HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 12-21 HCA AGENDA
BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING
COMMISSION
December 21, 2004
7 p.m.
All American Conference Room
Brooklyn Center City Hall
1. Call to Order: 7 p.m.
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes November 16, 2004
5. Chairperson's Report
6. Council Liaison Report
7. Senior Housing Report
8. 57�' Avenue Senior Housing Proposal Update
9. Other Business
10. Adjournment: 8:30 p.m.
Memorandum To: Chairperson Mark Yelich and Housing Commission members
From: Tom Bubhtz Communit Develo ment eciali
y p Sp stl/
Date: December 15, 2004
Subject: Senior Housing Report
Enclosed is the Commission's Senior Housing Report for your consideration. I have
added a Summary of the entire report which will include a summary of the Commission's
recommendations when they are finalized.
Please contact me with any comments or questions. My e-mail address is
tbublitzna,ci.brooklvn-center.inn.us and phone is 763-569-3433.
Also, please contact me if you will be unable to attend the meeting.
I
i
I
Senior Housing in Brooklyn Center
A Re ort From the Brooklyn Center
p
Housin Advisory Commission
g
1
Introduction and Executive Summary: Senior Housin�
in Brooklvn Center
Under the direction of the Brooklyn Center City Council, the Housing Commission has been
researching and discussing issues relative to senior housing in the City of Brooklyn Center. This
report serves as a written summation of the Commission and Staff research and examination of
the future of senior housing in the City.
The Commission's senior housing report is comprised of three parts.
1. A summary and analysis of demographic trends at the state, county and local
level along with a discussion of some of the financial and lifes t yle factors
affecting the housing needs and desires of elderly residents.
2. A demand analysis and estimate of senior housing in Brooklyn Center through
2009. This section of the Commission's report was prepared by Maxfield
Research, Inc. and it provides an analysis of the potential demand for various
types of senior housing products in Brooklyn Center, based on objective and
accepted methodologies for assessing housing demand.
3. The third and final part of the report is the Housing Commission's senior
housing recommendations. The Commission's recommendations are intended to
serve as a guide for evaluating future senior housing projects and are based on
the Commission's first hand research of existing senior housing in the area along
with analysis of housing data gathered by staff.
The following is a summary of the Commission's report on Senior Housing in Brooklyn Center.
DEMOGRAPHIC ANALY5IS
The population 65 and older in Minnesota will rise moderately until the end of the decade
to an increase of approxunately 14 percent. Between 2000 and 2030, the State's
population over 65 is expected to double from 600,000 to 1.2 million. Most of the
growth of this 65 plus age group will be primarily in suburban areas where the middle
aged population is concentrated today. The elderly population will more than triple in
most suburban counties between 2000 and 2030.
The 85 and older population is expected to grow 25 percent from 2000 to 2010 and 91
percent between 2000 and 2030 and by 2050, the state's population over 85 will nearly
triple from the year 2000 to 250,000.
After 2010, most population growth in Minnesota will be in people age 65 and over with
a 16 percent increase from 2000 to 2010, a 60 percent from 2010 to 2020 and a 95
percent increase from 2020 to 2030. By 2030, nearly 50 percent of all elderly households
will be one person households, doubling the number of persons over 65 who live alone.
Hennepin County has more seniors than any other Minnesota county and approximately
72 percent of residents age 65 and older in Hennepin County live in the suburbs.
2
The number of seniors in Hennepin County will increase significantly around the year
2010 when baby boomers enter the 65 and older age group. The fastest growth will be in
suburban Hennepin County, particularly in second ring suburbs where seniors who live in
those areas are choosing to stay as they age.
During the period from 2000 to 2010 the second ring suburbs will continue to see larger
increases in the number of seniors than the inner or outer ring suburbs. None of the first
ring suburbs are projected to gain more than 500 elderly in the next ten years and
Minneapolis may lose another 4,300 seniors. Currently nearly one in three seniors in
Hennepin County lives alone; however, 60 percent of seniors age 85 and up in Hennepin'
County live alone.
The 55 through 85 year old population in Brooklyn Center represents 23.5 percent of the
total city population. This is slightly higher than Hennepin County as a whole at 17.7
percent and the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area at 17.2 percent.
Both the Brooklyn Center percentage of owner occupied households and the percentage
of renter households over 65 are higher than the Hennepin County and metropolitan area
percentages.
Brooklyn Center's 55 through 75 year old population has a slightly lower median income
than the Hennepin County or metropolitan area median.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH, INC. 2004 SENIOR HOUSING UPDATE
Maxfield Research, Inc. is one of the metropolitan areas most respected market research
firms. Each year Maxfield Reseaxch tracks the senior housing market and produces an
annual report on senior housing. Maxfield's 2004 senior housing market update provides
a comprehensive survey of senior housing in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area.
The 20041VIaxfield report points out that current demographic trends tend to indicate that
growth and demand for senior housing will not be as consistent over the short term as
most senior housing will be marketing to a smaller depression era generation. These are
the people generally bom before 1945 with the largest group born between 1927 and
1945. Demand for senior housing by the baby boom generation born between 1946 and
1964 will begin in earnest by the end of this decade.
The Maxfield report notes that owner occupied housing for seniors has a experienced
resurgence after nearly a decade of little construction. This type of product includes
housing such as condominiums and cooperatives.
In its 2004 report Maxfield defines and tracks various types of housing including adult
projects with few or no services, congregate projects with some support services, assisted
living projects with more intensive type services and affordable senior housing, which is
3
typically set to be affordable to persons with incomes of up to 60 percent of the county
median income.
Maxfield tracks senior housing in the Metropolitan area by quadrants. Brooklyn Center
is located in the northwest quadrant and according to Maxfield, currently has the second
highest number of non-subsidized senior units in the metropolitan area. Maacfield also
reports that from 2004 to 2006, an additiona15,600 units of non-subsidized senior
housing could potentially come on line in the Twin Cities metropolitan area including
1,168 units in the northwest quadrant, which represents 21 percent of the projected units
from 2004 to 2006.
The Maxfield Senior Housing 2004 Update reports that 84 percent of the metropolitan
area's senior housing units are rental but there is a growing demand for owner occupied
coop's, condo's and new products such as age restricted townhomes and detached villa
communities. Maxfield projects that if all of the proposed owner occupied senior
housing is built, it could represent 22 percent of the metropolitan area's non subsidized
senior housing by 2006.
Some of the conclusions of the 2004 Maxfield Senior Update include the following:
Pent up demand exists for senior housing particularly affordable and independent senior
housing.
Demand for ownership product such as cooperatives and condominiums will be strong
over the next two decades, particularly projects geared for active independent recent
retirees.
The leading edge of baby boomers will be entering their mid-70's shortly after 2020, so
assisted living and memory care will continue to be needed.
Most metro area quadrants will have high growth potential. High occupancy rates and
rapid absorption in independent housing indicated pent up demand with the potential to
develop additional product throughout the metropolitan area.
Some metropolitan area quadrants could experience saturation in assisted living product
over the short term but it should continue to grow as the population ages.
Assisted living should remain strong in the developments where there is a continuum of
care where the independent housing components feed into the more service intensive
assisted living components.
Maxfield projects the greatest potential over the next two decades will be for
developments that cater to active aging baby boomers.
New construction should satisfy much of the demand but potential exists to convert older
rental or condominium properties with a majority of studio and one bedroom units.
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
Housing affordability issues are a significant part of planning for future senior housing. While
there is no absolute definition of affordable or subsidized housing, affordable housing typically
involves some level of public subsidy to lower the rents to tenants while subsidized housing may
4
imply a deep subsidy which requires tenants to pay 30 percent of their income towards rent with
a subsidy making up the difference.
The Maxfield 2004 Senior Housing Update points out that seniors moving to independent senior
housing offering no services will spend up to 40 percent of their income on housing and in a
congregate setting, seniors will allocate anywhere from 50 percent to 80 percent depending on
the level of services provided. Additionally, the Maxfield report indicates that in an assisted
living and memory care situation, seniors will often spend 80 percent or more of their income on
housing and services.
While rents affordable to households earning 60 percent of inedian income or less is a typical
affordability standard, it should be noted that in specific projects, the affordable definition is tied
to the particular funding mechanism'such as Tax Increment Financing, t� credits, housing
revenue bonds, etc.
MODELS AND TRENDS IN SENIOR HOUSING
Based on current data, some of the trends and indicators for future senior housing include:
Housing industry data shows that younger baby boomers, just beginning to look at senior
housing, are attracted to housing that meets the needs of an active lifestyle including
access to recreation such as golf and heath clubs.
The Maxfield 2004 Senior Housing Update Report points out that owner occupied
housing will experience a growing demand over the next several years especially for
those seniors who can now live in age restricted housing and own their units in the case
of coop's and condominiums.
Developers are now including senior housing as a component in the so called "Urban
Village" concept development being planned in numerous eities around the metropolitan
area.
One of the models the housing industry is viewing as a trend is the `continuum of care"
where a variety of senior housing is built in a campus setting and seniors can choose
independent living, rental or owner occupied age restricted housing alongside or with
access to assisted living or skilled nursing care services.
In addition to the many independent living options for seniors, there will also be choices
for seniors choosing to remain in their single family home. For example, a major senior
reseaxch report published in 1999 and titled, `Building Toward the Senior Boom" pointed
out that `seniors desire to remain in their own homes and neighborhoods will persist and
grow stronger in the future'.
The Minnesota Departrnent of Human Services also recognizes that `aging in place' has
become a reality for seniors and, as physical changes occur in an aging population,
numerous was must be developed to support aging in place. According to the
Department of Human Services, this approach to aging may assume a service
coordination model where elderly persons remaining in their homes may select from a
menu from services to assist them with their particular needs.
The demographics of an aging population in Minnesota and the rest of the nation are
undeniable. The population will age gradually unti12010, then after 2010 the fastest
population growth in Minnesota will be in people age 65 and over with a 60 percent
increase from 2010 to 2020 and a 95 percent increase from 2020 to 2030.
5
By 2030, nearly 50 percent of all elderly households will be one person households.
Hennepin County has more seniors than any other county in Minnesota. In Hennepin
County approximately 72 percent of residents age 65 and older live in the suburbs.
DEMAND ANALYSIS AND ESTIMATES FOR SENIOR HOUSING IN BROOKLYN
CENTER MARKET AREA
Maxfield Research, Inc. has prepared a calculation of the potential demand for various senior
housing products in the Brooklyn Center market area based on the size of the local senior
household base, senior household incomes, home equity potential and an inventory of existing
and planned competitive senior housing in the market area. It should be noted the methodology
used by Maxfield Research to assess the demand does not take into account the desirability or
appropriateness of any specific sites proposed for senior housing and is a generalized analysis of
senior housing demand. Maxfield points out that a more thorough investigation of any unique
characteristics of the Brooklyn Center market area could be outlined in a more complete
feasibility study and could reveal more specific factors that might impact demand on a specific
project. The demand analysis provided by Maxfield is a"macro" look at the market area and
that a more site specific or "micro" examination of a specific site may result in a senior housing
demand factor for a particular site that cannot be accounted for in a larger (macro) analysis.
A summary of the Maxfield research and analysis of the senior housing demand in the Brooklyn
Center market area follows:
Maxfield has established the Brooklyn Center market area to include the following areas;
Brooklyn Center, Robbinsdale, Crystal, and census tracts from southem Brooklyn Park
and northern Minneapolis. This is the primary draw area or "market" area for senior
housing. Maxfield estimates that 75 percent of the demand for a senior housing project
or projects could come from this market area.
Maxfield has determined that a portion of the demand far any senior housing
development will come from outside the market area and their estimates are that between
20 to 25 percent of the total demand for senior housing will come from outside the
market area.
The time period used to create the demand estimates is from 2004 to 2009. This five year
period is a standard time period for developing market studies since it is difficult to go
beyond a five year time line since markets, technology and other factors relating to I
housing demand cannot be projected accurately beyond five years.
In 2000 the Brooklyn Center market area contained 25,132 persons aged 55 and older,
15,056 aged 65 and over and 7,210 persons aged 75 and older. Between 1990 and 2000
the market areas 55 to 64 and 65 to 74 population declined. However, growth among
older seniors 75 and over was very strong, increasing by 1,620 persons or 29 percent.
Between 2000 and 2009 the majority of the growth in the market area will be among per
sons aged 55 to 65 (an increase of over 2900 people).
Growth among older seniors 75 and over, the primary market for senior housing with
services, is expected to grow slightly through 2009 by 574 people.
Demand for independent market rate senior housing will typically come from households
with incomes of $25,000 or more while demand for affordable senior housing will
typically come from households of $25,000 or less.
6
The number of households headed by persons 65 and older, the primary market for age
restricted housing, is expected to increase by roughly 150 households in the market area
between 2004 and 2009.
The target maxket for age restricted independent senior housing is generally senior
households age 65 and older with incomes of at least $25,000. A small portion of older
adults age 55 to 64 may also choose age restricted housing, but overall, they usually
account for only a small portion of the demand within any given market area. As of
2004, Maxfield estimates that 5,894 senior households (65+) in the market area with
incomes of at least $25,000 accounting for slightly more than 60 percent of all senior I
households in the market area. In addition, there are an estimated 5,863 households aged I
55 to 64 in the market area with incomes of at least $25,000. I�
The median income of senior households (65 plus) is expected to increase by 12.5 I
percent over the next five years by $31,087 in 2004 to $34,975 in 2009. Thus, the
percentage of seniors able to afford market rate senior housing will increase. I
In addition to their existing income sources, many senior households will be able to
derive additional income from the sales of their homes allowing many senior households
with incomes of less than $25,000 to afford senior housing alternatives.
As of 2000, 79 percent of the market areas senior (65 plus) households own their
housing. This homeownership rate is slightly higher than for the State of Minnesota,
which has a home ownership rate of 77 percent.
The current high home ownership rates in the market area for senior households will
allow prospective residents to tap into significant equity reserves upon the sale of their
homes that can be utilized for alternative housing.
Maxfield inventoried 1,764 market rate independent senior rental housing units in the
Brooklyn Center market area. Approximately 6Lpercent of the independent
developments in the market area are market rate "adult" (no services) projects while the
remaining developments offer congregate services (meals, housekeeping, etc.) that are
either included in the rent or available on an optional basis.
There are 300 owner occupied units in the market area, two of the projects, or about 75
percent of the total ownership units, are senior cooperatives.
MARKET RATE INDEPENDENT SE1vIOR HOUSING DEMAND ESTIMATES
Market rate independent senior housing is defined as market rate independent senior rental and
ownership housing including housing with and without services.
Maxfield estimates that there are 13,674 households (55+) in the Brooklyn Center market
area, as of 2004, with incomes of $25,000 or more, plus households with incomes
between $20,000 and $25,000, who would qualify with the proceeds from a home sale.
Maxfield projects that for 2004 there is a demand of 21 congregate independent units and
an excess supply of 226 adult units in the Brooklyn Center market area.
Adjusting for inflation, Maxfield has estimated that households with incomes of $30,000 and
more and homeowners with incomes of $20,000 to $29,999 would best qualify for market rate
independent senior housing in 2009. The demand for congregate units for 2009 increases to 26
units while the excess supply of adult rental units is 221 units. It should be noted that the
demand figures are not cumulative. In order words, the demand figures for 2004 affect the
demand in 2009 and if the 2004 demand is met prior to 2009, the result is a lowering of demand
for 2009.
ASSISTED LNING DEMAND ESTIMATES
The primary market area for assisted living housing in the market area is seniors aged 75
and over with incomes of $30,000 or more. An income of $30,000 and an 80 percent
allocation of that income on housing translate to an affordable monthly fee of about
$2,000, approximately the starting price for basic units at assisted living projects in the
metro area.
Ma�cfield projects that there is a demand for 73 units of market rate assisted living
housing in the market area in 2004. Following the same methodology and utilizing the
projected incomes of older senior households in 2009, results in a total market area
assisted living demand increasing to 74 units in 2009.
MEMORY CARE HOUSING DEMAND ESTIMATES
According to date from the National Institute of Aging, about 25 percent of all persons
with memory care impairments are a market for memory care units. This figure takes
into account that seniors in the early stages of dementia will still be able to live
independently while those in the later stages will require intensive medical care that
would only be available in skilled care facilities.
M�field estunates that there is an excess demand for 45 memory care units in 2004 in
the market area and applying the same calculations to the age/income qualified base in
2009, and accounting for memory care units in the development pipeline, results in
demand for 49 memory care units in 2009.
AFFORDABLE SETTIOR HOUSING DEMAND ESTIMATES
In general most senior households with incomes in excess of $25,000 and senior
homeowners with incomes of $15,000 or more can afford market rate senior housing
without financial assistance and do not need subsidized housing.
Seniors with incomes less than $15,000 and seniors with incomes between $15,000 and
$25,000 who currently rent their housing are candidates for subsidized affordable
housing.
Maxfield Research projects that there is an excess demand for 696 units in the Brooklyn
Center market area in 2004. Maxfield projects that a subsidized/affordable project in
Brooklyn Center would capture 45 percent of the tatal market area demand, meaning that
there would be a demand of 313 units of subsidizedlaffordable senior housing in
Brooklyn Center for 2004. Applying these same calculations to the age and income
qualified base in 2009 results in excess demand for 325 units. It should be noted that as
with all the demand calculations, the 2004 and 2009 demand nuxnbers do not stand alone.
In other words, to the extent that the excess demand is satisfied for the 2004 demand
figures, this would influence and reduce the demand for 2009.
8
PRELIMINARY DEMAND CONCLUSIONS
Maxfield Research has determined that pent up demand currently exists for congreg�te
independent living (with services), assisted living, memory care housing, and
subsidized/affordable independent living.
The market for active adult independent living is very competitive at this time, largely
due to a number of older, general occupancy rental conversions by Lang Nelson.
Maxfield's research also indicates that there could be a significant amount of competitive
product in the development pipeline which, if built, would result in a large number of
adult ownership product in the market area.
INSERT SUMMARY OF HOUSING COMMISSION RECONIMENDATIONS HERE
WHEN THEY ARE FINALIZED
Part 1: Demographics and Hot�sing
Analy�is
DEMOGR.APHIC CHANGE AND AGING IN MINNESOTA
TATE SUMMARY
According to data from the Office of State Demographer and the Minnesota Department of Human Services, the
following changes in the State's older population are proj ected.
The population 65 and older in Minnesota will rise moderately between 2003 and 2010, with an
expected gain of 14 percent.
Between 2000 and 2030, Minnesota's population over 65 will double from 600,000 to 1.2 million.
The effect of Minnesota's aging population will be most visible in suburban areas where the middle-
aged population is concentrated today. The elderly population will more than triple in most suburban
counties between 2000 and 2030.
The 85 and older population is projected to grow 25 percent from 2000 to 2010 and 91 percent between
2000 and 2030.
Between 2000 and 2050, the State's population over 85 will nearly triple to 250,000.
The proportion of the State's population over 65 will rise from 12 percent in 2000 to 24 percent in 2030,
when one out of four Minnesotan's will be over 65.
After 2010, most population growth in Minnesota will be in people age 65 and over with a 16 percent
increase from 2000 to 2010, a 60 percent increase from 2010 to 2020 and a 95 percent increase from
2020 to 2030.
By 2030, nearly 50 percent of all elderly households will be one person households, doubling the
number of persons over 65 who live alone.
Most geographic areas of the state will experience growth in people over 65 in the next few decades.
The majority of growth in the 65 and over population will occur in the Twin Cities 1Vletropolitan region.
The following tables show the dramatic increase in elderly growth in Minnesota over the next 30 years.
