.0% 0.7% -0.7% 0.0% 25 to 34 years 49.4% 50.6% 100.0% 49.5% 50.5% 100.0% 0.1% -0.1% 0.0% 35 to 44 years 68.3% 31.7% 100.0% 61.8% 38.2% 100.0% -6.6% 6.6% 0.0% 45 to 54 years 75.3% 24.7% 100.0% 71.4% 28.6% 100.00/0 -4.0% 4.0% 0.0% 55 to 64 years 80.2% 19.8% 100.0% 76.5% 23.5% 100.0% -3.7% 3.7% 0.0% 65 to 74 years 86.0% 14.0% 100.0% 81.6% 18.4% 100.0% -4.4%_ 4.4% 0.0% 75 to 84 years 84.3% 15.7% 100.0% 78.2% 21.8% 100.00/0 -6.1% 6.1% 0.0% 85 years and over 69.1% 30.9% 100.0% 66.3% 33.7% 100.0% -2.9% 2.9% 0.0% Total 67.6% 32.4% 100.0% 64.9% 35.1% 100.0% -2.7% 2.7% 0.0% Source:2000 and 2010 US Census Figure 25:Age Distribution of Renter Households 2010 1v3 90/ : 1 -- - -- 11- -- -- - o .c 85 years and over -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- - u) 75 to 84 years o 60% - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - t,65 to 74 years r 55 to 64 years •45 to 54 years 40% - -- -- - - -- - -- -- - -- - 4 *35 to 44 years <I) II 25 to 34 years U L. a) 20% - -- __ .._ __ ___ __ _ -- -- - 15 to 24 years 0. 0% , ' ' ' • , - 2!■ a •a a A •a• ..:9 •a .,a ,is<cr2 , 4\ •aC' 0' e c'.1 c, x\O e, 8, 9,, ;.c., ,e 6.0 4..e. .., OP e ,1:■) Source:2010 US Census City of Richfield,MN V. Stantec Page 37 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 HOUSEHOLD SIZE Data on household size can reveal whether there is any overcrowding among a City's rental housing stock. Table 14 and Figures 26 through 29 display data on household size. Key findings from the data follow: • Over two-thirds of renter households in Richfield consist of one or two persons • There are 951 renter households in Richfield with four or more persons. Assuming all 656 single- family and duplex rental units (Table 1) have three or more bedrooms, this means 216 renter households with four or more persons are living in units with two bedrooms or less. • Richfield's profile of renter household size is very similar to that of the Metro Area with nearly an identical proportion of one-person renter households. It was revealed in Figure 5, however, that Richfield has a significantly larger proportion of one-bedroom rental units than the Metro Area. This suggests that there is either a greater incidence of overcrowding in Richfield's rental housing stock or that the Metro Area has a significant number of two-bedroom or larger apartment units occupied by one-person households. • The proportion of larger households (5+ persons)that rent is much higher in Richfield than the Metro Area. In Richfield, over 38% of these larger households rent, while roughly 26% of Metro Area households of the same size do. Again, this suggests that Richfield's rental stock is accommodating much larger households than other communities, despite its high proportion of one-bedroom units. • Relative to its peer communities, Richfield has a large proportion of renter households with three or more persons. This is additional evidence that Richfield's rental housing stock has very few if any empty bedrooms, whereas many of its peer communities have a significant number of empty bedrooms. Table 14: Household Size by Tenure 2010 Richfield Number of Households Tenure Distribution Tenure Split Persons per Household Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total 1-person household 2,776 2,305 5,081 28.9% 44.3% 34.3% 54.6% 45.4% 100.0% 2-person household 3,599 1,255 4,854 37.4% 24.1% 32.8% 74.1% 25.9% 100.0% 3-person household 1,406 689 2,095 14.6% 13.3% 14.1% 67.1% 32.9% 100.0% 4-person household 1,055 470 1,525 11.0% 9.0% 10.3% 69.2% 30.8% 100.0% 5-person household 395 257 652 4.1% 4.9% 4.4% 60.6% 39.4% 100.00/0 6-person household 189 121 310 2.0% 2.3% 2.1% 61.0% 39.0% 100.0% 7-or-more-person household 198 103 301 2.1% 2.0% 2.0% 65.8% 34.2% 100.0% Total 9,618 5,200 14,818 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 64.9% 35.1% 100.0% Metro Area Number of Households Tenure Distribution Tenure Split Persons per Household Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total 1-person household 171,241 147,789 319,030 21.9% 44.1% 28.5% 53.7% 46.3% 100.0% 2-person household 280,552 87,139 367,691 35.9% 26.0% 32.9% 76.3% 23.7% 100.0% 3-person household 128,197 42,563 170,760 16.4% 12.7% 15.3% 75.1% 24.9% 100.0% 4-person household 123,219 29,587 152,806 15.7% 8.8% 13.7% 80.6% 19.4% 100.0% 5-person household 50,854 14,883 65,737 6.5% 4.4% 5.9% 77.4% 22.6% 100.0% 6-person household 16,887 6,908 23,795 2.2% 2.1% 2.1% 71.0% 29.0% 100.0% 7-or-more-person household 11,525 6,405 17,930 1.5% 1.9% 1.6% 64.3% 35,7% 100.0% Total 782,475 335,274 1,117,749 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 70,0% 30.0% 100.0% Source:2010 US Census City of Richfield,MN C�I}� 4}.p/.�. Page 38 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 4^ JINf`G�. 193802154 Figure 26: Distribution of Renter Households by Size of Household 2010 50% - 45% -----..-------- __ - - Richfield 0 40% Metro Area s y 35% - = 30% T - c 25% - a+20% - -- y 15% - ..il._. . . v y10% - __ .. ._.. . . a. 5 + % I -- 1 pph 2 pph 3 pph 4 pph 5 pph 6 pph 7+pph Persons per Household Source:2010 US Census Figure 27: 1-Person Renter Households 2010 Figure 28: 2-Person Renter Households 2010 60% o N a 9 SO% 0 30% t d w= 40% o 25%c 30% 2Pe a , 15 20% _ 11111 c a \ca ` - -1111111_. `yoe DeoQia�e4 P �ce� ,p\e'''oo�o��oe "' .ose ,oQ�\e \e�oa oi,s `` o'''' .A'z. yeses <aoa cso> 0' y<eb Q`t> �Q\,, 4 ' 0� 5,„,. Go �,,, �' o e e'6 o\aec Q-o ooF` `yos ,, aec Source:2010USCensus Census G �`Q\y �� Source:2010 U S Figure 29:3 or More-Person Renter Households 2010 H 35% 2 30% a, 0 25% ----I 2 c w 15% t O N o 10% ? -I:IJ I W O. 0% JyQa,k-c 1' �a\ca oye' oe c,,�c Q�e `oPea r\e\d\e�oa Ea�ca, 5,o Go\ae Q- ,' ,00cc ?„, ,ems Q` \:,` \, ..' \Q Source:2010 US Census City of Richfield,MN ,,. M}p� Page 39 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 I 1}R 193802154 HOUSEHOLD TYPE Related to household size is household type. Changes in household type can place pressure on the types of rental units needed in a community. For example, increasing numbers of renter households with children will place greater demand for units with three or more bedrooms, not to mention amenities such as play areas and accessibility to nearby schools. Table 15 and Figures 30 through 32 present data on household type. The following are important findings: • Nearly 28% of Richfield's renter households have children. This is a higher proportion than the Metro Area rate and one of the highest rates among its peer communities. • Richfield's rental stock is accommodating more and more households with children, even though much of the rental stock was not built to be marketed to families with children. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of renter households with children increased by 460. During that same time, renter households without children decreased by-159. Table 15: Richfield Household Types 2000 and 2010 Number of Households 2000 2010 Number Chg.2000-2010 Percentage Chg.2000-2010 Household Type Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Husband and Wife no children 3,494 504 3,998 1,910 473 2,383 -1,584 -31 -1,615 -45.3% -6.2% -40.4% Husband and Wife with Children 2,234 358 2,592 3,150 475 3,625 916 117 1,033 41.0% 32.7% 39.9% Unmarried Family with Children 518 633 1,151 294 976 1,270 -224 343 119 -43.2% 54.2% 10.3% Unmarried Family no Children 699 319 1,018 775 366 1,141 76 47 123 10.9% 14.7% 12.1% Non-Family,Single 2,663 2,428 5,091 2,776 2,305 5,081 113 -123 -10 4.2% -5.1% -0.2% Non-Family,Roommates 566 657 1,223_ 712 605 1,317 146 -52 94 25.8% -7.9% 7.7% Total 10,174 4,899 15,073 9,617 5,200 14,817 -557 301 -256 -5.5% 6.1% -1.7% Percentage of Households 2000 2010 Percentage Chg.2000-2010 Household Type Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Husband and Wife no children 34.3% 10.3% 26.5% 19.9% 9.1% 16.1% -14.5% -1.2% -10.4% Husband and Wife with Children 22.0% 7.3% 17.2% 32.8% 9.1% 24.5% 10.8% 1.8% 7.3% Unmarried Family with Children 5.1% 12.9% 7.6% 3.1% 18.8% 8.6% -2.0% 5.8% 0.9% Unmarried Family no Children 6.9% 6.5% 6.8% 8.1% 7.0% 7.7% 1.2% 0.5% 0.9% Non-Family,Single 26.2% 49.6% 33.8% 28.9% 44.3% 34.3% 2.7% -5.2% 0.5% Non-Family,Roommates 5.6% 13.4% 8.1% 7.4% 11.6% 8.9% 1.8% -1.8% 0.8% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Source:2000 US Census;2010 US Census Figure 30: Distribution of Renter Household by Type of Household 2010 50% V1 c 45% Richfield CU 40% - - Metro Area - o• 35% .. y 30% r cu• 25% ce 8 20% o+ 15% v io% ` 5, s` 0) 0% Husband& Husband& Unmarried Unmarried Single Roommates Wife,no child Wife,child Family,child Family,no child Household Type Source:2010 US Census City of Richfield,MN ..� ((�� }}pper�. Page 40 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 �/^ StanteC 193802154 Figure 31:Change in Renter Households by Type of Household 2000 to 2010 60% ` 50% ; Richfield y . c Metro Area c2 40% , c I (I)4:1 30% +-.._.... t c 2 u20% U g ■ a 2 0% — u a -10% 1 -20% Husband& Husband& Unmarried Unmarried Single Roommates All Types Wife,no Wife,child Family,child Family,no child child Household Type Source:2000 US Census;2010 US Census Figure 32: Renter Households with Children 2010 .. 40% T.. s 35% y 30% 0 2 25% Iinhi1 a. \e� � a a,e °a .e a ,,e <<, '' .o<') ,;) (Pe' 0‘ - e� ° ° e Q °� Qo a a Source:2010 US Census City of Richfield,MN Page 41 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 ,/- Sta naLZ, 193802154 LENGTH OF RESIDENCE Length of Residence indicates how much turnover there is the rental stock. Frequent turnover can result in greater wear and tear on the rental stock. It can also be an indicator of community involvement and participation among residents since it is often difficult to get involved in community issues and concerns when your stay is short term. Table 16 and Figures 33 and 34 display data on length of residence for Richfield and Metro Area households as of 2010. Richfield renters tend to have slightly longer lengths of stay than compared to the Metro Area and its peer communities. This is not surprising since Richfield tends to have a slightly higher proportion of renter households with children, who often try to avoid regular moves in order to keep children in the same schools and not disrupt their social networks. Table 16: Household Length of Residence 2010 Richfield 2010 Tenure Distribution Tenure Split Year Moved Into Unit Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Moved in 2005 or later 1,515 3,421 4,936 15.8% 65.8% 33.3% 30.7% 69.3% 100.0% Moved in 2000 to 2004 2,096 1,057 3,154 21.8% 20.3% 21.3% 66.5% 33.5% 100.0% Moved in 1990 to 1999 2,384 529 2,913 24.8% 10.2% 19.7% 81.8% 18.2% 100.0% Moved in 1980 to 1989 1,176 113 1,289 12.2% 2.2% 8.7% 91.2% 8.8% 100.0% Moved in 1970 to 1979 937 22 958 9.7% 0.4% 6.5% 97.8% 2.2% 100.0% Moved in 1969 or earlier 1,509 58 1,567 15.7% 1.1% 10.6% 96.3% 3.7% 100.0% Total 9,617 5,200 14,817. 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 64.9% 35.1% 100.0% Metro Area 2010 Tenure Distribution Tenure Split Year Moved Into Unit Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Owner Renter Total Moved in 2005 or later 151,638 232,885 384,522 19.4% 69.5% 34.4% 39.4% 60.6% 100.0% Moved in 2000 to 2004 198,972 63,866 262,838 25.4% 19.0% 23.5% 75.7% 24.3% 100.0% Moved in 1990 to 1999 219,428 28,631 248,059 28.0% 8.5% 22.2% 88.5% 11.5% 100.0% Moved in 1980 to 1989 105,900 6,932 112,832 13.5% 2.1% 10.1% 93.9% 6.1% 100.0% Moved in 1970 to 1979 56,673 1,800 58,472 7.2% 0.5% 5.2% 96.9% 3.1% 100.0% Moved in 1969 or earlier 49,865 1,160 51,025 6.4% 0.3% 4.6% 97.7% 2.3% 100.0% Total 782,475 335,274 1,117,749 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 70.0% 30.0% 100.0% Source:US Census,2006-2010 American Con-aunty Survey Figure 33:Length of Residence among Renter Households 2010 Figure 34:Renter Households in Unit Less than Five Years 2010 80% s 85% o 70% Richfield d 80% e 60% Metro Area ° 50% x 75% ;_.IL:: - i : iimrffll 2005 or 2000- 1990- 1980- 1970- 1969 or alater 2004 1999 1989 1979 earlier e�oa �a\ca ,a\43, ese, .e∎a c49° Pea Qa5 ��ca>, se .. , Year Moved Into Unit aQ� aec SS) Q`r °c� e'�° °S' o`` ,t,°� e�Qt` Source:US Census,2006-2010American Community Survey 0° y> \�5 ka Source:US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey City of Richfield,MN 4. }tom Page 42 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 flL C 193802154 INCOME Previous sections of this report discussed current rent rates among Richfield's rental stock and the incomes needed to afford those rents without being overly burdened (Table 9). Table 17 provides a detailed breakdown of Richfield households (and its peer communities) by age, income bracket, and tenure. It is important to break down income data to such detail because income levels are closely correlated with age and tenure. Because homeownership often has a significant financial barrier to entry, rental housing tends to have a larger proportion of lower-income households, though many middle- and higher-income households choose to rent as well. Furthermore, households at the two ends of the age spectrum, younger and older households, often prefer renting because it provides greater flexibility and requires less maintenance. Yet, these same households also have lower incomes because of limited earning potential (i.e., little work experience or retirement). Key findings regarding income are: • Richfield has 2,749 renter households with annual incomes below $35,000. This is 53% of all renter households. • Richfield also has 2,452 owner households with annual incomes below $35,000. Although this is only 25% of all owner households, it is roughly equal to the number of low-income renter households. Clearly, this has implications regarding the need for the continuation of homeownership assistance programs, but it could also greatly impact Richfield's rental housing stock. It indicates that there is a substantial number of homeowners who may not be able to continue to financially afford homeownership and could up needing to transition to rental housing if their work or health situation were to change. This is important because many of the mortgage practices of the previous decade, such as no money down programs or liberal income-to-loan ratios, that helped modest-income households achieve homeownership are no longer in place, which leave many of these households with rental housing as their only choice. • Among younger low-income households, almost everyone rents, and unless incomes for these households increase as they age, they will likely remain renters due to the financial barrier of homeownership. • Among older low-income households, homeownership is far more prevalent, which suggests that as these homeowners transition to rental housing, they will require units with affordable rents. • The median household income of Richfield's renters is roughly $33,000. This is several thousand dollars below the Metro Area median and near the bottom of its peer communities. • For Richfield's largest age group of renters, those 25 to 34, the median household income is about $36,000, which is well below the Metro Area median for this age group and near the bottom of its peer communities. • For the oldest age group, those 75 and older, the median renter income is about$22,000, which is above the Metro Area median and more in the middle of its peer communities. City of Richfield,MN Page 43 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 4, .7an`& 19 802154 P P co h.t Cr,M O P O CO O O M O O N O In O tD Ln N 01 to M N O ul 0 0 N N N tD N tD O O ui N N N N O P O N N N M .