HOUSING NEEDS STUDY FLORENCE, OREGON AS OF September 12, 2006 PREPARED FOR Mr. Rodger Bennett City Manager City of Florence 250 Highway 101 Florence, Oregon 97439-7628 PREPARED BY Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI Real Estate Appraiser and Consultant 4535 S.W. 96th Avenue Beaverton, Oregon 97005-3329 Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI Real Estate Appraiser and Consultant September 25, 2006 Mr. Rodger Bennett City Manager City of Florence 250 Highway 101 Florence, Oregon 97439-7628 RE: Housing Needs Study, Florence, Oregon SCM No. 06-383 Dear Mr. Bennett: As requested, I have completed a housing needs study for the purpose of formulating my opinion as to the unmet demand for affordable housing in Florence, as well as providing information regarding market rents, affordable rents, and housing prices. The city as well as developers and non-profit organizations are the intended users of this study, which will be used for planning purposes in preparation for development of affordable housing. In determining the unmet demand for affordable housing units in Florence, I used HUD SOCDS data from the 2000 Census, surveyed property managers of market-rate and affordable rental housing in Florence, and surveyed several of the major employers in Florence to estimate the unmet need. The following table details my estimate of the allocation of unmet need for 265 affordable housing units in Florence. Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% One-bedroom 104 50 45 (8) Two-bedroom 27 8 8 3 Three-bedroom 28 - - - Total 159 58 53 (5) Source: SOCDS CHAS Data Projected Unmet Need by Income Band Florence The only two apartment complexes that have been built since 1981 in Florence, were both built as condominiums, and are a series of four-plexes. The ones on Jasper Lane are two-bedroom 2.5-bath units with attached garages. They are 1,200 square feet and rent for $950 ($0.79 per square foot). The ones on Whispering Pines are two-bedroom 1.5-bath units with open parking only. They are 1,000 square feet and rent for $750 to $850 ($0.75 to $0.85 per square foot). 4535 S.W. 96th Avenue Phone 503-643-8200 Beaverton, OR 97005-3329 Fax 503-643-8333 Mr. Rodger Bennett September 25, 2006 Page 2 The remaining complexes were built between the 1940s and 1981. They indicated one-bedroom rents in the range of $400 to $585; two-bedroom rents in the range of $495 to $700; and two three-bedroom units that rent for $650. As you can see, there is considerable overlap in rents with quality and condition contributing to the differences. Some of the owners are in the process of or have rehabbed their units. They are able to get significant premiums for the rehabbed units. Rents for two-bedroom homes or duplexes range from $645 to $900. Rents for three-bedroom homes range from $875 to $1,100. One four-bedroom home rents for $1,200. With the exception of the four-plexes on Jasper Lane and Whispering Pines, which are in initial lease-up, there are not any vacant apartment units. (I was unable to reach the manager at Sunset Apartments, though there was no vacancy sign, and no listing in the newspaper. Ten months ago, he had three vacancies.) Oak Terrace is the only family complex with set rents. At $370 for two-bedroom units and $425 for three-bedroom units, these rents are significantly lower than the older market-rate two-bedroom rents ($495 to $700) and three-bedroom rents ($650). The maximum allowed household income for tenants at Oak Terrace is 50 percent of median, which for a household of 3 persons (two-bedroom unit) is $24,600 and for a household of 4.5 persons (three-bedroom unit) is $28,450. Not surprisingly, the manager has 33 people on her waiting list. These analyses and conclusions are effective as of the date of my inspection of the comparables of September 12, 2006. This report is subject to the Limiting Conditions, Certification and Special Assumptions contained herein. It has been made in conformity with, and is subject to, the requirements of the Appraisal Institute. This report is meant to comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. The following report is a summary of the pertinent data and analyses used in arriving at my conclusions. Sincerely, Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI Oregon Certified General Appraiser C000044, expires August 31, 2007 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 - City of Florence TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal Certification .............................................................................................. i Assumptions and Limiting Conditions ....................................................ii Summary of Salient Facts ........................................................................iii Introduction............................................................................................... 1 Regional Description ................................................................................ 3 Neighborhood Description..................................................................... 12 Subject Market Area ............................................................................... 16 Residential Market Overview ................................................................. 19 Rents ....................................................................................................... 32 Conclusions............................................................................................. 85 ADDENDA 2006 Lane County LIHTC Incomes and Utility Allowances Qualifications - Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 - City of Florence Page i CERTIFICATION I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: * The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. * The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. * I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. * I have no bias with respect to any property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. * My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. * My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction of value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. * My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics of the Appraisal Institute and the Uniform Standards of Professional Practice. * I, Sylvia C. McFarland inspected the exterior of all of the comparables, except the two houses on Park Village Loop, on September 12, 2006. * No one provided significant real property appraisal or appraisal consulting assistance to the person signing this certification. * The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by it's duly authorized representatives. * As of the date of this report, Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI has completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. * Sylvia C. McFarland is currently certified in the State of Oregon (C000044) and in the State of Washington (1100131). ____________________________________ September 25, 2006 Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI Date ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 - City of Florence Page ii ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS This report is made expressly subject to the conditions and stipulations following: 1. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description provided or for matters pertaining to legal or title considerations. Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable unless otherwise stated. 2. The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable, but no warranty is given for its accuracy. 3. All engineering studies are assumed to be correct. The plot plans and illustrative material in this report are included only to help the reader visualize the property. 4. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. 5. The appraiser, by reason of this market study, is not required to give further consultation or testimony or to be in attendance in court with reference to the property in question unless arrangements have been previously made. 6. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report shall be disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media without the prior written consent and approval of the appraiser. 7. The forecasts, projections, or operating estimates contained herein are based on current market conditions, anticipated short-term supply and demand factors, and a continued stable economy. These forecasts are, therefore, subject to changes with future conditions. SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS Unmet Need The following table details my estimate of the allocation of unmet need for 265 affordable housing units in Florence. Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% One-bedroom 104 50 45 (8) Two-bedroom 27 8 8 3 Three-bedroom 28 - - - Total 159 58 53 (5) Source: SOCDS CHAS Data Projected Unmet Need by Income Band Florence Date of Analysis These analyses and conclusions are effective as of the date of my inspection of the comparables of September 12, 2006. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 - City of Florence Page iii ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Introduction Page 1 INTRODUCTION Clients and Intended Users The City of Florence is the client for this market study. The intended users of this report are developers and non-profit organizations planning to develop residential housing in the Florence area. Intended Use The intended use of this market study is to provide basic information to the intended users as to housing needs in Florence. This report is not intended to be used to meet Oregon Housing’s market study requirements for tax credits. Identification of the Property There is no particular property that is the subject of this market study. Description and Scope of the Market Study I inspected the Florence area, looked at and analyzed 2000 Census Data, and talked to several of the major employers in Florence. Using dexonline.com for apartment complexes and property managers, I surveyed most of the market-rate and affordable apartment complexes in Florence. In addition, I surveyed a representative sample of small plexes, condominiums for rent, and single-family houses for rent. Using the demographic information as well as the information provided by the major employers, apartment managers, and property, managers, I estimated unmet need for housing affordable by households making less than 60 percent of median in Florence. Using the information provided by the property managers, I discussed current market rental and vacancy rates for apartments, plexes, and single-family houses in Florence. I also discussed affordable apartment rental and vacancy rates. Date of the Market Study The effective date of this market study is the date of inspection of the comparables, September 12, 2006. Regional Map ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Regional Description Page 2 REGIONAL DESCRIPTION The city of Florence is located in Lane County. The map on the previous page shows Lane County and portions of surrounding counties in west-central Oregon. A map of Florence is found between this Regional Description and the following Neighborhood Description. Location Lane County is located in the west-central area of the state of Oregon. It extends from the Cascade Mountains, west to the Pacific Ocean. The Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area, the largest population center in Oregon and southwest Washington, lies 110 miles, or 2 hour's drive to the north. Lane County is bounded on the north by Lincoln, Benton, and Linn Counties, on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the east by Deschutes County, and on the south by Douglas County. Transportation Network Florence is located near the southwest corner of Lane County, on the Pacific Ocean. Hwy 101 runs north/south along the coast, through Florence, and extends north through Washington, and south through California. Highway 126 runs east/west from Florence, through Eugene/Springfield and extends east to Highways 242 and 20, which provide access to Bend, in Central Oregon. Highway 20 extends further east through Burns and on to the Idaho border, where it joins with I-84, which is a major east/west freeway extending from Portland, through Idaho, and then down into Utah. Interstate 5 (I-5) runs north/south, dividing Eugene from Springfield, and extends north through Washington to the Canadian border, and south through California to the Mexican border. Population My descriptions and discussions on the demographic factors under this heading and for employment and other market factors under subsequent headings have been drawn from a variety of sources. The population figures in the following table include only the four largest cities in Lane County. The 2000 and 1990 population figures are from the U.S. Census. The 2004 and 2010 population figures are from the Center for Population Research. Population Changes 1990-2005 Forecasted Population 2010 Forecasted Annual Annual Annual 1990 Change 2000 Change 2005 Change 2010 Municipality Census 1990-2000 Census 2000-05 Estimate 2000-10 Forecast Florence 5,162 3.5% 7,263 2.4% 8,185 Eugene 112,669 2.0% 137,799 1.2% 146,160 Springfield 44,683 1.7% 52,729 1.2% 55,855 Cottage Grove 7,402 1.4% 8,537 1.3% 9,110 Lane County 282,912 1.3% 322,959 0.8% 336,085 0.7% 347,494 Oregon 2,842,321 1.9% 3,421,399 1.2% 3,631,440 1.2% 3,843,900 Source: 2000 & 1990 Census and Population Research Center ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Regional