Minnesota age 65+ population projected to rise
sharply in coming decades
Projected population
1,1315�
951,600
795.,00
6e4OOo
594,2fi6 a
20Q0 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Sources: 2000 census, SFi; Minnesota State Demagraphic Center
Numbers are rounded
1
Minnesota age 85+ population projected to rise
between I000 and 2030
163,300
134 900
115 400 121,60�
106.700
85,601 �•400
t
i
i 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 i
Projected population
i Source� 2000 ce�u�, SFt: MlnnesoW Smte Demographk Cditer
Numbers are raunded
,i
I
From 2000 to 2030, fastest growth in Minnesota wiil be for ages over 60
/W a9et 27
13 i
5-9 10
�a�a
15-19 5
20-24 16
25-29 19
j 30-34 11 I
3539 0
40-44 2
45-49 12
50-54 20
55-59
60-64
6 135
70-74 131
75-79 111
8a84 100
91 I
Projeded change
Sourc� Minnesota State Demographit CeMer
2
TWIN CITIES AND HENNEPIN COUNTY SUNIMARY
he St. Paul based Wilder Foundation's Research Center noted in a 1999 study on Twin Cities area seniors
tled "Building Toward the Senior Boom" that, by the year 2025 the senior population in the Twin Cities area
will more than double. According to the Wilder Report, outlying suburban counties will grow fastest, but
Hennepin and Ramsey Counties will also add substantial numbers. The rapid growth will begin in earnest in
the year 2010. The report goes on to state that around the year 2010, the baby boom generation enters
retirement ages and will swell the 65 to 74 year old population segment and by the year 2020, baby boomers
will enter the 75 to 84 year old age group, the age at which many seniors move into senior housing. Finally,
baby boomers will turn 85 in 2030 and from then unti12050 there will be an "unprecedented number of very old
seniors in the Twin Cities area".
The following demographic information was obtained from various reports prepared by Hennepin County
relative to the senior population in the County.
Hennepin County has more seniors than any other Minnesota County. According to the 2000 Census,
Hennepin County has 122,358 residents who are 65 years old or older, representing over 11 percent of
the County's total population.
In Hennepin County, approximately 72 percent of residents age 65 and older live i� the suburbs.
The highest concentrations of people over the age of 65 are in suburban communities. In parts of
Minnetonka, Edina, Brooklyn Center, St. Anthony, Bloomington, Richfield, Golden Valley, Wayzata,
New Hope and Robbinsdale, the 65 and older population is 30 to 49 percent of the total population.
Even though Hennepin County has the largest senior population, as Hennepin baby boomers aged,
39,401 fewer of them lived in the County in 2000 than in 1990.
The number of seniors in Hennepin County will increase significantly around 2010 when baby boomers
enter the 65 and older age group. Fastest growth will be in suburban Hennepin County, particularly in
the second ring suburbs where services and amenities are currently accessible only by automobile.
Seniors who live in those areas are choosing to stay as they age.
Growth in the 65 year and over age group will accelerate over time, particularly between 2010 and 2025
when baby boomers will join the group creating an estimated 51.5 percent increase over 15 years
(compared with a 12.5 percent increase from 1995 to 2010).
It is estimated that 11.5 percent of the population of Hennepin County is 65 and over (10.8 percent in
Minneapolis; 11.9 percent in the suburbs).
The greatest rate of growth for the senior population has been in the second ring suburbs, attributable to
aging in place.
During the period from 2000 to 2010, the second ring suburbs will continue to see larger increases in the
numbers of seniors than the inner or outer ring suburbs. Bloomington and Plymouth are projected to
gain over 2,000, and Minnetonka, Brooklyn Park, Eden Prairie and Maple Grove are projected to
increase between 1,100 and 1,500. None of the first ring suburbs are projected to gain more than 500
elderly in the next ten years. Minneapolis may lose another 4,300 seniors.
Nearly one in three seniors in Hennepin County lives alone; however, 60 percent of seniors age 85 and
up in Hennepin County live alone.
SUMMARY OF 2004 MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC SE1vIOR HOUSING UPDATE
Maxfield Research Inc. is one of the Metropolitan area's most respected market research firms. 1Vlaxfield
Research has tracked the senior housing market for over 20 years and for many years has produced an annual
�eport on senior housing. Maxfield's 2004 Senior Housing Market Update provides a comprehensive survey of
market rate and affordable senior housing projects in the Minneapolis/St.Paul Metropolitan area. It should be
noted the Maacfield Report is limited to "market rate" and "affordable" senior housing and does not include
3
subsidized projects with "deep subsidies". The Report also includes only established projects open for 12
months or with stabilized occupancy. The purpose of this section is to suxnmarize the sections of the Maxfield I
2004 update which are pertinent to the Northwest section of the Metropolitan area and the City of Brooklyn
�enter. The following is a summary of and excerpts from the Maxfield 2004 Senior Housing Update.
OVERVIEW OF METROPOLITAN AREA SErTIOR HOUSING MARKET
Maxfield's assessment of the senior housing market notes that the number of non-subsidized senior housing
u.nits in the Metropolitan area now exceeds 25,000. The report goes on to specify that "barring any major
market downturns", projects currently in the "development pipeline" could result in 31,000 total units by the
end of 2006.
The Maxfield report points out that current demographic trends would tend to indicate that growth and demand
for senior housing will not be as consistent over the short term as most senior housing will be marketing to a
smaller depression era generation. These are the people generally born before 1945 with the largest group born
between 1927 and 1945. Demand for senior housing by the baby boom generation born between 1946 and 1964
will begin in earnest by the end of this decade.
The Maxfield Report observes that housing development during the 1980's concentrated on "congregate" rental
housing and today's senior housing market has evolved into a complete "continuum of products" designed to
accommodate the life style needs of extremely diverse market segments, from those maintaining a single family
home to very frail seniors in need of housing with support services.
Maxfield notes the owner occupied housing market for seniors has experienced resurgence after nearly a decade
of very little construction. Maxfield points out that between 1996 and 2003, 2348 units of owner occupied
enior housing were built accounting for an average of 290 units per year or just over 20 percent of the senior
ousing units built in the Metropolitan area.
Maxfield predicts that between 2004 and 2006 owner occupied senior housing will account for about 35 percent
of the senior units built in the metro area, beginning to serve a relatively untapped market.
TYPES OF SErTIOR HOUSING
The senior housing market is a diverse one and will continue to be so well into the future. Maxfield Research
has developed the following senior housing classifications in their analysis of senior housing:
ADLJLT PROJECTS. These projects offer virtually no support services or health care but restrict
tenancy to those 55 or 62 and over. These projects aze usually apartment style rentals but also include
age restricted condominiums, cooperatives, townhome developments and even detached housing units.
CONGREGATE PROJECTS. These projects offer support services such as transportation, meals and
housekeeping. These developments tend to attract an older and frailer resident than do adult projects.
Congregate units are also much more likely to be occupied by a single person (typically 75 percent to 85
pereent of the units) than adults projects which can have as many as one half or more of their units
occupied by couples.
ASSISTED LIVING PROJECTS. This product is the most service intensive type. Assisted living and
memory care offer the highest level of services short of a nursing home. Assisted living housing
typically includes at least two daily meals as well as all of the support services found in congregate
proj ects. Assisted living proj ects also provide 24 hour staffing and emergency response along with the
availability of personal care assistance (bathing, dressing, grooming, etc.) Maxfield also points out that
in addition to assisted living proj ects, memory care housing is a specialized assisted living product
4
specifically designed and programmed for persons afflicted with Alzheimer's disease or other
dementias. This type of housing provides specialized care including safety systems through secure
access doors as well as higher staff to resident ratios.
AFFORDABLE SEIVIOR HOUSING. In addition to the types of senior housing products, Maxfield
Research also addresses the issue of affordable senior housing. Maxfield differentiates between
affordable and subsidized senior housing by pointing out that affordable senior housing targets modest
income households rather than very low income households targeted by subsidized senior housing.
Maxfield points out that typically the affordable projects have ceilings on the income of residents and
rents, which are typically set to be affordable to persons with incomes of up to 60 percent of the county
median income.
Affordable projects are contrasted with deeply subsidized projects where rents are typically based on a
sliding scale (generally 30 percent of adjusted household income) and are geared towards very low
income seniors.
Affordable housing usually does receive some type of subsidy to keep rents affordable but the subsidies
are not the deep subsidies associated with low income housing.
Maxfield also points out that affordable senior housing projects can be stand alone projects but
increasingly consist of units within a mixed income building where market rate units are also present.
SUMMARY OF SENIOR HOUSING LTNITS
The following figure from the Maxfield 2004 Update provides a summary of the various types of housing
products in the metro area as of the fourth quarter of 2003.
Figure 5
NON-SUBSIDIZED SENIOR HOUSING IN THE 7-COUNTY TWIN CTTIES METRO AREA
4th puarter 2003
Affordable I Adult I Con�reeate I Assisted livio� 1 Memorv Care I Total
Projects 58 113 92 86 49 398
Units 2,922 7,025 9,195 4,721 1,090 24,953
Avg, Size 50 62 100 55 22 63
According to Maxfield's data, the various product types expressed as a percentage of total senior units in the
metro area are shown by the followxng:
Con e ate Pro'ects 37 ercent
g J P
Adult Projects 28 percent\
Assisted Living Projects 19 percent
Memory Care Projects 4 percent
Affordable Senior Units —12 percent
SUMMARY OF SENIOR HOUSING UNITS BY OUADRANT
The Maxfield Senior Housing Update for 2004 divides the Metropolitan area into several quadrants for
purposes of tracking senior housing production. The map on the following page shows the breakdown of Twin
Cities quadrants as defined by Maxfield Research. The City of Brooklyn Center is in the Northwest Quadrant.
A breakdown of the total count of housing units by quadrant from the Maxfield r�port follows.
SUMMARY OF TOTAL NON-SUBSIDIZED SE1vIOR UTTITS BY OUADRANT EXPRESSED AS A
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL METRO AREA UNITS
Southwest 7,731— 30.9 percent
Northwest 5,923 23.7 percent
Northeast 5,108 20.5 percent
Southeast 2,641-10.6 percent
Minneapolis —1,884 7.6 percent
St. Paul —1,666 6.7 percent
�UNIMARY OF iJNITS BY TYPE AND OUADRANT
The Northwest Quadrant has the most adult project units of all the quadrants with 1,948, which translates to 33
percent of the total Northwest Quadrant senior housing and 28 percent of the total metro area adult units.
Congregate housing has high concentrations in Minneapolis where is comprises nearly 70 percent of the City's
senior units and the Southwest Quadrant where it represents almost 50 percent of the Southwest Quadrant's
total senior units. Overall, 40 percent of the congregate units are in the Southwest Quadrant.
Assisted living units represent 11 percent of Minneapolis senior units and 27 percent of St. Paul's senior units.
The Southwest Quadrant accounts for 33 percent of the metro area's assisted living units.
Memory care is concentrated in the Southwest Quadrant, which accounts for 41 percent of the Metropolitan
area's memory care units.
Affordable housing accounts for 12 percent of the units surveyed in Maacfield's 2004 Senior Housing Update.
Of the 12 percent total metro wide affordable units, 27 percent of these are located in the Southeast Quadrant
and 21 percent in the northeast quadrant. Affordable units count for only 2 percent to 10 percent in the
remaining quadrants. The relatively high percentage of affordable units in the Southeast Quadrant is due in
large part to the efforts of the Dakota County Community Development Agency, which utilizes a special county
tax levy to assist with senior housing projects. For many years, the Dakota County Housing Authority has been
the most active county housing authority in the production of senior housing units in the Metropolitan area.
6
T�in Cities �uadrants
f
I
t
r
i�t� y s-
c a'�. 4 y.w',
3 c -.�a� 5
4 k.
q 'YK
x t� "`y i N'.�
:M r 's n
J
yti j <�E y 5 F
N�It.� ,rr
A
r
O
5 s.I� 4
4 5U YJ1*
x..
�._r
�.E
'C3 d
7
MARKET CONDITIONS AND VACANCY RATES
ccording to the Maxfield 2004 report, between 2000 and 2003, the overall senior housing vacancy rate in the
win Cities Metropolitan area increased from 2.5 percent to 4.1 percent.
Maxfield points out the market for affordable as well as independent senior products (adult and congregate) still
remains strong metro wide, with vacancy rates below the industry equilibrium standard of 5 percent. As of the
fourth quarter 2003, Maxfield points out that only 2 percent of the affordable units were vacant, 3.2 percent of
the market rate adult product was reported vacant as were 4 percent of the metro area's congregate units.
Maxfield reports that a typical vacancy rate of 5 percent is considered equilibrium for independent senior
housing. Vacancy rates well below this figure indicate that the demand for independent housing product
continues to surpass the supply in the Metropolitan area.
The following figure from the M�field report shows the senior housing vacancy rates by quadrant and product
type in the Metropolitan area.
FiEuro 10
SEWIOR VACANCY RATES BY QUDRANf PRODUGT TYPE
TCMA 2003
ProJ UniU Vaa 7G a' Proj Unih Vaa 9G Proj Uaits Vac. •A.
Mpla. 1 22 0 O.OYe 4 378 21 S.6°/ l l 1,285 54 4.2Yc
NE 21 1,004 17 ri 33 1,678 39 23N 15 1,201 38 3.2'k
NW 10 597 22 3 T/e 24 1,871 68 3.6Yc l9 1,793 59 3.3'�E
SE 13 649 6 0 9Ye IS SSO YL 4.09k 7 697 SS 7.9Se
St.P 2 41 0 0 M/ 7 557 13 23Y< 6 397 23 6.394
SW 7 339 8 2 4Y. 23 1,607 47 2.9°/. 29 3.421 125 3.T/c
Totol 54 2,652 53 2 0°/� 106 6.641 210 3.2°/� 87 8.794 336 4.0'k
Avg Size 49 'I 63 101
Proj Units Vac. Proj Units Vac. Proj Units V�c. °�G
Mpis. S 199 11 S.5°/. 0 0 0 0.0°/. 2l 1,884 86 4.6'h
NE 13 938 63 6.Th 9 208 5 2.4°h 91 3,029 162 3.27E
NW 24 1,089 69 6.3Y 9 243 20 8.2°/. 86 5,593 238 4.3'k
SE 8 345 23 7.2Y� 6 138 19 13.876� t; 49 2,379 127 5.3�E
St.P S 396 S I 12.� 0 0 0 0.074 20 1,391 !9 6A'iE
SW 23 1,369 SS 4.09'e 19 377 ?A 6.4'/e 101 7,113 2!9 3.6yE
Total N 78 1,336 274 6.3yGM I 43 966 6S 7.OY 36i 23.389 961 4.1X
AvY Siu 56 I 2 Z r���
8
INCREASING PRODUCT DIVERSIFICATION
Perhaps one of the more important sections of the M�field 2004 Senior Housing Update is the discussion of
enior housing products and the diversity of products available. Maxfield points out that senior housing
onstruction in the 1980's focused on congregate housing products, which led to an over supply of congregate
products at the end of the decade. By contrast, Maxfield points out the success of today's senior housmg
market is marked by diversity of housing products.
Maxfield has included the following senior housing projections for the next two years.
From 2004 to 2006 an additiona15,600 units of non-subsidized senior housing could potentially come on line in
the Twin Cities Metropolitan area including:
Northeast Quadrant —1,531 units 27 percent
Northwest Quadrant —1,168 units 21 percent
Southeast Quadrant —1,167 units 21 percent
Southwest Quadrant 974 units —17 percent
St. Paul 548 units —10 percent
Minneapolis —193 units 4 percent
The Maxfield report also notes the following dominant housing products types by quadrant, projected for 2004
to 2006:
Northwest and Southwest Quadrants Owner Occupied
Southeast Quadrant Congregate
Northeast Quadrant Adult and Congregate
�WNER OCCUPIED HOUSING
The Maxfield Senior Housing 2004 Update reports that 84 percent of the Metropolitan areas senior housing
units are rental but there is a growing demand for owner occupied co-op's, condo's and new products such as
age restricted townhomes and detached villa communities. In 2003, there were 4,600 age restricted owner
occupied housing units in the Metropolitan area representing approximately 7 percent of the Metropolitan areas
non-subsidized housing. Maxfield projects that, if all of the proposed owner occupied senior housing is built, it
could represent 22 percent of the Metropolitan areas non-subsidized senior housing by 2006.
DEMOGRAPHIC/DEMAND FACTORS,
The Maxfield report provides a section on demographics in the Metropolitan area as summarized below:
In 2000 there were 255,000 people 65 and over and 124,630 people 75 and over in the Metropolitan
area.
From 1990 to 2000, the increase in younger seniors 65 to 74 grew only by 5,000 (4 percent increase)
largely due to the lower birth rates of the depression area generation, those born in the 1920's through
1930's. As a result, Maxfield points out that over the course of the decade 2000 to 2010, the aging of
the depression era generation will have a moderating effect on growth among older seniors. Between
2000 and 2010, Maxfield projects an increase of 52,000 seniors in the Metropolitan area, a 20 percent
increase, 2/3 of which will be among younger seniors 65 to 74.
As Maxfield notes, the baby boom generation is a different story and between 2010 and 2020, the
Metropolitan area senior population is projected to gain 144,000 additional seniors (107,500 65 to 74
and 37,000 75 and over).
After 2020, demand for senior housing with services will increase dramatically when baby boomers start
moving into their mid to late 70's.
9
From 2020 to 2030, the Metropolitan area senior population is projected to grow by 179,000 persons
resulting in 630,290 persons over 65 and 285,200 persons 75 and older by 2030.
The following table from the Maxfield 2004 Update shows senior household tenure in the Metro area
between 1990 and 2000.
FIGURE 17
SENIOR HOUSEHOLD TENURE
METRO AREA
1990 2000
Own Rent Own Rent
Total No. Pct. No. Pct. Total No. Pct. No. Pct.
�:Metro Total 82,52L •'b8,030'> ::-,82A, 14;491 17.6 'S3,G73.,,. r,�E.2�` ���,,,�3:7
s
Minneapolis 10,103 7,011 69.4 3,092 30.6 12,719 8,806 69.2 3,913 30.8
St Paul 8,603 5,983 69.5 2,620 30.5 10,707 6,765 63.2 3,942 36.8
Rem.ofMetro 63,815 55,036 86.2 8,779 13.8 57,483 38,102 66.3 19,381 33.7
Met�o Total 7$,165 ;58,297 77.6 16,868 22A °36;54� b01,�, ;!?,4,23�
Minneapolis 15,493 10,918 70.5 4,575 29.5 16,3'78 10,042 61.3 6,336 38.7
St Paul 12,307 8,607 699 3,700 30.1 12,673 7,341 579 5,332 42.1
Rem.ofMetro 47,365 38,772 81.9 8,593 18.1 31,733 19,164 60.4 12,569 39.6
Metro Total 7,354 0 9.733 16.7. ..-2,377 -1.4.Y 20,125 1�,�Z6 ..'`46 9. �,w' �,9�9, :;�`�+�12:��
Minneapolis -5,390 -3,907 -35.8 -1,483 -32.4 -3,659 -1,236 -12.3 -2,423 -38.2
St Paul -3,704 -2,624 -30.5 -1,080 -29.2 -1,966 -576 -7.8 �-1,390 -26.1
Rem. ofMetro 16,450 16,264 41.9 186 2.2 25,750 18,938 98.8 6,812 54.2
Sources: U. S. Census Bureau, Maxfield Research Inc.
10
The Ma�field report projects an increasing homeownership trend to 2020. This is due to younger seniors
preferences for ownership housing and expansion of homemaking and home health care services for the frail
lderly. Maxfield also projects that, with appreciating home values and increased wealth of future seniors, this
hould mean a strong demand for market rate congregate and assisted living.
Maxfield Research draws the following conclusions for the future of senior housing in the Twin Cities
Metropolitan area:
Pent up demand exists for senior housing particularly affordable and independent senior housing.
Demand for ownership products such as cooperatives and condominiums will be strong over the next
two decades, particularly projects geared for active independent recent retirees.
Demand for more service intensive housing may not have the same potential as owner occupied
products but increasing life expectancies and increasing senior incomes will likely allow this type of
senior housing product to capture more of the senior market.
The leading edge of baby boomers will be entering their mid 70's shortly after 2020 so assisted living
and memory care will continue to be needed.
Most metro area quadrants will have high growth potential. High occupancy rates and rapid absorption
in independent housing indicates pent up demand with the potential to develop additional product
throughout the Metropolitan area.
Some Metropolitan area quadrants could experience saturation in assisted living product over the short
term but it should continue to grow as the population ages.
Assisted living should remain strong in developments where there is a continuum of care where the
independent housing components feed into the more service intensive assisted living components.
Maxfield projects the greatest potential over the next two decades will be for developments that cater to
active aging baby boomers.
New construction should satisfy much of the demand but potential exists to convert older rental or
condominium properties with a majority of studio and one bedroom units.