-1 to P N O P M 01 P N N O co 01 N N O P M 01 01 Cr, P Ili 01 N P Ill V. 0 d' N 2 o N co CA N 01 01 01 N O =M co P P Cr,V� N 0 P Ol = in In P tD M N N Cr,.-1 to a) = ro" O tD N t0 to O M P 0 N i.0 2 .y .- N N.t .y P` V u ul 2 i N V Ni 1 t N = - N N N IO.- M N N Q Q Q Q W M cn N esr M tVD OOI iOO CO CO tVD .Mt WI O cD M N CO N �O CO nJ M CO in Oi N N,-, 00 T H.Pt O O O O v0 N N 03 M CD tVD 0M 01 } O.1 M N N N M N.r .t �}i M In P P CO 01 N Ili N N N 3§ N.i.t N N ti u7 ij M M M M N t0 tD P N N N N Jp uj c7' N N N C) co pl tto P O G O M O N N 0, M in tOp co M M N In N O, 04 N V- N co O O 01 0, M t0.i N co S P r.i P O 01 O WI OD Q C.-1 N.N-I.Ni.O-1 N N.-t O M Lin Q C .O M N N in N tV0 P N N 00,` Q C N 01 CO.1 ul N .1 O CO < C '.I ..in N N CO Ili P CI M N N 0 a co rA O ~ M 3 M I, C .0 C L O H y L.7' 0 O P N N CO Cr.1 N.-t 0 0 O LA In M 01 0 01 N .Mt in 01 to 0 O 0 N Cr N.to ul 0 0 N 0 01 M CO 01 t0 t0 .--1 N JO N 01 O O N O P .+ O J CA M M Cr 0 J U7 VD Cr 0 N N N J 2 u"1 2 N N ti S C to =N-I-I.,t ti N .N-1 O M .-i NO WD C g OP pp�� pp 400 N.Mt N to VOi N. ON O VD ti ON+tt0 M co N tto CA co.Nt CO N _M..t T l�.P-t V tN0 O S in O01 M.,t M O rA CO OW,uW1 Tr Na�oo N .2 .t.+.I.-1 CO.t.-I Mi P N N N CO CA N ut.r up P M M N M N O .t.r O .ti N N t P "t M M In N M V to y0 H 8) P 2 12 i 0 N ui In In in M tO P P P tD 01 N Tr c0 Tr tp O Oi 0,N O N CO In to N P O V'O N Oo N CO M In to N P P N on Oi co N .-4 N N C) P In N CO M N t0 M N N ti 0 N CO O P P Cr,OD 01 0) N N yr-4 01 CO 01 P P Cl) N N 01 CO M O N N rA Q 3 N t .t <OC H u N co u P 0 O N M N N D N M P N M P N on O N O � O O 0 0 0 W 01 00 01 CO 01 N O 00 tD M N N O ul CO CO to.N-1 M N L N Ln N CO P 01 P .i ti N to N P N ti M 01 P .Ua O j C ti .i M M P M M N = V' P VD ui.Pt N.1 M tD to _ N N M P WI N P N ..0 P P N N N N CO M N C) O O p C ~ N J C P 2 2 2 oe 2 C rt N Lli to N M P M 0 CO P N to co 7 co LA 0i N N N.CO M P N P N N N O 10 N M M N M p Vr W ui tp CO N Oto N to 01 Ot on.-I ui M N N N N 01 0 P V4 M N P sr-N N O O ui P N N ut O�tO tD OC tD N on N O N N M P M M co N in N Cr CO Cr p,..May 01 N V N P CO LA .t LO P N N N t0 P in M O yO H o ++I�-b'' .-a.ti toO 0 .4,T;P o ff .1 Cr' N LA LA V7 N O ut H to LA M u1 CO Cr ul CO N N N N N Ln N N M 0 P P .1 0 M Cr O Cl-M N O P O .-I N M 01 M N 10 O) M P M to Vi M N 0 Ln ui C) 0 0 0, N LO M N LA O N. C) 01 N M to LA P .t CO LO 01 0 O) Cr N P IA N 01 M CO Q 0_i .-t N M M N N CO a C .t N ui.i 01 N 01 P 0)C M N P O,O.t 04 C.a N N Cr M u7 N P .O 0 .t u)0 .-a 1-1 in o O .-1.-i P o O N N a o O o 0 N N N Cr P WI 0.Nt N M N ul 0 N 01 O M t0 O'V 10 O P al N N O N ti N P O.4 01 N 01 N N M N 01 N t0 to M N J N v, O co N co.Pi N M .t CO N N in P M u)t0.M-t t0 N M P _t0 P N VD ul.Pa N tD P 01 O N N C O C UI 2 2 d, 2. C _C .I N 01010401010104 N co 01 P s.N LA M to M CO c,P CO O 01 P M Cl- Ln ui N to CO^o tl co Ln P .'-t N-a N u1 In N P N 10 _P 01 N N o WI tD 0 CO 0 0 CO M M to N. N ul O N to 0 M o,LA M I� Q'N N O O sr or,sr L0 M VD P on N V. In O1.M-L NN P .Pa P .r M N OA in M M O H N In $~ y.-I N ut O .N lD} L1PS O•� •"1 N Ul Vi O QH O f- OF in u1 in in 'V P O 0 N 0 ti u) N CO VD V' P tD to O M 0 N O O O N P O N O Cr .t N O N P N P P o M N N CO O CO.a 01 O 0) Ili P M P N 01 O 01 N N C) P M P in ul Ln M O M N O C) M P CO N Ln 0 to 01 0) O LA M N CO 0 CO N N Q 0 N P Cc,P On C C N LA 01 O M M Ul Cn C .0 N in N P N P O1 C N M P N tD to N-0 O .t O ..+.t .1 L(■ Q O .I N ul Q O .-i.-0 O .i� 0 P 0 0 p Tr O v al V''N N OOi-,t'p P N VD Vt CD OMN1 pj C CO L!1 W N co O N O'V N C C -N.0 4000 m RO UI N 0 CO v C u.l'1'Vol M 100 t0 O O N tto rq 0 2 C 2 ) .0 S C 2 0) �pp pp1 o W.O M N pp M O N N co t0 ttpp ul 01 01 to 00.t N M u)T.y N N .t p P Ln O O M m N O 01P t0N P N N 01M NM O Cr M O M P N O O LnO N COOS N un P v0 M N.O 01 O (V y O M M P M P N .+ N N O Ln N v. B ti N N N P M M 1, P ul P VP O O cl-P O .a .a LA P L F .a.-i P 2 p .a N �)1 8 H 0 M Vt u) N L' 01 t0 ul.t 01 01 N Oi M O 01 M P M M CO N 01 LA N O O N co Cr O P N O.-I O N CO N O M CO N O VD Cr Cr ttpp LA N N 01 (I) N M M N CO CO CO vi .Pa 01 C) M M Cr Cl- P LO N LA LA tO O C) N.I P 01 CO CO N M LA N C) N M LO.1 CO 01 0 CO Cr H Q 3 N N M V' C 0 N M t0 N LO P M ¢C Cr M.4 N ul m C~ M N in 01 M t0 =0 N = 0 :N .0 In O C L O 0 N 0401 M N M.-I in N O O N c�M M N N 01 O 10 tp tD N 01 ul O t1 O O.-1 N N O 'C N M Cr O ui 01 ti .Mt O in 01 to O P N co M N u) 01 tD GI O 0 P M t0 tp O N O co P M O N.M-1 Ol M P y�j N N P ul co .Mt N L. cu _ N .-I 01 0 C N M Cr N Ol 3 .ti N .-I.-I O N.i .i N N =K a 2 0 MOM.-IN LA l.0 sq. tp0M LO CO Cr O1OO MM1O.-40 of N O)O Ln O .t LAM N t0 LnO CA'T 01 Cr Cr ul M mC O N 10 01 ul Al -L O 01.t M N Ol N M O M 01.t.-401.-1 O M O 010101.-101 P ul. S N N O O ui Li 1 M M N yN N . Cr Cr N M CO OM Ot N CO 1.0. 6.- t N t0 N M N .- .t Cr M co P co M O (l N ~ rn M ' M .0 P M O O O F- 0 1- .2 1- N O 0010101 O 04 N ut N N N Cr 01 tD CO 0 N M CO N N N u1 VD CO t0 u1 .-1 LO ui CO LA N CO.t N CO Cr O N 01 up u1 up C) Ln M M Ln LA al LD N 0 N P LA N M in LA co P tp N Cr .t N M.N-1 O u)v0 ui N CO C) N M tD Ill NMa 0, W Q 0 P N N ti Q 01 C C N M ui P M.t N C C V7 M Cr N 01 0)C N N O N u) 0 Q 3 0 O 0 01 O O O 0 4 h In N Ln 10 M N N .-I M N N ul N M O M M O 'C N .4 P N 01 .Pa.-I O op P.-I 'c N P in O in N Ln co N W.Pt P .Nt.M-I N CO!100'1.N-I.N-4 l(1 O C. .0 sr Cn CD 04 Ln uUi N M N N O = O.3 0)ul N N tto M N.N-1 N h N N.-1 N O N N p .t C N 2 C J 0) .-1 M N N Ui d 2 ce N 2 C) C 0 E N O Cr CO.a Al N N Al O N N M OO P ul N P P 01 O.0 VD N .+P t0 P CO O VD 01 .4 O N M P O..a O O N O N co tD N P 01.~.t N.a O N 00.M.1 in N Cr N M N.a..1 CO Cr.N.t N Ln P P M 01 ui.a.a CO C) N ing.a NO N0 N co M 5 C`i hi v O rV MI C N N N Cr N N O N M O to 1 Cr N N N O N N N O M 12 N.-4 O ti ut t0 N P t0 a O.a 1D 01 in CO 01 N M O M ? 2 C N CO = c ti N M V .N. c M M O .1 LA CO C 0 L O L O O o 0 o T 0 L L O 0 UiN in M M P CO O N N 0 0 to 40 O 0 ul O N Cr)to O M LO/) to 0 Tr N CO N M u1 N N in 40 o tD N tD in N O 01 O P C 0 2 C N u N P O 00 0 0 N 2 C N-.0.0 N 0 u P .P-1 0 C N N M P. P P J M M N N P N Z C) = C C } � v - s (T - 0 N C 3 _c 01 01 V C -a 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 001 0 O1 -a D1 O 0) a 2 C o o rn rn rn rn rn rn m rn o rn rn rn 01 rn�1 rn rn o rn rn rn rn rn rn rn o1 L O 01 m 01 T O 01 01 L O 01 01 01 01 O 01 CJ1 `) L o 01 01 0 al 01 0 4 1))i) N 00 V 001y 7 Vim'=0'Vim-O0i".Pt O 41) C)00 0l 01 01 01 01 T T V, O y C)00 01 O O 01 Ol 01 O N O Obi Obi OO1 Obi Obi Obi Obi .O J E o.-t .-1 N M P N al to E J .4 o V V 0?V Di H P 0\V V Oi.t Oi-12 C)0 T Oi V V 6,7- V Oi.t O C r. = v, -I NNtPr 04o c o°w wN 'oE Eo.I .4NMPNrnt, E J Eo`.t .tNMNolto .. a 8 o o u r o a 2 0 w 611 69-v -EA- n » o 0 owww o Prw CJ oe ri a o c c o 0 0 0 o Q o 0 0 o,m S c Q 8 0 0 0 Q o o ',`6 c 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m 0 c°° Q Q ° 8 0 0 al J 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,c J o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v J (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 C i o 0 0 S o 0 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 c {o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c 5 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 3 4: C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o E c 0S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C1 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CI V Q u,,o.fit o ul ul o ul 0 .U-i 14 8< '^O u)O fA N 0 ut 0 LA. C)< 5 0.Ua 0 u)N o uj 0° C< In o in O u o ul O itea 2 1_' N N M LA N 0 a N N M LA N 0 70 y N N M Ill N 0 C .0 w to CV CO to to'A 89-1- m ww to 6 to to 6 to H W tPr ar+n to tR to w tPr H W -1 w-to ur to to 40406 voH .-I H c0 U/M V'N N W 0 c-O M c c W N W O 0 W U7 Ul O N.Ny Cl W V N W 10 N Ut O N Ul 0 0• 01 y V W N.-I M W 0 M W.-I O c0 0 Ul M N 01 1O N W c Ul W N T 00 M 0,O W N M U1 0 0 01 M W W 2 0 N N N 10 O M t0 0 M O _ U1 N V'O N M O 01 M M 2 lO N W 0 N 0101 W =0 O N N N O'O N O Ul 2 .-I.-1 .ti -) .ti W 2 .-I.-I.-1 UI W = .-I N N.-■N.-i 0 2.'I .-I.'I .- N t W U1 UJ U)0 •"I M Q Q Q Q Cl M ul .-I N 01 0 O N N 0 W N N N 0.OW 001 0 M Q 0 W N 0 0 M .. N 110 N O O N M N M.-�O T N Obi 011 O 0 MM . -I.M-I .0i N N N CO 01 .r N N N M M N .+.-I .-�N N N V'M M N ]- .-I .-1 ...I + O + O N N 0 N 4) .-I vo-N N N~ N W Ul M Ul 0 l0 0 O 100110 0 p1 O O N N LO M W 0 0)0 01 N N N O N N M N N W 0 m 0 0 10.My 01 U1 N O Ul 10 W W c c OJ 01 c9 N W N cc 1O N.N-I a c N M N O N IN O . N O O a C CO... .NN . .N M M 0 N < C.U'1 N O N N N N N M O1 N O. M 0 0 .0 s 0 ~ v N L N O O 0 ,.„, .. .„.. ,,,, ,,,g M 10 N 2 C 0 0 M W cc O 0 -O'^0 S C 011 N O N 00 0 11V1'V O N O u N N N N M N N 01.--I.-I 0 CT 22 g2 e� � p1 _NN1000 CE McoM 0 M 0) 110 UU1 NON V'lO N.4 N0 _ M V N'MnO M�0�)00 NN 0011 N LWA N O°1 R 7 N 1^ll N .y Al ^ . .-I N?ul M M.-1 t0 OF 01- 1- OF N Ul W O 10 V' O 01 N O 10 N 1O tO UJ Ul U1 O W)O N N tO�M N W N O W O U) W 0 W O W N W M M U)c� U7 N U1 N .'-i V'N 0 V' M Ul 0 M N 01 4) M N U1 M N 0 c0 .-1 U1 0 N M Ul O N t0 W.My 1O N 1O N N 0 N 0 N N 01 N UI W Q C ~ ..N . ,--1W Q C M Q C .-I N N N .-I M Q C N 0 0 M M M 010 .6 0 0,0 '-' in 03 N a O 0 0 0 0 N O O O Ul N N O 011 O O W VW'V'N N M M N V 4) 0.M-1 N N n N m l0 M ~ Ilmj N N M 01 N W 10 M O„• .y .,,1 O C N j N y N N M N M N V N 01 2 5 2 _ 29,( N M�.l 11pp ee}} pp p1 c� 001 M.N 011 N O 0 M N N W M 0 M O UI 01 N 0 UU1 N N M N ^101 NW 110 100 m W m UU1 M 01 N 0.y N W O M M OWO V N M M M ti V'jp.. •-1 M.ti.ti 4_ ,T .i N M Ul M O N N ,y. p ti ..N)0 1�.010101 M vr,2g C F N 10 B1- OF N U) L m O.a )0 W 01,W 10 N V' U1 01 O l°N 0.-i 01 0 CO U1 10 01 W W N 10 N N 0 .-I M )0 M N M Ul V'01 M N 4) O N 10 W 0 N N 10 10 4) N N 0 W O M Ul U1 4) O N V' N W N N N N 01 N 0 O.Ul- N- O 01 W 0 M Ul 01 a c N N M M't Q= H .-i 10 Q N 0 M 0 N M a c M 0 Ul O W 0) 01 U; 0 0 "' 10 0 0 N 0 .� U1 'O O O 0 0 • 00 .+M V'01 40 O .-1 W N Ul 0 001 U1 W N O O U1 N N N M N 01 W W N M fM L N N Ul O1 N 01 M Ul M V' .1 N M M N .-I O O N N H W W W 10 M Ul N N 01 01 N M M V V Vl O M N N N 01 O N O N- U1 O C V" = C.-1 .-1 ,-1 N = w xce 2 K m 1p W p 10 N N M 01 N 0 00 W N N Ul 0 N M U1 N N M o m IV0 W▪ M O W M O O M OM1 O O W 100 N Ill W 0 O N W 0i O 0 M N M W 10 O W 01 N N 0 V'.-I W M N N O N OOII O N M V' V•O O ICI N N N N M ut O M)0 Ul N U1 M ti.-I .4 .-. Ul N vl.y N M 21- 21- '- °I- M Y 0 .-1 .-1.-V.-I I� V U1 UI Lll O N .--1 W m O O 01 O cc�� 0 V. 10 W U1 O Ul ti 10 W N d• V• '1Y O UJ O N 10 N N 01 l0 N 1111 N U1 l0 W W W O 10 W W N 4) H M O W En F 01 4) M U/ O.-1 N W l0 41 N M M V'l0 N V'O Ut 01 M O 10 M 01 N W N 0 C N O .-I M V' 0 N C~ .-I .-1 N N Q O N Ul V N V'N Q M V'N Cl 0 N O Id ti.ti 1p O �t 0 0 0 O y�j M.N.I M CO M N O W ywj M V' UM1 W N O W 001 O O ytj▪M O M M M 0M-I M 0 W y�j _0 1 111 1 110 lW0 001 N 01 ti 10 U01 N L/ 2 N 20 W = .-i = C N N .- 0 'I N O.N N N N UJ W lA 0.-I U1 0 U1 W N Ul 01 N O W W M U)W Ul V' .+N M U1 10 Ut N V'N N ut N O 10 N N^� V' .Ny V' .-1 Ul W M O N M W M 10 M U1 N N Ul 10 V' V'O M M W N W 1D =0=N000=000 .-I N M N N { .-I N M N.-. .a V• '4-.0.. M 0 M Ul.-I M jp N.•+N N M 10 N O Ut N V' '� L .2 .- .r .2 - .-1 .2 -. N 212 .-i.ti.ti ti n �) U • M Ut Ul O W Ul O N N Oc� O N M 1O 01 0 0 U1 M N W O M M N Ul W U1 M N O.-1 01 01 N M V N Ul 01 O.-I Ul M O .-I 01 4) N N U).-1 01 O N 0 N N . . . . 1n.y 0 0 0) 4) Ut N N O m M 1010 O 0 0)0 O O 01 Ul O M M 1W Q 0 ~ .i N N N O 0 O 0 O M M O' N .11t 0 .-I..-1 N d' W W V')o W . .-1 ti U1 'a I O O C = = O O l0 N O O M W N V1 W M (mil N M U1 O N W N L N Ul O M W 10 O M U1 M 'c N W O M O W N N W W N Ut N Ut V'M N N N N 01 N 0 1._01 N .y U1 N NN N O 0 N N O .My Ul U1 .i 10 N 0 10.Mi 0 0)0 0 01 im C C p .-a t0 O N M .-I 10 • Y 2 2 K .4 O 0001 ONO m .•I O N M U/Ul W O N 0 0 .010 M N M l0 CO N Ut.01 0101 O N Ul 01 O N.+p 0 _ P N W N N N l0 p M 0 0110)V•N M 0.My N W W�M W M 0 0 0 0 0 V'0)N N N V'm O M 3 M IR .y n '� N ,-/A .,-, N O O N N .-.M 01.y.-i.-f W N 01- F~ 2 O N N 0 U1 `� N N O .-)N 0 01)0 W V)0 M 10 M 0 011 N O 001030 N W 0 N N 0 01 0 N N 0 0 N V'Ul M N N O Ul l0 10 N 111 N .-I 10 10 10.Mi 10 01 N 4) N .-I O 01 N N M 4) M l0 M 0 CO 10 01 M W M N 0 N N N N 10 N N 10 U1 0 Q C N Q C .-1 Vl Q M N N Q 3 .4 0 W N N 0 N 0 VD 47° m0 O O O 0 0 O Q MN O 01 NW N W 0 0 N O N M O M'V N 001.