Description Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Regional Description Page 4 While growth was very low and sometimes negative from 1980 to 1990, it improved in the 1990s, with Florence growing at a faster rate than the other municipalities, the county, and the state as a whole. The forecasted population for 2010 was done in 2003. At the same time they forecasted 2005 population. The 2005 estimate for Lane County is only 0.67 percent higher than the 2005 forecasted population, while the 2005 estimate for Oregon is 0.37 percent higher than the 2005 forecasted population. Thus, it is likely that the 2010 forecast for Lane County is on the conservative side, and that Florence will grow at a faster rate than is forecast for Lane County. Residential Housing Housing Stock The following table compares the distribution of housing units by type (single-family, 2 to 4 units, etc.) in Florence and Lane County, as of the 2000 census. Units in Structure - All Housing Units Florence Lane County Year Built No. % No. % Single-Family 0.0% 91,687 66.0% Duplex 0.0% 4,771 3.4% 3 or 4 0.0% 5,483 3.9% 5 to 9 0.0% 5,475 3.9% 10 to 19 3,540 24.3% 4,675 3.4% 20 or more 7,755 53.2% 10,773 7.8% MH,RV,Boat 3,281 22.5% 16,082 11.6% Total 14,576 100.0% 138,946 100.0% Source: 2000 U.S. Census Florence has a lower ratio of single-family homes and a higher ratio of mobile homes, R.V.s, and boats than Lane County as a whole. It is likely that some of the difference is due to the number of vacation homes in Florence as compared to the county as a whole. Housing Unit Age The following table compares the age of the housing stock Florence and Lane County. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Regional Description Page 5 Year Structure Built - All Housing Units Florence Lane County Year Built No. % No. % 1999 to 3/2000 103 2.8% 2,558 2.0% 1990 to 1999 1,252 34.5% 22,193 17.0% 1980 to 1989 725 20.0% 12,505 9.6% 1970 to 1979 987 27.2% 34,233 26.2% 1960 to 1969 222 6.1% 22,191 17.0% 1950 to 1959 173 4.8% 15,596 12.0% 1940 to 1949 117 3.2% 10,743 8.2% 1939 and earlier 49 1.4% 10,434 8.0% Total 3,628 100.0% 130,453 100.0% Source: 2000 U.S. Census Florence has a much higher ratio of 1990-built housing units, and lower ratios housing units built prior to 1970 than the county as a whole. This is likely due to the increasing attraction of Florence as a vacation community with increasing numbers of vacation homes. In addition, with the population increasing at a faster rate than for the county as a whole, it would follow that there would be more newer housing units in Florence. Housing Units by Tenure The next table shows the ratio of housing units that were rented, owner-occupied, and vacant as of the 2000 census. Florence has slightly lower ratios of renter-occupied housing units than the county and the state as a whole, but its ratio of vacant units was much higher. Almost half (46.4 percent) of the vacant units were housing units used for seasonal, recreation, or occasional use. Occupied Housing Units by Tenure All Households % % Renter Vacant Census Tract Renter Owner Units Units Florence 1,157 2,407 32.5% 14.6% Lane County 49,245 81,208 37.7% 6.1% Oregon 476,833 856,890 35.8% 8.2% Source: 2000 Census Multi-Family Real Estate Market There is no published data on the multi-family market in either Florence, or the county as a whole. My survey of the rental market in Florence, as well as Newport and Lincoln City, suggest that apartment vacancy rates on the coast are low. According to the Fall 2005 Duncan & Brown Apartment Report, apartment vacancy rates in Eugene, over the last 16 years have averaged less than 3 percent, with only ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Regional Description Page 6 one year over 5 percent (Fall 2003). The vacancy rate for the metropolitan area as a whole was 1.21 percent as of the date of the survey, which is the lowest rate since the fall of 1994. Single-Family Real Estate Market As can be seen below, Lane County has enjoyed five years of growth in single-family home prices and sales volume. Average home prices have increased from $155,089 in 2001 to $226,090 in 2005. The Median Sales Price dipped in 2002, but has increased since then. Sales volume has increased from 3,915 to 5,295 sales per year. 2001 2002 Sales Price No. of Sales Price No. of Month Median Average Sales Median Average Sales Annual 149,925$ 155,089$ 3,915 140,000$ 159,399$ 4,304 % Change between years 2.8% 9.9% 2003 2004 2005 Sales Price No. of Sales Price No. of Sales Price No. of Month Median Average Sales Median Average Sales Median Average Sales Annual 149,000$ 168,762$ 4,569 161,500$ 186,527$ 5,056 195,000$ 226,090$ 5,295 % Change between years 5.9% 6.2% 10.5% 10.7% 21.2% 4.7% RMLS Market Statistics Lane County Single-Family Price and Sales Volume Trends - 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 N um be r o f S al es $- $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 A ve ra ge a nd M ed ia n Sa le s P ric es Number of Sales Average Sales Price Median Sales Price Economic Factors The economy of Lane County is primarily based on retail trade, services, and government. Employment The following table below shows non-farm "covered employment" in Lane County for 2005, 2004, 2003 and 2002. As you can see, approximately 1,600 jobs were gained between 2002 and 2004, with an additional 5,900 added in 2005. The categories with the largest percentage gains were Financial Activities and Transportation/Warehousing/Utilities. The categories with the largest percentage losses ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Regional Description Page 7 were Information and Nondurable Manufacturing. Unemployment in June 2006 was 5.6 percent, down from 6.4 percent in June 2005. Unemployment in the State of Oregon in June 2006 was 5.4 percent, down from 6.3 percent in June 2005. Nonfarm Employment Lane County 2002-05 2005 2004 2003 2002 1 Change Total % Total % Total % Total % % Construction/Mining 8,200 5.5% 7,700 5.4% 7,500 5.3% 7,600 5.3% 7.9% Durable Goods Mfg. 16,100 10.8% 15,300 10.6% 14,500 10.3% 14,700 10.3% 9.5% Nondurable Mfg. 4,000 2.7% 4,100 2.9% 4,100 2.9% 4,200 3.0% -4.8% Wholesale Trade 5,700 3.8% 5,600 3.9% 5,100 3.6% 5,200 3.7% 9.6% Retail Trade 18,900 12.6% 18,300 12.7% 18,400 13.0% 18,500 13.0% 2.2% Trans/Ware/Util 3,100 2.1% 2,900 2.0% 2,700 1.9% 2,700 1.9% 14.8% Information 3,500 2.3% 3,300 2.3% 3,500 2.5% 3,700 2.6% -5.4% Financial Activities 8,300 5.5% 7,700 5.4% 7,500 5.3% 7,200 5.1% 15.3% Prof & Business Services 15,600 10.4% 15,500 10.8% 14,700 10.4% 15,000 10.6% 4.0% Educational Services 1,400 0.9% 1,300 0.9% 1,400 1.0% 1,300 0.9% 7.7% Health Care & Social Asst. 17,800 11.9% 17,300 12.0% 17,100 12.1% 17,200 12.1% 3.5% Leisure & Hospitality 13,900 9.3% 13,600 9.5% 13,500 9.6% 13,500 9.5% 3.0% Other Services 4,900 