Citv of Brooklvn Center Demo�raphics
The following summaries compare selected portions of Brooklyn Center's 2000 demographic data to Hennepin
County and the Twin Cities Metropolitan area. The source for the data contained in the tables is from the 2000
and 1990 U. S. Census as compiled by the Metropolitan CounciL
Table 1
Percentage Change in Population and Households from 1990 to 2000.
Demographic Information Brookl�n Center Hennepin County Metropolitan Area
Total Population 1.0% 8.1% 15.4%
Number of Households 1.8% 8.8% 16.7%
11
Table 2
Brooklyn Center Population By Age and Comparison of Percentage Change 1990-2000 to Hennepin
County and Metropolitan Area
1990 2000 Percent Change 1990 to 2000
Age Number of Total Number of Total Brooklyn Hennepin Metro Area
Center County
55-64 3,488 12.1 2,374 8.1 -319 8.6 10.5
65-74 2,299 8.0 2,428 8.3 5.6 -5.7 1.4
75-84 962 3.3 1,569 5.4 63.1 8.9 5.2
85+ 285 4.0 5.0 1.7 78.9 3.2 1.9
As an additional comparison, the following data shows the percent of total population represented by elderly
age groupings for Hennepin County and the Metropolitan area:
Hennepin Count� Metro Area
Age 1990 of Total 2000 of Total 1990 of Total 2000 of Total
55-64 7.7 7.7 7.2 7.6
65-74 6.2 5.4 5.5 49
75-84 3.6 4.0 3.1 3.4
85+ 1.5 �.6 1.2 1.3
Table 3
Elderl,y Renter Household 65+ by Type of Householder 2000
Family 1-Person Other Non-Family of Total
Household Household Household Households
Brooklyn Center 111 I 552 I 8 5.9
Hennepin County 4,344 16,639 508 4.7
Metro Area 9,002 33,820 784 4.3
Table 4
Elderly Owner Household 65+ by Type of Householder 2000
Family 1-Person Other Non- of Total
Household Household Family Households
Household
Brooklyn Center 1,449 762 33 19.6
Hennepin County 34,172 22,516 1,170 12.7
Metro Area 74,888 44,445 2,291 119
Table 5
Comparison of Population by Age 2000
55-64 of Total 65-74 of Total 75+ of Total
�rooklyn Center 2,374 8.1 2,428 8.3 2,079 7.1
Hennepin County 85,773 7.7 59,737 5.4 62,621 5.6
Metro Area 200,980 7.6 130,615 49 124,630 4.7
12
Table 6
Median Household Income by Age 2000 I
55-64 65-74 75+
Brooklyn Center $54,875 $36.-012 $23,418
Hennepin County $61,091 $39,898 $26,223
Metro Area $61,242 $38,357 $24,824
Summarizing the 2000 census data shows that in general, the Brooklyn Center older populations tend to:
Represent a slightly higher percentage of the total city population than the Hennepin County ar
Metro average.
Represent a higher percentage of both the total renter and owner households than the Hennepin
County or Metro average.
Tend to have a slightly lower median income than the Hennepin County or Metro area median
Complete copies of the Metropolitan Council's Community Housing Profiles for Brooklyn Center, Hennepin
County and the Twin Cities Metropolitan area are included as attachments to this document.
HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
As noted previously in this report, there is a difference between affordable and subsidized housing. Subsidized
housing implies a specific program to house low income persons, such as the Section 8 program which requires
tenants to pay a portion of their income (usually 30 percent) towards rent while the Section 8 subsidy pays the
�mainder.
Affordable housing, unlike subsidized housing, does not provide a direct subsidy to tenants. Affordable
housing typically involves some level of public subsidy to lower the rents to tenants but not a direct subsidy to
the tenants. For example, Maxfield Research Inc. defines affordable senior housing as proj ects "targeting
modest income households". In this definition, senior projects have a"ceiling" on both the income of tenants
and the rents. Typically, affordable rents are those that are affordable to persons with incomes of up to 60
percent of the County median income. Subsidized projects, on the other hand, generally provide much greater
subsidies, typically requiring tenants to pay 30 percent of their income and are geared toward very low income
seniors.
Information from Maxfield Research also notes that seniors are often able to pay a higher proportion of their
incomes for alternative senior housing than young and middle aged households. Since typically, seniors do not
have many of the expenses of younger families such as saving for children's education, saving for retirement,
etc. they are willing to pay a higher proportion of their income to live in rental housing and particularly if the
housing provides support services. The industry standard for most households is to allocate 30 percent of their
income for housing. Maxfield points out that seniors moving to independent senior housing offering no
services will spend 40 percent of their income on housing and in a congregate setting, seniors will allocate
anywhere from 50 percent to 80 percent depending upon the level of services provided. Finally, Maxfield
reports that in an assisted living and memory care situation, seniors will often spend 80 percent of more of their
income on housing and services.
13
Using 2000 census data, the following is a summary of senior income and rent affordability;
For the 2000 census, the median income for older Brooklyn Center residents were:
0 55 to 64 $54,875
0 65 to 74 $36,012
0 75 and over $23,418
(Based on 1999 income data)
The Minneapolis/St. Paul Metro area median income used for calculating housing affordability for 1999 was
$63,600 and for 2000 was $68,600based on a family of four. The resulting calculations for households at 60
percent of inedian based on household size were:
1999 2000
One Person $26,700 $27,600
Two Person $30,540 $31,650
(It is assumed here that the majority of senior households will be one and two person households.)
The 2000 census (1999 income data) median income for Brooklyn Center residents in the 55 to 64 and
65 to 74 are above the 60 percent of inedian income figures. Although census data does not coincide
directly with the 60 percent Metro area incomes in the 2000 census, 459 seniors in Brooklyn Center 65
to 74 earned less than $25,000 and 743 of the 75 and over senior earned less than $25,000. Expressed as
a percentage, this means that at least 42 percent of the 65 and over seniors in Brooklyn Center were
below 60 percent median income for the Metropolitan area. The actual figure would likely be higher
because of the way income is reported in census breakdowns. By contrast, for the same 2000 census
year, comparable figures for Hennepin County indicate at least 39 percent of the 65 and over seniar
households earn under $25,000 and 40 percent of the 65 and over Metro areas senior households earn
less than $25,000.
Based on 2000 census data, we know that at least 1,202 senior households 65 and older in Brooklyn
Center earned $24,999 or less annually. Many earned less than this but census figures do not provide
further detail. At a rate of 30 percent of the $24,999 used for housing costs, this would translate to a rent
of $625 monthly. At 40 percent, the monthly rent allocation would be $833. The median monthly rent
for Brooklyn Center for the 2000 census was $636.
AFFORDABLE RENTS 2004
Both the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) and the Department of Housing and LTrban
Development (HUD) use the same income standards for measuring housing affordability. For 2004, the MHFA
and HUD median household income is $76,400, which is based on a family of four. The MHFA and HUD
income data is broken down by household size and percentages of the county median income. Assuming most
seniar households 65 and over are one or two person households, the following income and rent data is from
1V�IFA, and establishes maximum rents for its housing programs based on 30 percent of gross income dedicated
to housing costs. The table also shows rents where 40 percent of gross income is dedicated to housing costs.
14
2004 MHFA Income Limits and Maximum Gross Rents
(Including Utilities) by Household Size
�ousehold Size Income Maximum Monthl Gross Rent Maximum Monthl Gross Rent
Y Y
(30%) b,y Household Size (40%) by Household SIze
1 $26,850 $671 $895
(50% of
Median)
1 $32,220 $805 $1,074
(60% of
Median)
2 $30,700 $767 $1,023
(50% of
Median)
2 $36,840 $921 $1,228
(60°/a of
Median)
The above table serves as a guideline for determining what rents are considered affordable at various income
levels. It must be noted that affordable rents are often defined by specific funding programs and mechanisms
employed to finance and create affordable units. Federal, State and County loan programs may have different
definitions and requirements for rent affordability. For example, rental housing projects receiving TIF
assistance must meet one of the following conditions:
At least 20% of the units are occupied by individuals whose income is 50% of the area median
income (Section 142(d) of the IRC) or
At least 40% of the units are occupied by individuals whose income is 60% of the area median
income (Section 142(d) of the IRC) ar
At least 50% of the units are occupied by individuals whose income is 80 of the area median
income (M.S. Section 469.1761, Subd. 3)
BROOKLYN CENTER SE1vIOR HOUSING PROJECTS
The table on the following pages describes the existing senior housing projects in Brooklyn Center. The
information in the table was onbtaibed from the 2003-2004 Senior Housing Directory prepared by Senior
Housing, Inc. and through interviews with representatives of the senior housing developments.
Information in the table shows that there are approximately 331 market rate adult independent units, another
205 market rate adult units with access to congregate/assisted living services, and 97 exclusively assisted living
units, 37 of which axe memory care units. There are also 122 income restricted rental units that are not age
restricted but do have a significant number of senior residents.
15
EXISTING BROOKLYN CENTER SENIOR HOUSING
Name Address of Type of Housing Number Rents Services and Amenities
Building of LTnits
Crossings at Brookwood Market Rate 138 $803-$885 1 Bedroom Underground Parking*
6201 and 6125 N Lilac Drive 55+ Age Restrictions $888-$970 1 Bedroom Den Transportation*
$898 $1,045 2 Bedroom Community Room
Craft and/ar Exercise Room
*Included in rent
Twin Lake North Market Rate 276 Total 193 $799 1 Bedroom Garages
4500-4590 58 Avenue North Units Approximately 70% $820-$8S0 2 Bedroom Private Balconies/Patios
55+ and 30% adults Indoor Pool
Billiards Room
View Pointe at Shingle Creek Income Restrictions 40 $550-$605 1 Bedroom Clubhouse
6221 Shingle Creek Parkway Not Exclusively Senior —122 $700-$770 2 Bedroom Laundry Facility
Total Units (Approximately Wheelchair Access
33% seniars)
Earle Brown Terrace Market Rate With Assisted 140 $1,090-$1,140 1 Bedroom Garage*
6100 Summit Drive Living Services Available $1,140-$1,240 1 Bedroom Den Transportation*
55+ Age Restriction $1,260-$1,390 2 Bedroom Community Room
Response System*
Craft and/or Exercise Room
Meals Program*
Additional Services With
Assisted Living Assisted Livin�
$1,200-$1,250 1 Bedroom Housekeeping*
$1,370-$1,500 2 Bedroom Laundry/Linen
Personal Care/Nurse
*Included in Rent
16
Maranatha Place Market Rate 65 $870 Studio/Efficiency Garage Available fo 35/mth
5419 69�' Avenue North 55+ Age Restrictions $1,035-$1,065 1 Bedroom Community Room*
$1,065-$1,290 1 Bedroom Den Craft and/or Exercise Room
$1,315-$1,330 2 Bedroom Response System*
Meals Program Available
Housekeeping*
Personal Care/Nurse
Available
Transportation*
Prairie Lodge Market Rate 60 $1,900-$2,200 Studio Efficiency Community Craft Room*
6001, 6010 Earle Brown Drive Assisted Living Response System*
52+ Age Restrictions Meals Program*
Laundry/Linen*
Housekeeping*
Transportation*
Personal Care/Nurse
*Included in Rent
Memory Care 37 $2,200-$2,900 Studio Memory Care has all of the
Suite/Efficiency above services plus secured
building and secured unit.
17
MODELS FOR SENIOR HOUSING
Perhaps the single most important message for planning future senior housing is that the success
of senior housing efforts will be totally dependent on the demand of a variety of segments in the
older population, and that "one size fits all" does not apply to senior housing development.
Estimates from the housing indushy speculate that the roughly 77 million baby boomers born
between 1946 and 1964 will double the demand for senior housing over the next 20 years.
Housing industry data shows that the younger baby boomers, just beginning to look at senior
housing, are attracted to housing that meets the needs of an active lifestyle. The demands of this
young senior group includes access to golf, health clubs, health care, recreation, etc.
As the Maxfield 2004 report points out, owner occupied housing will experience a growing
demand over the next several years. Housing industry data supports this shift from rental to
owner occupied senior housing since seniors can now live in age restricted housing and owns
their units as in the case of cooperatives and condominiums.
Developers are also including senior housing as a component in the so called "Urban Village"
developments currently being planned in cities like Apple Valley and Maplewood. This concept
includes senior housing, retail shopping, restaurants and offices with planned open space and
walking trails and other amenities.
One of the models the housing industry is viewing as a trend is the "continuum of care" where a
variety of senior housing is built in a campus setting where seniors can choose independent
living rental or owner occupied age restricted housing alongside or with access to assisted living
or skilled nursing care services.
In addition to the many independent living options for seniors, there will also be choices for
seniors choosing to remain in their single family home. In a 1999 report titled "Building Toward
the Senior Boom", produced by the East Metro SAIL (Seniors Agenda for Independent Living),
one of the underlying assumptions of the report is that "seniors desire to remain in their own
homes and neighborhoods will persist and grow stronger in the future".
The Minnesota Department of Human Services also recognizes aging in place as a reality for
many Minnesota seniors. Information from the Minnesota Department of Human Services
points out that:
Aging in place has become a reality and as physical changes occur in an aging
population, numerous ways must be developed to support aging in place.
Many seniors want to remain independent and live in their own homes. This approach to
senior housing may be supported by such things as home care programs, innovations in
accessibility and assistive devices. Additionally, this approach to aging may assume a
service coordination model where elderly persons remaining in their homes may select
from a menu of services to assist them with their particular needs.
18
Summarv
The demographics of aging in Minnesota and the rest of the nation are undeniable. The
population will age gradually unti12010, then after 2010 the fastest population growth in
Minnesota will be in people age 65 and over with a 60 percent increase from 2010 to
2020 and a 95 percent from 2020 to 2030.
By 2030, nearly 50 percent of all elderly households will be one person households.
Hennepin County has more seniors than other county in Minnesota. In Hennepin County,
approximately 72 percent of residents age 65 and older live in the suburbs. Nearly one in
three seniors in Hennepin County lives alone; however, 60 percent of seniors age 85 and
up in Hennepin County live alone.
According to the 2004 Maxfield Research Senior Housin,g Update, the Northwest
Quadrant of the Metro area, of which Brooklyn Center is a part, has the most adult senior
project units of all the quadrants in the Metro area with 1,948, which translates to 28
percent of the total Metro area adult units.
The Southeast Quadrant of the Metro area has the most affordable senior units with 27
percent of the total affordable units. The northeast quadrant is second in affordable units
at 21 percent. Affordable units count for only 2 percent to 10 percent in the remaining
quadrants of the Metro area.
The Maxfield report shows that 84 percent of the Metropolitan area senior housing units
are rental, but that there is a growing demand for owner occupied coops, condos and new
products such as age restricted townhomes and detached villa communities.
While the current and near future market shows high demand for adult few service
projects, after 2020 the demand for senior housing with services will increase
dramatically when the baby boomers start moving into their mid to late 70's.
Brooklyn Center's senior population tends to represent a slightly higher percentage of the
total city population then the Hennepin County or Metro average and it represents a
higher percentage of both the total renter and owner households than the Hennepin
County or Metro average.
Brooklyn Center seniors, according to 2000 census data, tend to have a slightly lower
median income than the Hennepin County or Metro area median.
Much of the Minnesota State Department of Human Services' focus in developing
models for an aging population addresses aging in place for seniors who own their own
homes, particularly those living alone. This segment of the senior housing mazket must
also be addressed in terms of assessing the feasibility of providing supportive services to
those who choose to stay or cannot afford to leave their single family home.
19
Part 2: Demand Analysis for Senior
Housing in Brooklyn Center
Re�earch �nc,
October 4, 2004
TO: Mr. Tom Bublitz
City of Brooklyn Center
FROM: Matt Mullins
Maxfield Research Inc.
RE: Preliminary Demand Estimate for Senior Housing in Brooklyn Center,
Minnesota
Introduction/Purpose and Scope of Research
This memorandum contains an assessment of the market potential for senior housing alternatives
in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Maxfield Research Inc. calculated the potential demand for
various senior housing products based on the size of the local senior household base, senior
household incomes, home equity potential, and an inventory of existing and planned competitive
senior housing in the Brooklyn Center Market Area.
The methodology used to calculate demand in this memorandum is proprietary to Maxfield Re-
search, but is consistent with methodologies used by analysts throughout the senior housing in-
dustry. It is important to note that the demand estimates and conclusions contained herein are in-
tended to assess the depth of the market for various senior housing alternatives in the Market
Area and to determine whether additional senior product could be supported.
The demand methodology does not take into account the desirability or appropriateness of any
given sites, which may impact demand: A more thorough investigation of the unique character-
istics of the Brooklyn Center Market Area, outlined in a Full Feasibility Study, could reveal
more specific factors that might impact demand and appropriate market positioning.
615 1 Avenue NE #40Q Minneapolis, MN 55413
(612) 338-0012 fax (612) 904-7979
www.maxfieldreseazch.wm
i
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
Ci ,ty of Brooklyn Center Page 2
Brooklyn Center Market Area
We have determined the primary draw ("market") area for senior housing located within Brook-
lyn Center. This analysis presents an overview of the demographic and economic characteristics
of the area's target markets. It then defines the various types of senior housing available in to-
day's market and inventories existing senior housing product in the Market Area. Finally, it pre-
sents demand calculations for subsidized independent housing, as well as market rate adult, con-
gregate, assisted living, and memory care products, based on the amount and level of competitive
product and our overall conclusions.
Market Area Definition
Based on traffic and community orientation patterns, geographic and man-made barriers, and our
experience in senior housing feasibility, we estimate that roughly 75 percent of the demand for a
senior housing project(s) would come from a draw area that includes the following areas:
Brooklyn Center, Robbinsdale, Crystal, and census tracts from southern Brooklyn Park and
northern Minneapolis. We define this area as the primary draw area (or "Market Area"). A map
of the Market Area is found on the following page.
A portion of the demand for any senior housing development will come from outside the defined
Market Area. These individuals will include persons currently residing just outside the Market
Area who have an orientation to the area (i.e., church, doctor, etc.); persons who once resided in
the area that desire to move back to be near friends and family, as well as parents of adult chil-
dren living in the Market Area. These groups are estimated to account for at least 20 to 25 per-
cent of the total demand for senior housing in the Market Area.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
i
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Pa�e 3
i�
B�rar+akiyn +�enter
1Vlarke�t Axea
f
�e�ma�d'er af
3
��rket�Ar+ea
k
3 �.e: ,S d g b
ry �b C��3r "c 3
Fsiiis+�
x�
x�
�x��� �a�
Pt Y i9W
i wi i
:.�=g r i
F y �tt
>k r n a
3
j� j�?'e r
a Y J
l t
n
k 3
Y� j
^f
w L. 4
a'"
�tCfC�e t,�81fe t,,
y �.x..:
M�CIC�RCSGA[C21� Tt1C.
Older Adult (Age 55+) Population and Household Trends and Projections
Table 1 presents the older adult (age 55+) population and household age distribution for the
Brooklyn Center Market Area as of 1990 and 2000, with 2004 estimates and projections to 2009.
The 1990 and 2000 figures are from the U.S. Census Bureau, while the 2004 estimates and 2009
projections are provided by Claritas, Inc., a nationally recognized economic and demographic
forecasting firm. The projections provided by Claritas, Inc. have been reviewed by Maxfield
Research, Inc. and, where necessary, have been adjusted according to recent local migration
trends and local estimates.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brookl.yn Center Pa�e 4
The following are key points from Table 1:
In 2000, the Market Area contained 25,132 persons age 55 and older, 15,056 persons age 65
and older, and 7,210 persons age 75 and older. Between 1990 and 2000, the Market Area's
older adult (55 to 64) population declined by -441 persons, as well as younger seniors (65-
74), with the loss of -620 persons. However, growth among older seniors (75+) was very
strong, increasing by 1,620 persons, or 29%.
Between 2000 and 2009, the Market Area's older adult population is projected to increase by
roughly 3,424 persons (13.6%) to about 28,560 persons by 2009. The majority of the growth
will be among persons age 55 to 64 (an increase of over 2,900 people). Seniors age 85 and
over are projected to grow by 31.2% between 2000 and 2009�(530 persons).
Growth among older seniors (75+), the primary market for senior housing with services, is
expected to grow slightly this decade. Between 2000 and 2009, older seniors (75+ and the
primary market for senior housing with services) are projected to increase by 574 people
(8.0%) and 127 households (2.6%).