- M N N W N N O M OV M 011 100 O M Uvj W O 110.�-1 0 0 7 0 M M 0 V' _Rt.,. M M O C .-1 N 01 C .-1 .-1 N Ul 10 0 10 N M 2 W SS± 2 2 O M 0 0000 N N O 01 N O O M N M V' ti M 10 U]U 000 O W N W Ul W .-I p.Ny 01 1D M N N M O C)W.-1 M 01 O d• ti M 111 H O'.-.M.•..fir.•I M.r lfl , 0 =W0000. N W M V N O N M.N.N M M C N. N H .ti N F N O N M )L. v n` t CV 0 .O = c 0 0 0 0 N N O- N O N = M O V'.-I W N U1 M O O D = tO W m.i.i ,-L N V'O U1 N C W N Ul 0 0 M CO N U1 W M ro 438.0 =o 0 -, H N O O O O Ul O O W O O E N O N 01 M M N O 10 O W N V'O N 10 V' V' N N O W N N W 10 N 10 .M-1 W W N 10 U1 0 C .7 0 M ,A0 .-1 0 V .-1 N.1 C 0 M V' N M 0 10 M 0 N V' O 0 N V V'10 0\.U-1 O-N W z CO a. a a m (r- n C0 0101 0101 0101 01 001 p O1 01 Ol O1 01 01 01 0011 of 01 01 01 01 01 C1 �-0 01 Q1 01 O1 D1 01 01 _' ,c O O1 rn Q1 0,O1 0,a, ,= O 01 T 0,Q1 Ol O1 Ol ,= 0 01 01 01 01 01 O1 01 .�1= O O1 01 O1 O1 01 0l 01 ,- - Q 0 0 010101 01010101 ,. 0 O o1 01 01 01 01 01 Orn 4) 0 01010/01 O1 01 01, O o1 O O o1 01 01 O`Oi ° 0 O'Oi r 0 Oi V'of ° U) 0 O..4 0?V 7 0.4 01 -1-1 ° U' 0 O V`m V V'of V`of-1-1 0 N °O V' O �' 0,0 Eo .-INm ' Nrn. E ° Eo .-INMONm4A. E ° g ..r.gE0Nm c f� m= 8 rt v v en�n e v 28_7101-69-0-0-0-0-61 ° 0 . MM-1,4. 0 - a�g E O w w Mn lv I- (U rl N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° 2 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° o c 8 0 0 0 0 0 ° m S cp o o m S c o o m c o o c m S c 0 0 C O O O O 00 O 0 0 h 0 F O O O O O O 3 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ ° IO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 `W C c ^Wo OO WO°O°O °o°O d o ,- c �' . 888888°-0- c 5........o O O O O o :,,, -t '"o o lli ui o vi°o l°n S 0 ¢ o o vi lri o Iri o .R a aNi 0 N N r�i 0 n o l`.tipl o 0 a N o o In vi o to o° C�' J wNNM t w H 4,13-b9-4,1-4 Mvr lu stn F°- .� .- --. +r+w Fn yr --a»I- �uvf w linwmH NO N N O N M o 0 O M N.-1 t0 t0 N 01 co co N VI M LOO N CO N l(1 O N.-1 N 01 M M N N t0 O)N N N N 0 N N.N CO VI 01l O N O N O O1 M N O O N N O l0 O.O N M IA N.1 N O O N 0 CO N lA O N =N N CO N.O 01 CO N N Cr N 2 N N N N N ti 2 .I ` N = MMNN N N N.`1 tD ¢ ¢ Q N N N.N i0O.-1 N N O M N N M 01 .N+N M CO O CO.-1 Vt N.-1 N M P M N O t0 t0 t0 N N V)CO O M O CO t0 M N co O co t0 O N t0 0 01 t0 at VI N At CO N N N co O +O.1 N N N N N M M.-N .+t0 O N N N .1 N M M N N V at C N CO.01 Cr,N N ca 0 1D N N t. d,1- F CO NV-N N-�M-1.Nn N01 .�-i Ln N N N � O a N 0 N N N M N Cr 01 N g 01 O O CO CO O1 N O t0 N WN O N 01 N t0 N1 a� Ol co O Ol O N tD VI O.N-1 V1 N CO CO M N N N N N .N al ¢ C O..N-1.N-1 O.N N°N.-i 0 Al.N ¢ C N tv0 M R 00..1 CO V)IN Cr N 0 ti t '� 0 p •'-1 O.... t0 O V)Nb O tD d`N C .0 .0 J? O V.IN .-1 01 N 01 0 M P N pA Vp1i po 2 C N.N co VD.M-1.N l0 V1 H Cr 2 C O CO N lM0.N--1 O N N N 2 C N N N O O.N V.N N N K O V)V`M cl CO-N 0 �pp up po CO N xp t0.D N 01 M M N N CO N M CO M V.-.N.1 O IN N Cr M•.0.1 O N�p8O VP).N-1 N CO M M.N M 0'V.VX (1 .1 N g .1 N p 0 NC'1D t0 N co 10..01•-, M Y1 1- g N g F- N.-1 0 N 0 t VI IA 0 O VI V)N N N.-1 N N 0 O N CO O 01 CO V)N .-1 M N N CO N CO N ON t0 0 t0 CO N N N N V)NO N V)l0 O. N M 0) d) O 0 N 0 VD N 0 N N 01 N M N O N LO O N NN N N N ¢ C N N N N N V) N C .I M .1 CO O C O O P 0 N,N 0)0 0 M o LI 0 ¢0 .1 ¢0 CO-M O."V`O.N-N`O.0 O Qi t0 W O 'O 2 o a, N t0 M N N N N 011.N .I 0 O O N V1 01 VI N M 111 0 .-1 01 O N N lO M O O N N = C.i.-1 H lA VI M N ? C CO N Vl N N N N j C n 0 N N N 0 N N M.NN 00., S y 2 ..-I N N N N N yV N` n t0 N M N C N VMI ..N N 1tO0 CO N P N O ro 10 M t0 01 M M,CO N!tO M 0) n g M E .t0 Vl V1 N N f1N')N N N N IN N IA t0 IA N N CO Vl N M M N M N O 0 O.Cr N N CO t0 N O. h U) V1 N VI N 01 VI 0.-1 O V) N 0) VD CO CO N N N CO O a) N 0N on 0 M N At CO N 01 0 1r WI Q C .1 N CO N Cr Cr O 0 C N N V)N N 0 Vli 01 C O tO O N N V1 N O 01 N V) N a N ¢0 CO'CO'N Oi.N-1`CO N N N tND 1n 0 0 'O L N CO.Oy.N CO N CO VI N N N CO V]N V1 01 01.VD VI O Vl CO O N O IA O M O N O ul V1 N N O O 01 M M.-1 N N N t0 M O N N N N M N co N Lel N O t0 N N Vl M CO V) pO m N Do C N j C in LO N t0 CO.-1 t0 N N M S K 1Q )V)N N.N cr V)tp N N M p2 M n At GO ir, ffttpp W N N V. tp N t0 N N O N pp M N O.t0 N O 01 IN Npp11 N N pN P t0 40t^ N .0 i M)O) t0 N N N.-1 V- M un O Oi V V V)N\V)LS"N V)N N^ S O g F O g F . N N N V)N N.0 cu V V ' O M VI O O N O N N O.N N CO t0 O 0 M N 01 0 M N N O.111 N N N N 01 CO 0 V- 0 U) O M N N N N N d N 01 0 P M N N N O N N Vt N N a) N 0 VI Ill M N O N V)IA a. ¢C M N lA M O 01 C N N 0 t0 O N 01 C N N N .1 01 O1 N M IA P .o8 O N N O N O CO'N N N Co- vi.M V)VN'O C t O O N Ulna V ti M M-I Cr O.N"1 V°'N.P-1 VMVS� N I(1 N 00 A 0 N FA N t0 O N N MV-tN N M Ol V)01 N P N 01 ., p C ...1 t0 Oo C .i O. S "O,O N N 0 N N I NN INA N 0 S K S g 22 tp NNN tp co O l N.1 rA 1 0 NON VD 01 N CO O N aVt�t0 t0 O.-1 N 0 01 M 01 N tN N .)N lA CO N N CO t0 ON P N rsi CO N N Q .N CO N M V1 CO N t0 N�N O.0 N N N O N VI O P N N 01,01 CO.M Obi NO Pi.M-1 N 001 M M M M N O. ,,»� I. f° "'N O N Ng O N O N V)M O N V)N N t-m C M V1 N N N N N N 0 N N O 0 N CO t0 VD N 0 N N V-CO lA lA P M 0 01 01 t0 N N .-I O N N O Cl Nll N N N NO ti N 01 N N ON M P M P 01 t0 N 01 Vl 0c�O N t00 M N N N N O O M O N Q N N N N C N N N N N N CDC CO tO N .-I CO N N CO CO �C ~ a O N N O ti ti N D M N M M N lil C v O O c C O CO VI M CO CO N CO V)V1 CO O Cr N N N N 01.N N N co W N M 0 N N O N o N CO M ` = t0.-1 N N N CID CO 0 0)CO N y1 O N N V1 N N N N N M , N N N CO N N N 0 0 0 0 pp C O la. N N N rN-1 a C V)CO 01 O.-I .-1 .1 In N N 13 2 K 2 C W N N N N N O.N-I`n VIN N 0 N.-I N N 0 N t0 M O.Vl(N N N N O1 Tctt to N ppN1 pNp O1 N t0 co 0 N tyV0. R CO N pQ t0 LO C) N 0.N-1.-N A NY N If1 P N N N N N_.-i ti.Ni N l OM.N O.01 V W N N M IA.N VD N,M O 001 O Q F N 2 O .a V) Q .O N nNp O ON NNN N N 0 Cr N M N. O ul Lo N Z N O N N M V O O N N M N 01 0 0 N M N N N 0. N N Ol N PP M tp M M N N N N N N N N N CO C N Cr N 0 N P N N 0)C N:O N N p N M V0 N i N C N. 0 C 0 l 0 < D y.i N N n MN O Oi O o a� 0 .I O C N 0 DI t Cr WI VD VD CO Cr CI C ?C O W M~O.N-I N N.N-I M N M v N N O LOO N N M V'N co N 00 ym1 C.N-1 VMl O t0 U).-1 .N-1 co CU ON on N .D pp 0O C N N .-I N N t0 N Ill M.-I M Oo 't-'N N N N N 0)N 0 N N N „Q 2 '� 2 C CO' 2 O Ill 111 V)-. .NO.N-1 N M 001 0 �. ..4.00 t0 O O P O v) 01 M O.N Vl O O tD M Vl N V'N N 01 Ot V1 t0 0 N N N N 0 O N M M N N N N N 01 N N N N NN V'M O M CO IA in 111 CO r. t0 N N N.1 N N N N O M,N VI.M M P N,- �. N N F0 "N N O N N'C 0 N oo N.-N Oi j IN f- N co E O w v w` v E N C N N N N N N N 0 N O N g .10000301010N0 01 t0 VD Ill co O.t0 N M O M N ?0 O C = C .ti M.ti H O C IOA M ll N O VN1 ON1 N M.M'I i C m E '_N6 0 O O O .i ti ff ri U _ pppp U O 3 N M CO OOi t�0 N°N OO N-t0 Cr N O 00 O O M CO O t00 CO 0 ON.N N VD N N N N a C 0 2 in S C N N N.) N O C'tin N N N CO VD,Cr 01 M N O Z j = O[ ) cc N CO-0 CO't0 tD t0 N N O N RI 7 °o c .O pp11 0 01 N . 3 C L O O.001 01 T 01 01 p0p�I 0` 0 01 01 0O011.O.01 0)01 01 p Ot pOp11.01 O.01 01 00i j E 2 Q vOi W O V.`O+V '70 700).N-1 a m O 004 00)O.001 00.001 001 0 t W °001 Ol 001 00.00.00.00.0 41 C p 4, O O N 0U} E I O E O.N-N�N M N ON N 001 UI E 8 E O.N-I N N M 0 N 001#E 0 >?.i C M V1-V1-tPr fq FPr N 2 O VT tR tH V}yq h CA- rl al S' 2 22gg° 0 �°mcu gcggggg2o v2 gggggg0 ° U y a m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0° '� m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O co Q C S m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O vi E £0 0 0 o O o 0 o O p C o 0o o 0 0 0 0 0 c p O ¢C N O O o O O O O O O O C O O O O O 8 O O C S O O O O O O°° g N O V)O N V)O N O. D < N O lri O V)V)O N Lri'O I°l1 D 133< O O °�wVA w wCA. I- °� 8484 _64.I°- °J'VAw VA^y}w#ON Figure 35:Median Household Income,All Renters 2010 $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 = Eli',000 • . - -- -,000 $o �a�\� oa�r��i1�`�oP`�2�,a\�,�°, ,,;`°.cA�c q-`'. ��ca� Cate <aca 00�c ° 0 4 Q Source:US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey o Figure 36: Median Household Income,Renters Age 25-34 2010 Figure 37: Median Household Income,Renters Age 75+2010 $80,000 $35,000 $70,000 - $30,000 $60,000 v E $50,000 $25,000 '_c $40,000 Ed $20,000 m - - a $30,000 fir. dilifilil c $15,000 c< $10,000 - - -- -. $s,000-- $0 a \ 4, �� aA4eSPa �� ., e .4q'' <,* C ,;t› e, e, oa e a ,;\ s 6\ ,,° ..k- c a Q` Pe� ` ,aQ� �ScQae, '`. a �' QOe�° �ooaeoco�a `o oA yy �Qh 0 �o �Q\yl 0? cam. Source:US Cens us,2006-2010 American Community Survey Source:US Cens us,2006-2010 American Community Survey It should be noted that the recent bust in the for-sale housing market and the resultant foreclosure crisis has had immediate impacts on the rental market by dramatically increasing the number of rented single- family homes. However, there is the potential for some long-term impacts as well, which are related to the attitudes and perceptions of homeownership. A theory is emerging that long-held beliefs in the economic stability of homeownership may be eroding among younger households, particularly among those who typically would become first time homeowners in the next several years. The theory holds that the longer the for-sale market experiences weak price appreciation (it has been six years since the housing crash began), younger generations may not see the value of homeownership in the same way as previous generations did. Furthermore, with persistently high unemployment rates, younger generations may question investing in a housing situation as permanent as homeownership because of the potential that they may need to relocate for work opportunities. Therefore, if the for-sale market does not improve significantly over the next several years, these attitudes may strengthen resulting in an increasing number of lifestyle renters who may choose to continue to rent in lieu of homeownership. Table 18 presents data that tries to better understand the City of Richfield,MN , Page 47 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 ,�. Stantec 193802154 effect of more"lifestyle"renters. It displays the change in median incomes for renter and owner households between 2000 and 2010. The following are important findings from the table: • The median income of Richfield renters increased nearly 13% in the last decade, while the median income of owner households increased 11%. Metro-wide, the rate of change among renters was 25%, while among owners it was only 18%. This lends some corroboration to the theory laid out above that as younger renter households gain more work experience and higher incomes they may be remaining renters at higher rates than previous decades. If this trend continues, there will be need to create more rental options targeted to affluent households. • Increases in Richfield's renter and owner incomes tended to lag behind its peer communities between 2000 and 2010. Richfield had the second lowest rate of increase among its renters and the third lowest rate of increase among its owners. Table 18: Median Household Income 2000 and 2010 Renter Households 2000-2010 Change Community 2000 2010 $ % Bloomington $35,542 $41,912 $6,370 17.9% Eden Prairie $49,489 $55,260 $5,771 11.7% Edina $36,814 $55,611 $18,797 51.1% Golden Valley $31,995 $39,981 $7,986 25.0% Hopkins $33,185 $40,520 $7,335 22.1% Maplewood $28,383 $32,639 $4,256 15.0% Mpls(S of 42nd) $37,628 $48,226 $10,598 28.2% Richfield $29,572 $33,335 $3,763 12.7% Roseville $32,039 $40,530 $8,491 26.5% St. Louis Park $33,915 $46,121 $12,206 36.0% Metro Area $30,480 $38,106 _ $7,626 25.0% Owner Households 2000-2010 Change Community 2000 2010 $ Bloomington $65,713 $71,646 $5,933 9.0% Eden Prairie $91,633 $108,795 $17,162 18.7% Edina $81,043 $92,552 $11,509 14.2% Golden Valley $71,289 $88,593 $17,304 24.3% Hopkins $54,040 $64,071 $10,031 18.6% Maplewood $60,712 $68,927 $8,215 13.5% Mpls(S of 42nd) $64,335 $80,098 $15,763 24.5% Richfield $57,120 $63,233 $6,113 10.7% Roseville $64,736 $65,868 $1,132 1.7% St. Louis Park $60,411 $71,511 $11,100 18.4% Metro Area $66,430 $78,025 $11,595 17.5% All Households 2000-2010 Change Community 2000 2010 $ Bloomington $56,057 $60,558 $4,501 8.0% Eden Prairie $79,334 $90,313 $10,979 13.8% Edina $67,361 $78,586 $11,225 16.7% Golden Valley $63,694 $78,355 $14,661 23.0% Hopkins $39,386 $46,424 $7,038 17.9% Maplewood $52,086 $56,303 $4,217 8.1% Mpls(S of 42nd) $58,423 $71,281 $12,858 22.0% Richfield $46,098 $50,676 $4,578 9.9% Roseville $51,516 $54,507 $2,991 5.8% St. Louis Park $49,525 $61,195 $11,670 23.6% Metro Area $55,128 $64,485 $9,357 17.0% _ Source:2000 US Census;2006-2010 American Community Survey City of Richfield,MN C}' }p/+ Page 48 Jtuf`eC Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 '�I 193802154 RENT BURDEN Rent burden is the proportion of household income spent toward housing and utilities. When lower income households spend more than 30% of their income toward rent and utilities this burden is considered excessive because it begins to limit the money available for other essentials such as food, clothing, transportation, and healthcare. Table 19 presents the number and percentage of Richfield renter households broken down by annual income and percentage of income spent on housing. Important findings include the following: • 45% of Richfield's renter households have incomes below$35,000 and spend more than 30% of their income toward housing. This is higher than the Metro Area rate and one of the highest rates among its peer communities. Table 19: Rent Burden of Richfield Renter Households by Household Income 2010 Number of Households Housing Costs as a Annual Household Income Percentage of Less than $10,000- $20,000- $35,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000 Total Household Income $10,000 $19,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 or more Households Less than 20.0 percent 0 49 13 166 500 186 153 1,067 20.0 to 24.9 percent 0 21 62 269 62 18 63 495 25.0 to 29.9 percent 0 48 479 119 46 8 0 700 30.0 to 34.9 percent 50 21 316 43 58 0 0 488 35.0 percent or more 582 722 598 229 17 0 0 2,148 Not computed 0 39 22 32 46 0 33 172 Total 632 900 1,490_ 858 729 212 249 5,070 Percentage of Households Housing Costs as a Annual Household Income Percentage of Less than $10,000- $20,000- $35,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000 Total Household Income $10,000 $19,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 or more Households Less than 20.0 percent 0.0% 5.4% 0.9% 19.3% 68.6% 87.7% 61.4% 21.0% 20.0 to 24.9 percent 0.0% 2.3% 4.2% 31.4% 8.5% 8.5% 25.3% 9.8% 25.0 to 29.9 percent 0.0% 5.3% 32.1% 13.9% 6.3% 3.8% 0.0% 13.8% 30.0 to 34.9 percent 7.9% 2.3% 21.2% 5.0% 8.0% 0.0% 0.0% 9.6% 35.0 percent or more 92.1% 80.2% 40.1% 26.7% 2.3% 0.0% 0.0% 42.4% Not computed 0.0% 4.3% 1.5% 3.7% 6.3% 0.0% 13.3% 3.4% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source:US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey Figure 38: Percentage of Low-Income(<$35,000) Renter Households that Spend More than 30%of Income toward Housing a) 60% • 0 aa) 50% _ . .