3.3% 4,900 3.4% 5,000 3.5% 5,000 3.5% -2.0% Government 28,200 18.9% 26,200 18.2% 26,200 18.6% 26,300 18.5% 7.2% ------------ --------- ------------ --------- ------------ --------- ------------ --------- --------- Total Covered Employment 149,600 100.0% 143,700 100.0% 141,200 100.0% 142,100 100.0% 5.3% Source: OLMIS The following table shows the largest employers in Lane County. PeaceHealth Corporation is the largest employer and represents less than 3.0 percent of the number of employees in the county. Thus, no one employer dominates Lane County employment. It is noteworthy, however, that of the top 15 employers, eight are either government or education, two are medical and two make recreational vehicles. Major Employers – Lane County No. Employer Employees 1 PeaceHealth Corporation 4,300 2 University of Oregon 3,676 3 Lane Community College 2,531 4 Monaco Coach Corp. 2,400 5 Eugene School District 2,025 6 U.S. Government 1,800 7 Lane County 1,786 8 Country Coach 1,600 9 City of Eugene 1,452 10 Springfield School District 1,162 11 State of Oregon 1,100 12 Hynix Semiconductor 931 13 McKenzie-Willamette Medical 750 14 Symantec Corporation 700 15 PSC Scanning 600 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Regional Description Page 8 Employment Trends The following table shows the employment and unemployment trends over the last ten years in the Eugene/Springfield Metro Area (which encompasses all of Lane County). Employment has increased 10.3 percent over the last ten years, while unemployment has increased from 5.3 percent to 6.1 percent. Employment and Unemployment Trends Eugene/Springfield Metro Area Year Employment % Change Unempl. Rate 1995 148,356 8,310 5.3% 1996 150,784 1.6% 8,786 5.5% 1997 150,877 0.1% 8,733 5.5% 1998 155,384 3.0% 9,402 5.7% 1999 157,720 1.5% 8,822 5.3% 2000 161,226 2.2% 9,184 5.4% 2001 158,233 -1.9% 11,617 6.8% 2002 159,774 1.0% 12,287 7.1% 2003 158,961 -0.5% 13,869 8.0% 2004 160,416 0.9% 12,589 7.3% 2005 163,668 2.0% 10,683 6.1% Total Change 10.3% Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics According to the Oregon Employment Department, Non-farm employment is expected to increase 14.8 percent between 2004 and 2014. This is down from the 20.4 percent growth between 1992 and 2002. The industries expected to add the most jobs in the Eugene/Springfield Metro Area between 2004 and 2014 are as follows: Industry Job Increases % Growth Health Services 4,700 27.2% Professional and Business Services 4,400 28.4% Retail Trade 2,300 12.6% Government 2,200 8.4% Source: Oregon Employment Department Workforce Analysis Industry Changes - Eugene/Springfield 2004 - 2014 An Indian Casino opened in Florence last year, and the tribes employ over 200 people in Florence. According to 2000 Census data, 3,962, or 9.2 percent of Lane County area residents were self-employed compared with 8.9 percent statewide and 6.6 percent nationally. Income Per capita income grew at an annual rate of 3.1 percent in the Eugene/Springfield Metropolitan Area and 3.2 percent in the state of Oregon, from 1997 to 2004. The actual individual annual increases varied from ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Regional Description Page 9 year to year. With the projected job growth concentrated in the Service sectors, it is not unreasonable to assume that, on average per capita incomes will increase at a rate below 3 percent per year. Annual Area 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Increase Lane County $22,494 $23,601 $24,318 $25,500 $25,954 $26,531 $26,445 $27,788 3.1% Oregon $24,469 $25,542 $26,480 $28,097 $28,507 $28,924 $29,161 $30,561 3.2% Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis: Regional Economic Accounts Per-Capita Personal Income 1997 to 2004 Consumer Price Index The following table shows the historical annual change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the U.S. as a whole, and for the Portland/Salem Metropolitan area. From 1995 through 1999, Portland/Salem’s CPI increased at a faster rate than for the country as a whole. That changed in 2000 through 2005. Year Portland-Salem U.S.A. 1995 2.9% 2.8% 1996 3.5% 3.0% 1997 3.4% 2.3% 1998 1.9% 1.6% 1999 3.3% 2.2% 2000 3.1% 3.4% 2001 2.5% 2.8% 2002 0.8% 1.6% 2003 1.4% 2.3% 2004 2.6% 2.7% 2005 2.6% 3.4% Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics C.P.I. - Portland-Salem and U.S. Education Lane County residents have access to several universities and colleges. They include Eugene Bible College, Lane Community College, Linfield College, Northwest Christian College, Pacific University, Pioneer Pacific College, and University of Oregon. Oregon State University is located in Corvallis. Lane Community College has a branch in Florence. Facilities and Community Sacred Heart Hospital is the regional hospital and largest hospital between Portland and San Francisco, with 432 beds. It is located in Eugene. Peace Harbor Hospital in Florence is located at 400 Ninth Street. It is a 21-bed acute care hospital. The Siuslaw River borders Florence to the south and to the west. The ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Regional Description Page 10 Oregon Dunes National Recreation Park is located between the Siuslaw River and the Pacific Ocean. The Siuslaw National Forest borders Florence to the east. Thus, there are plenty of opportunities for outdoor recreation in and around Florence. Summary Lane County is located in the west-central area of Oregon. It is served by I-5, the major north/south freeway serving the west coast of the United States. Eugene is also served by east/west highways which provide access west to the coast, and east to Bend in Central Oregon, and further east to I-84 near the Idaho border. Growth in Florence in the 1990s and early 2000s exceeded that of the Portland Metropolitan Area and the State as a whole, while Lane County has lagged behind Portland and the State. Growth in per capita income in Lane County has been marginally lower than the state as a whole, since 1997. Employment is dominated by Government, Retail Trade, and Health Care & Social Assistance. In Florence, Tourism is a major employer. Neighborhood Map SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Neighborhood Description Page 11 NEIGHBORHOOD DESCRIPTION The town of Florence is considered to be the subject neighborhood. With a population of 8,135, and its distance from other towns of comparable or larger size, Florence is a small enough community that any housing development will draw from the entire town. The map on the previous page shows Florence and its relationship to the Hwy. 101 and Hwy 126. Florence is located 60 miles west of Eugene, with an approximately driving time of 1.25 hours. Both Hwy. 101 and Hwy 126 go through Florence, intersecting in the southern portion of the town. The Rhody Express