By 2009, it is projected that the Market Area will contain 7,352 households age 55 to 64,
4,663 households age 65 to 74 households, and 5,085 households age 75+. Overall, house-
holds age 55 and older are projected to account for one-third of the Market Area's house-
�olds.
Like population, householders age 55 to 64 will increase by 1,489, or 25.4% between 2000
and 2009. Householders age 85 and over will increase by about 330 households, or 30.5%.
Total population and households in the Brooklyn Center Market Area is projected to decline
by about 5% respectively between 2000 and 2009.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 5
TABLE 1
OLDER ADULT (55+) pOPULATION HOUSEHOLD AGE DISTRIBUTION
BROOKLYN CENTER MARKET AREA
1990-2009
Number of Persons Chan e
Ag�., .:a
60 to 64 5,334 4,429 5,059 5,671 -905 -17.0% 1,242 28.0%
r e
70 to 74 3,702 3,778 3,596 3,511 76 2.1% -267 -7.1%
a
80 to 84 1,693 2,252 2,336 2,412 559 33.0% 160 7.1%
i g
�r�-
55+ 24,573 25,132� 26,882 28,556 559 2.3% 3,424 13.6%
Percent 19.1% 17.9% 19.6% 21.4%
i
75+ 5,590 7,210 7,421 7,784 1,620 29.0% 574 8.0%
Percent 4.4% 5.1% 5.4% 5.8%
�s r:_ ��3�i'
Number of Households Chan e
Age
n,�
65 to 74 5,462 4,832 4,646 4,663 -630 -11.5% -169 -3.5%
I f
85+ 909 1,079 1,248 1,408 170�� 18.7% 329 30.5%
55+ 15,629 15,653 16,426 17,100 24 0.2% 1,447 9.2%
Percent 31.4% 29.1% 31.2% 33.4%
75+ 4,060 4,958 4,954 5,085 898 22.1% 127 2.6%
Percent 8.1 9.2% 9.4% 9.9%
Sources: U.S. Census; Claritas, Inc.; Maxfield Research Inc.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
Ci ,ty of Brooklyn Center Page 6
.tfv�63 E
GM
�.v-.
4 'f' M 'i
a�
Y
�Y
�F{ v,_.
8,000
a x s c ��u'�. a s�� 3d�
6,OOU
���w
tAge 55-64
f 5� �i W��
kr
���4� t ���,tl���t
��i�l,y� Age 65-74 s
4,000 ��Age 75+
2,000
1990 2000 2004 2009
Year
�.E��'Z�Y
�3,«V�. ���i,'�. �a s.�
Q
J�000
h
O s a i� �s ,ss:s� a aSe��3 a�
M f� r �.."r o-�" sr w';�� e,��,�
w �.'s i M r�.w m
4,000 E e�
tAge 55-64
��4 ds �°�r
3,OOQ ""FAge 65-74
��Age 75+
2,000
1990 2000 year 2004 2009
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 7
i
Senior Household Incomes
Table 2 shows incomes for older adult and senior households in the Market Area in 2004 and
2009, based on estimates by Claritas, Inc. It is important to note that the data does not account
for the asset base of senior households, nor supplemental income that a senior household could
gain from the sale of a home or frbm family members. The data in Table 2 helps determine the
demand for various senior housing products based on the size of the market at specific cost lev-
els. This data is incorporated into demand calculations, which are presented later in the analysis.
The frailer the senior, the greater the proportion of their income they are willing to spend on
housing and services. Studies have shown that seniors are often willing to pay 40 percent or
more of their incomes for market rate senior housing with little or no services, while income al-
locations of 50 to 65 percent are typical in a congregate setting and 80 to 90 percent or more for
assisted living housing. It is important to note that the proceeds from the sales of their homes, as
well as financial assistance from their adult children and long-term care insurance are often used
as supplemental income in order to afford senior housing alternatives, especially in settings with
a high degree of support services.
Again it is important to note that the size and growth projected for the caregiver/referral mazket
(ages 55 to 64) is also an indicator of potential demand for assisted living beds that could be gen-
erated from outside the immediate draw area. Research has shown that more affluent caregivers
sometimes provide financial assistance to their elderly parents. Recent studies have shown that
16 percent of assisted living residents received some financial assistance from family members.
Another seven percent of the senior population currently has long-term care insurance, which
aids in expanding the income/asset-qualified senior base.
Demand for independent market rate senior housing will typically come from households with
incomes of $25,000 or more, while demand for affordable senior housing will typically come
from households with incomes of $25,000 or less. Based on an income allocation of 40 percent,
a household with an income of $25,000 could afford a monthly rent of $830.
The following are key points from Table 2.
The number of older adult and senior households (persons age 55 and over) in the Market
Area is expected to increase by roughly 675 households (41%) between 2004 and 2009. The
majority ofthis growth is expected among households age 55 to 64, which will add 526
households (+8%0).
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 8
TABLE 2
SEIVIOR HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER
BROOKLYIV CENTER MARKET AREA
(Number of Households)
2004 2009
65+Tota1 SS64 •65-74 75+
Market Ares I No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct No. Pct.
UnderS14,999 1,768 18.4 479 7A 654 14.1 1,114 22.5
a��4ri0-S2x,99� ...1�3$!� .2Q� ,�8� 1 ,735 "IS I�D3. .�..;2�,3
S25,000-534,999 1,797 18.7 989 11.6 S00 17.2 997 20.1
S35,Oao �49 99� I,668; 17.4 1�3.3 iS i 933 2Q T 73S ;I�t;8
SSO,000-574,999 1,355 14.1 1,866 273 878 189 477 9.6
S75,000 ss� 9e� 388; 6'.1 �7,123 7G.3 382 8 2 i 206 4.3
SI00,000 or moro 486 5.1 1,052 15.4 264 5.7 222 4.5
rot�l 9,80tl; ,idp U ;.G„82fs 10�;0 4;641"r t00 4 A,954 ;10Q.0
MedianIncome I 531,087 I I 558,413 I I 537,154 I I 526,605
65+ Total SS-64 65-74 75+
Market Ares No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct.
Under SI4 999 1 500 15 6 459 6.7 557 12 0 943 19.0
S45;apo-SZa,995 1709; 17 -.47;9 b, I b18 t3 i3 091 22.Q
525 ,000 S34 999 1 669 17 4 698 10.2 715 15 4 954 19.3
S35;oao-549,999 i 1,971..... 26.5 7 138 i6,'7 �'981 ,`_Z.I,i x; 496. 2UA
Sso,000-E7a,99v 1,454 15.1 1,846 27.0 924 19.9 530 10.9
Si3;000=�9s,9�9 i b ��d�. 4� s ..,..�0 26G.. 54
5100,000 or more 715 7.4 1,546 22.6 404 8.7 311 6.3
Fatal 9,748:' 1(ItS 7352 107'7 4,fi�3,. ,.7DU4 ..:5,085 1A2.6
c a y
1
Median Income I 534,975 563,028 I S41,750 530,330
65+ Total 55-64 65-74 75+
MarketAres No. Pct. No. Pct Na. Pct� No. Pct.
Unda 514,999 -268 -152 -20 -0.3 -97 -2.1 -171 -3.5
S�S;oao�:���, �2 �r1.� :�5 �,Q ,..:2,� 172_
525,0oo-S34,999 -128 -7.1 -91 -1.3 -85 -1.H -43 -0.9
T3S;dOD, S4� 999. 30� 1$:2 tUS...' .I.S 48 Q .;s 255 S.1
SSO,000-574,999 99 7.3 -20 -0.3 46 1.0 53 1.1
S75;U�((1;599,949. 142. '.24.1 °1�3 ,.,..1,.8 82 i8 i, GO, 1.2
5100,000 or more 229 47.1 494 �7.2 �140 3.0 89 1.8
��tt�l �,14� 1.5 �9�6 .3. f9 ;p d 131. 2,�
8
q'� ,,.i,i v '�I� i
a.
Median Income S3,888 12.51 54,614 7.91 I 54,596 12.41 I 53,725 14.0
Sources: Clazitas, Inc.
Maxfield Research Inc.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 9
The number of households headed by persons 65 and older, the primary market for age-
restricted housing, is expected to increase by roughly 150 households (1.6%) between 2004
and 2009.
The number of householders with incomes under $35,000 is projected to decline for each age
cohort between 2004 and 2009.
The Market Area's older adult households have substantially higher incomes than senior
households who have reached retirement age. The 2004 estimate shows that the median in-
come of households aged 55 to 64 was $58,413, compared to $37,154 for households 65 to
74, and $26,605 for households age 75 and older. The higher incomes for younger senior
households (65 to 74) compared to older seniors (75 plus) is primarily due to the fact that a
higher proportion of younger seniors are manied, and are more likely to have two pensions
or higher Social Security benefits; while some continue to work.
The chart below visually depicts the income trends among older adult (55+) households in the
Brooklyn Center Market Area.
Household Income Growth Comparison
Brooklyn Center Market Area 2004 2009
s,000 $7o,oao
2004
7,000 $60,000
2009
6,000
$50,000
!��1 a7:;..
5,000
o $40 000 a
4,000
o $30,000
x 3,000
2,000 $20,000
1,000 $10,000
0 $0
55-64 65-74 75+
Age Cohort
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 10 I
The target market for age-restricted independent senior housing is generally senior house-
holds age 65 and older with incomes of at least $25,000. A small portion of older adults,
ages 55 to 64, may also choose age-restricted housing, but overall, they usually account for
only a small portion of the demand within any given market area. As of 2004, we estimate
5,894 senior households in the Market Area with incomes of at least $25,000, accounting for
slightly more than 60% of all senior households. In addition, there are an estimated 5,863
households age 55 to 64 in the Market Area with incomes of at least $25,000.
The median income of senior (65+) households is expected to increase by 12.5% percent
over the next five years, from $31,087 in 2004 to $34,975 in 2009. Thus, the percentage of
seniors able to afford market rate senior housing will increase. Furthermore, there is a grow-
ing awareness and acceptance of the senior housing concept among seniors and their adult
children, resulting in an increased demand for senior housing
Homeownership Rate/Housing Values
In addition to their existing income sources, many senior households will be able to derive addi-
tional income from the sales of their homes allowing many senior households with incomes of
less than $25,000 to afford senior housing alternatives. For independent seniors, the proceeds
are often invested and used to supplement their income. For frail seniors, their proceeds are of-
ten used dollar-for-dollar to cover assisted living housing and services. Table 3 shows the pro-
pensity for the Market Area's older adult households to own or rent their housing as of the 1990
and 2000 Censuses.
As of 2000, 79% of the Market Area's senior (65+) households owned their housing. This
homeownership rate is slightly higher than for the State of Minnesota, which has a home-
ownership rate of 77%.
Homeownership rates normally decline the older the household. As of 2000, 84% of house-
holds age 55 to 64, 86% of households age 65 to 74 and 73% of households age 75 and older
own their housing. As seniors age, they may no longer desire, or be able to maintain their
single-family homes. They may prefer to move to housing that offers them greater freedom
from maintenance and/or offers them support services. Seniors typically begin to consider
moving into senior housing alternatives in their early 70s. If alternatives exist, a portion of
these households may move into apartment or independent senior housing, while the vast
majority will remain in their homes. As these seniors age, however, they will increasingly
look for housing that offers support services and assistance with personal care.
The number of homeowners in the Market area declined by -651 households between 1990
and 2000 for homeowners between the ages of 55 and 74. However, the number of home-
owners ages 75 and over grew by 887 households in the same decade.
The current high homeownership rates in the Market Area for senior households will allow
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 11
prospective residents to tap into significant equity reserves upon the sale of their homes that
can be utilized for alternative housing.
TABLE 3
OLDER ADULT HOUSEHOLD TENURE
BROOKLYN CENTER MARKET AREA
1990 and 2000
Age of Householder
Own Rent Own Rent Own Rent Own Rent
Homeownership Rate 87% 83% 67% 76%
Homeownershin Rate 84% 86% 73% 79%
Pct. Change -5% 19% -8% -23% 33% 1% 7% -9%
Sources: U.S. Census; Maxfield Research Inc.
Talile 4, on the following page, presents resale data for homes in the Market Area over the last
four years from the local Multiple Listing Service. Brooklyn Park was excluded from this
analysis as the majority of the Brooklyn Park MLS geographic area is outside of the Market
Area. This data is useful in that it represents the amount of equity that seniors may be able to de-
rive from the sale of their homes to supplement their income should they desire to move into al-
ternative housing.
As of August 2004, the average home value in the Brooklyn Center Market Area for the past
year was $176,067 while the median sale price was $174,457. It is important to note ihat median
sale prices are generally a more accurate portrayal of the likely home equity, since average fig-
ures can be skewed by a few very high- or low-priced homes.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Pa�e 12
TABLE 4
SINGLE-FAMILY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL SALES
BROOKLYN CENTER MARKET AREA
2000 through August 2004
Average
Median Average Market
Number Selling Selling Time
District Year of Sales Price Chg. Price Chg. (Days)
Robbinsdale 2000 251 $131,000 $132,345 20
(360) 2001 247 $150,000 15% $152,036 15% 23
2002 280 $164,850 10% $164,663 8% 31
2003 301 $177,000 7°/a $178,452 8% 32
2004 206 $192,750 9% $194,170 9% 34
�amden 2000 711 $96,323 $94,704 22
(302) 2001 641 $118,000 23% $114,132 21% 25
2002 700 $130,900 11% $130,470 14% 30
2003 745 $145,000 11% �145,707 12% 35
2004 527 $156,000 8% �157,752 8% 35
Sources: Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota (MLS)
Maxfield Research Inc.
Home values have appreciated significantly in the Market Area over the last four years with
the average and median sales price increasing by an average of over 13% each year between
2000 and August 2004.
Through August 2004, median home prices range from $156,000 in Minneapolis Camden to
$192,750 in Robbinsdale. The median home price in Brooklyn Center was $183,000 which
is an 8% increase over the 2003 median price of $170,000.
MAXFIELD RESEARCA INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 13
During the four-year period, the average length of time a home remained on the market in-
creased annually through August 2004, from 20 days in 2000 to 34 days in August 2004. Al-
though sales times over the last three years have slowed slightly since 2000, this is still a
relatively rapid turn around time for the sale of single-family and multifamily homes. An
average sales period of just over a month still indicates a sellers market and that seniors
would be able to sell their homes in a reasonably short period of time should they decide to
sell their homes.
Since a significant majority of senior homeowners will own their home outright, they will
have access to a sizeable financial resource in the form of the equity they can realize from
the sale of their home. While the interest earned on investing these funds can help offset the
monthly costs associated with living in a senior housing facility, many seniors are also will-
ing to begin spending-down assets in order to live in a facility that meets their needs. For
example, a senior who owns their home outright for $174,000 would likely be able to derive
approximately $163,500 after factoring in marketing/real estate commissions and moving
costs. Should this equity be invested in an interest-bearing account with a four percent re-
turn, it would produce an income of $5,600 annually (or $542 per month). Should a senior
utilize the home proceeds on a dollar-for-dollar basis to support assisted living housing, the
proceeds of this home would last roughly 65 months (just over five years) based on an aver-
age monthly assisted living fee of $2,500.
Senior Housing Defined
Senior housing is a concept that generally refers to the integrated delivery of housing and ser-
vices to seniors. As Figure 1 below shows, senior housing embodies a wide variety of product
types across the service-delivery spectrum, from independent apartments and/or townhomes with
virtually no services on one end, to highly specialized, service-intensive, assisted living units or
housing geared for persons with dementia-related illnesses (termed "memory care"). In general,
independent senior housing attracts persons age 65 and over while assisted living attracts persons
age 80 and older who need assistance with activities of daily living (ADLs), such as dressing,
showering and grooming.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 14
i
FIGURE 1
CONTINUUM OF HOUSING AND SERVICES FOR SENIORS
Single-Family Townhome or Nursing Facilities
Home I Apartment
�i'�
Fully Independent Fully or Highly
Lijestyle Dependent on Care
Senior Housing Product Type
Sowce: Maxfield Research Inc.
The least service-intensive buildings, also termed "active adult" or "adult" projects, are similar
to general occupancy housing, offering virtually no support services or health care, but restrict-
ing tenancy to those ages 55 and over. Congregate projects, the next level up on the service-
delivery spectrum, offer support services such as meals and housekeeping, either included in the
rent or a-la-carte so that residents can choose whether or not to pay for the services.
The most service-intensive product types, assisted living and memory care, offer the highest
level of services short of a nursing home. Typical services covered in the fee for both of these
product types include all meals, housekeeping, linen changes, personal laundry, 24-hour emer-
gency response, and a wide range of personal care and therapeutic services (either built into the
fee or a-la-carte). Sponsorship by a nursing home, hospital or other health care organization is
common for assisted living and memory care projects (as well as for many congregate/service-
intensive projects).
Supply of Senior Housing in the Brooklyn Center Market Area
Table 5 shows an inventory of the existing senior housing developments in the Brooklyn Center
Market Area and vicinity. The developments have been divided into subsidized/affordable pro-
jects, independent projects, both aduldfew-services and congregate/optional-services, assisted
living and memory care projects. Furthermore, a number of projects are located on the fringe of
the Market Area in New Hope or Brooklyn Park that were also included. Some of the senior
housing developments are located on campuses which incorporate more than one type of hous-
ing. For example, The Waterford in Brooklyn Park offers independent rental townhomes, con-
gregate apartments, assisted living units and memory care units providing a full range of senior
care options.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 15
TABLE 5
SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS
BROOKLYN CEIVTER MARKET AREA VICINITY
Aucust 2004
Year
Project LocaHon Unib Product Type Open
Lilac Parkway Apartments Robbinsdale 48 RentaUSection 8 N!A
Robbins Landing Robbinsdale 91 RentaUSection 8 N/A
Shingle Creek Commons Minneapolis 22 Rental 2002
View Pointe at Shingle Creek Brooklyn Center 122 Rental/Section 236 N/A
Subtotal 283
Market Rate Rmtal
Anthmry James New Hope 73 Rental 1986
Broadway Cowt Robbinsdale 57 Rental 2000
Broadway Village New Hope 202 Rental 1968/1988
Calibre Chase Crystal 76 Rental 1988
Crossing Estates Brooklyn Center 73 Rental 1984
Crossings Manor Brooklyn Center 65 Rental 1984
The Crystal Crystal 39 Rental 1986
Twin Gakes North� Brooklyn Center 193 Rental 1987
Subtotal 778
Ownership
Bre�ner Way Minneapolis 77 Condominiwn 1985
Lee Squaze Robbinsdale 124 CooperaUve 1985
Realife Coop of Brooklyn Pazk Brooklyn Park 99 Cooperadve 1998
Subtotal 300
Optional Services
CopperfieldHill Robbiasdale IS'7 Rental 1993
The Waterford Brooklyn Park 144 Rental 1992-93
Subtotal 301
Service Intensive
Eagla Brown Terrace Brooklyn Center 140 Rental 1987
Notth Ridge Apartments New Hope 180 Rental 1983
Maranatha P►ace Brooklyn Center 65 Rental 1988
Subtotal 385
Market Rate
Copperfield Hill Robbinsdale 76 Rental 1993
Heathors Manor Crystal 77 Rental 2001
Northridge Apartmeats New Hope 25 Rental 1983
Prairie Lodge BrooMyn Center 60 Rental 1992
Subtotal 238
Copperfield Hill Robbinsdale 11 Renta! N/A
Prairie Lodge Brooklyn Center 43 Rental 1992
Subtotal 54
Chardon Court New Hope 129 CongregaWOp6onal 1985
Nodh Oaks on Emerson Minneapolis 48 Affordable Assisted Living 1994
St. Therese Apartments New Hope 220 Congregate Service Intensive 1979
Waterford Manor Brooklyn Park 65 Assisted Living 2000
Waterford Manar Brooklyn Park 5 Memory Care 2000
Waterford Town6omes Brooklyn Pazk 24 AduldFew Services 2000
Twin Lakes Noct6 has 276 units. (Approximadry 70% senior and 30% adu(ts)
Source: Max6eld Research, Inc.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 16
Maxfield Research Inc. identified four subsidizedlaffordable senior projects in the Market Area,
with a total of 283 units. Subsidized rental developments offer affordable rents to income quali- I
fied seniors. In many of these developments, residents pay approximately 30% of their adjusted
gross income for rent.