- N 7 0 = 40% U7iiiiII11 0% - - 0% -- QaacR�a``o�a�a\a� 4. �oq� '', ■y., ``'o D'' a' �cA�e�el''' 4\ �e ac o Q-o c o a C Q,5 0 e Source:US Census,2006-2010 American Community Survey City of Richfield,MN Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 4, nt°r' 193802154 Page 49 CITY OF RICHFIELD - RENTAL HOUSING INVENTORY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT Socio-Economic Trends Previous sections addressed the current and recent demographic situation for Richfield and its peer communities. This section presents data of several key forecasts that will affect the demand for rental housing in the future. POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD FORECAST Tables 20 and 21 present data on the forecasted population and household growth of Richfield and its peer communities. Richfield and its peer communities are fully developed, which helps explain why their forecasted growth rates do not equal that of the entire Metro Area. The Metro Area figures include both fully developed communities as well as those communities with large tracts of vacant land that can accommodate large scale residential construction. Communities with significant amounts of new residential construction are typically the ones that experience the largest population increases. Although Richfield is fully developed, the Metropolitan Council expects an important amount of population growth to occur over the next 20 years due to redevelopment opportunities of older, underutilized buildings and properties. Although Richfield has been engaging in significant redevelopment over the last 30 years, the Metropolitan Council anticipates that with a rapidly aging population, higher energy costs, and an enhanced transit system, that redevelopment will become even more feasible in the coming decades. This can be seen in Table 20 where Richfield's population is expected to increase about 10% in both the 2010s and the 2020s, which is a sharp change from recent decades when decreasing household size resulted in overall declines in population. According to Table 21, which displays forecasted household growth, this population growth will equate to approximately 1,500 new households each decade. In order to accommodate this new household growth, substantial amounts of new multifamily housing will need to be built because the economics of replacing non-residential uses with single-family housing is not realistic. As noted previously in this report, in all likelihood much of this new multifamily housing will probably be in the form of rental housing. It should be noted that if substantial numbers of new housing units are not built then the population growth displayed in Table 20 will not occur. Table 20: Population Growth Trends 2000-2030 Forecast Numeric Change Percentage Change Community 2000 2010 2020 2030 2000s1 2010s1 2020s 2000s1 2010s1 2020s Richfield 34,310 35,228 38,800 42,500 918 3,572 3,700 2.7% 10.1% 9.5% Bloomington 85,172 82,893 86,600 88,600 -2,279 3,707 2,000 -2.7% 4.5% 2.3% Eden Prairie 54,901 60,797 65,200 72,400 5,896 4,403 7,200 10.7% 7.2% 11.0% Edina 47,425 47,941 48,500 49,400 516 559 900 1,10/0 1.2% 1.9% Golden Valley 20,281 20,371 20,700 21,700 90 329 1,000 0.4% 1,6% 4.8% Hopkins 17,367 17,591 18,300 18,600 224 709 300 1.3% 4.0% 1.6% Maplewood 35,258 38,018 39,000 41,400 2,760 982 2,400 7.8% 2.6% 6.2% Minneapolis(S of 42nd) 71,219 71,659 75,200 77,100 440 3,541 1,900 0.6% 4.9% 2.5% Roseville 33,690 33,660 34,700 36,000 -30 1,040 1,300 -0.1% 3.1% 3.7% St. Louis Park 44,102 45,250 47,600 49,800 1,148 2,350 2,200 2.6% 5.2% 4.6% Peer Community Total 443,725 453,408 474,600 497,500 9,683 21,192 22,900 2.2% 4.7% 4.8% 7-County Metro Area 2,642,056 2,849,567 3,178,567 3,452,567 207,5111329,0001 274,0001 7.9%I 11.5%1 8.6% Sources:US Census;Metropolitan Council;Stantec City of Richfield,MN Page 50 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 Stantec 193802154 Table 21: Household Growth Trends 2000-2030 Forecast Numeric Change Percentage Change Community 2000 2010 2020 2030 2000s 2010s 2020s 2000s_ 2010s1 2020s Richfield 15,073 14,818 16,300 17,800 -255 1,482 1,500 -1.7% 10.0% 9.2% Bloomington 36,400 35,905 38,200 39,300 -495 2,295 1,100 -1.4% 6.4% 2.9% Eden Prairie 20,457 23,930 27,400 31,900 3,473 3,470 4,500 17.0% 14.5% 16.4% Edina 20,996 20,672 21,100 21,600 -324 428 500 -1.5% 2.1% 2.4% Golden Valley 8,449 8,816 9,000 9,400 367 184 400 4.3% 2,1% 4.4% Hopkins 8,359 8,366 8,700 8,900 7 334 200 0.1% 4.0% 2.3% Maplewood 13,758 14,882 15,900 17,400 1,124 1,018 1,500 8.2% 6.8% 9.4% Minneapolis(S of 42nd) 31,204 30,458 r 31,900 32,900 -746 1,442 1,000 -2.4% 4.6% 3.1% Roseville 14,598 14,623 15,100 15,600 25 477 500 0.2% 3.3% 3.3% St. Louis Park 20,773 21,743 22,700 23,700 970 957 1,000 4.7% 4.4% 4.4% Peer Community Total 190,067 194,213 206,300 218,500 4,146 12,087 12,200 2.2% 6.2% 5.9% 7-County Metro Area 1,021,454 1,117,749 1,281,749 1,411,749 I 96,295!164,000!130,000! 9.4% 14.7%I 10.1% Sources:US Census;Metropolitan Council;Stantec EMPLOYMENT FORECAST Employment growth in Richfield and its neighboring communities will be a key driver of demand for rental housing in the coming decades. According to Table 22, Richfield is not expected to capture a significant share of the area's employment growth over the next 20 years. However, the adjacent communities of Bloomington and Edina are expected to add nearly 20,000 jobs in the 2010s and another 13,000 jobs in the 2020s. Many of the people hired for those new jobs would certainly consider Richfield as possible location for housing if there is adequate supply and choice for them to choose from. Table 22: Employment Growth Trends 2000-2030 Forecasts Numeric Change Percentage Change Community 2000 2010 2020 2030 2000s 2010s 2020s 2000s 2010s 2020s Richfield 11,762 17,100 17,600 18,100 5,338 500 500 45.4% 2.9% 2.8% Bloomington 104,548 108,100 124,700 135,200 3,552 16,600 10,500 3.4% 15.4% 8.4% Eden Prairie 51,006 55,000 62,000 65,500 3,994_ 7,000 3,500 7.8% 12.7% 5.6% Edina 52,991 52,100 55,000 57,400 -891 2,900 2,400 -1.7% 5.6% 4.4% Golden Valley 30,142 31,700 33,100 34,500 1,558 1,400 1,400 5.2% 4.4% 4,2% Hopkins 11,979 13,600 14,800 16,300 1,621 1,200 1,500 13.5% 8.8% 10.1% Maplewood 29,259 36,600 41,000 44,500 7,341 4,400 3,500 25.1% 12.0% 8.5% Minneapolis(S of 42nd) 12,031 13,800 11,100 11,500 1,769 -2,700 400 14.7%-19.6% 3.6% Roseville 39,211 42,500 44,700 46,100 3,289 2,200 1,400 8.4% 5.2% 3.1% St. Louis Park 40,696 46,200 50,500 52,500 5,504 4,300 2,000 13.5% 9.3% 4.0% Peer Community Total 383,625 416,700 454,500 481,600 33,075.37,800 27,100 8.6% 9.1% 6.0% 7-County Metro Area 1,606,263 1,816,000 1,990,000 2,126,000 1209,7371 174,000 136,0001 13.1%1 9.6%1 6.8% Sources:US Census;Metropolitan Council;Stantec POPULATION PROJECTIONS BY AGE GROUP As presented previously, it is important to understand the age breakdown of the population because there is a strong correlation between one's age and the likelihood that they may rent their housing. Although long range age projections are not available at the municipal level, the Minnesota State Demographer recently released projections for the State of Minnesota, which are presented in Table 23. According to the table, those age groups with a propensity to rent offer up a mixed bag regarding how much growth may occur and subsequently drive demand for more rental housing. Among the older age groups, there clearly is strong growth projected through 2030. This will unquestionably drive demand for senior housing. However, not all seniors who want to rent their housing will want to live in an City of Richfield,MN Stantec Page 51 }}antec Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 4; St 193802154 environment dominated by the provision of personal care services. This will open up opportunities for more upscale rental housing that appeal to older age groups, though not necessarily age-restricted. Generally speaking, the upscale quality of buildings that cater to this group has more to do with better unit finishes and features than a long list of common area amenities. Among the younger age groups, particularly in the 25 to 34 age, which is typically the largest renting age group, there will be a slight decline in population during the 2020s. Therefore, it will be important to be mindful that numeric growth will not necessarily drive demand in this age group. However, as mentioned previously, this group may be increasingly attracted to renting because of shifting attitudes toward homeownership. Table 23: Projected Population Growth by Age Group,State of Minnesota 2010 to 2030 Numeric Change Percent Change Population Age 2010 2020 2030 2010-2020 2020-2030 2010-2020 2020-2030 Under 18 Years 1,283,174 1,390,945 1,468,976 107,771 78,031 8.4% 5.6% 18 to 24 years 502,895 481,495 528,933 -21,400 47,438 -4.3% 9.9% 25 to 34 years 719,226 747,328 738,303 28,102 -9,025 3.9% -1.2% 35 to 44 years 678,767 740,391 769,172 61,624 28,781 9.1% 3.9% 45 to 54 years 807,154 669,191 730,422 -137,963 61,231 -17.1% 9.2% 55 to 64 years 634,019 772,363 641,276 138,344 -131,087 21.8% -17.0% 65 to 74 years 356,326 565,154 690,324 208,828 125,170 58.6% 22.1% 75 to 84 years 221,752 279,403 448,616 57,651 169,213 26.0% 60.6% 85 years and over 107,271 125,989 166,283 18,718 40,294 17.4% 32.0% Total Population ' 5,310,584' 5,772,259' 6,182,305 461,675 410,046 8.7% 7.1% Source: Minnesota State Demographer City of Richfield,MN C}' p�+ Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 �: JLUI II . Page 52 ` 193802154 CITY OF RICHFIELD — RENTAL HOUSING INVENTORY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT Housing Conditions The previous sections of this report presented a great deal of quantitative data on the condition of Richfield's rental housing stock and renter household base. This section provides some additional context to the condition of the housing stock by providing qualitative data based on interviews with apartment property managers and a windshield survey of the neighborhoods where rental housing is the most concentrated. PROPERTY MANAGER INTERVIEWS Stantec interviewed a number of property managers at some of Richfield's largest apartment complexes. The interviews were intended to gain insight and feedback about important issues and concerns regarding the marketability of their properties and the potential role the City could play in assisting them to keep their properties as marketable as possible. The interviews were not meant to be exhaustive or statistically significant. Managers at five different apartment complexes, representing over 1,100 units, were interviewed. Manager and apartment names have been kept confidential. Below are relevant comments from the interviews: • City is doing a good job supporting rental housing • Has had experience with city funds- interior and exterior improvements • Current low vacancy-able to lease quickly • Additional cross walks in close proximity to the building would be helpful • No known experience using city funds for improvements • Has availability at each building-about a 2-3%vacancy rate, no waiting lists • Both buildings we manage on bus route • No impediments to maintaining buildings or marketability • Only 2 vacant units -very low vacancy rates compared to even last summer • 80% of units are rented by retirees from Richfield wanting to stay in Richfield • No known experience using city funds for improvements • Great location - access to Rainbow Foods and medical services (walking distance) • Nature center is in walking distance • Low crime • Could see benefit of streetlight near property-fairly dark in immediate area • Across the street from Best Buy • A park across the street is difficult to access - very busy street- crosswalks would be helpful. • No trails nearby • No on site playground • Challenge with language barriers - would love to see city sponsored language classes offered to the rental communities in Richfield. Also needed: "how to"classes on appliances, housekeeping basics, etc. • Would like city info provided directly to managers so that they can get to the residents (e.g., recreational programs) • Need City info prepared in a variety of languages • Police contact is good • Management does a great job - nicest properties in town in her opinion - put a lot of money into buildings recently City of Richfield,MN Page 53 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 Stantec 193802154 • Low vacancy at this time • Older building - 1970 • Great access to transit— right at the door • No outside amenities - closest park is several blocks on a busy street • Did get one met council grant that was aware of to install energy efficient windows in apartments and furnaces in the townhome units • Concerned