provides bus service around Florence Monday through Friday between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., with two routes. It costs $1.00 to ride the bus for the day. (Please see route map at the end of this Neighborhood Description.) Employment According to a March 20, 2006 article by Michael Meyers of the Oregon Employment Department, employment in the Florence area (Florence, Mapleton, Dunes City, and Westlake), is dominated by two industries: retail trade and leisure and hospitality. These two industries represent nearly 40 percent of the employment in the Florence area. (These figures are from 2004.) Some of the major employers in Florence are detailed in the table below. As you can see, they expect employment to remain stable or increase. The Three Rivers Casino will be opening a new casino and hotel in 2007. They expect to almost double their employment from 236 to approximately 450. PeaceHealth, also expects continued growth in employment. Don Bourland of the Human Resources department at PeaceHealth indicated that is due to a couple of factors. The first is the aging population which requires increased health care. The second is the increasing sophistication of health care, which adds to demand for services and therefore increased employment. Number Number Number Employees Employees Employees Employees Employees Employees Employees Earning Earning <$35,000 w/ living outside Employer 2005 2006 Proj. 2007 <$35,000 <$18,000 working spouse Florence Peace Health 410 440 470 25 to 30% 50 to 60% < 10% Three Rivers Casino 216 236 450 90% 20% School District 175 175 175 50% 60 >50% 10% Fred Meyer 170 170 170 "High" 75 to 80% 25% City of Florence 54 57 60 12% 80% 33% Major Florence Employers Approximately 167 of the employees of these five employers live outside of Florence. Three of the five human resources managers estimated that the vast majority of those employees were living outside of Florence due to the lower cost of housing in the surrounding communities. They indicated that employees are living in Mapleton, Coquille, North Bend, Newport, and Eugene. Obviously, some of these employees are living in the other communities due to allegiance to that community as opposed to housing costs. SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Neighborhood Description Page 12 Based on information from the employers, I am estimating that between 400 and 500 employees make less than $35,000, which would be approximately 60 percent of median for a family of four. Many of these employees have working spouses which would increase their household income above $35,000 and therefore above 60 percent of median. I estimate that approximately 100 of these employees have household incomes of less than 60 percent of median. As can be seen on the southern portion of the Florence Comprehensive Plan map, found at the end of this Neighborhood Description section of the report, there is quite a bit of public land in the southern section of Florence. Commercial is situated along Highway 101, and in the Old Town area of the city. Industrial is located to the west. There are several small markets in Florence, and two major grocery stores. Safeway is located at Hwy. 101 and 7th. Fred Meyer is located at the north end of Florence, also on Hwy. 101. Both are served by the Rhody Express bus service. Peace Harbor Hospital, with offices for numerous doctors with a variety of specialties, is located at 400 Ninth Street. The city of Florence provides police service. Siuslaw Valley Fire and Rescue provides fire and ambulance service. As discussed in the Regional Description section of this report, The Siuslaw River, the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Park, the Siuslaw Forest, along with the Sea Lion Caves, Heceta Head Lighthouse, Oregon Coast Aquarium, casinos, and outlet malls provide a wide variety of opportunities to enjoy Florence. Summary Florence is considered the subject neighborhood. Commercial development is located along Highway 101, as well as in the downtown core area. Florence is served by a hospital, parks, outdoor recreation, police, fire, and rescue services, with most services accessible within walking distance of the bus service. SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Neighborhood Description Page 13 Rhody Express Map SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Neighborhood Description Page 14 SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Neighborhood Description Page 15 SUBJECT MARKET AREA The primary market area for residential development is judged to be the City of Florence. The secondary market area would be that portion of Lane County situated closer to Florence than to Eugene. Population The following table shows the 2004 population estimate as well as the 2000 and 1990 census figures for Cottage Grove, Florence, Eugene, and Springfield, and (the four largest cities in Lane County) as well as Lane County and the state of Oregon. As you can see, Florence has grown at a faster rate than any of the other municipalities. Population Changes 1990-2005 2005 Annual 2000 Annual 1990 Municipality Estimate Change Census Change Census Florence 8,185 2.4% 7,263 3.5% 5,162 Eugene 146,160 1.2% 137,799 2.0% 112,669 Springfield 55,855 1.2% 52,729 1.7% 44,683 Cottage Grove 9,110 1.3% 8,537 1.4% 7,402 Lane County 336,085 0.8% 322,959 1.3% 282,912 Oregon 3,631,440 1.2% 3,421,399 1.9% 2,842,321 Source: 2000 & 1990 Census and Population Research Center Households The following table shows the number of households. As you can see, the rate of household growth in the 1990s exceeded that of population growth, suggesting that average household size was reduced. Household Changes 1990-2000 2000 1990 Annual Census Tract (Census) Census Change Florence 3,564 2,299 4.5% Eugene 61,444 46,274 2.9% Springfield 21,500 17,447 2.1% Cottage Grove 3,430 2,802 2.0% Lane County 138,946 110,799 2.3% Oregon 1,452,709 1,103,313 2.8% Source: 2000 Census & 1990 Census _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Subject Market Area Page 16 Household Tenure The following table shows the ratio of renter-occupied housing units for all households. As you can see, Florence has a lower ratio of renter-occupied housing units than Lane County and the state or Oregon. Florence has a higher ratio of vacant housing units than the county and state as a whole. This is due, in part to the higher ratio of vacation homes in Florence as compared to the county and state. Occupied Housing Units by Tenure All Households % % Renter Vacant Census Tract Renter Owner Units Units Florence 1,157 2,407 32.5% 14.6% Lane County 49,245 81,208 37.7% 6.1% Oregon 476,833 856,890 35.8% 8.2% Source: 2000 Census The table below shows the allocation of the vacant units. As you can see, the vacancy rate for rental units in Florence