We inventoried 1,764 market rate independent senior rental housing units in the Brooklyn Center
Market Area. Approximately 61 of the independent developments in the Market Area are mar-
ket rate "adult" (no services) projects, while the remaining developments offer congregate ser-
vices (meals, housekeeping, etc.) that are either included in the rent or available on an optional
basis. It should be noted that Twin Lakes North is not strictly a senior building, as about 30% of
the tenants are not seniors. Therefore, we have designated 70% of the total units at Twin Lakes
North as senior, or 193 units.
In addition, there are 300 owner-occupied units in the Market Area. Two of the projects, or
about 75% of the total ownership units, are senior cooperatives. Residents of senior cooperatives
must purchase shares in the cooperative as well as a monthly fee. The share price varies depend-
ing on the size and location of the unit. Cooperatives usually have lower monthly fees when
compared to rental developments because of this entrance fee.
Existing Senior Housing
Brooklyn Center Market Area September 2004
800
700
600
500
p 400
w
0
z 300
Zoo
ioo
o,
Adult Adult Adult Congregate Congregate Assisted Memory
Subsidized Rental Owner Optional Intensive Living Care
Some of the independent developments shown in Table 5 are developments that have been con-
verted into senior housing from general occupancy apartments. These developments are oper-
ated by Lang Nelson and monthly rents at these projects are somewhat lower than most market
rate developments in the Market Area and thus, generally attract seniors with lower incomes.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 17
Moving up the service spectrum, the Market Area contains four assisted living facilities with 238
units. In addition, one market rate and one affordable assisted living facility are located just out-
side of the Market Area, combining for 113 units. The Market Area also has two memory care
facilities, consisting of 54 units collectively.
Marcfield Research Inc. identified six independent senior housing developments within the City
of Brooklyn Center with a total of 658 units (including 70% of the units at Twin Lakes). One of
these developments is subsidized, three are adult/few services, and another two are congregate
service intensive projects.
In addition, the City has one assisted living facility of 60 units with a memory care development
of 43 units on the same campus. In total, the City of Brooklyn Center cunently has 761 units of
senior housing (includes 70% of the units at Twin Lakes North).
Planned/Proposed Competitive Senior Housing Developments
The following is a summary of pending senior housing developments identified by Maxfield Re-
search Inc. through conversations with Market Area city officials in September 2004.
Brooklvn Center
The Brooklyn Center Planning Commission and City Council approved a proposal for conver-
sion of the Days Inn located at 1501 Freeway Boulevard into senior condominiums. The pro-
posal was submitted by Bridgecreek Development and was originally slated to begin the conver-
sion process in February 2004. However, no building permits were ever issued and the project
has not progressed. At this time, it is unlikely the project will be resurrected. Additionally, the
City of Brooklyn Center had been discussing the acquisition of property in the area south of 57�'
Avenue and east of Highway 100. Preliminary discussions for this redevelopment have included
the possibility of senior housing uses. Again, however, this is a very preliminary concept and no
formal development plans have been submitted for review.
Brooklvn Park
The City of Brooklyn Park currently has three senior housing proposals in the planning stages.
The first is a proposed senior campus by Presbyterian Homes consisting of 82 units of owner-
occupied cooperative housing, 60 units of independent rental and 60 units of assisted living
housing. The site location for the proposed development is 97`� and Regent Boulevarc�: Pres
Homes has submitted its site plan to the City and has been in discussions with city officials, al-
though approval of the plan has not been granted.
The second proposed senior development is a 72-unit age-restricted for-sale condominium. The
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brookl.yn Center Page 18
development will be known as SummerHill of Edinburgh and the proposed location is 85�` and
Edinbrook Crossing.
The third proposed senior development in the City of Brooklyn Park has been pending for some
time. Victory at Home has received city approval for development of the Homestead of Brook-
lyn Park, a 153-unit independent rental facility offering some additional services on an a-la-carte
basis. The site for the development is located on the northeast corner of 85�' Avenue and West
Broadway Avenue. Although the project received approval some time ago, the developer has yet
to purchase building permits and begin construction.
At this time, it is unclear at what time these three projects will pursue with construction, if at all.
Robbinsdale
The City of Robbinsdale has approved a redevelopment of for an old school site at 42" and Re-
gent Avenue, just east of Highway 100. The proposed plan includes a 60-unit senior cooperative
building, 10 single-family homes, and 142 units of multifamily housing in six buildings. Ac-
cording to the City, the proposed senior cooperative is likely to break ground in Fa112004.
New Hope
Although not located in the Market Area, a new project in New Hope could affect the demand
for senior housing in Brooklyn Center. According to City officials, there are long range plans to
redevelop the area in and around Bass Lake Road and Winnetka Avenue into a mix of new resi-
dential and commercial uses. One of the residential uses under consideration is senior housing.
The redevelopment of this area is still in the planning process. Although preferred housing de-
velopers have been selected for some of the residential development, no formal development
proposals for senior housing have been brought forward at this time.
In May 2003, the Planning Commission approved construction of a four story 82-unit owner-
occupied senior cooperative to be built on the vacant property east of Chardon Court. The de-
velopment will be known as Woodbridge and construction started in spring 2004 with an
estimated completion of spring 2005.
Market Rate Independent Senior Housing Demand Estimates
Table 6 presents our demand calculations far market-rate, independent senior housing in the
Market Area in 2004 and estimates for 2009.
The table calculates demand based upon senior households with income of $25,OU0 or more, in-
cluding those households whose incomes would rise to this level based on proceeds gained from
the sale of their single-family homes. We have estimated this proportion based on the home-
ownership rates for each age cohort.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Pa�e 19
I
I
TABLE 6
MARKET RATE INDEPENDENT SENIOR RENTAL OWNERSHIP HOUSING DEMAND
BROOKLYN CENTER MARKET AREA
2004 2009
Age ofHouseholder Aqe ofHouseholder
55-64 65-74 75+ 55-64 65-74 75+
ofHouseholds w/ Incomes of $15,000 to $24,999' 484 735 1203 558 666 1022
(times Homeownership Rate x 84% 86% ?3% 84% 86% 73%
(equals) Potential Market 407 632 878 469 573 746
(plus) ofHouseholds w/ Incomes of $25,000+' 5,863 3,257 2,637 6,125 3,130 2,574
(equals)Total Potential Mazket Base 6,270 3,889 3,515 6,594 3,703 3,320
(times) Short-Term Capture Rate x 1.5% 10.0% 22.0% x 1.7% 10.5% 23.0°/a
(equals) Short-Term Demand Potential 94 389 773 112 389 ?64
Total Market Rate Demand Potential 1,256 1,264
With Without w�tn Wit6out
Services Services Services Services
(times) for housing w/services w/o services x 50% x 50% x 50% x 50%
(equals) Demand poten6al 628 628 632 632
(plus) Demand &om Outside Mazket Area (25°/a) 209 209 211 211
(equals) Total Demand Potentiai 838 838 843 843
(minus) Existing Competitive Units 817 1,036 817 1,064
(equals) Total Long-Term Demand Potential 21 =-198 26 =-221
(minus) Pending Competitive Independent Units 0 28 0 0
(equals) Excess Demand 21 -226 26 -221
2009 income-qualified figures adjusted for inflation ($30K or more homeowners w/ inc. of $20-30K)
Z competitive units includes 100% of all mazket rate rental at 95% occupancy (market equilibrium). Includes 50% of
competitive for-sale developments in the Market Area and 50% of competitive rental projects just outside of We Market Area
(see Table 5). Also includes 70% of units at Twin Lakes North.
3 Pending units aze stated at 95% occupancy (market equilibrium). Pending ownership product includes 50% ofunits
Source: MaxSeld Research Inc.
In order to arrive at the potential age-income qualified base for congregate senior housing, we
have included all older adult, senior, and older senior households with incomes of $25,000 or
more plus households with incomes between $20,000 and $25,000 who would qualify with the
proceeds from a home sale. We estimate the number of age/income/asset-qualified older adult
households in the Brooklyn Center Market Area as of 2004 to total 13,674 househoids.
Adjusting to include appropriate short-term capture rates for each age cohort (1.5% of house-
holds age 55 to 64, 10.0% percent of households age 65 to 74, and 22.0% of households age 75
and older) results in a local short-term demand potential for approximately 1,256 market rate in-
dependent senior units. Additional demand will come from outside the Market Area. Independ-
ent demand in the Market Area will be split into housing that offers no basic support services
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brookl.yn Center Page 20
("adult") and housing that offers meals and basic support services on an optional basis ("congre-
gate"). Based on the age distribution of the Market Area population, we project that 50 percent
of the Market Area demand will be for congregate housing (628 units) and 50 percent will be for
adult housing (628 units) in 2004.
Then, based on the draw of other projects in the Market Area, we estimate that seniors currently
residing outside the Market Area will generate 25% of the long-term demand for senior housing.
This demand will consist primarily of parents of adult children living in the Market Area, indi-
viduals who live just outside the Market Area and have an orientation to the area, as well as for-
mer residents who desire to return upon retirement.
From this total, we subtract the number of existing units (minus a vacancy factor of 5% to allow
for sufficient consumer choice and turnover) in both congregate (with services) and adult (with-
out services) units and pending units to get a total long-term demand of 21 congregate independ-
ent units and an excess-supply of -226 adult units.
Adjusting for inflation, we have estimated that households with incomes of $30,000 or more and
homeowners with incomes of $20,000 to $29,999 would best qualify for market rate independent
senior housing in 2009. Considering the growth in the older adult base, the income distribution
of the older adult population in 2009, and accounting for other pending senior projects in the de-
velopment pipeline, our methodology projected that demand for congregate units increases to
26 units, while the excess-supply of adult rental units is -221 units. The charts on the follow-
ing page geographically display the supply for independent units in the Brooklyn Center Market
Area.
"Adult" Independent Senior Rental Housing Demand
Brooklyn Center Market Area, 2004 to 2009
l,000
soa
600
400
200
0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Existing Units Pending Units Excess Demand
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 21
"Congregate" Independent Senior I3ausing Demand
Brooklyn Center Marke� Area, 2004 to 2009
90d
21 22 23 24
800
700
600
'300
:400
300
200
"100
0-
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Existing Units Pending Units Excess Demand
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 22
Assisted Living Demand Estimates
Table 7 presents our calculations for the age/income-qualified market for assisted living housing
in the Market Area for 2004 and 2009.
The primary market for assisted living housing in the Market Area is seniors age 75 and over
with incomes of $30,000 or more. An income of $30,000 and an 80% allocation of that income
on housing translate to an affordable monthly fee of about $2,000, approximately the starting
price for basic units at assisted living projects in the Metro Area. A portion of senior homeown-
ers with lower incomes could also afford assisted living housing upon allocating the proceeds
from the sale of their homes toward assisted living housing. It should also be noted that there are
a significant number of seniors who will spend down their assets in order to avoid institutional
care.
Because the vast majority (90% according to an ALFA survey) of assisted living residents are
single, our demand methodology separates the number of senior households that live alone from
those that live with a spouse or other relative. We have further broken down the number of sen-
ior households by household type and income. From these figures, we have applied acceptable
capture rates to each income cohort and household type to derive the potential income-qualified
market. As of 2004, there were 1,491 age/income-qualified seniors in the Market Area.
Because demand for assisted living housing is need-driven, we then reduce the age/income-
qualified market to account for the potential market needing assistance. Studies by several gov-
ernment agencies indicate that about 30% of all non-institutionalized seniors age 75 and over
need assistance with at least three activities of daily living and would be a potential market for
assisted living housing. Applying this proportion to the age/income-qualified household base
yields a potential assisted living market base of 447 seniors in 2004.
From this total, existing assisted living housing in the Market Area must be subtracted. After
subtracting the existing assisted living, units less a seven-percent vacancy rate (282 units), there
remains a potential unsatisfied demand for 165 units of assisted living housing in the Market
Area in 2004.
Due to the availability of home health care service providers, and the likelihood of family mem-
bers providing limited assistance, we estimate that two-thirds (67%) of the age/income-qualified
market needing assistance will be able to remain in their homes. The remaining one-third will
need assisted living housing within the short-term. Applying this market penetration rate, results
in a local short-term demand of 55 units in 2004.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 23
TABLE 7
ASSISTED LIVING DEMAND
BROOKLYN CENTER MARKET AREA
2004 2009
HHs 75+ Capture Potential Non-single Capture Potential HHs 75+ Capture Potential Non-single Captute Potential
Income Lv�. Alone Rate HHs HH's 75+ Rate HHs Income Lvg. Alone Rate HHs HH's 75+ Rate HHs
Less than $20,000 1,245 25% 311 470 5% 23 <$24,000 1,398 25% 349 527 5% 26
$20-$34,999 584 75% 438 1,015 15% 152 $24-$39,999 509 75% 382 884 IS°/a 133
$35,000+ 298 100% 298 1,342 20% 268 $40,000+ 321 100% 321 1,446 20% 289
Total 2,127 1,047 2,827 444 2,227 1,052 2,858 448
l 1
Total potential income-qualified mazket 1,491 1,500
(times) Percent needing assistance w/ 3+ ADIJIADL's x 30% x 30%
(equals) Age/income qualified market needing assistance 447 450
(less) Existing assisted living units/beds (less 7% vacancy rate) 282 282
(equals) Net age/income qualified market needing assistance 165 168
(times) Short-term market peneVation rate of 33% x 33% x 33%
(equals) Short-term demand from senior househoids 55 55
(plus) Proportion from outside the market area (25%) 18 18
(equals) Total market area assisted living demand 73 74 i
Source: M�eld Reseazch Inc.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 24 I
We estimate that 25 percent of the demand for assisted living at the proposed project would
come from seniors currently living outside the Market Area. This supplemental demand would
include seniors currently living just outside the Market Area, former residents desiring to return
to the area or parents of adult children currently living in the Market Area. Thus, we believe that
demand exists for 73 units of market rate assisted living housing in Market Area in 2004.
Following the same methodology and utilizing the projected incomes of older senior households
in 2009 results in a total Market Area assisted living demand increasing to 74 units in 2009.
Assisted Living Housing Demand
Brooklyn Center Market Area, 2004 to 2�09
400
350'.
300
250
204.-
150=
100
50;:
0'
2004 2005 2p06: 2007 2008 2009
■ExistingUriits ■PendingUnits ■Eaccess Demand
Memory Care Housing Demand Estimates
Table 8 shows the age/income-qualified market for memory care housing in the Brooklyn Center
Market Area for 2004 and 2009.
Demand is calculated by starting with the estimated Market Area senior population in 2004 and
multiplying by the 8.0% incidence rate of Alzheimer's/dementia. This yields a potential market
of 1,206 seniors in the Market Area. According to data from the National Institute of Aging,
about 25% of all persons with memory care impairments are a market for memory care units.
This figure takes into account that seniors in the early stages of dementia will still be able to live
independently while those in the latter stages will require intensive medical care that would only
be available in skilled care facilities. Applying this figure to the estimated population with
memory impairments yields a potential market of 301 seniors in the Market Area in 2004.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
'I
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 25
TABLE 8
MEMORY CARE DEMAND
BROOKLYN CENTER MARKET AREA
2004 2009
2004 2009
65 Population 15,072 15,575
(times) 8% Dementia incidence rate x 8% x 8%
(equals) Estimated senior pop. with dementia 1,206 1,246
(times) Percent needing specialized memoty care assistance x 25% 25%
(equals) Total need for dementia care 301 312
(times) Percent income/assest-qualified x 25% x 25%
(equals) Total income-qualified market base 75 78
(plus) Demand from outside Market Area (25%) ZS 26
Total Demand for memory care units 100 104
(minus) Existing memory caze units* 55 55
(equals) Excess memory care demand in Market Area 45 49
Existing memory care units minus a 7.0% vacancy rate; does not include memory care units
within skilled care facilities
Source: Maxfield Research Inc.
Because of the staff-intensive nature of dementia care, typical monthly fees for this type of hous-
ing start at about $3,000. Some of the income-qualified seniors will have high monthly incomes,
however, most will be willing to spend down assets and/or receive financial assistance from fam-
ily members to afford memory care housing. We estimate that 25% of Market Area seniors
would be income-qualified for memory care housing (this figures takes into account married
couple households where one spouse may have memory care needs and allows for a sufficient
income for the spouse to live independently). Multiplying the potential market (301 seniors) by
25%, results in a total of 75 income-qualified seniors in the Market Area in 2004.
We estimate that 20% of the overall demand for memory care units would come from outsid the
Market Area. Finally, we must subtract existing memory care units in the Market Area (minus a
7% vacancy rate), resulting in an excess demand for 45 memory care units in 2004. Applying
the same calculations to the age/income-qualified base in 2009 and accounting for memory care
units in the development pipeline results in demand for 49 memory care units in 2009.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 26 I
Memory Care Housing Demand
Brooklyn Center Market Area, 2004 to 2009
1FO
'100-•
90
80
7Q
60'-�
SO
40
30
20
10-
0-
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
I F.xisting Units Pending Units Excess Demand
Subsidized/Affordable Demand Estimates
In general, most senior households with incomes in excess of $25,000, and senior homeowners
with incomes of $15,000 or more can afford market rate senior housing without financial assis-
tance and do not need subsidized housing. Subsequently, seniors with incomes less than $15,000
and seniors with incomes between $15,000 and $25,000 who currently rent their housing are
candidates for subsidizedlaffordable housing. Based on these factors, we estimate demand for
subsidized senior housing in Brooklyn Center as shown in Table 9.
The table shows a total potential market base for senior housing of 2,175 households in the
Brooklyn Center Market Area in 2004. Not all of the age/income-qualified market senior house-
holds will need or want subsidized housing. We estimate that 45% of the market base will need
or want subsidized senior housing in the Market Area. Thus, demand exists for 979 subsidized
senior housing units in the Market Area. At the present time, there are 283 subsidized senior
housing units in the Brooklyn Center Market Area.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
Mr. Tom Bublitz October 4, 2004
City of Brooklyn Center Page 27
TABLE 9
SUBSIDIZED/AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING DEMAND
BROOKLYN CENTER MARKET AREA
September 2004
Age/Income-Qualified Market:
Senior Households (65+) w/incomes below $15,000' 1,768 1,842
(plus) Senior households w/incomes between $15,000 and
$25,000 who rent their housing' 407 392
(equals) Potential market base 2,175 2,234
(times) of market base needing/wanting low-income housing z 45% 45%
(equals) Subsidized/affordable senior housing demand 979 1,005
(minus) Ex'rsting subsidized/affordable units 283 283
(equals) Excess long-term demand 696 722
(times) which a project in Brooklyn Center can capture x 45% 45%
(equals) Excess demand Brooklyn Center can capture 313 325
2009 income-qualified figures adjusted to account for inflation ($17k or less and renters $17k-$28k)
2 Exisiting units includes both independent and assisted living
Source: Maxfield Research Ina
Subtracting the existing subsidized/affordable units results in excess demand for 696 units in the
Market Area. We project that a subsidized/affordable project in Brooklyn Center would capture
45% of the total Market Area demand. Thus, in total, we project 2004 demand for 313 units of
subsidized/affordable senior housing in Brooklyn Center. Applying the same calculations to the
age/income-qualified base in 2009 results in excess demand for 325 units.
Preliminary Conclusions
Our preliminary assessment of the age/income-qualified senior base and inventory of existing
competitive units in the Brooklyn Center Market Area indicate that pent-up demand currently
exists for congregate independent living (with services), assisted living, memory care housing,
and subsidized/affordable independent living. However, the market for active adult independent
living is very competitive at this time, largely due to a number of older, general occupancy rental
conversions by Lang-Nelson. The research also indicates that there could be a significant amount
of competitive product in the development pipeline which, if built, would result in a large num-
ber of adult ownership product in the Market Area. It is important to note that some of the pro-
posed developments may not be built, while other developments may come to fruition in the fu-
ture.
MAXFIELD RESEARCH INC.