about increase in rental rates • Concerned about future competition as Richfield has recently approved and is also reviewing additional affordable housing projects - some with a significant number of units. Their buildings are also at an affordable rent(accepts assistance). Fears too much competition from these new affordable buildings would result in vacancies in the future. The older buildings will not be able to compete. Would like to see more money invested in existing rental properties and for the City to do a better job of making existing programs more widely known among the owners and managers. • Lately they have been also losing people to Burnsville - lower rents for same size apartments. Also, some competition with older parts of Edina. Competition with surrounding communities is a big deal. • Need more activities for kids, teens and families • 494 needs a noise wall • Crime prevention info and contact by police department is great • Language barriers is an issues - education on housekeeping (pests, general cleaning, humidity), use of appliances, etc would be very helpful. Mentioned a program in Bloomington-SHAPE. WINDSHIELD SURVEY A visual inventory of the rental housing stock was performed to gauge the condition of properties in key locations of the City and to identify where additional investment could be focused to improve the marketability of certain districts. Below is a brief summary of the survey by district. NORTHWEST RICHFIELD Anchored by the commercial node at Penn Avenue and 66th Street West, this neighborhood is mostly single-family in character, though important concentrations of smaller apartment buildings are situated along Queen Avenue, Oliver Avenue, and portions of 66th Street and Penn Avenue. Most of the single- family homes are well maintained, which has a positive influence on the apartment buildings by making them feel and appear well-maintained as well. Furthermore, the commercial corridor along Penn Avenue has experienced redevelopment recently, which has had a positive influence on the neighborhood by creating a sense of renewal. The Southdale area, which is less than a mile to the west of this neighborhood, also has a very positive effect on rental properties because its large number of jobs is within walking distance or a short bus ride. The biggest opportunity to help maintain marketability of the apartments in this neighborhood would be to continue improving the pedestrian connections along Penn Avenue so that the businesses along the corridor can continue to serve as an amenity for nearby apartment residents. NORTHCENTRAL RICHFIELD This neighborhood is centered on the intersection of Lyndale Avenue and West 66th Street. This area has been the focus of significant redevelopment for nearly 30 years and has seen the development of several high rises, which has resulted in a decidedly urban character. There are over 800 rental units in this area. This neighborhood, by far, has the widest range of properties; old, new, senior, general-occupancy, low- rise, and high-rise. It also has the City's only newer, upscale apartment complex, Oaks on Pleasant, which features many of the amenities (and pricing) found at other newer upscale apartments in the Twin Cities. This area is also well connected with trails to nearby Wood Lake and Richfield Lake and the Hub Shopping Center. City of Richfield,MN �/ (}'n}p/� Page 54 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 '�- Stan t&`& 193802154 This neighborhood has also been the location of several recent proposals for new apartment development, including Lyndale Commons, which is currently under construction. The energy associated with continued redevelopment of underutilized properties will improve the marketability of the existing, older rental stock by incentivizing owners to make upgrades to their properties. Nonetheless, there are some older buildings that lack many of the amenities desired by today's market, which may require assistance with appliance upgrades, weatherproofing, and cosmetic changes. NORTHEAST RICHFIELD East 66th Street between Portland and Cedar Avenues serves as the backbone of this neighborhood. The Cedar Point Commons redevelopment at Cedar and 66th Street resulted in the demolition of several smaller apartment buildings. Therefore, the remaining rental stock consists mostly of smaller buildings scattered along East 66th Street. For the most part, these properties have varying degrees of maintenance and upkeep. However, there is no major concentration of buildings in any one block or intersection. Therefore, it would be difficult to strategically employ area-wide public investments in the hopes of attracting significant new private investment. Therefore, any public intervention needed to improve the rental housing stock will likely need to occur on a project-by-project basis. SOUTHEAST RICHFIELD With over 1,000 apartment units, southeast Richfield has the second largest concentration of rental units in the City. However, nearly all of the units are situated along either I-494 or Highway 77. The apartments along Highway 77(Cedar Avenue) are mostly, smaller buildings with few amenities and a wide variety of owners and property managers. These properties have varying degrees of maintenance and upkeep. Therefore, due to the decentralized nature of ownership, the area is susceptible to a downward trend toward disinvestment if a handful of properties begin to exhibit clear signs of deferred maintenance. The biggest challenge to the marketability of these apartments is the impact of noise from the highway and the airport, which is just across the highway. As a matter of fact, the perception of airport noise is probably a bigger problem than actual airport noise because most of the buildings face directly toward the airport and without any sound wall or berm prospective renters can't help but consider the impact. The apartments along I-494 are much larger and have more amenities and are often professionally managed. As a result, these properties tend to have slightly higher rents than those along Highway 77. However, they too suffer from proximity to a major highway and do not have the benefit of sound walls. Moreover, East 77th Street in this part of Richfield has a significant volume of traffic, which, in many ways, serves to severely cut off these properties from nearby shopping and parks. This is especially challenging for residents with school aged children who are challenged by the need to cross busy roadways to get to schools, parks, and stores. Better pedestrian connections and sound improvements would enhance the marketability of these properties. SOUTHCENTRAL RICHFIELD The heart of this neighborhood could be considered Lyndale Avenue and West 77th Street because of the major redevelopment that has occurred in the last 10 to 12 years. The rental stock in this area is mostly contained in two large, apartment developments; Mainstreet Village and Lynwood Gardens. Mainstreet Village is a 12 year old senior housing development that is located in a mixed-use building with offices. Lynwood Gardens is a 1960s era complex with just over 300 total units all of which are one-bedroom. In addition to only having one-bedroom units, the square footages of the units at Lynwood Gardens are small for their size being less than 600 square feet. Therefore, the rents at Lynwood Gardens are some of the most modest rents in the market. Despite these marketing challenges, Lynwood Gardens has City of Richfield,MN v c�,� }per Page 55 Stan}EC Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 1 193802154 received some new investment recently, which can be seen in the improvements to the leasing office and signage and overall branding of the property. Regardless, the complex, despite its overall number of units, has few amenities to market to prospective renters. The biggest benefit to maintaining the condition of the rental stock in this neighborhood will be to continue building upon the recent changes that have occurred at 77th and Lyndale Avenue, such as better streetscape and pedestrian connections, which have served to attract a new mix of businesses to the area. SOUTHWEST RICHFIELD Most of the apartments in this part of Richfield are concentrated in an area near West 76th Street and Penn Avenue. This area has the largest concentration of apartments with over 1,300 units. Much of the stock is located in three large apartment complexes, though there are a number of smaller buildings located along Oliver and Penn Avenue just north of 76th Street. The larger apartment complexes are in relatively good condition with visible signs of regular maintenance. The area is also influenced by the Best Buy headquarters, which looms large over the Penn Avenue and 76th Street intersection. Although the Best Buy development has changed the physical character of the neighborhood, it has also brought new investment into the neighborhood as well. The largest of the three big complexes, Crossroads at Penn, consists entirely of one-bedroom apartments, which is a rarity in today's market. Despite the marketing challenge this creates, the property continues to maintain relatively high occupancies, which indicates the overall strength and marketability of its location. The neighborhood has a number of parks, playgrounds and open spaces. However, the volume and speed of traffic along 76th Street cuts off the properties south of 76th from these amenities. Therefore, the best opportunity to enhance the marketability of these properties will be to either create better pedestrian connections across 76th or to help the property owners integrate such amenities within their developments. It should be noted, though, that due to the influence of the Best Buy development changing the character of this neighborhood, it is likely that some of the apartment properties with visibility to I-494 or I-35W may be targets for redevelopment as well because they are located on larger parcels, consist of building more than 40 years old, and have a challenging unit mix. City of Richfield,MN /�}pr Page 56 U11 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 '�/ `Gti 193802154 -G = la AVNO1NIl0 Iw- S 3AV NOINI10 Q '- O CA .. �__ f / 1- M J 0 • (Q (B =r r -cn •C .__ - w- _3 -_��- S3Ab;aNZ- _� - / ..._ .-- - _. o-_ - ` _,_. -S 3AVaNZ .. ti Q_ ,✓, _ •- U_ "� Q) Q -- r : S 3AV SN2A31S _ w - .- - in-- -r r S3AtlSN3A31S. (n Q Q d1Sl /S3AV-lsb_ S3AVlsl' !!� - !r �: y- S3AV1SL C CO 0 3 >, CO , . / , r ' -1`_- _ i� T __ _ fir' / _ %" tr = • N N = _— - S 3AV.131103IN .- . 0 OU -0 Cl) L e._r_ , I .N_ \ = . 7 O C (0 • �, 3 3 s 3AV 1 as1.s y co u) _ (a (0 Q. -; I- - / r / N W ■ 1-...- S 3AV- 1NOM1A3M S 3M H1210M1N3M z __-o a:_:.-" V FMS 3A-HlaOM1N -3M -- z N --S 3AV-, n8S111d ' ..--_-__S=3AVAan9Sllld S 3AV Aan9Sl-lld fit .. - 3 _ S= L d-i/3n - ---- ---=-___S 3AV 1NVSV3ld - - 2. 51-3� •Ntl�/ `_-__3--�~... . .� S3Atl0NV21O _ .__. -- ,S3AVONVa`Jltl._ ^a.3Atl .-:.-S-3AVONV r rr a 57y/ry 1N ld S 3AV 1NVSt •1 3, AV 131NNVH 1, -3 `- - ;:I '-' __... S 3AV 131aaVH � _!T � 1 � . � s 3AV al3laavo r _ • ODLAK� �� - 53AVOan9SOnV-..3_. S 3AV 3ltlaNA1 _ •• WO ` 42- y Oh / __._ ._ _ - ._ A • _ , s3AtlH01aaltl--- __ 1 �i : . /'I Q/,-- �j• m , S 3AV 1NVAa9 "f >' i pa C S 3Atl-XVA100 -- /_ G SAY Ndna O - - I Willillik. _.. S=3AV NOS2131413 S SAtlNOSa31N3- S 3AV.1NOW321d rrr 2. • I▪ r - .. .3.._..-. �. "S-3AVaalddIO _-- :_: d Va - S 3AV • - - -- - - AV. a IO-. 1▪ w N 3 / S o, 1- _ 3- _ -3 S 3AV1al08WnH -.- _ _.... - S 3AtllalOSWnH I 3 / r a0.3aOHS 9S AMH 31V1Sa31Nl • 1` _ :- I M r _S3AVLa108WOH 1 : S3Atl�NIAaI y CO S--3AtloNl¢al /- r 0C �zl -e-.. -S snv-sswv i,.. - -- -- ._ ... -s-3AVS3WVP -S 3AV s3WVP 4.- S3AtlXONH - • N- __+ .- .__. --- 4-0 --S 3AVXONN - - -- -- ON -._ 0.- S3AtlX N/ 1.- ././. •▪ 0- --- ---- .S 3/1,V NV001 _ .. S'3AV:N V001 y /w _.. -fin ---- 3 1 0, . , S 3AV NVOONO - o . - S 3AVNVONOW r ." n / S 3AV ■1M3N- T Ow._ :N. . . 1� W _ 1 fo/ �J—' �_ % - >� 7 S 3AV NO1M3N • .�_ _ T. -- / e... r, �� r. -� S3AV N01M3N - � --- e3 ---T 1 r r _ / f I / / tl . Qum ,k r / i /_ JNY/r/[/ / A Q rx7r, 31 --3vr 3/,' N33nD-- z (0 1 _T� i a✓ e) - O tB (n t i• (Q N / co(B _ ... _ Ae l3ssna= w a�-i ----/--- 7 U (B =CO Q .-E, (q ` S 3A tlala3HSr f 7 Q S;3AV-NYaId• 3- 0 C� c))._U) 0 --_- y-l_/__ _S-3AASHWOH1 . -7- / N O M Q- 1 -:.: x'• (z co �.- ' �: T ('? O t6 e6 (n N S 3AV N01dn 7 _ o L.C L �, 1 o O Q ... S3AV 1N3oy ----- `, - :- - �3 Q C Q' r- > - , S 3A1j1N30NIA _ Q 2 Q Q N / 'i > N Q ca O % 4 1 - O .�D Q_! E S 3AV an Q • S 3AV N2ln9HSb/M / N BHSVM j1 - y I O 0 Q Q ■. r••••∎••�•r••••-•.-••.lr / •-•••.,_-_••..••-.••-••-••..■.-••-1■-,:�/ O 0 (� S 37�tl•S3Xa3�C•• •• •• S 3iFd S3a37N••�' Cr) r4 E . w CITY OF RICHFIELD — RENTAL HOUSING INVENTORY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT Gap Analysis Previous sections of the report addressed the current supply of rental housing in Richfield by providing data on the number of units, buildings types, number of bedrooms, amenities, rents, etc. For select data, comparison statistics were provided to allow the reader to better understand how the condition of Richfield's rental stock may compare against communities of a similar age and location within the Metro Area. The gap analysis presented as part of this section translate the findings of the previous sections into areas of potential need. RENTAL HOUSING NEED 1. Two- and Three-Bedroom Units Richfield is sorely lacking in two- and three-bedroom rental units. This likely does not come as a surprise to anyone familiar with the rental stock of Richfield. Many of the large apartment complexes that dominate the City's rental housing supply were built in the 1960s at a time when market demand was driven by a young baby boom generation moving out of their parents'homes and forming their own households. Skip forward 45 years and the baby boom generation is now entering retirement. Furthermore, some of the fastest growing household types in Richfield are families, which often require three or more bedrooms. Although one-bedroom units are an important unit type that remains in strong demand (unlike studio units), most newer apartment projects now have a unit mix that is more evenly balanced or even tilted toward more two-bedroom and larger units. Therefore, in order for Richfield to diversify its supply of rental housing it should look for ways to increase the number of two-bedroom units either through new construction or perhaps rehabilitation of existing units. 