was significantly higher in 2000 than it was in Lane County and Oregon. Similarly, the ratio of For Sale units was also higher in Florence. The percentage of the vacant units which were for Seasonal, recreational or occasional use was 46 percent in Florence as compared to 22 percent in Lane County and 33 percent in Oregon. This is due to Florence’s location on the coast. Municipality Rental For Sale Seasonal Migrant Other Florence 13% 4% 46% 0% 8% Lane County 7% 2% 22% 0% 7% Oregon 8% 3% 33% 0% 8% Source: 2000 Census Notes: The vacancies for Rental and For Sale are the ratios of vacant rental (or for sale units) divided by total Rental (or total For Sale Units). The remaining categories are the vacant units in that category divided by the total number of vacant units. Vacancy Status Age of Housing The following table shows the age of renter-occupied housing units in Florence and Lane County. As with all housing units, Florence’s rental housing stock is newer than that of the county as a whole. Florence has a higher ratio of renter-occupied housing units built since 1980 than the county as a whole. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Subject Market Area Page 17 Year Structure Built - Renter-Occupied Units Florence Lane County Year Built No. % No. % 1999 to 3/2000 56 4.8% 1,014 2.1% 1990 to 1999 286 24.5% 7,753 15.7% 1980 to 1989 235 20.2% 4,711 9.6% 1970 to 1979 319 27.4% 13,626 27.7% 1960 to 1969 113 9.7% 9,218 18.7% 1950 to 1959 111 9.5% 5,355 10.9% 1940 to 1949 38 3.3% 3,669 7.5% 1939 and earlier 8 0.7% 3,899 7.9% Total 1,166 100.0% 49,245 100.0% Source: 2000 U.S. Census Household Income – Renter Households With the exception of households making less than $5,000 Florence had a higher ratio of renter households in the under $35,000 income range than Lane County as of 1999. Household Income - 1999 Renter Households Florence Lane County Income Band No. % No. % Less than $5,000 34 2.9% 4,167 8.5% $5,000 to $9,999 200 17.2% 6,334 12.9% $10,000 to $14,999 179 15.4% 5,686 11.5% $15,000 to $19,999 154 13.2% 5,357 10.9% $20,000 to $24,999 116 9.9% 4,615 9.4% $25,000 to $34,999 204 17.5% 8,155 16.6% $35,000 to $49,999 155 13.3% 7,713 15.7% $50,000 to $74,999 81 6.9% 4,965 10.1% $75,000 to $99,999 8 0.7% 1,290 2.6% $100,000 or more 35 3.0% 963 2.0% Totals 1,166 100.0% 49,245 100.0% Source: 2000 Census Summary and Conclusions The population and number of households have grown at a faster rate in Florence than in Lane County and the state of Oregon, since 1990. Household growth has been faster than population growth suggesting that household size is going down. Florence has a lower ratio of renter-occupied housing units than the county as a whole. Due in part to the comparatively high ratio of seasonal/recreational homes in Florence, Florence had a higher vacancy rate than Lane County or Oregon as of the 2000 Census. Florence has a higher ratio of renter households in the under $34,000 income ranges, with the exception of the under-$5,000 category, than Lane County as a whole. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Subject Market Area Page 18 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 19 RESIDENTIAL MARKET OVERVIEW My discussion of the residential market will focus on both supply and demand. Supply will be addressed first by a summary of single-family and multi-family construction trends for Florence. Multi-family demand will be discussed by an analysis of rents and vacancy rates in apartments along the central Oregon Coast, and in Florence. Single and Multi-Family Residential Housing Supply The table below shows the number of housing units at the start of 1990, and building permits added in each subsequent year through 2005 for Florence and for Lane County. Florence and Lane County Residential Construction History SF as SF as as % of % of % of Year SF MF Total Total SF MF Total Total SF MF Pre-1990 1,181 560 1,741 67.8% 77,791 24,025 101,816 76.4% 1.5% 2.3% 1990 23 6 29 79.3% 880 1,024 1,904 46.2% 2.6% 0.6% 1991 40 14 54 74.1% 994 104 1,098 90.5% 4.0% 13.5% 1992 47 6 53 88.7% 1,664 492 2,156 77.2% 2.8% 1.2% 1993 63 32 95 66.3% 1,254 234 1,488 84.3% 5.0% 13.7% 1994 62 46 108 57.4% 1,405 588 1,993 70.5% 4.4% 7.8% 1995 47 6 53 88.7% 984 1,459 2,443 40.3% 4.8% 0.4% 1996 144 114 258 55.8% 1,410 722 2,132 66.1% 10.2% 15.8% 1997 49 5 54 90.7% 1,231 1,284 2,515 48.9% 4.0% 0.4% 1998 53 61 114 46.5% 1,334 661 1,995 66.9% 4.0% 9.2% 1999 43 7 50 86.0% 1,161 673 1,834 63.3% 3.7% 1.0% 2000 20 0 20 100.0% 1,153 177 1,330 86.7% 1.7% 0.0% 2001 56 2 58 96.6% 1,217 178 1,395 87.2% 4.6% 1.1% 2002 69 8 77 89.6% 1,401 225 1,626 86.2% 4.9% 3.6% 2003 59 29 88 67.0% 1,349 191 1,540 87.6% 4.4% 15.2% 2004 66 41 107 61.7% 1,348 400 1,748 77.1% 4.9% 10.3% 2005 64 47 111 57.7% 1,492 769 2,261 66.0% 4.3% 6.1% ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------- ---------- --------- --------- 1990 thru 2005 905 424 1,329 68.1% 20,277 9,181 29,458 68.8% 4.5% 4.6% Total Supply (2005 ) 2,086 984 3,070 67.9% 98,068 33,206 131,274 74.7% 2.1% 3.0% Percent Increase 76.6% 75.7% 76.3% 26.1% 38.2% 28.9% Avg Annual Additions 1990 thru 1994 47 21 68 69.3% 1,239 488 1,728 71.7% 3.8% 4.3% 1995 thru 1999 67 39 106 63.5% 1,224 960 2,184 56.0% 5.5% 4.0% 2000 thru 2005 56 21 77 72.5% 1,327 323 1,650 80.4% 4.2% 6.5% Source: Oregon Building Permits by County and U.S. Census Florence Lane County Lane County Florence There were almost 102,000 housing units in Lane County at the start of 1990, with 1.5 percent of the single-family houses and 2.3 percent of the multi-family housing units located in Florence. Florence's share of single-family development has been in the range of 1.7 to 10.2 percent between 1990 and 2005. Meanwhile, its share of multi-family development was less consistent, ranging from zero to 15.8 percent of Lane County as a whole. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 20 Florence’s share of Lane County’s multi-family units increased from 2.3 percent to 3.0 percent by December 2005. The ratio of single-family to total housing units increased from 67.8 percent at the beginning of 1990 to 67.9 percent by December 2005. Single-Family Residential Demand As seen in the Regional Description section of this report, single-family residential home sales volume in Lane County as a whole, have increased between 4.7 percent and 10.7 percent per year since 2001. Average home prices have also increased between 2.8 percent and 21.2 percent per year since 2001. The averaged sales price was $186,527 in 2004, increasing to $226,090 in 2005. For analysis of the single-family market in Florence, I have relied on data provided to me by Tawfik Ahdab, an Oregon State Certified Residential Appraiser with Pacific Valuation Group, located in Eugene Oregon. Mr. Tawfik specializes in the Florence market area. He obtained his data from Florence MLS and Paragon MLS. The two MLS systems categorize the greater Florence area as including the neighborhoods identified as Beach, East, North, South, Town, Reedsport, Waldport, and Yachats, as well as all subdivisions in the city of Florence. Thus, this data includes a larger area than the city limits of Florence. The greater Florence area enjoyed increasing sales volume from 2002 (419 sales) through 2004 (561 sales), with volume dropping in 2005 (449 sales). In the first six months of 2006, there were 168 sales for an annualized total of 336 sales, a drop of 25 percent from 2005. Average prices increased 7 percent from 2002 to 2003, and 28 percent from 2003 to 2004 and from 2004 to 2005. In the first two quarters of 2006, average prices are up over the first two quarters of 2005, though the average price in the second quarter of 2006 is down nine percent from the average price in the first quarter of 2006. In 2005, the average price dropped only slightly more than a half percent from the first to second quarter. The average home price increased from $149,987 in 2002 to $274,268 in the first six months of 2006, for a total increase of almost 83 percent in just 3.5 years. Thus, as with many markets throughout the state and the country, Florence is seeing a softening of the single-family sales market. The graph on the following page shows the trend of sales volume, average home price and median home price for the years 2002 through 2005 and the first six months of 2006 (annualized). ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 21 2002 Sales Price No. of Month Median Average Sales Annual 132,000$ 149,987$ 419 % Change between years 2003 2004 Sales Price No. of Sales Price No. of Month Median Average Sales Median Average Sales Annual 140,000$ 160,124$ 483 176,400$ 205,176$ 561 % Change between years 6.8% 15.3% 28.1% 16.1% 2005 June 2006 YTD Annualized Sales Price No. of Sales Price No. of Month Median Average Sales Median Average Sales Annual 229,900$ 261,604$ 449 239,000$ 274,268$ 336 % Change between years 27.5% -20.0% 4.8% -25.2% RMLS Market Statistics Greater Florence Single-Family Price and Sales Volume Trends - 100 200 300 400 500 600 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 YTD N um be r o f S al es $- $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 A ve ra ge a nd M ed ia n Sa le s Pr ic es Number of Sales Average Sales Price Median Sales Price ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 22 The graph below shows the trends in sales volumes for homes at various price levels. As you can see, over the last four years, the volume of sales at the lower price levels has decreased, while the volume of those at the upper price levels has increased. Single-Family Sales Volumes by Price, Greater Florence Oregon 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year N um be r $0 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $124,999 $125,000 - $149,999 $150,000 - $174,999 $175,000 - $199,999 $200,000 - $299,999 $300,000 and up If you assume that a family of four making 60 percent of median - $32,820, could afford a down payment of 5 percent to 10 percent, and had no other debt, they could afford monthly payments of principal, interest, taxes, and insurance of $766 (28 percent of gross income) to $903 (33 percent of gross income). If we assume a 6.5 percent interest rate, 30-year amortization, taxes of $600 per year, and insurance of $200 per year, they could afford a home in the range of $108,000 to $139,000. (This is based on information found on KeyBank’s mortgage calculator web site.) In 2005, there were 69 (15.4 percent) of the 449 homes sold in the greater Florence area priced at less than $139,000. Some of these sales were likely outside the Florence city limits. I looked at a couple real estate brokers’ web pages looking for houses available for sale in the range of $75,000 to $150,000. There were 44 houses available in that price range. However, most appear to be manufactured houses or recreational vehicles. I talked to Rose at United Country West Coast Realty (541-997-8485), James at Prudential Pacific Properties (541-997-6000), and Lynette at Coldwell Banker (800-999-5343). They indicated that most of the homes available for sale at under $150,000 would be older manufactured homes, some of which are not in very good condition, and some of which are not financeable. In addition, most of them are in gated communities with age restrictions that limit owners to people over aged 55. The brokers felt that families making less than 60 percent of median would choose to either rent apartments or buy homes outside of Florence where prices are lower for the size and condition of the housing unit. One broker indicated that in the seven years he has been in the real estate business, he has sold two houses to locals with the rest being sold to people moving in from outside of the area, mostly retirees. Thus, retirees are bringing equity from homes owned outside the area, likely in more expensive markets, and they have been pushing prices upward. They did feel that the upward trend in prices has recently reversed, with many homes listed for sale dropping their listing prices. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 23 Multi-Family Residential Demand As shown in the table at the beginning of this Residential Market Overview, over 9,100 multi-family housing units were added between 1990 and December 2005 in Lane County. Florence represented 424 of those multi-family units, or 4.5 percent of the total apartment units added in Lane County in the 15- year period. The State of Oregon’s Housing and Community Services Department lists eight projects they have funded in Florence. Those complexes are listed below and total 185 units. Only the 48-unit Oak Terrace serves families. Of the 185 Section 42 units, the 18-unit New Winds project will be starting construction in October. There are 186 additional units in five projects, funded by other entities (H.U.D., etc.) in Florence. These complexes serve the chronically mentally ill, developmentally disabled, disabled, elderly, and families. Name Address Units Population Section 42 18th Street Project 2345 18th Street 1 DD First Street Group Home 1567 First Street 1 DD Munsel Park 2021 Twelfth 44 Dis,Eld New Winds SEC 8th & Laurel 18 CMI Oak Terrace Apts 2350-2490 Oak St. 48 Fam Spruce Street Remodel 1410 Spruce Street 1 Fam Tanglewood 15th & Spruce 40 Eld. Windsong Senior Apts. 1365 Spruce Street 32 Eld Total - Section 42 185 Other Shorewood 1451 Spruce 73 Cong Laurelwood Homes 11th & Maple 30 Eld,Fam The Pines 1550 W. 15th 25 Fam Siuslaw Dunes 1750 43rd 45 Fam 1320 Eighth Street 1320 8th Street 13 N/A Total Other 186 Subsidized Housing in Florence In 1999, 60 percent of median for a household of four persons in