I
Part 3: Housing Commission
Recommendations for Senior Housi�g in
Brooklyn Center
Draft
Brooklyn Center Senior Housing Recommendations
Brooklyn Center Housing Commission
December 20, 2004
In response to a request from the Brooklyn Center City Council for recommendations
regarding senior housing in our city, Housing Commission members visited several
existing local senior housing facilities including: Realife'Cooperative in Brooklyn Park,
The Crossings at Brookwood in Brooklyn Canter, Prairie Lodge in Brooklyn Center, and
Copperfield Hill in Robbinsdale. Together these represent the full spectrum of senior
housing options from owner occupied independent living to service intensive memory
care. Facility tours and conversations with each of the site managers offered valuable
insights into the business of senior housing and industry directions that otherwise would
not have been known. This first hand research together with secondary senior housing
data gathered by city staff form the basis of the recommendations.
The Housing Commission is pleased to offer the following recommendations for the
purpose of evaluating senior housing proposals brought before the City CounciL We
believe these guidelines will serve the city of Brooklyn Center not only in providing for
senior housing needs in the near future, but also help stabilize long term city population
turnover, contribute to the city property tax base, and help create a more desirable
community far all ages in which to live and work. The recommendations are not listed
in any particular order of importance.
i. Declare a set of long term senior housing goals for the city. By declaring goals,
residents, property owners, and developers will have a clear understanding and more
confidence in the city's plans and intentions for senior housing and re-development.
For example, in the interest of affordability, one goal could be to encourage seniors
owning a single family home to continue living there as long as possible and take
advantage of external support services for lawn care, snow removal, transportation, house
repair, and medical care. This may require the city to better communicate to senior
residents how they can find and access these services. These include private senior
service coordination businesses and elderly safety net watch services.
In addition to single family homes, another goal might be to provide seniors with a
variety of independent living options such as senior apartments, condominiums, or
cooperatives so that empty nesters have the apportunity down-size and remain in the
community.
Beyond independent living, another goal might be providing a full compliment of
assisted living, congregate care, and memory care options that will enable seniors to
remain connected and involved with family and community.
2. Plan for senior housing unit numbers to support long term community stability.
It is difficult to recommend a precise number of additional senior housing units since
senior housing can be in many different forms ranging from single family homes to
institutional care settings. Assuming a stable city population of 30,000 with seniars
being part of a normally distributedpopulation over the long term, Brooklyn Center
should plan housing for about 6500 seniors over age 55 with roughly 1800 of those over
age 75. Even though it is tempting to jump on the senior housing building trend, keep in
mind that over responding to the anticipated baby boom generation may result in the city
having an undesirable senior housing glut when the baby boom bubble passes.
According to facility managers at site visits, current excess senior housing market
capacity is reflected in occupancy rates of 92% compared to normally preferred rate of
98%. They also expect this to turn around with an improving economy.
Based on a market demand study by Maxfield Research Inc. (October 2004 for
Brooklyn Center and portions of surrounding comxnunities, roughly 450 additional senior
housing units will be needed by the year 2009. The study notes that a substantial number
of units are already in the planning pipeline of cities surrounding Brooklyn Center but
with current weak demand some of these may not materialize until later or not at all.
All considered it would be reasonable for Brooklyn Center to add 150-200 senior housing
units over the next five years. Owner occupied independent living, assisted living and
memory care facilities are the primary needs in Brooklyn Center.
3. Give preference to senior building projects that can support an integrated range
of senior service levels from independent living or congregate care to assisted living
to memory care. Service providers have found that this business model offers the most
successful senior living experience. Having a range of services at one site provides an
easier transition for seniors as their needs change. It also helps providers retain
customers for longer time periods. The average length of stay in many senior housing
facilities is four to five years. Facilities that are not vertically integrated and provide
only a narrow range of services will have a more difficult time attracting seniors and
continuing as viable entities over the long term. The October 2004 Maxfield market area
study forecasts demand for a full range of senior housing services.
4. Increase the number of owner occupied senior condominiums or cooperative
housing. The city currently has none of this type of senior housing available.
Ownership without burden of maintenance is an attractive housing alternative, especially
for younger healthy seniors able to caxe for themselves independently, and generally
enjoy an active life.
With already over 400 independent senior rental units in existence in Brooklyn Center,
additional rental units would only increase our nearly 30% rental housing ratio and risk
making our city less desirable compared to other community choices. Instead, give
favorable consideration to projects that replace existing rental properties with owner
occupied senior housing or convert existing rental properties to senior only rental.
5. Consider new senior development projects in context of larger city redevelopment
plan. The community needs of senior citizens are different and therefore redevelopment
planning should take these needs into account. Seniors are attracted to housing options
that have close proximity to amenities and services that can simplify or enrich their lives.
These include close proximity to personal services like hair stylists, attorneys, parks,
medical facilities, shopping, library, mass transit, schools, activity centers, walkways, etc.
This highlights the need for Brooklyn Center to redevelop with senior housing in a
"walk-able" and "wheel-able" community. This may call for.implementing traffic
calming features that improve pedestrian safety and accessibility to community assets.
6. Consider new senior building projects that offer Brooklyn Center greater
property value. With limited land far housing development, the best opportunity for
increasing the city property tax base is by building upwards �nd additional senior housing
is an excellent opportunity for moving in this direction. Building codes require concrete
and steel construction for buildings four or more levels high. During the site visits, The
Crossings in Brooklyn Center and Copperfield Hill in Robbinsdale, constructed in this
manner, left the impression of durability. Also, more fire retardant masonry materials
could arguably help improve safety of senior residents.
7. Implement the full range of affordability in a senior housing projec� Building on
the City's commitment to diversity, the Housing Commission recommends that a senior
housing project serve the full spectnim of housing costs. Specifically, projects with a
ho�sing mix of 15% low, 70% middle and 15% high cost units. Typically these units aze
differentiated in cost by the square footage of living space, unit location within context of
larger building, and unit amenities like balconies. The Housing Commission believes
that a range of affordability in a senior housing project makes for a healthier community
compared to isolated concentrations of low or high cost housing options.
The Housing Commission has learned from existing senior housing providers that they
cannot operate quality facilities in a financially responsible manner if they allow their
subsidized resident population to rise above 10-15%. At the same time providers are
f nding there is a market demand for higher cost senior housing, which is not currently
being met in Brooklyn Center. The recent addition of six higher valued luxury units at
The Crosssings at Brookwood is an example.
8. Consider on-site amenities made available to senior residents of a proposed
project. Most all-senior housing complexes offer to some degree these features which
contribute to the quality of life for residents:
Wood Shop
Billiards Room
Indoor heated parking and car wash stall
Game/puzzle room
Guest apartments for short term rent
Craft rooms
On site hair stylists/barber facilities.
Large atriums and smaller sitting rooms with natural light sources for gatherings �I
Small gardening plots available.
Exercise equipment rooms.
Cable TV/Internet connections
Secure building access points
ADA accessible rooms and assist features.
Facilities for flexible meal plans ranging from cook your own to full service.
Attachments: Community Housing Profiles
Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County and
Twin Cities Metropolitan Area
r
.7
4•
i'
Community Housing Profiles for Brooktyn Center
oam r�on, �s�o ana z000 u.s. ce�w ���oroa.
Table 1: Demqpraphies
�emo0�aphic informa�on 1990 2000 q�an�e 96 charpe
Total aooula�on 28�887 I 29�172 I 285 I 1.096
Numbec of households 11.226 11.430 204 1.876�
Persons t,ou�er,o�a �.se Z.s2 -o.oa -�.s� I
Number of familles 8.141 7.382 759 -9.gg`�
Petsons per` famqy 299 3.11 0.12 4.096
Table 2: Poputation by age I
AA 8 1990 2000 Chanpe
Number 96 of �tal Number X of totai Nurt�er Pe�cent
Under 5 years 2,162 7.596 1.957 6.T9G -205 -9.596
5 to 9 1 I 6.896� 2.150 I 7.496� 189 9.6%
10 �014 1.738 6.0%� 2.055 7.096� 317 I 18296
15 to 1T 1.042 I 3.696 1.148 8.99b 106 I 10296
18 to 21 1.522 5.39L� 1.572 5.4%� 50 3.396
22 to 24 1.32T I 4.B%� 1.233 429b� -94 j -7.196
5„37'2 18.696� 4.330 14.8%� -1.042 -19.496
3,797 I 13.19�e� 4.451 �15.396� 654 I 17.296
45 to �4 2,932 10.196 3,395 11.B96 463 I 15.896
3.488 I 12.19L I 2.374 I 8.1961 -1.114 -31.99G
65 to 74 2.299 8.0961 2,428 I 8.3961 129 5.6°�6
75 to 84 9B2 3.396I 1.569 5.4%� 607 63.196
as and oiaer zss I �.ox� s�o I �.r�� zzs �8.sx
Total �opulatlon 28.�87 100.OX� 291M 100.OX� 28S 1.09f�
Table 3: Race%ttmtcity by ape, 2000
Btadc or Asian TMro or
White Ame�iCan A jndian Islander race or�La�tir�o
Unde� 5�ea�s 922 498 I 21 275 I 42 199 8�
5 to 17 I 2�823 1.152 I 54 I 835 116 373 I 214
18 to 24 1.T16 I 502 I 24 I 3T6 65 122 132
6.160 1.44T 97 704 162 I 211 290
45 b 54 I 2.777 I 310 I 28 204 I 37 I 39 I 52
2.1191 120� 18� 93� 9� 15I 22
65 to 74 2.303 50 I� 7 I°. 53 I 0 I 15 12
75 and older 2.005 I 31 I 4 I 29 I 3 I 7� 7
Total �opufatiorl I 20�825 I 4,110 25S I 2,569 434 I 981 823
Metropolitaa Conadl
�r�c�m,� no�.c�s�..c• st.r�.�. uioi-��• ��si�sa�.i000• �,c�ot�tsso mr�s��
a�� u� �.ius ,.�,w.�.��
f
Communihr Housinp Proflles for Brooldyn Center
Page 2 of 8
Table 4: Households by type
Household type x
FarMy households 8.141 7.382 I a59 9.8K
Marti� wuples 8.343 5,29T -1.046 -16.596
W ith relat�! children under aqe 18 2.568 2�236 I -332 •12.996
No r+elated chtldren under age 18 3.775 3;061 714 -18.996
Other familfes 1.798 I 2.085 287 I 16.0%
Male householder� no wife present 363 548 185 51.09G
With related chiidten u�e� aqe 18 186 I 328 142 I 76.3K
No related chAdren under ape 18 177 220 43 24.3X
Female householde�� no husband preseM 1.435 1,537 102 7.1X
With related children under aqe 18 963 1.088 125 13.096
No related children under age 18 472 449 -�3 .4.g�6
Non-famiiy househoids 3.085 4.048 I 963 31.296
�-ae�on z.aas s.2�s rra a�.sx
2 w rnore aerso�s 6ao I aso �90 29.77c
Total 11„Z2� I 11.�430 204 1.d'X.
Table 5: Househoid type by age of householder� 2000
Other no�rfamUy
Ape of owner householder Famlly househotd 1-person househoW household
Younp adults (15-24 Vearsl 66 21 61
Workinq-ape 000ulaUon %25-641 I 4.281 851 366�
Elderiv f65 and otderl I 1,449 762 33�
I Otlter non-farNh►
Ape of renter householder
Famiy household 1-person household Imusehoid
Your� adults (15-24 vearal 241 204 115
UVorkini�-ape 000ulatlon �25-641 1.2T0 827 22g
�tderlY l65 and o�er) N 111 552 8
Tabie 6: Tenure by age of householder•
1990
�Age of househoider 2 ChanOe
Owners Rsnters Owners Rerrters Ownera Renters
15-24 Years I 76 I 498 I 159 548 83 50
1.366 I 1.201 1.090 I 953 -276 -248
1.565 575 1.767 T25 202 150
1�369 239 I 1.540 I 425 I 171 I 186
1.753 I 230 1.116 227 -637 -3
74 1.219 I Z90 1.301 186 82 I -104
5 and over 458 I 387 882 I 511 424 I 124
otal houaehotds 7,806 3A201 7�855 I 3�5T5 49 I 15S
Communtty Housing Proflles fo� Brooidyn Cerrter
Pape 3 of 8
Table 7� Race/ethhtctty by tenure and age of hou�ehoider, 2000
Owner-ocxupied unris Renter-occupied units
l�e of householder �pa�� tiispanic
White Non white or La�no White Non-white or Latino
15 24 y�ears I 111 I 48 4� 288 I 260 35
I sze I 2s� z� I a9a as9 4e
3 1.44T 320 I 35 404 I 321 I 25
4 1�326 214 14 276 149 11
5 1,052 I 64 5� 165I 821 4
ssaa �.2se I s� �ss I 2o I a
75 and over 868 I 161 0�. 496 I 15 I 1
Total househoids 6,899 I 956 I 85 I 289 I 1.;286 I 1ZT
Tabte 8t Occupied housing units by type and tenure
Type of housing and 199p Z000
units In struc�ure Owners Rer�ters Owners Renters
Sinqle famihr. detached 7.102 183 I 6:967 I' 193
Sinqle famBY. attac,hed 540 381 629 I 300
Duple�ass 28 44 41 I 56
Buildings with 3 or 4 units 16 140 I 36 I 106
Buildinps with 5 to 19 untts 7� 1.310 18 1.369
Buiidings with 20 or more units 82 1.3d3 131 1.530
Mobile homes 13 0� 23 0
Other units 18 19 5 I 0
Total occupled housing unib 7�80B 3,420 7.870 I 3.554
Table 9: Meastues of crowding by tenure. 2000
Measures of crowdtng Owner households Renter househo�s
1.0 persor� per r�oom or feuver 7.510 3.180
More than 1.0 peBOn per �m 360 374
Table 70: Value of owner-occupled units� couM�/ assessors' data
Vatue: Number of Number of units
units in 2000 in 2002
Under 550.000 178 77
50•000-aT4.999 467 109
5�000-599,999 2.967 313
100,000-;124�999 4.096 1,248
125.000-s149.999 354 4�694
150.00O�S174.999 103 1.49T
175.000-s199.999 28 178
�O.00O�S249,999 36 91
50.000-s299.9g9 9 I 26
300.000-s399�999 0 6
OQ.000-5499,999 0 0
500.000 or more 0� 0
otal owner untts: 8.238 I 8,239
Source: CouMy Aa:esaors' databaae.
Community Housinp Profilles for Brooklyn Center
Pape 4 of 8
Table 11: Value of owner.occupted� units� 2000 Tabie 12: Median value of owner-occupied uMts
Value of ovmer-occupied units; Number of units 1990 value ST8.700
Unde� 5100.000 3.383 1890 value In 2000 S"s 5100.550
�100.�00-s149.899 4.0� 2000 value 5105�600
150.00O,S174.999 195
175�000-�199�999 74
00.000�299.999 106
300.000-5399.999 12
00.000-$499.999 11
500.000 or hiqher 20
otal o�wner units: 7.870
Tabie 13: Monthly houstng costs by mortQage status, 2000
Owner-occupied uNts with a mortpa8e er-oxupted unfts wlth no mortpage
Monthb t�usin9 oosts Owner untts onthly housing costs Owner unita
Less tlran 3300 0 ess than 5200 85
5300-i399 r� 9g
$400-5499 136 1.475
5500-5599 00-5499 534
5600�699 247 799 2T
$700-5799 404 800 or more p
5800-5899 821 Z.121
5900-5999 760
$1,OOO,S1,249 1.366
51.250,51.499 b71
51.500 or more 315
T°tal 5�66
Table 14: Median housing costs for owner-o�xupied untts
Median moMhly housing oosts 1990 1990 oost in 2000 S's 2000
bY ��a0e atatus
Wlth a mor�ape 5713 s911 5949
J Wifhout a mortpage s18a 5241 �289
Table 15: Gross moMhty rant patd, 2000 Table 16: Median gros� rent
reM Number of unita 1990 �pg
Less than 5200 1990 2000 S's $g5p
59 Z000. M S63g
�0,4399 g2
00-5499 262
00-5599 847
DO-Z699 808
00-5799 434
00-5899 467
900-s999 143
1.000-�1.249 157
1.250 or more 61
Community Housinp Proflies for Brooldy� Ceriter
Page 5 of 8
Table 17: Gross rerrts paid by number of bedrooms� 2000
ReM cate�odes Number of bedrooms
None One Two I Three or more
With cash retrt 212 I 1.411 I 1.409 I 422
Less than 5200 9� 62 42 I 21
5200�299 0� 12 40 N 7
5300-5499 I 39 I 183 I 841 38
�574� 114I 9421 726I 74
5750-5999 I SI 1591 465I 211
51.000 or more I 42 I 53 52 71
No cash �ent 0 I 14 I 33 46
Total 21Z 9.425 I 1.442� 46a
Table 78: Household income by age of householder.1899
Income Ape of householder
Under 25 I 25-34 35-44 I 45-54 I 55-64 I B5-74 I 75 and over
ess than 510.000. I 96 I 56 I 44 40 I 50 I 81 170
10.0OO�,S14.999 109 I 53 85 I 67 13 125 239
15.000-$19.999 66 I 93 92 I 62 29 133 N 204
0.000,�24,999 67 165 I 133 65 59 120 130
.000-529.999 69 243 I 140 102 75 I 165 I 159
0.000,�34,999 33I 141 I 130 89 44 I 1061 131
'.000-539,999 91 I 158I 161 76 122I 77' 83
O.00O�S44,999 48 144 I 163 106 68 134 39
5.000-549,999 32 129 I 109 128 100 I 115 49
�,000�59.999 28 310 I 444 2B2 186 158' 6:i
60.000-574.999 29 294 477 291 224 142 56
5.000-s99.999 42 180 I 394 383 I 159 68, 38
100.000-s124.999 3 54 I 127 201 107 I 23' 24
125.000-a149.999 0 7 I 48 15 31 5 0
150,OOO,S199.999 I 6 31 18 I 18 12 I 14 9
00.000 or more I 0 I 6 I' S� 13 I 0 I 11' i 1
�tal househoids 737 2.03B I 2�5T0 1.91a I 1.2T9 1 ft77 1„405
Table 18; Medtan household income by age, 7999
AQe of househokler Median
household income
Under 25 years s25.729
543.380
554,091
558.173
554.875
T4 536.012
5 and older a23�418
Ait housefiolds 544,570
I
Community Housin8 Profiles for 8rookiyn Cerrter
Page 6 of 8
Table 20: Housing costs as a peraent of househoid income, 2000
Households payinp less than 3096 Households paying 30�6 or more
19991ncome of (ncome for housir� of income for housing
Ownets I Retrters Owners I Renters
Less than 510.000 7 I 22 11T 299
S10.00O,S19,999 I 296 133 210 729
730 528 515 I 518
.000,�as;ass I �.�so �s aoa 2s
O.00Q.S74.999 2.184 458 107 0
5.0�-599.999 1.067 151 12 I 0
100.000 or trrore 658 I. 35 9 I 0
Table 21: Households payinp 359�G or more of income far housing costs� 2000
Households paying X of househoid income
Tenure �us�g
3596 39.996 I 4096 49.99ri 5096 or more
224� 246� 380
itenters I 235 250 775
Tabie Z2: Households paying 30X or more of Income for housing
by age of househoider� 2000
�e of householder Owner ReMer
Under 251reaca 29 278
275 284
378 2T2
164 145
74 173 0
5 and older 165 441
Table 23: Poverty rates
p�� Below poverty levet in 1989 Below poveRy level tn 1999
Number N Peroetrt Number Peroerrt
ina�auais I 2,os� I 7.��t 2.�aa I 7.a�
Families I 479I S.8°Yo� 349I 4.74�6
Households I 763 I 8.896� 683 6.096
Ta61e 24: Poverty status by age
Ape group Persons below poverty level in 1989 Persons bel�v poverty level in 1999'
Number I Percent Number Perce�d
Under 5 298 I 14.396I 225 11.996
51 14.59�6� 40 8.496
5-11 304 12.7°k� 303 12.296
12-17 207 11.196� 207 I 9.Og6
1.041I 5.6°k� 1�1251 6.596
55-74 50 2.2%� 96 3.996
T5 and over 80 I 6.9�oI i47 I 7.8X
Communriy Housinp Proflles for Brooklyn Center
Page T of 8
Table 25: Poverty status by,family type.1999
tYPe Number below Percent below
poverty level poverty level
�IaRied-oouple famiN 173 I 3.196
With reiated chHdren underage 18 115 4.99G
No related children tu�derags 78 58 �,gq�
Male householde�, no wiEe prese� 37 7.396
With related chtldren under ape 18 37 11.596
No related chpdren under apa 18 0•� 0.096
�emale househoider� no husband present 139 9.7%
With related children under ape 16 126 11.996
No related chpdren under �e 18 13 3.596
Table 26: Homeless populatton by county
Sc�tt and
Year Anoka Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Canrer Washinpbon Total
z000 I �9 �7s I a,3gz ss� �oo �7s j s.�
2002 289 238 3.659 1�429 53) 103 5�824
Sot�e: AAN Dept of ChUdren� Fammss ar� L.sarNnp Quartedy Shei6sr Survey.