2. Newer Properties with Modern Amenities and Features Richfield has only one general-occupancy rental property less than 30 years old. It is the only rental property that features a full complement of modern features and amenities including a fitness center, walk-in closets, in-unit washer/dryers, and underground parking. Furthermore, this same property is almost entirely filled by retirees from Richfield who want to stay in the community but aren't ready for more service-intensive senior housing. This lack of newer rental options with modern amenities and features is limiting the City's ability to retain longtime residents and attract new, younger residents who want more modern rental housing, particularly young professionals who work along I-494 or in Downtown Minneapolis. It should be noted that amenity-driven rental housing benefits as much by amenities that are imbedded within the property as well as amenities found within the surrounding neighborhood. A pedestrian- oriented environment with connections to nearby shopping, parks, and other uses can be a huge differentiator for upscale properties in a competitive environment. The redevelopment that has occurred at 66th and Lyndale, 66th and Cedar, and Lyndale and 76th are excellent examples of how improvements to the public realm enhance the desirability of an area and would be attractive for prospective renters, especially those with the discretionary income to be selective in where they decide to live. City of Richfield,Housing MN JtdnteC I Page 58 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 3. Subsidized Units Appropriate for Families Although the City has a large supply of older,affordably priced market rate units, many of which accept Section 8 vouchers,there is a limited supply of two-and three-bedroom units that would be appropriate for families,especially units that are restricted to very low-income households. Based on the analysis in the preceding sections, It was discovered that the City does not have any project-based,subsidized units with two-or more bedrooms available to families. Although there probably are a number of scattered site single-family homes that are subsidized, It is unlikely that any large scale expansion of supply could be satisfied through the acquisition of single-family homes. Therefore,the need could be more efficiently met through construction of new, subsidized rental housing. Furthermore, new subsidized housing could be programmed with social services that would help residents make ends meet and transition into market rate housing. Such services might include skills training or education, daycare,access to healthcare,etc. To put the lack of subsidized housing into context, consider Richfield's peer communities.Among the 11 communities analyzed,the overall percentage of general-occupancy rental housing that is subsidized is 6.4%. In Richfield,the percentage is less than 1%.Therefore, in order for Richfield to simply meet the peer community average, it would need to construct close to 300 new subsidized units. 4. Senior Housing (All Types) Although Richfield is experiencing an Influx of younger families into both Its owner-occupied and rental housing stock,there remains a substantial number of older households living in single-family residences throughout the City who would like to stay in the community, but either can't afford the transition into market rate senior housing or there are not units available among the existing supply.The problem is most acute for older households in need of subsidized or at least affordable senior housing.The only subsidized senior housing property is Richfield Towers,which is a 1970s-era building with mostly one- bedroom units.The problem is that subsidized senior housing from this era was designed mostly for single women, which at the time made up the vast majority of need. Although older, single women still dominate the need for subsidized senior housing,there are many more low-income older couples today than there were 35 years ago. However,subsidized senior housing is not the only type of senior housing needed. Given the fact that the oldest members of the baby boom generation are beginning to retire,they represent the first wave of a group that will swell the demand for senior housing of all types for years to come. The challenge moving forward will not be in identifying the need,that will be apparent, but in designing housing styles and types that appeal to a new generation of older adults.The baby boom generation has profoundly changed the housing market for every life stage it moves through. Older age will be no exception.Their wants and tastes will likely be vastly different than their parent's generation. Although gauging the senior housing needs of the baby boom generation will be difficult, it will also represent a lot of opportunity for positive change. NEW RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES After several years of sluggish growth, rental housing development has begun to significantly increase. The overall rental market has seen vacancy rates drop to historic lows, meanwhile price Increases have begun to rise rapidly. Developers are now capitalizing on these positive market fundamentals In a big way. As of April 2012, Finance and Commerce,a Minneapolis-St. Paul-based business periodical, has been reporting that there are approximately 78 active apartment projects in various stages of development throughout the Twin Cities totaling nearly 12,000 units. Most of this development activity has been focused in Minneapolis,though several projects are located within Richfield or nearby in Bloomington and Edina. City of Richfield,MN d' ��9�}p/� Page 59 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 ,�' J�Q„`GLo 193802154 • Within Richfield,there have been several recent proposals for new rental housing,one of which is currently under construction. If all three were to be constructed, it would total close to 300 new units with a mix of both market rate and affordable rents. • In Bloomington,there are three active projects,two of which are under construction,totaling more than 750 units. In Edina,there are currently two proposals for new apartments,which combined would be more than 460 units. Not all of this proposed development will likely come to fruition. However,even if a proportion of it were to occur it still represents a significant number of new rental units.The potential impacts this_may have on Richfield to accommodate new rental housing,however,are only short-term in nature. Real estate development Is cyclical. When market fundamentals are ripe,the private sector will capitalize on opportunities until the market becomes saturated.At which point,development will significantly decrease until market fundamentals become positive again.When one looks at the condition of Richfield's supply of rental housing, it is clear that the strategies needed to address needed changes have to be longer term and perhaps span several real estate cycles. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS Stantec contacted the Metropolitan Council regarding Richfield's affordable housing requirements related to their participation In the Livable Communities Act(LCA).According to the Metropolitan Council,there are three requirements of communities to participate in the LCA and be eligible to compete each year for approximately$15 million in grants.The requirements for Richfield are as follows: 1. Richfield must negotiate affordable and life-cycle housing goals with the Met Council. Richfield's goals for 2011 through 2020 are 497 to 765 new affordable units,and 765 to 1,500 new life- cycle housing units.The affordable housing numbers are based upon the city's share of the region's need to add over 51,000 affordable units in the decade, and the life cycle number at the high end is a reflection of the total number of units the City's land use guiding for the decade could allow as new or redevelopment. 2. Richfield must prepare a Housing Action Plan that outlines how the City intends to approach achieving its goals.This plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council. 3. Richfield must expend on affordable and life-cycle housing from its own locally generated dollars, usually its local levies,a minimum amount each year called the Affordable and Life-cycle housing Opportunities Amount(ALHOA).This can be an expenditure on housing maintenance and preservation,on subsidy to developers,on local costs associated with revenue bonds or a TIF, etc. Richfield's amount for last year was$85,424. These are the requirements for LCA participation. Richfield has been a participant since the program started in 1995. For purposes of the LCA program,the Metropolitan Council defines affordable housing in a report titled Determining Affordable Housing Need In the Twin at/es 20112020as the following: a housing unit is affordable if it is priced at or below 30%of gross income of a household earning 60%of the Twin Cities median family Income($50,340 in 2012 for a family of four). The 60%income threshold is determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)and is the cutoff for tax-credit housing development,the main program for new affordable rental housing construction nationwide. City of Richfield,MN Stantec Page 60 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 CITY OF RICHFIELD — RENTAL HOUSING INVENTORY AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT Housing Strategies This section outlines potential strategies for addressing the rental housing needs identified in the previous section. In many cases,the City may already be utilizing a specific tool or applying a certain policy to address the City's rental housing needs.Therefore,the strategies outlined below are not meant to be prescriptive or to replace any currently used tools or policies. Instead,they are meant to be a source for new ideas and examples of tools and policies that may be appropriate for Richfield as the City meets its future rental housing needs. Below is a list of strategies culled from a variety of sources, including the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency(MHFA), Urban Land Institute, PolicyLink.org, HousingPolicy.org,and several other affordable/rental housing advocacy groups. It should be noted that none of the listed strategies are in any particular order of importance nor is the list exhaustive. It is a starting point for further research and planning. INCLUSIONARY HOUSING Designed as a local regulatory tool, incluslonary housing (zoning) requires developers to include a number of affordable homes in new residential developments over a certain size.The number of affordable units to be included in the new developments is based on a percentage of the total number of units in the development(generally 12% - 15%).The cost of providing the affordable units Is offset with a density bonus.The affordability level of the designated units can target one income group,such as households earning 50%of the median income, or may serve a range of incomes. PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS Public-private partnerships are often considered"creative alliances"formed between a government entity and private developers to achieve a common purpose, such as the increase of more rental housing choices. Fully developed communities,such as Richfield, need to rebuild and revitalize older portions of their cities and the public need to monetize underused assets has dramatically changed the rules of redevelopment. Private capital can no longer be relied on to pay the high price of assembling and preparing appropriate sites for redevelopment. Conversely, local governments can no loner bear the full burden of paying the costs of requisite public infrastructure and facilities. True partnerships of the private and public sectors can replace potential confrontation with collaboration and cooperation to achieve shared goals and objectives. DENSITY BONUSES Density bonuses are granted for projects in which the developer agrees to include a certain number of affordable housing units or perhaps some other project feature that would enhance the livability of the development, such as improved pedestrian connections between the building and public right-of-way or enhanced architectural treatment of building facades. In the case of ensuring more affordable housing, for every one unit of affordable housing a developer agrees to build,a jurisdiction allows the construction of a greater number of market rate units than would be allowed otherwise. Most often, density bonuses vary from project to project and do not exceed a particular threshold (for instance, 20%of normal density)determined by local officials. EXPEDITED PERMITTING Delays during any stage in the development process add to the final costs of new housing. Reducing the costs incurred by developers during the development review process makes multifamily housing projects more attractive. Expedited permitting is a cost-efficient and very effective way of reducing developer City of Richfield,MN