Tabl� 27: Year sMucture was bullt
1999-
Year strudure 1939 or 1940- 1950- 1960- 19T0- 1980- 1990- 1995- March
was buGt ea�lier 1949 1959 1969 1979 1989 1994 1998 2�� Totals
Owner-ocxuDled I 2461 526 I 4.259 I 1.529 I 809 I 351 I 43 I 65 42I 7.870
Renter-occupied N 58 52 424 972 1.340 589 N•'' 89 I 30 0 3�554
Tabie 28: Residenttal permtts issued� 19T0 through 2007
�Type of res(dential pertnits issued Number of unNs pertnftted in:
1970-1979 �1980-1989 1990-1994 1995-1999 2000 2001
Singie famil�r, detached 3631 61 I: 32 33 2� 2
510I .414I 0� 14� 0� 0
Dualex 281 81 41 01 01 0
�u�� 891 1 361 N 2� 0� 0� 0
�rotai �nn�ta �.7ss I saz I 3a I ar i z� z
Sourtx: Meiropopfan Coundl Annt�l B� Psnn� Survey.
Table 28: Residential demolttions� 1990 through 2001
�'ype of unit demolished Number of demoit�ons
Single-familar� detached 66
Other resideMial 4
70
Source: Metropoqtan CouncU Annuai Bupdi� Psrtn� Stuvey.
i
Community Housinp Profiles for Brooklyn Center
Paae 8 of 8
Table S0: Job growth
1990 2000 Chenge 96 change
�P�oY�ent 17,0� 16;693 -313 -1.89G
Sou�es: Mlnr�eaota Deparbnant ot Employmsrd and Economic Development
•"(�edY �ee�a Deparlmsrd af Economic SecurriY) and Msbvpoqtan CouncQ.
Tabte 31: Wage inforn�atton, 2002
Wage group
PaY��9 55.15 a� lesslhr 259
Paying 55.16 to 511.04/hr 5�212'
PaY�n9 511.05 to $18.44ihr 4�247
�Yi�9 S7 8.45 to 529.49/hr 3�045
��9 �L9.50 to �36.87/iu 734
PaYi�O over' 536.87Ihr 1,314
Total Jobs in c�mmunttal 14.811
'Nutr�bers may not add to btal due to roundinp.
Souroe: Nponesota DepanmeM of Empbymetrt and Econom� Development
l��N ��a Dspartrnent of Economic Secudty)'and_ AAetropo�an CouncR.
Community Housing Profites for Hennepin County
csm rrom �eeo a�a Z000 u.s. c,er�,s eooc�c a� no�a.
s
Table 1: Demographics
Derr�praph� infom�tlon 1990 2000 Chanpe ��6 cha�pe
Total pooula�on 1.032.431 1.116.200 I 83.769 I 8.196
Number of househoids 419,060 456.129 37.069 8.8%I
Persons per household 2.41 2.39 I -0.02 -0.896 I
Number of families 257.347 267.303 N 9.956 3.996
Persons per famiy 3.02 3.07 0.05 1 J9L
Table 2: Population by age
1990 2000 Change
Number 96 of totai Number 96 of total Number Perc�lt
Under 5 years 77�210 I 7.596 73�2B1 j B.696 ��94g j -4.796
9 I 69.723 I 8.896I 75.780 I 6.896I 6.057 T.29G
10 to 14 58,918 I 5.796I 75.109 6.796 16.191 19.396
15 to 17 32.958 I 3296 43.352 I 3.996 10.394 I 12.496
18 to 21 56.083 I 5.4%� 59.126 5.396� 3.043 3.69f.
22 to 24 52,942 I 5.196 49.641 I 4.4961 �.301 I -3.9%
25 to 34 218.965 21.09L 183,860 I 16.596 -33„105 -39.596
35 b 44 I 170,376 16.5961 191.872 1T2%I 21.496 I 25.796
45 to{4 101.766 9.996M 156.068 I 14.096� 54.302 64.896
ss to sa I �e.� I T.s� es.rrs I �.r� �.zao I s.s9c
65 to 74 64.498 6.29L 59.737: I 5.496 �4.761 I -5.796
75 to 84 37.486 3.696 44.942 4.096 7.456 8.996
85 and olde� 14.973 I 1.596 17.679 1.696I 2,706 3.29G
Total �opulatlon 1 032 1� 100.OX 1 116 00 100.OX� 83�769 I 100.OX
Tabie 3: Race/ethnicity by age. 2000
Biadc or Asian or 'iWo or
A�e African American Padflc Other more Hispantc
White Ame�(c�n indian Isiander race rac�s or Latino
Under 5 vears I 49,255 I 10.096 I 957 I 4.940 I 2.798 I 5.215 I 5.6T4
5 to 17 I 136.203 I 27.278 2.861 I 13.620 I 4.782 I 9.517 9;568
18 to 24 I 79.825 11.850 I 1.3T5 I 7.102 4.755 3,860 8,778
25 �0 44 301.869 I 34.506 I 3.710 19.295 8.838 I 7.514 17.111
'l5 54 138.186 I 9.041 I 1.2T1 4.728 I 1.281 I 1.561 2.634
55 to 64 I 77.879 I 3.839 I 616 2.368 385 I 686 972
65 to 74 I 55,585 I 2.087 2T3' 1' 1,263 I 142 I 387 I 459
75 and older I 6p.11g I 1.248 I 100 I�••; 770 I 85 I 301 I 305
Totai �op�ulatlon E98,921 I 99,943 11,163 54,086 23.,046 I 29 041 45,439
44�atstropolitan Couadl
Meus T�rk Gna� 230 &u Fillkh 8tnd 86?�d, Mimnoh 53101-161b •(6S1) 60I-I000 Fmc 602-ISSO l7Y 291�0904
1HatroIn�Ilne6�•liii• da�aaua�sfa+la��x.rr• winr.wro�om�nelCa=
Community Housing Profiles for Henaepin CouMy
Pape 2 of 8
Table 4: Households by type
Hbusehold tYPe 1990 2000 Change 96 Change
Famii�r households 257.347 267�303 I 9.956 3.996
Martied oouples 203.656 206,487 I 2.831 1.196
With related children under aQe 18 94.023 97.754 3.731 1.496
No related children under age 18 109.633 108.733 .gpp -0.396
53.691 I 60.816 7.125 2896
AAale householde�� no wife preseM 11,708 N 15.824 4.116 1.6y6
With related children unde� a4e 18 5,259 8.528 8.269 1.396
No related chAdren under age 18 6.449 T.29B 84T 0.396
Fert�le householder. no husband prese� 41.983 44.992 5.009 1.2%
With related children undera�e 18 27.450 31.017'� 8.56T 1.496
No related children under age 18 14.533 13.975 -558 -0296
NonfiamiN households 161.713 188.826 27.113 10.SX
1-person 121.665 145.086 23.421 9.196
2 or more persons 40.048 43.740 3.692 1.496
TO� 419�060 456�129 I 37�069 I 14.4X
Table 5: Househoid type by age of householde'r� 20Q0
Age of ormer householder Famiy household 1
-person household household
Younp adufts 115-24 yearsl 1.546 759 953
Workins�-a�e oo�ulatlo� 125-64a I 178.431 r 46.840 15.448
Elde�lY (65 and older) 34.172 22,516 1.170
Age of renter householder Othsr non-tamily
te Famiy househoid 1-person household household
Younq adults (15-24 veausl 7.303 �8.323 9,917�
Woridnp �culation (25 I 42,4�4 50,039 14.797�
Eldefi► (65 and oider) 4�344 16.639 508�
Table 6: Tenure by age of householder
1990 Zb00 �e
�e of householder Owners ReMers Owne�s Renters Owners ReMers
15-24 yaars I 2.795 I 24,614 3.380 I' 25.252 585 I 638
52.587 I 57.996 44.563 50.435 -8,024 7�561
71.420 2B.883 79.041 I 29.926 I 7.621 I 3,043
48,094 I 11.863 74.037 I 18.829 I 25.943 6.968
36.164 8.735 42.6T1 9.412 4.507 67T
65-74 32.231 I 9.44Q I 30.672 7.090 -1.559 -2.350
5 and ov� 20.319 r 13.919 27.429 l3.392 7.110 I -52T
otal househoids 265 610 153A50 I 301.T93 I 154,336 I 56�183 I 886
e
Communtty Housinp Proflles f� Hennepin Couniy
Paps 3 of 8
Table 7: Race%thNctty by tenure and age of hous.eholder. 2000
Owner-occupied units Renter-occupted untts
Ape of househoider H p
White Non�h(te or Latino White Non-white or Latino
15-24 years I 2,71 S I 662 160 I 1$.054 I 7�198 I 1.773
39,106 5.457 1.119 34.7T7 15,6B4 8.392
71.871 I 7.3701 1.159 I 20,330 9.598 I 1.446
45-54 68,561 5.476 667 13.930 4.899 602
5 40.119 2.552 I 283 7.2B2 2.150 196
65-T4 29.454 I 1.218 147 5.915 1.175 80
75 and over 26.T82 I 647 70 12.743 649 I 87
Total hou�holds 27a.�411 I 23.382 I 3�605 I 11 005 41 33�1 I 7�
Table 8: Occupted hous[ng units by type and tenure
Type of housin� and 1990• 2000
un�s in strudure Owners Rentets Owners Rerrters
Sinple family, detached 226.636 12284 I 249,758 I 10.591
S(nqie famih�. attached 16.183 9,021 24.935 I 7.542
Duplexes 6�132 16.064 6.662 13.893
Buildings with 3 or 4 units 1.813 9.175 I 2.873 I 8.943
Buiidinps with 5 to 19 unfts 3,020 34.892 4.190 34.834
Buiidings wtth 20 or more units 9.626 70.241 12,109 78,278
MobiCehomes �,os� ��s I �,�7s �9s
Other units 1.139 1.660 29 17
Total occupied housing units 265�610 153,A50 301.a3S I 154
Tabie 8: Measures of crowdin� by tenure� 2000
Measures of Owner householda ReMer households
1 A person per room or fewe� 296.523 140.772
More than 1.0 person per room 5.312 13�522
Table 10: Value of owner-occupled units, county assessors' data
Value: Number of N�nber of unit4
units In 2000 in 2002
Under 550.000 19.104 11.709
$50.000$74.999 24,607 7.662
5.000-$99,999 46.528 16.666
100�000-s124,999 72,806 32�358
125.000-5149.999 55�423I 60.045
150.000-5174.999 33.307 6�.062
175.000-5199.999 21.114 39.971
OO.00O�S249.999 25.671 44,180
50.000-5299.999 13.025 23.695
00,000-5399.999 11.582 23.195
00.000-5499,999 4,807 9,343
500,000 or more 5.739 12.143
otal owner units: 333�713 341 A29
Source: County Aeaeason' database.
Community Housinp Proflles for Nennepin County
Page 4 of 8
Table 11: Value of owner�occupied units� ?A00 Tabte 12: Median value of owne�upied units
Value of owner-oxupied units: Numb� of units i 1990 vaiue 590,600
Under 5100.000 62,4� 1990 value in 2000 S's 5115.754
700.000�149.999 108.091 Zp00 yalue 5143,400
150.000�174.999 35.93B
175.00O,S199.999 22.743
00.000�299.999 42.092
.000-5399.999 15�.333
�.000-$499,999 6.369
500.000 or hipher g,gp2
otal owner units: 301.835
Table 13: Monthly houstn0 costs by mortgage status, 2000
Own�'-ocxupied untts with a mortaage e�-oa:upted units �nrtth no mortgage
MoMhiy housinp oosts Owner unfts ornhb housing costs Owner units
Less than 5300 3T7 than S20Q I 2.402
5300-5399 1.440 N-s299 19,258
3.674 300�499 22,546
5500-5599 6,470 500�5799 5.777
$6�0-5699 10�519 00 or more 2.737'
$700-5799 14.568 �ta! 52.720
3800-5899 18.7T6
a900-S999 19.565
S1,OOO�S1,249 44.955
31.25�-51.499 31.503
51.500 or tnore 58.686
Total' 21D.533
Table 14: Median licustng costs for owner untts
Medlan monthy housinp costs 1990 1990 cost in 2000 S's 2000 1
by mortpage status
Wlth a mor�aqe 5833 51.064 51.166
Without a tnort9a9e 3220 5281 3325
Tabie 15: Gross morrthiy rent paid, 2000 Table 16: Median gross reM
Gross rer�t Number of units 1 1990 5487
�ss than 3200 8.918 1990 in 2000 S's 5822
DO-3299 5.676 2000 s654
300-3399 6.80?
99 14.916
500-3599 25.550
600-a699 24.887
00-5799 20.325
00-5899 18.138
900-5999 g,7�
1.000-$1.249 11.136
1.250 0� more 6.897
CommuNty Housinp Proflies for Henr�epin CouMy
Page 5 of 8
Table 1Z: Gross rents pald by number of bedrooms, 2000
Rerrt categories Number of bedr�ms
None I One 'Mro Three or more
With cash rent 17.T59 I 68.742 49.643 �14.831
Less than a200 1,835 5.660 1�093 33p
3200�299 1.224 3.021 1.017 N 414
6.236 10.184 3.713 1,590
5500-5749 6.380 I 34.682 17.058 2.676
ST50-s999 1.474 11.767 18.286 4.302
s1,000 or more 610 3,428 8.476 5.519
No cash reM 127 594 1.011 1,215
Total 1T,886 69.336 I' Sp,g54 16.046
Table 18: Household tncome by age of householder,1999
Income Ape of househoider
Under 25 25-34 I 35-44 I 45ti54 I 55-64 I 65-74 I 75 a�d over
�ess than �10.000. 4.814 I 4.B83 4,346 3,347 I 3,010 2.646+ 4.703
$10.000$14.999 3.071 3.457 2.586 I 2.076 1.433 2.5T9 5.537
15,000-$19,999 2.716 3.769 3.146 2.032 I 1.506 2.953 I 5.138
0,000-a24.999 2,763I 5.582 4.634 3.131 I 2,155 2.898� 4.254
��.�000-�s.�ss I Z.soa I s.3a� a.s�s I �,s� I z.� �.s� s,sss
.Q00-�34,999 2.268 6.332 5.632 4.305 I 2.463 2.902 2.792
.35.000-$39.999 1.915 I 6.210 5.866 3.868 2.463 2.330 2486
0.000-$44,999 1.570 5.908 I 5.777 4.133 2.386 2.396 1.912
5.000-549.999 1.502 I 5.722 5�257 3.812 •2,336 1.898I 1.618
0.000-559.999 2.016 10.198 11.343 8.�39 4.909 I 3.450' 2�508
�.00O,S74.999 1.897 12.953 15.149 11.301 I� g,263 3.575 2.117
5.000,�99.999 1.346 I 12.824 1T.418 15.547 7.268 3.148 2,028
100.000�124,999 421 I 5.185 9.145 10.087 4.626 1.744' 844
125.000-�149.999 179 2.3T0 4.966 5.323 2.565 I 832 406
150.000-Z199.999 48 I 1.606 4.850 I 5.025 2.117 691 371
00,000 or more 47 I 1.265 I 5.486 6,536 3.339 1.107' S88
�tal households 28�87T 94A05 I 110,5Z9 92.614 57.1s2 3T.781 40,890
Tabie 19: Median housshold Income by age,1999
Ape of householder Median
household income
Under 25 Years $27.324
549.200
561.339
369 995
561.091
74 $39.898
5 and older 326.113
Ali households t51�711
Community Housing Protqes f� Hennepin County
Pa�e 6 of 8
Table 20: Housing c�sta as a psrcent of household Income. 2000
Nouseholds Payin9less than 30°K Ho�eholds PaYinp 3096 w more
1999 income of income for housinB of income for housinp
Oumers Renters Owners I R�te�s
ess than 510,000 273 3.956 4.024 14.516
10.00O,S19,989 5.186 5.432 6.669 20.517
0�000-534.999 15,965 22.288 14.112 1T.825
,000�$49.998 2B.058 23.801 11.057 2,812
so,000-a�a,ass �.esa zz.7o� 7.s2o s�rs
s,000,ssg,s9s aa.oa� e,ozs �.szo i so
100.000 or more 66.988 5.9B:i 1.735 I 16
Table 21: Househoids paying 35'�L or more� ot Income for housing costs, 2000
Households payinp 96 of househoW income
Tenure for housing
3596 39.99L 4096 49.99�. 5096 or more
�eB I 9,252 9.323 14.198
�nt�rs I a,ss7 �o,3so za.s�
Table 22; Households paying 30yo or more of income for housing
by age of householder� 2000
Age ot householder Owner Rente�
Under 25 years 884 12.165
�L5-34 7.802I 14.543
3 14.298 9.152
10.762 5.710
B.047 3.480
5-74 4.415 3.051
5 and older 3,831 8.310
Table 23: Poverty rates
Below poverty level in 1989 Below prnre�i leve� in 1899
Number Pe�cerrt Number Percent
indtviduals 93.388 9296 90.3841 9.09�
Fam8les 16.538 6.4�+ 13.578 5.396
Households 36.749 8.896I 33.953 8.096
Table 24: Poverty status by age �A
9ro Persons below poverty level in 1989 Persons below poverty level (n 1999
Numbei' I PerceM Number Percent
Under 5 I 11,721 1 18.3XI 8.044 I 12.79�6
2.388 I 19.1%� 1.798 13.59/.
.�11 10,514 I 15.396� 9.832 12.19�0
12-17 7�082 I 12.2°�� 8.903 N 11:6°�6
53.588 I 8.796� 55,059 8.3%
85-74 3.579 I 6.0%� 2,990 5.4%
�l5 and over 4,516 I 11.4°�6� 3,758 7.3X
4
Community Housing Profiles for Hennepin County
Page 7 of 8
Tabie 25: Poverty status by famtly type,1999
Fartdaly type Number�below PeroeM below
poverty level po��y
Martied-couple famAV 4.663 2.39L
With related chpdren under age 18 3�229 3.396
No related chi�iren under age 18 1.434 1,396
Male householder, no wife preseM ��346 g,g�
With related chiidren under age 18 1.049 14.4%
No related chiidren under age 18 297 4.5�
Female housaholder, no husband preseM 7�570 20.996
With related chiidren unde� age 18 6.967 29.696
No related chpdren under aee 18 gp3 4.
Table 26: Homeless populatlon by county
Scott and
Yea� Anoka Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Carver Washington Total
2000 25g 175 3.592 981 N 100� 1T6 5�383
2002 289 238 3.659 1,429 b3 103 5.824
Souroe: MN Dept of Ch4dron, FamiAes and Leaming �y She�er 3�rey.
Tabie 27: Year structure was buiit
1999-
Year struc�ure 1939 or 1940- 1950- 19�- 1970- 1980- 1990- 1995- March
was buift earlier 1949 1959 1969 1979 1989 1994 1998 Totals
Owner-ocamied I 65.318 24.673 I 57.702 34.485 I 41.451 44,820 15,460 13.701 I 4.2251301.835
Rente�-oa:upied 32.521 8�118 16,133 29�513 35,270 I 22.860 �5,783 3.099 997 154,294
Tabie 28: Residernial pennits Issued� 1970 through 2001
�Typa of residentlai permit� tssued Number of units pertNtted in:
1970-19T9 �1980-1989 N 1990-1994 I 1995-1999 2000 2001
51n�1e tamily, detached 30.723 29.660 I 12.695 I 10.795 I 2.223 I 1.909
i'ownhouse 7.799 7.860 I 1.241 I 3.980 T40 734
Duplex 2.458 2.469 4Q2 I 422 74 36
Multifamily 29.9T9 I 30.353 3.723 I 6,208 I 2�253 I 2.66�4
�1'otai Demtlts 70�959 70.142 18,061 2'1A05 5.290 5,343
Souroe: Metropolimuf Cour►cq Annual BuUdtnp Pe�mlt Survey.
Table 28: Resldenttal demolltioos� 1990 through 2001
`Type of unit demolished Number of demolitions
Sinple-familv, detached 3.644
Other resider�ial 3.887
7.531
Sot�ce: Metropoqtan Coundl qnnual Bupdinp Perm� Sunrey.
CommuNty Housinp Proflles f� Hennepin County
Page 8 of 8
Table 30; Job qrowth
1990 I Z000 I cnange cnanee
Employment 723,105 856�331 133,226 18.49�
3ource: Nqnnesota Department of Employment and Ecatanic Development
(fomnertY N�nnesota Departmsrrt of Eoonomtc Searrlb) and MetroPaNan Cou�.
Tabte 31: Wage infoRnatton� 2002
Wage grot�P :lobs
Jobs paying 55:15 or lesslhr 16.912
Paying $5.16 bo 511.041h� 193.988
�Yi�9 511.05 to $18.44Jhr 246.986
�Y��9 518.45 to 529.49/tu 187.053
�Y�9 5�9.50 to s36.87/tu 58.912
Paying over �36.87/hr 114.850
Total )obs in community 817.902
Sourae:'Mtnneaota Deperbnent oi Employment and Eeorromic DenrelopmsM
(forme�fy N�nnesota Deparhtient of Ewnotnic Seeucity) and Metropolitan Co�uu�l.
t
Communifiy Housing Profi�es for Tw1n Cities Metropolitan Area
Data trom 1980 and 2000 U.S. Census except as nobed.
,y
Tabie 1: Demopraphics
Demographic Infomrafijon 1990 2000 Change 96 chanpe
Totai vovulatbn 2,288.721 2�642.056 353.335 15.496
Number of households 875.504 1.021 t 454 145.950 16.796
Per�ns Der household 256 253 -0.03 -1.196 I
Number of famiites 583.900 658.159 74.259 12.796
Per�ons per fampY 3.12 3.14 0.02 0.596
Table 2: Population by age
1990 �000 Chanpe
Number of botal Number 96 of total Number Pe�
Under 5 years 185;121 8.196 188�236 j 7.1 3.115 0.9�
5 to 9 174,3661 7.6°Yo I 198,890 7.596I 24.324 6.996
10 to 14 149.873 I 6.6961 197.611 I 7.596� 47.638 I 13.5�6
15 to 17 82.791 1 3.696� 112.99T I 4.396� 30,206 I 8.596
18 t� 21 125.027 5.596� 137,670 52%� 12.643 3.696
22 to 24 110.339 4.896 106,55B 4.096 3.783 I -1.196
467.578 I 20A96� 411.155 15.696� -56.423 -16.096
35 to 44 376.266 I 18.4961 :469.324 I 17.896� 93.038 I 26.396
228.177 10AX 363.592 13.896� 135.415 38.396
16:i.930 7296� 200.980 7.6°y6� 37.050 I 10.5°�6
65 to 74 125.635 5.596 130.615 4.996� 4.980 I 1.496
75�to 84 71.994 5.196 90,292 3.496� 18,298 I 52°Yo
85 artd older 27.504 I 1296 34.338 1.396 6.834 1.996
Total �opulation 288 721 I 100.07L 64Z 056 100.07GI 35 335 100.0'K
Table 3: Rac�lethMctty by age, 2000
Btadc or Asian or 'I'wo or
�8 Aftican Arr�ican Padftc Other more Hispanic
Wh� �e�n India� Isiander race rac�s orLa�no
Under 5 years I 141.092 16,165 I 1.657 12.298 5.600 11.424 I 12.576
5to 1T 395.563 I 43.029 I 5.186 I 34,941 10,153 I 20.426 I 22.787
18 to 24 192.982 18.331 I 2.488 I 14.891 8.229 I 7.305 16.020
��'44 748.010 I 53.972 N 6.998 40.386 18.T42 14.3T1 33,941
331.128 14.091 I 2,280 I 10.135 2.692 3.26B 6,978
64 186,443 I 5.835 1,168 5,187 I 96fl 1.399 2.564
65 to 74 I 122,951 I 3,227 452 2.761 I 412 812 1.264
75 and oider M 119,948 N 1,9T0 188.� 1.660 M 2g5 I 599 772
Total �opulatton 38�717 I 156 620 20,417 I 122.Z39 I 45�061 59�602 I 95,902
•�/Metropolitan Conadl
'7.t r.� c� �o �..cfue sa�c sc t.m. ss�oia� (�si) saa-i000 F.� 6oz.tsso mr ��-0sot
Mskornso I.im 60Z•tu: data�.w.wr ,rr�.eoeo�nel�or�
Communfty Housin� Proftles for T�rin t�ties Metmpoqtan Area
Pape 2 ot 8
Table 4: Hcuseholds by type
Hou�enoia �e �sso z000 c,nanoe cnan�e
Famil�r households 583.900 658,159 74,259 12.796
M�� �pi� 471.507 520.281 48.774 8.496
With related children under a�e 18 Z38.126 262.754 24.g2g 4,2y`
No relat�l chiidren under age 18 233.381 257.527 24.146 4.196
Other families 112.393 137.878 25.485 4.4X
Male householder� no wife presetrt 25.479 36.486 11.009 1.996
With related chiidren under ape 18 12.457 20.791 8.334 1.49G
No related chiidren u�er age 18 13.022 15.697 2.6T5 0.596
Female housetrolder� no husband present 86.914 101,390 14.47B 2.596
With related chpdren undera�e 18 58.150 71.246�� 13.096 2,2�6
No related children under age 1 S 28.784 30.144 1.380 0276
Non-tamilY households 291.804 363.295 71.691 12.396
�-aerson �.srl za�.oss I' se.asa �o.o�
2 or rtwre persona 68,982 62.209 13.227 2.396
Total 875�504 I 1,021„�454 145'950 1 25.OX
Tabie 5: Household type by age of householde�� 2000
Other non-tamqy_
Age of owner househotder Famity household 1-person household household
Youn£I adults �15-24 Vears) 5.160 1.895 2.398
WOrIC�11p-8�B DODUI8UOI1 �ZS-B�{� 467.474 98.420 32.146�
Elderlv (65 and olderl 74,888 44,445 I 2.291
4ge of renter househotder Other non�amqy
Family household 1-pers�n household household
Younq adults t15-24 vearsl 15.347 13.896 17.452�
Woridn�-aqe popula�on �25-64� I 88.826 88.686 24,524
DderN (65 end olde� 9.002 33.820 784
Table 6: Tenure by, age of hotiseholder
1990 2000 Char�ge
Age of householde� Owners Renters Owners N Rerrtqrs Owne�s Renters
15-24 years I 7.889 44.854 9.790 46.699 1.901 1.845
127.898 105.815 114.071 91 �342 -13.827 -14.473
164.074 48.451 203.T29 58,438 I 39.655 8.987
��o.ess I�.2�z I �rr.oso I ss.orr I ss.2o1 �s.ess
81.834 16A81 102.583 18.205 20,749 I 2,124
74 6'2.948 17.753 68.030 f 14,491 5.062 -3.262
5 and over 38.42T I 25.3T9 I 53.6T3 I 27,236 I 15.246 1,857
otal househotds I 593�959 I 281,545 I 728,966 292,488 I 135�00T I 10,943
Community Housinp Proflles for lwrin Ci�es Metropolifan Area
Page3of8
Tabie 7: Race/ethNcity by tenure and aye of householder, 2000
Owner-ocxupied R�ter-oa�pied units
Ape of householder Htspanic Hispanic
White Non-white or Lattno Whfte Non-white or Latino
15-24 years 8.446 I 1,344 I 405 35,212 11.487 3.089
103.413 10.658 I 2.628 65.818 25.524 I 5.954
3 189.208 14.521 I 3.110 42.015 I 16.423 I 2.883
4 166.602 10.488 1.805 27.940 I 8.137 1260
55-64 97,846 4,737 I 839 14.6101 3.5951 474
�65-74 65.810 2„220 443 12,525 I 1.966 241
75 and over 52.531 I 1.142 218 I 26.08T I 1,149 175
Total households 683�856 I 45�110 I 9.�448 I Z24,ZpT I 68 81 14 0, T6
Table 8: Occupied housing units by type and tenure
7ype of houstng and 1990 2000
unfts in strudure Owne�s I ReMers Owne�s Renters
Single family. detached 505.380 23.716 I 602.952 I 21.T82
Single familv. attached 36.927 I 17.849 67.3841 17.052
Duple�aes 10.942 27.496 11.196 I 23.858
Buildings with 3 or 4 units 3�602 18.578 6.018 18,398
Butldinps with 5 tio 19 unib 5.988 66.899 8.426 68,600
Buiidings wfth 20 or more units 14.116 I 122.990 17.893 141.431
Mobife homes 14.579 842 15.078 1.172
Other units 2,425 3.175 170 I 44
Total occupied housinp units. 593,959 I 281.545 729„117 I 292.3ST
Table 9: Measures of crowdtn� by tenure, 2000
Measures of crowdinp Owner households Rerrter households
1.0 person per room or fewer 716.462 268,566
More than 1.o person peF room 12�655 23,771
Table 10: Value of owner-occupied units� county assessors' data
Value: Number of Number of units
units in 2000 in 2002
Under �50.000 30.983 17.765
$50,000-574.999 49,666 12.875
s,aoo-sss,sss �.�r3 �a.�a
1�.000-s124.999 177.791 80.313
125.000-5149,999 139.888 154.971
150,000-$174.999 81.124 148.539
1T5,0�,$199.999 51,329 97.360
00.000-�249.999 57.65T 107.043
50.000-$299.999 27;387 55.566
00,000-$399.999 21.521 48,418
00.000-5499.999 7,495 1T.193
$500,000 0� rtbre T,538 17,391
'Total owner units: 7B4.152 I 791.992
Sou�ce; Counry Aasesaon' database.
Cammunity Housinp Profiles for '11Nin Clties Metro�litan Area
Pape 4 of 8,
Table 11: Value of owner-occupied units, 2000 Table 12: Medlan value of owner.occupied aNts
Value of owner-oxupied units: Number of unib 1990 value 586.111
Unde� S700.000 154.085 1990 value in 2000 S"s s110.018
5100.00O�S149.999 266.963 2000 value s140,507
150.000-5174.999 93.183
175.00O,S199.999 �g.662
00.000-5299,999 101,208
00.000-5399.999 3� �p57
.00Q,S499.999 12.218
00.000 or hiqhe� 13.741
�tal owner units: TZ9.117
Table 1S: Monthly housing costs by mor�a�e status, 2000
Owner-oxupied units with a mortgage er-oxupied units wlth no mortpage
Morrthly housin9 costs Owner units nthly housing costs Owner unfts
Less than 5300 1.138 �ss than 5200 6.709
3.308 200-5299
5400-�498 7.777 44.880
$50�-5599 �O�S499 50.168
$600-3699 14.456 500-$799 11.823
$T00-3799 24,384 800 more 4.328
a800-$899 •45'657 otal 117.708
5900,�999
49.T09
$1,OOO,S1.249 116.064
$1,250-a1.499 83.338
$1,500 or more 138.358
Tohl 517.728
Table 14: INedian housing costs for owner-occupled uniffi
Median mo�hly housinp costs
bY ��De9e status 1990 1990 cost in 2000 S's 2000
With a mortpape 5827 51.05T 5�.165
Without a mo�tgage 5221 52�2 5318
Table 15: Gross morrthiy rent pald, 2000 Table 16: Median gross rent
re� Number of units 1990
Less than 5200 16.773 1990 in 2000 S's 5618
$200-5299 10.783 2000 Sg4g
5300-5399 13,410
3400-5499 29.251..
3500-3599 48.031
�600-�699 51.119
$700-5799 40.021
5800-$899 28.045
$900-a999 17,621
51.000-$1.249 19.383
$1.250 or more 11.484
i
Communiqr Housin� Profiles for '11vin Ct�es MetropoAtan Area
Page5of8
Table 7T: Gross rer�ts paid by number of bedrooms, 2000
Rent catsgories Number of bedrooms
None N One Two I Three or more
Wfth qsh ret�t 27.788 125,058 I 100,941 I 31.534
Less tita� 5200 2,7101 10.348 2.330 I 785
5200-5299 1.891 5,848 2.070 974
5300-5499 9.514 21.756 8.005 3�38g
a500-S749 10.522 6:i.094 41.039 I, 6.280
$750,5999 2.048 18.436 34.150 9,268
s�,000 ormore �.�a3 s,srs I �a.saT �o,sa�
No cash rerrt 215 I 1.066 I, 2.049 2.466
T°� 28.003 126.126 702.990 34,OpZ
Table 18: Household Income by age of househoider� 1999
Ape of householder
Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55.84 I 65-T4 75 and over
Less than �10.000 7,506 8,576 8.2� 6.886 I 6,173 5.750! 10.050
.10�000-$14.999 5.265 I 6.525 5.205 4.041 3.396 I 5.7881 11.799
15,000-$19,999 5.006 I 7.515 6.474 4.391 3,457 I 6.480 10.499
O.00O,S24,999 5.399 10.294 8.715 6.393 4.709 I 6.625 8,510
5.000-$29,999 5.291 12.545 10.816 7�180 I 5.290 I 8.5991 6.962
30 •��.�9 4,482 I 13.654 12.830 8.951 5.968 N 6.6781 5.712
5.000-$39.999 4.170 12.785 13,450 8.314 5.747 5.662 4.686
0•��-544.999 3,6T3 12.744 14.�6 9.310 5.849 5.128 3.6�9
.5.000,�49.999 3.043 12.289 12.910 8.852 •5,500 4.703 2.972
O.00O,S59.999 4.847 24.311 27.924 20.354 12.042 7.686 4.626
6�.�OO,S74.999 3.985 31,68T 40,644 28.747 '15,540 T.235 4�043
75.�00$99.999 2.576 30.052 47.340 39.445 I 18.292 6.657 8.796
100.000-$124,gg9 T32 11 �569 24.015 24.695 10.848 3.343' 1.554
125.000�149.999 364 4.758 11,666 12.8T4 5.860 I 1.630 794
150.000-a199,999 77 3,212 10.166 10.792 4.851 1.311 634
200.000 or more 133 2.330 I' 9.907 11.298 5.988 1.733'. 961
otai households 56,549 204.866 Z64,32a 212.533 119,570 N 83.008 81.2Z7
Table 19: Medtan housshold Income by a8e.1999
`4pe of househotae' houseMho�id�tnc�me
Under 25 years 529.804
�1.906
563.479
s70.551
561.242
5-74 538.357
5 and older s24,824
All households S54„33T
Community Housi� Proflles tor Twin Cities Metropolitan Area
Page 6 of 8
Table 20: Housing costs as a per+cent of household income, 2000
Households paying less than 3096 Househoids pey(np 309L or more
1999 income of tnwme for housing of income for housing
Owners� Renters Owne�s Re�s
Less.than 510.000 677 7.293 8.421 27.070
�10.�OO,S18.999 11.708 I 10.834 14.685 39�796
0,000-534,999 35.815 43.627 31.713 33.pp7
,OOO.S49,999 61.813 46.795 27.472 5.018
0.000-574.999 146.054 42.381 21.421 I 1.192
75,000,�99,999 115.463 14,399 5.866 115
100.000 or more 149,518 9.782 3.023 I 3g
Tabie 21: Households paying 359G or more of income for houslnp costs� 2000
Households payi� 96 of household Incorr�
enure for housing
3596 39.9% 409L 49.996 5096 or more
21.937 21.636 30.819
�Re�ters 16,332 19,610 46,498
Tabie 22: Households paying 30� or more of income for housing
by age of householder� 2000
Age of househoider Ovmer Renter
Under 25 years 2.624 20.938
20.483 26.415
34.464 17.703
23.811 11.024
55-64 13.621 6.714
65-74 9.82T 6.477
!75 and older 7.771 16.966
Tabie 23: Poverty rat�
p� Below poverty level in 1989 Belaw poverty Ieve1 in 1999
Number Pe�cent Number Percent
individuais 182,680 8.196� 179.316 7.496
FarNl(es 33.938 5.8°�6� 29.090 4.696
Households 68,773 7.996� 65.737 6.996
Table 24: Poverty atatus by age
,4g8 proup Pe�sons belaw poverty level in 1989 Pe�sons betow poverty level in 1999'
Number Peroent Number Percent
Under 5 24.495 13.4�6� 17.010 I 10296
5 4.879 13.4%� 3,697 10.696
6-11 ?2,139 11.1%. 22,265 10.3°k
12-17 15�245 9.2% 19.105 9.3�0
1 99,431 6.9%� 103,045 6.6�0
S5'74 7,146 5.8%� 6.030 4.9%
T5 and over 9.345 11.1°k� 8.164 I 7.9°h
Communiqr Hous�g Profltes for Twin Cides Metropolffan Area
Page 7 of 8
Table 25: Poverty status by family type,1999
Number below Pet�cent below
pov�erty level poverty level
MaRted-couple famil,y 10.419 2.py6
W1th related chtldren under age 18. 7�235 2,7,G
No related children under age 18 3,154 �Zy�
Male househoider� no w�e preserd 2,4T9 7.796
With r+elated children w�der ape 18 2.046 11.596
No related children under age 18 433 3.096
Female householder� no husband presern 16.192 20.096
With related chlidr.en under age 18 15,031 28.0%
No t�lated cF�Udren under age 18 1.161 4.296
Table 26:� Homeless population by county
'Scott and
Year Anoka Dalaota Hennepin Ramsey Carver Washinpton Totai
2000 259 175 3�592 981 100 176 5�383
2002 289 238 3.659 1.429 53 103 5�824
Source: MN Dept ot Chiidren. Famfies and Leaminp Quarterly Shelb� Survsy,
Tab
le 27: Year structure was built
1999-
Yearstruchue 1g3g 1g4p. 1950- 1960- 1970- 1980- 1990- 199�'a- March
�s earUer. 7949 1959 1969 1979 1989 1994 1998 2�00 T��
�wner-occupied I 121.9831 42.380 I105.961 I 83.481 112,255 125.478 I 64.694 55.592 I 17,293 I729.117
Renter-occupied N 52�847 14.359 28.180 53.020 70,793 46.551 14.482 9,234 2,871 292.337
Table 28: Residerrtlal permits issued.1970 through 2001
Type of residenUal pem�ts issued Number of unNs pertrdtted in:
1970=1979 N 1980-1989 1990-1994 I 1995-1999 2000 2001
5ingie family. detached 88.473 90.656 53.868 46.835 I 9.557 8.746
ownhouse 16,347 I 19.705 I 7.101 12.610 I� 3.339I 3.28T
u,pfex 4,5� 5.995 946 1.100 160 •160
u���l 81.B16 61.606 11.111 17.785 4.T10 5.988
171.005 177.962 73,026 78,330 17,7B6 18,181
Sour�cs: Mettopoqtan Cotmdl Annual Bulidinp Penr�t Survey.
Table 29: Rasidential demolittons� 1980 ti�rough 2001
•`Type of unit dertalished Number of demolitlons
5ingle-familY. detached 6.571
Other residerrtiai 4.570
I��� 11.141
Source: Metropolitan Coancq Mnual BupdinD Pertn� Survey.
e
I
Communi�r Housing Proflies for 7-CouMy'i�in Cftfes Metropolttan Area
Page 8 of 8
Table 3Q: Job �rowth
1990 I 2000 Chanpe 96 change
EmPloymeM 1.272�773 1.562�833 290.060 22.896
Soume: Nqnnasota Departmait d Empbymerd �d Econank Development
(forma�ly Minnesota DspartmeM oi Economic Sewrity) and Mehrop�an Camc�.
Table 31: Wage information. 2002
WaDe OrouP Jpbg
Jobs PeY1n9 55.15 or I�slhr 30.050
Payinp �5.16 to 511.04/lu 392.893
Payin� 511.05 to 518.44/tu 411.376
�Y�9 518.45 to 529.49/hr 346.186
?aY S29.50 bo 536.87/fv 104�264
Payi�O �er 536.87Ihr 186.185
Total Iobs in communtty 1,530.954
Sourca N6nneeota Deparknent of Employment and Economk Devslopment
(formedY I�Unnescta Departmerrt of Economic Secutit�. and Metropo�tan CowtcY.