C�,� Page 61 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 , xp 193802154 costs. Fast-tracking review and permitting of multifamily housing reduces developer costs at no-cost to local jurisdictions. FEE WAIVERS To help maintain housing affordability and/or stimulate development in targeted neighborhoods,some communities offer fee reductions for qualifying projects, or waive fees altogether. PRESERVE THE EXISTING SUPPLY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING For many subsidized properties,the underlying contract with the Department of Housing and_Community Development(HUD)that enables reduced-rent units to very-low income households often expires in a set number of years(typically, 20 years).Therefore, one of the easiest ways to preserve the existing supply of affordable housing is to track these properties and work with property owners to secure additional funding to help extend the contract before it expires and the property reverts to market rate status. GREEN BUILDING AND REHABILITATION PRACTICES Green building and rehabilitation practices,such as weatherproofing and replacement of outmoded heating and cooling systems, can dramatically reduce or control the cost of operating many rental properties by using less energy. These savings can sometimes be passed along in the form of reduced rents to tenants. Furthermore,such building and rehabilitation practices can improve the health conditions for many tenants or enhance the property's marketability to environmentally conscious tenants. LAND ACQUISITION In order to meet redevelopment goals, it may be necessary to strategically acquire key sites. Although cities certainly want to be mindful that they don't have too many properties off the tax rolls for too long, sometimes land acquisition is an excellent way to increase developer interest where interest may have been weak because the City signals strong commitment to the project by acquiring land. Control of land is an essential component to the redevelopment process and is best achieved as early in the process as possible in order to mitigate price speculation and to have a strong bargaining chip in the negotiating process with developers. HOUSING CODE ADJUSTMENTS The redevelopment of vacant and underutilized buildings is often constrained by antiquated building and housing codes that were designed during a previous era of the City's development. Review and adjustment of such codes may reduce barriers to new development and investment in the City's rental housing stock. SITE-CLEANUP ASSISTANCE There are large pools of funding available for site clean up through a number of federal,state,and regional sources. Historically, much of the funding for site clean up was tied to health and safety issues. However, recognizing that contaminated properties have adverse affects that go way beyond immediate health concerns related to exposure, programs through the EPA and others are targeting the economic importance of revitalizing such properties and are making monies available for area-wide planning and the eventual redevelopment of properties into uses that will benefit the local community,such as expanded rental housing options. City of Richfield,MN Page 62 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 SMALL AREA PLANNING Small area planning can be an Important tool to both identify where additional rental housing could be located within a community but also as a way to build support and acceptance among residents, property owners,and businesses for the change needed to accommodate new rental housing. STRATEGIC INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS Sometimes attracting private Investment in rental housing can be achieved through strategic infrastructure investments,such as new roads,sidewalks, parks, and utility improvements. These investments can attract private sector interest by simply enhancing the locational value of a given site or sites through better access,aesthetics,or function,or they can signal to the private sector the City's commitment to revitalize a particular area or district. ZONING CHANGES While requests to rezone Individual parcels or issue a variance may be successful in allowing individual projects to move forward,securing these approvals can be a lengthy process that often Involves a great deal of uncertainty and adds substantially to total development costs. Large-scale rezoning can allow new projects to be built in appropriate areas not currently available for residential development or can increase densities in existing residential areas and may enable sufficient increases in the overall supply of rental housing to accommodate demand and either moderate pricing pressures or create opportunities at appropriate price points. STRATEGIC USE OF PUBLIC LAND The opportunities presented by publicly-owned land extend beyond simply allocating vacant land for new housing development or demolishing unused buildings for new construction from the ground up. With a little creativity, housing development opportunities can be found in public sites that are in active use as well as in outdated structures that the community cannot or will not demolish. In high-growth housing markets,communities may wish to consider whether certain sites,such as hospitals, public housing,or schools, have extra land that could be spun off as affordable homes, or whether certain types of locations, such as surface parking lots,or low-density structures,can be redeveloped as a mixed-use property to both fulfill the original use and provide new rental housing. In slow-growth housing markets, communities may wish to consider how the adaptive reuse of historical or culturally-significant buildings for rental housing can help to strengthen the community fabric while also providing more rental housing opportunities. FACILITATE THE REUSE OF ABANDONED,VACANT,AND TAX-DELINQUENT PROPERTIES The tools for reusing disinvested properties generally Involve breaking through administrative challenges that can otherwise hinder redevelopment. These challenges may include lengthy and complicated tax foreclosure processes, laws that may make it difficult to reuse properties for affordable housing, and the lack of authority and capacity to take a coordinated and strategic approach to land acquisition and disposition. Communities have overcome these challenges through tax foreclosure reforms, land banks, and shared databases of abandonment indicators. By streamlining the procedures for acquiring and disposing of disinvested properties In a strategic manner that is consistent with local priorities, communities can help alleviate blight,stem neighborhood decline,and expand the availability of quality, affordable homes. Code enforcement and nuisance abatement programs can also be useful for reducing the spread of disinvestment while other properties in the community are being reused or redeveloped. HOUSING TRUST FUNDS Housing trust funds are powerful tools for providing locally targeted and managed assistance for affordable housing.The funds can have a variety of revenue sources, but among the most common are City of Richfield,MN i=. StQntec Page 63 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 �� 193802154 some portion of the local real estate transfer tax, penalties on late payments of real estate taxes and fees on other real estate—related transactions. Each housing trust fund has a governing body that decides how the funds are used. Some support demand-side solutions,such as subsidizing the down payment on a home purchase by low-to moderate-income residents. Housing trust funds are often used to increase the supply of affordable housing,such as providing zero-interest loans or gap financing for affordable housing new construction or rehabilitation. COMMUNITY LAND TRUSTS A Community Land Trust is a private nonprofit corporation created to acquire and hold land for the benefit of a community and provide secure affordable access to land and housing for community residents. Land is taken out of the market and separated from its productive use so that the impact of land appreciation is removed,therefore enabling long-term affordable and sustainable local development Through CLTs, local residents and businesses participate in and take responsibility for planning and delivering redevelopment schemes. LAND BANKING A land bank is a public authority created to efficiently hold, manage and develop tax-foreclosed property. Land banks act as a legal and financial mechanism to transform vacant,abandoned and tax-foreclosed property back to productive use. Generally, land banks are funded by local governments'budgets or the management and disposition of tax-foreclosed property. In addition,a land bank is a powerful locational Incentive,which encourages redevelopment in older communities that generally have little available land and neighborhoods that have been blighted by an out-migration of residents and businesses. While a land bank provides short-term fiscal benefits, it can also act as a tool for planning long-term community development. Successful land bank programs revitalize blighted neighborhoods and direct reinvestment back into these neighborhoods to support their long-term community vision. RENTAL HOUSING DESIGN STANDARDS Design standards can achieve multiple goals. First,design standards can help insure that newly constructed rental properties provide the kinds features and elements that would balance out the City's rental stock instead of contributing to an increasing concentration of similar property types. Second, design standards can help improve the overall quality of the housing stock by introducing higher quality examples of what is expected within the community with respect to rental housing.Third,design standards can help secure critical funding for projects from lenders and housing agencies. In particular, Minnesota Housing,the state agency that helps fund and promote the development of affordable housing throughout the state, has minimum design standards for projects that it finances.Their standards are meant to ensure that rental housing they finance is decent quality,energy efFlcient,functional, sustainable,and effective in reducing long-term maintenance costs. MINNESOTA HOUSING(MHFA)PROGRAMS As the Minnesota state agency that funds and promotes affordable housing, Minnesota Housing plays a central role in assisting the development community to provide quality rental housing. The following attachment Is a summary of the programs and their terms Minnesota Housing uses to support greater housing choice throughout the State. Please note that not all of these programs may be applicable or appropriate for projects in the City of Richfield. City of Richfield,MN $j- �nt& Page 64 Rental Housing Inventory,May 2012 193802154 to *' c 3 �.�• a) O. C N 7 N C u .CD-R 5 a as E a E u 3 cc .Q c O C c 0 z • C m u � I' C ° _ to c E• 0. C f0 U a al c U L O +' x L W: E m s O m a,� c o a�i H a a 10 0 0:U • ° c .,cop. 0 > o +, V o a ,. c N C C c. O O L. O C 0• O c a a1 a) O m 4, .. ..14 c C b Z i to E ++ C ++ lV0 C C w C Z O a7 O.'N N a) U N 7 N ++ 0 • '0 2 a ¢ a7 c N L w E _ _ a>im . o 0 lb to a o `00 E E m a L w. > e E 0 c 2 'x t" u y b0 0 -p W. 0 x C C c c O f0 0 O. to.. E N C N H p c :0 N -. oo tcC C L O C .a N O L 00 L �+ a >' .t c o tcC-' _ _ `° UI o aci axi °• Y 4. Y o0' O Q• .c �o m a E ¢ ¢ o o . y O :° c al `� d `� v O o c c s c a E g o T ¢ H 1C a, ' L L y N 0 C p 0 O O 'C O c-I CO u) co O cf O Lr` G. C.I, K 2 Z co 8 lA l0 0' N 0. M Z • • LT Y lD Y lD L CD E c to N E C E a 0 N N •_C = C N U N c y c 0 CU M o° r, c E U E 2i a o O u o CC c. N U c h. 3 to n Fs cc °d C m o 1O o ti L U O c 1 13 ein w t � ? o C E c �> Z y C 0 +L+ • N m C c :C 3 VI Z0 J ++ .§ n 0 L 0 0 a Q aC N 0 - t- 0 co .0 v o > > VI m E o v o •.O ¢ ¢ Y 3 m v v C ■C E 0 -a c CD In t m +, C ++ ns CO 0 G O ,_ ? J C 0 0) N (0 0 ro .� a) a a� aUUa O = o o 0 o .0 N m FO- N O t� CC C a C7 d' N N m ' N a 1- d ac Z -0, = F to F 2 a) m ; c s 3 0 et o cc0 E L C 45 C N d th, O a7 x E a7 'tj O C a7 E O to E oQ ' :a y _ •c a s m o t ,c U c o b i0 u L/ .N - 7.6 t4 0 C 'U CU CC. OC 3 C y L 0 CD i 40 to W c m OO to O N to W C C O' O us CO C C O cc_o C O W N C C ;F, . C I 00 L > .O a W � � al c E C0 0 -0 C c c O civ'6 O 0 Lc < ¢ ¢ d 0 z � C En c E E v Q H o c $ o m -a o l°o b m ', w .c '° ° w ' y a, �•-t x c o ° E • Oa y ° CU e e t'i r, @JUa 2 t� E a c r. to rn (R TO co o c >• +—U o m 0 s, 'V ,F aC a7 .1. CO Q. N w �, s o o a o CI 0 C CO a) C �' y a) h t. E I; L a) 3 O C C O. Ql 0. O d V' Z 4. +s' •0 c CF .5•;C 0 -o ° > °C z Z o a) o 0. o 0. �o. a O 0.ca. al W vOi 0 co b) 3 4� ` 4-- 0._= Z 6 0 C co Q z > C 0 0 :g. 'c° :g•c j 0 0 •oo 0 ,0 u U C c -° a) 0 0. 0 0 as CO Z T. v 0 •c — •c 144 —C rJ 0 m s Q s c f0 a c as zz CO 0 m -O c a u. C 40 a o a) a a a °1 )L z i w3 O ° s 0 C 0. c .0 • CV E C > fl a) m r 'o c °a N a —° w I- .0 C L L C a) '@ O ~ O t0) C m e 0. p, O Q C U U an _a-0 cu 49. •tt wt To Y a) N N a) N o X ex, I- I-- a0 co E 3 sn � d 't '2 ma Aga 2a °N' 00 c l E 15 c Z N h o Y V) ao O 4- •3 i) :0 O O 0 o y C. H a YN g -O vs ua)) mF c ° c U � y +� m +y a, 43• p coao c )n :° 3 CU 0 W to 3 0 no C '�'' a1 aOg C O 3 C fa N Lt. 4pp- 0o Op O al sn = G C y 'E O 'al Q a) 0" O .§ U -� _p > V __I O 01 3 nr N _ E „ Y a. 0 m C C a-C+ C o 3 C "8 -0 0 O m es 0 C N C CO N CO! Zia 3 F- ° O Y Y V +' y a- N a co O ` u�O' X O 411 • • a) 3 a LL O . s co us < ca a O 1 0 O va Lav) :7 co '_I co E a o Y Y re C 0 = a) N +°, O O 0 E �° o � oaE yt yo Vf aci - -c o > 1:). ° o �y c .> c ° bp n•_ t Q.el so U h C Y ` �+ O Y W L 0 2 0 a) T 0 4 0 0 a 0 0 0 LL wccc E c..CcC •c +Pc � v H C abc N 4•• ° a Na V ° YO a) m 0.C O . C s 0• s a) a) s H cc Z 0 ooa TS 01 3aa § o F� W 23". S X 3 C -0 aD Cr a in 3 Y •y ° a a) C 0 a < N S Vf Q C 3 d O' a ai > p .0 C C .�+ LA ce O E N +O+ 16 C O O tOi) U > -0 m 3 :O �? 0. 0. 3 C .0 =a Z c v t E °o. + ° 0 0 .0c .3 a 0 '> Il z'n c ea I a) — *' aJ d v ao I- m m= cod � o E ' ° 2 2 . i c c v c E +' c +`3 s 3 p v Ci v ,� v� F°, s m oo in us a) N ? Y 4- t' 'y a) c aJ Ol Y a0+ ya 0 N OD •CO a E c aci ' ° o E —0a c c > °'•� ° O LA a) G. p U ° O 0 0 C N a 'r't a) eo\-1 C tNp N )a N , t . 0) 3 a) VI N s a, c E > fl o o > E o a, a "' c '= 0 . -°a W 0. z o 03.-o r m m -°a .°c Q . Q m O z z o tto 2 tt •a. > t. . �O a. 0 5 °- a a ac) a tab Z N N vii C tW C N. LO .Q C C a) c C C X aJ of al U a) 0 0) Z C Lu A.2 O CD cn C a d .�3 o �n a Y to ` III a) O C = d C 01 N N c C N h M N a) 0. N 'm a CO t. •C N us Q .0 00 m 4-' {�y a '� 'C '!)"' t) v. co a) a) a E K ' U C 3 Y C 4- a) O E H N 0. 'N m :C 43- 0 G .F3 U 00 e-I wt CO U C a c La 'u) H 0 a0+ a O Y 2 m 3 -O CC 0 C d E c c E c m • 0 C b�.ON Q C c �. 0 3 C a) 7 a, C c 0 — > m c m w U c 3 E O F 0 s c — o c a, a) `0 g m CU O .2 o 0 m C C y O - N CU O C 7 O 0 cca RI an A a > bEA C . C N -a 8 W N C O :C C t a Z U , 3 N .0 N a) .0 O O C O1 •U > `CU v C C S 000 ..c aJ V O C ca a0+ N t in U D• J t' •U`w O CO 0 a _ = y _ m• c6 o 0 c E 2 O cy to '3 0 c O m -C L O Q ui U c c '�'' E o. 0. 0 > 3 E 0, a - d Q ac c `= o m c 0 '' co OA > m ® 3 0 3 3 c � ,C 3 C co 7 m O m C W s N aal c ea O C 'C O O C 4- C E U '^ 0 - 0 0p 0 ( O 0 F0 .D 0 0 CO �Q 2 C .` C. ` -C O e' 03 W C n Tn 0 2 O +O+ > > : O O 0 ` C O t. 0 4 m o 'Q O •o w N ,ey, 0 O � °+—' oo �' s . acs 0 E . a00 YWbS` Lc) a 1- c = 33 0 o -C T o a c v°1, I W �' 0 (0 (0 'n z E zo .oC C. coo ¢ o mm o z zo Y CO 'c CO C ,0 a, �' ++ E d m L c 44 a On .0 C m LL' ul.c c a O N = N co W :10 O O O O O iA 0 g tw .. _ 0. 0) y 0. - �// in • O C ,�+�',0 c O •ate,, U) 0 LL O C C .0 C CO o 0 0.4-, C O. V Uoz �° � a00 .CO 4° E •° L C d y �TAc., a r d m •g. n E 3 0 F v. .g 5c oEs th Z •- a-g N �. -a a , 0..r a a0 w' 7. To yzf c E .0 O = ;;�� 4J E • C 3S F; C W o v o -� H C o .0 22 o 22 c C J J m 'y' a 7 m m < < Q Q L = = U i 'n `B E C `O L° " 1-5171M 0 0 0 v C c m Q c Q d L s n ,.; L o o ax 3 0 0 E " on > > m m N N m O U y 0) CU N F' h C. m \ (0 0 bA =. C o 'C t r c CO o °' o c w C c > c 00 C7 to O O on m N .y t. N m O p o �+.c• :g' C C O/ C �•• V• a, + v + ° y E _Qc c o m ca > c'n �r \• w' to U C N ea Z . m 0 c ` " o Za = F>'- o f Ill cu m C m d C c >' a, d) CO N : C Y o L U •p .c U C M ° N ei U t N C C U 'ho ca °° m Z 3 eel o c co d) N 7 �- O U N p C 4-• u 4- h U .c CO N m E N a h us O O y h fo E U .m.. .0 7 C U N a N a c O i` O cu C E .V.+• dj .0 �:P a ° CL Q Z as O e-{ CO U L E et +. L — L U C E V1 N N e° O U O C al 0 ° O � in O C Z O c a C E _O 4" y `f- 4- i+ U .t'' t fo U O c N a p h ° f6 +' '"' u E E = ° c ' .L o 0 3 0 . ° o E to ° a, p s ° O al c a "i- 'C E 43 yy ° 0 C L U h O v� v� I• L E U to 4- N o o J Q 4- c p F C c LL C -0 a, h s N Y ° —T. m d O JF y 'o N =� vv'i -°+ = a°'a 3 ?� m al .M^.. y co .ty 7 E G7 C U C N ?' c g JO 2 N 7 Ti N = _ 7 t O = vhi 'O C 'a SE a co < U U O D u a C y t s .c v W a o c a 2 U ax) a a 1 1 M 110 ++ 'd I— C al L v) • •O r Q 't—.r ++ CC .O 7 C= `�' vi Y y E ° fa a C O C U c C N C ° O O 0 L = a C a co O {� C U C •> E tu'�'iJ E U y U h c0 4- C cto h N E o O O C h o E c C. c C fp U L. N U o � _ _a C T +; U < c = o•—° Lac o O CD m T +°+ ° _ c cc c C E ° ° h C U ° v ea h ,.• ++ s E c a c n U V Ts > c C .0 O a N N C .}U—, co N t Q. o N ai '� C'T s° Si p0 L C N O y al T. .D 4_ c to -.0 fp C s- N "O .0 fa g fo 7 = 4,;', CO = C QJ x y c C N Vd 0 3 di O 44 CL CU a C fo C - N fM c a, ti 0 O O .0 E O s O_ a) E C 1- C +• tO O E Q ,' a m O C Z 0 'n E — t0 l� c• L }^� ° � 4-. L i� O 0 C U• L U Zvs. C,O t h ,� 0 VI c us W U 0 C 0 N +L' C (0 C G Ti c +U c U E m ` ._ A. ° a o a c U O j fa ��W/ y p •Q C a p u Y C N C CC m J fp v) 4� !' O n Q 2 i CU nj V W = U C bD ?y L a C O 7 e. u ILI 4-Q ° C .a y w E a, 'O a U C • Z U y 0 = A C U a= U C, 2 C 7 C C h bA 4-' fo ♦, f6 h a +� C Q a N c CU ai fa I m c �° > 3 I:° `- La ., c o 0 3 c c_ to L C C O thil v1 C E ,•„• .° L Q 4 a) .0 a C p, .0 .'•" U a s +L+ 'a U C :!' .4; a) N .p a C >. v ca •� u, a vci C 7 "O U > CO C U to U 'Q a U U y C Q. U) N s C C a0 .O L 'A MI 4-, a R a ° a C U N to 41 N U U yam. 40 �0 a. O t% M H 0{�■CO O) U C C O ++ T O N '~ fop s- E y 'O U N fCa .� a U U 'C UI 'us C U 00 0 p 0 fco W C .a U N o ao•� y >. O_ c C i c L U C U U }+ E. 7 p tO 0 O \ LL O to O C a= 1 o-, fo a. 0. -4 M. to < by N 0 K Z t0 -, 2 g O a U to = v 0. a..• o c-o o ..■ co a m° o E c 7 R E O o 0Ei " c O m a°p.t.' R E a. 4- > E au E @ 2 O u co O 'O D O .0 C 0 a C as CC a •1 " \ " _ 1 h W ` y w •fE6Q U U V .Es .a = p C 4- _ ++ c 01 'O U O O Z 3 m E H fa ++ 4C a a'O p to > U CC L .h ' C 4- C f0 ho LR O U O N U M ° U U •Z C 0. ° Ls` c -ca d 'V = Ti O *o' a v a C L = ° al c s Lg C .°s- Ill a s ;c fa U U m '0 U M U s n 'a L In L LI.- vi O O C C c cn 44 C N O N (a 'F C C 7 N w 4... •N C O N Q •+-O+ =C c N O 0 OO C a 'a- ct CC O 7 C O •,n C• ca 0 C U a .2 Ea o ,, CU bA o c aci c 3 ,v ;° c O z C 0 .0 U t0 O .3 `1 O p 0 e t0.c co e• a) C 2 O C N 7 U O o W ++ a) a) •43 co a Ta E N o ° E cp CU QS w +� a� C .0 N 7 N n a7 ^� ,F, to c O C S ,a, C O 7 Ew a)• CO a) m C O o U s o -a a E d • d C '121c a U a O v„ aJ •� O .00 O yp.. 4... p y ;C y N N > N ?•':ii 7 p m C 'o C a ac) c c aa) 0 vl o = 00 -' !C aoo �(0 CQ t�3 a ri ci o a, O E vEt -C N O •C C y"' N Fn rn ,_ + vi COI 4-■ d W. r c i-+ O :C y a) a) CO O 'Ci-, O K O aJ C •y •p 0.1 'N to C D: 7 p 'o a) C 0 4 s.. C a) C +' +'c+ _ c L. W y C 0 vO- s Ec c 0 me ,E al C Lu C uo o a w a.:°. y� +4, 4 0 0 c 4-, C 4, c ° o o ., .0 0 cu CU > aEi = c `: c p o > ,a E c z w v o o E o ° o m o TA S N C = C < W .Q O = 7 S L p -O ._ .F, O. w A .N C W -0 O p v U c o E cu 0 = t ? N 7 O) c N c E m C C or.;) C a-I ar _ CO aC 5 c o a t .a O o c •@ — o c v o T. m = jg 00�h CU' _• 2 �' c °m c ?_ 3 c c (°v 7 0 v- d-° v- as L u °; �O N O E CM c .n r? .a L. E +�p' E m E c a o f • • • o ate) c w E N N �' O LL w 0 0 Q � O w +c+ ¢ � o °m I- 4., 0 a o `n a pCp 6o J CO c 0 E L E N C 5 N ai a A '� -° cE ii L/I -1 p C i•' 2 re _ CL t o CO 0.0 y O U °' C CL °' CO T E N N L • E E " > > co C. N O- N 'p 7 N 't' c 0 m .• 0 a) m ♦-, w E 3 13 > o0m w C 0. N �p 0 �/ 01 OJ • O vi N .Q N C 0 4. L O Ids L` J CO ca 0 C L N o t " O ODU 'O ++ �a 7 U C E M 4U- '_rn M VW p a :C ..vii t .O 0 O 4 O O •C m CO to E C O. Q o N w a) O O H p a'ci .a m r v o co > > _ L a1 L L 7 .O ,y �I C V C E_ 7 C O ,� �a t0 U fa 'O ++ 1 CO 'C O 7 "X C E c�0 vl O C C C .0 a) O. .5 N • m 4- a) o n 4 U E E E E Y C p • it O U N O O (0 a) m CO CC Y 'N N p .O . p 'I O m H ma ec 4= a) — O O al co ..5. N :C c 00000• c •N co •N c to 44 a. a CO m'O O E O/ 5 OU Z a) O 7 N S 7 7 Ol 7 Y 0) Y EO \ N (a U U 4.. •., N d0 t10 2 C W 10 < CO +a C O O = 01 • 0.0 N Sin Q'y( al Oo 'a a N C 00 C N C Cl) (V to•O` 'Q p 0 o 0 O ` O 0 .R. 0 m N 7 6n 3 .0 p V1 O G. .(... W 0 Z C 0. oo Q 00 r•I 0 LL v>V? Cl) O to J l0 J 2 c m eO c C 0 i f0 0 C a.) o 0 O o 0 a 0. a. 4 o c G c C O C 3 d O.'CO O .1 eO C N o F• N •R C e•1 O CO Q.C E O 1 15 C E U E N C "0 0 C E ut ? I 0 E o C O 7 c oi N m E E a0J+ g oo w C E-.a d c E o al N ++ sn CC 'C CO •7 •w O 0 vl a) m s o S s aj E * ,= a V E 'v m 76 O h J U 0 CQCQ E. C '- as O 0 d xi_ °>a U z Q c O l- b v I W M y c cv O = _ —. , O LL C C to U C O O C7 O d a Z p o C a'i = o 6 c c c c 2 0 3• 0 m E c0 .0 .0 -a m +, y c C L t N 0 V E 0 Q, u 0 C 'a Q H O C C 0 C C ,_ E 'F' C ti al ch +O+ v O +O+ LL ..O N a) .0 O O C +�• 1 a O O '}C C c-,.0 -a co N y s- E 00 Z �o a o o H rtiaj o cu . .Q ,R o 0 c c - �' fl r rn al Z m m ° o co m c N t. a //�� i 0 J z aao z N H Q > 7 (1) .7 m in E Q a = o 02 O E O C a) 5 C O a1 a1 7 a 0 + OC :° o� c ea A� o z •W {.7 O ai U = U 0 •� O 0 Y L ctee .00 o o 4- c ui N C to g a 04,3 3 ly/1 N w C � y C T ��H// 0 ,4-. 0 E c d E o 3 c E " re > O O C U' Z 4 i+ 'n O co N C O0 0. U t lc- w R. by _ e +O+ 'a= O . to O - O .0 C C W LL 7 as c CO 01 m .� 0E13004-W S. •r U U) et bA CO R s co C N S. C d :p 4- ya . O U C • O 0 >. `m y 0 U i co 0 W • y m ° E U C C co" 41 2 vZ� 4/ OD C a w Gl f0 C >' W n° E o o _ c d co 0 .� c d ;� a"i w a a�i m H s v U CO/ _ m o E ca o E a c01 c R ea m 0 c r o CIA y d' J a1 O E E U CO o U .y y W U �,. U 01 U 3 M .L y.., Q3 +, a, NCU0 yab m m� .0 oC Q E •E E 0 c 11.1 +. a o G c NI 47, 3 0 >- o Q ca cn E 5 5 ° cc 2.. °c 2 2 N z z zo = o :- w � co 2 lit E ta ce E H 3 o' 3 .0 0 H F, E ac ,-c-' O E 3 � = 7 C Q m O >, c a1 a_a E c• o n O 'n o. U { Oa O m W " > 0. 4 co O CO R in N m m m 0U1 C K U '= •��+ N R a1 -a In .O in NR cY °� m i m E ,n f0-e y m U m c and c Oy c ao E C c = L t y 2 C y CUM C ea 0 55 to C .0 t 2 O N al N 'F W �2 U M U C EII C m e 0 Scc o a1 0 0 v o 0 a) c a) aci °• ai E s s E a, o m > o ti E ° m `o c o z 'C 'a N '00 0 0 C o\°\° d C o.C ° > E co ea m o U o w +, Z N .N CO .0 40 N m .2 E CU �u E m as ea c c o 'U ° E Z to fil a0my ro N.�C �CU X 1. "'C N O a N P. 0 C Z.:N �N > LL -a Y 'OL 0 Z N c,o r W c Y 0. E °a :F, N C 2 N m o C v m n Q a a C • 'C m a1 cC yi C C N 2 O E tCa N > ••C .c 0 0 j .� s N 6 V! 0J N a) Ol o 2 'a m a CU s of o O C 0. L e>i o c a . o c E a E > m 0 °° -0 Y "a U m O �/ ° a L v O c c a o "°- a E .= c c m L v • as o c c a o °JO °c CO 00 c a c s c �m`acso0I3 YEC � ° `°' o ^ E s L c N Y rn ° 0 a s a1 a) = CO 1) 0. a) N 0 0 0 C c 0 a s ,° U w m as a o a$ ar c .e aTi u <-1 .a c 16 —cc"' `n1 a 0 oL 13 c °. o o 1-4 o c `o € `i - C 0 LL 4. .0 7 y Q lL 0 20 2 v/ Z N� < U O Z Z E 1.gyp E co ea C L E ° 3 a �° L C N vs 0 0 Te 3 •c z 13 t s .c a a) N ' C 7 m 0 � O.om E c U W m y m i E L I-- & N C L '000 7 0 ea 0 '0 E 0 Z u1 a▪ °c o oc� o a>i N LL 0 C t y c E o El CZ Z = J E +, .0 g O .5 C IA u' 'a a1 C E 4- 0_ = m O Z t 0 C a) m C C x /A 4.. C m m 'L E •a A"w•N -' O 0 H a1 & a) a Ca c 0 2 :n O y Q 3 C C of d m m 0 m LL p 0 g C 3 U •> N Z U '0 'O t+ Ll U 4 CU CIO CO = Y. > N C a) C LO C C L• •� aa) N •0 N.y N O Q a 'V d aF O w E .t fl. c .0C O C0 ta.� 'O E ct C a a▪ o+ '' C C •rG C C ? 'n 01 a. — al 0 o N 0 0 -0 4- 4- o\° C .0 N n -a .Z 0 C a N O O 0 eI 0 y M 0 }a C to ?i > cg >> * u T C To N • 7 0 a) a) 0 0 o f O O O oo\° 0 0 C ei Li. .0 C 'a '0 Z U. = 1.0 lD M O Z Z Q l0 rm 2 al ..., N ^ CO C 0 0 N al > a s co E :e o a, 0 ° 3 0 > I . CD .n •fO S w a1 O t d $ CU O y E +' N .a ._.0 Y N ha o 0 0 0 0 3 - O C rn ° v c o o -d-aa ° _° — 5o C .0t0 omsd ECcac) cc s > 2 ai v a m > ami v a o E vEi V) G n c e°0 c u„ E c c D C > •tn m 0. O C O > •al 2 g x Y N c1 y 0 E a 0 L o a1 a1 N• 0 .c .y ..Q .0 m t 'a u O 'a 0 = Y L° L a s �F t7 F = a • _ $ , c m L c ea 5. & m = E Do to N m e 2 O • 0 C O 'a .- O-.W 2144 1. . .e 4' .0 N .< T> a E :R '0 yy7 % 'M l a1 A 0 7 G o N L L (a N N hD m o m 0 a) N fC �p 0.0 En• = c c a�i � $ � � 'tatc c a > AViI _ 7 v U E e O 'o_ > :p C .., $ E a -a N N c �v @c. N U U •''J O _ -o 10 w O c `2 ti co. or '�ii' O 'F' fin' = +' •- w $ o tsl O a E t0 -0 = d m c H o. as E pQ o ti 3 (Oj y 'E z U C S -a° tli V c 0 0. C c CO o W ;!t O tq' E w w E 7 • L ¢ N O i O 00 Z O `W vN, c -a 01 E > E u °> to " c en E m W O m C N C v d 5 Y •N •a O 0 C7• 'F '5 v. O C C W C U C p a�. ?� i w m 3 —°� C °Ei U °c C'' CO m E "a E u m E ili 7; O I"• W W El u- co E C ° x U 0 Z a ° O c t30 `� r a C a 0 co U w L w al E p f0 .• .0.= fl .N +,, O N G a C w ■ w 0 ..0 w 'O L N a C O Q O W O, O t0 :i C p .CF, 'F' w .a LL CO w 7 w 0 t0 0 L cu a+ L U. s W •� U b0 pp C 4- 3 t u 0 $3 -C ti0 O .0 O 2 O W c c N '' O ° \ T z °o O p +o, O> 3 cOD N t0s ?ai O N c p 'G P Q N ° o >, " a. w .0 C7 L E v}.0 n 41 W 0 N `1 N x a c ._ 'a °C = atg c °0 t0 c N w 01) aj ® > --°a r m C a 0 C °�i ,o M E o -a > 5 O CO E c N 2 t0 .0 w e U 3 U cc V L 'c m u ° O .w o o. w O C c=1 a C 4° C U J .� ¢ O 'a N 4- 0, 0. 11,1 -0 t N t° N CO C 1- O. t0 U LLOO U ° ° o c w 4 -El W Q C o 3 'fit' 'u_c 0 4-. w U N L w w T L .t..r C O t'' co d G Q t ,co o' c c >,.p w s a U 4- 0 To C c c a o v c a s ` ..� CJ = .y a 7 Y c c t a N c p -o ��a++ w 3 i w A X (5 O.�!° LL V C N °1 aOe y m w w U m a a >• • + m c CO p a O W o w Z 3 ° E a N U ( *' o c d: 5 m E iP. O: 3 -8 c •O 7C CJ pmi Q U4- w e E .wm N E �.. ¢ h ° ++ t0 7 4t� ' C O ..O %O bbo a.. a 7 �7 Z 6 N w L x m :7, 3 - o ° v N o o E E E CO 2 a ' o E O w fl o L v c vi0 L _ T > o CU 50 u ++ ._ to E to a D3 la 00 w � r > 2d t � — :le d �• E woa f. _ w .� 00•- ° .G 3 C C m Yi E of co t0 o L C .t_. C a N U 30 om y6 > s A cg761 v yt � .� do °a E co 0 O�ee a 5 CO o L° m e w Y c a °1 °J 10 0 c c x ° c N w al E (NI E N Gi '� t = •.n c 3 v• ri u °a_o tN' C `� +°' t-' " �' c° c CD re �` v01i aL reo O mz > 4- .= > x° E z 0 m d Si H WI a w c CU = x bo E o 4, tot° Lo 'C N N 4 .w y U Y w U tm Q c a,Z O W +a• O O.�L 4� C °C 3 L C 3 C 0 WO 0, x y ° - w w °- aot', T L T i a co C tY Z 0 c 0 '6A: N C C m > y E 00 d w > s °� _ c w E m g ° d o s 0 V p m H a m aco O :3 .>'' T s (0 .n > E 4 a = W a to — 0 0) +� -a 7 7 a C T C m 4 0 f0 := a d d m E o°c p °i m o 6.. O E a w E a +E . a L in a m p^ 'E Q.c c > w = tO T y :C s ° .� a d v o 1A o cad E N ' `o `' L = L. v w al w tn 5= � � � � ao °>la oum U o N ¢ o U 4.- .0 c °m° c O. it c r w s o Q a E c to a t° m° to s OD 0 ii Ln -0 7 U co CO R 6 ° ti C td C `� 'O O C C t° E C O w C U N ai to 74 o w o 3 s •Z m °a, c o 0- < 4.4 a a m m vl to cc U O 3 w a °o > x vl E z Z % coca' w N y m (Z )ca L 4- -•EU4 L a� owc ECo C E CO Q w ° V U 'a ha twit N m c c E •E ° Q o s +-' E c E m . a N L ° ( C o N Q. m C .0 � E a+ C Q w C CU ' C C la w CE O 0 C Q. co Z Y U 'a 4 w 0 C .0 b0 L (0 4- m w a w N -a v m 3 o 0 0." z o H w ° ° $ c °Ei E '�+ Q a E o O L a 4- 2 t0 �+ O C -a w °7 0 Q O o CO 'VU .1R" N o 14 :C O p O � Lo m a a wm C y o o s .� c o `° id c L °n E m m 3 v -a Q m C y�j Fu Q 3 t0 O w C ha C O C O O : t L O 'tea 'G cu .m , 2 t U as '.'�_n '.tom ±' w U w Q w p w \ w U w N c h 3 ° E ¢ e° Q do to °� 0 E ,o, c al to co 0 0°>ii, czG vWE- c > ` 0Ni ,� 5 H E sff��° 'E3 E co o .0 c +' w > ▪ Q+"C+ H C N w N O w a c-d 3 _ wn -. c' C C GZ C w i w y7' w '6 O 7 m L :c q' :c- ,