Lane County was $27,066. In the Subject Market Area section of this report, census figures showed that approximately 725 renter households had incomes of less than $27,066 in Florence. Thus, the subsidized housing units have penetrated approximately 51 percent of the income-eligible households in the market area. Components of Demand There are several factors impacting housing demand and unmet need in Florence. The first is the increasing number of retirees moving to Florence and buying homes with equity from other places. The second is the number of housing units owned by persons using the homes as vacation homes. These two factors have increased demand for single-family homes, and contributed to the rise in prices. As ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 24 mentioned earlier, anecdotal information suggests that retirees represent the largest share of home buyers in Florence over the last several years. The third is increasing employment. This also attracts households from outside the Florence area into the Florence housing market. Don Bourland of PeaceHealth said that the shortage of available housing stock at all price points has negatively impacted their ability to recruit employees to Florence. Approximately ten percent of their 440 employees live outside of Florence, due to the difficulty of finding affordable housing in Florence. Bob Garcia, Economic Development Director of the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians estimated that 20 percent of their 236 employees at the Three Rivers Casino live outside of Florence. The school district estimated that 10 percent of their 175 employees live outside of Florence. Fred Meyer estimated that 25 percent of their170 employees live outside of Florence. Barb Miller of the City of Florence said that 19 of their employees live outside the city limits, though 18 of them are within the Florence school district, and she feels they live outside the city limits due to a desire to live in a more rural setting. Peace Health is projecting an increase of 30 employees over the next year. Three Rivers Casino is projecting an increase of 214 employees, due to opening a new casino and hotel within the next year. Peace Health estimates that 25 percent to 30 percent of their employees make less than $35,000 per year. Three Rivers Casino did not indicate. The various employers estimated that between 60 and 90 percent of their employees making less than $35,000 were in two-wage-earner households. Vacancy and Rents I surveyed nine market-rate apartment complexes in Florence, comprising a total of 118 housing units. The complexes were built between the 1940s and 1981. They indicated one-bedroom rents in the range of $400 to $585, two-bedroom rents in the range of $495 to $700, and three-bedroom rents in the range of $650 to $725. Of the 118 units surveyed, none (0 percent) were vacant. Please note that I attempted, without success to survey the Sunset Apartments. I did talk to the manager last October. At that time his 32 one-bedroom rents were at $400, and he had three vacancies. Although the information is almost a year old, I included it in the rent survey. In addition to the apartment complexes, I surveyed several duplexes and single-family rentals. They indicated two-bedroom rents in the range of $750 to $950 for units built since 2000, and $645 to $900 for units built in the 1980s. They indicated three-bedroom rents in the range of $875 to $1,050. The ages ranged from the 1970s to 1990s. There was one four-bedroom unit, completed in 2006, which rents for $1,200. Eight of the two-bedroom units completed in 2006 were vacant. Their rents ranged from $750 to $950. There is some demand for furnished units. The furnishings result in a $350 increase over the base rent. I surveyed seven affordable complexes, comprising a total of 264 units. Of the 264 units, 148 were family units of which 100 were Section 8 or Public Housing Units with tenants paying 30 percent of their income toward rent. Only Oak Terrace with 48 units has set rents for families. They are $370 for two-bedroom units and $425 for three-bedroom units. There was only one vacancy in the 148 family units for a vacancy rate of 0.7 percent. The remaining 116 affordable units are for elderly and/or disabled tenants. Of the 116 elderly units, 76 charge tenants 30 percent of their income toward rent. Tanglewood, with 40 units has set rents. They have 30 percent units, 40 percent units, 50 percent units, and 60 percent units, with 26 of the 40 being at 60 percent rents. Their one-bedroom rents range from $262 to $481 and their two-bedroom rents range from $313 to $619. In the elderly units I surveyed, there were five vacancies, or 2.3 percent. Two of ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 25 those vacant units were in Tanglewood, which was completed in December 2005, and has not yet absorbed all their units. Both are two-bedroom units (40 percent and 50 percent units.) Wait Lists Section 8 - According to Jill Fields of Housing and Community Services Agency of Lane County (H.A.C.S.A.), as of April 10, 2006, there were 5,483 households on the Section 8 waiting list for Lane County. The wait list was closed to new applicants in October 2005, and will remain closed until the wait time is judged to be between 18 and 24 months. The current wait time is 40 to 42 months. Of the 5,483 households on the wait list, 8 percent are elderly, and 32 percent have a disabled family member. The elderly and disabled households may overlap. Forty-two percent want one-bedroom units, 37 percent want two-bedroom units, 18.5 percent want three-bedroom units, and 2 percent want four or more bedrooms. Almost 96 percent make less than 30 percent of median. Ms. Fields indicated that household income of the applicants usually changes between the time they apply and the time they receive vouchers. It appears that on average, their income increases. Two percent of the current Section 8 voucher holders live in Florence, implying that 110 households on the waiting list want to live in Florence. Apartment Complex Wait Lists – Six of the seven affordable complexes in Florence have waiting lists. They have a combined total of 193 households on their waiting lists, of which 131 households are waiting for family units. Rental Concessions – None of the landlords are offering rental concessions. Anecdotal Information – Sue Hogue, who manages and owns the Kingswood Apartments said that she lives in her complex and is friends with her tenants. It is difficult for her to raise her rents, because she knows her tenants can not afford to pay more, and she is friends with them. With sixteen units, she loses an average of two tenants per year, which is a very low turn over rate. Susan is the manager of the six-plex on 22nd Street. Three of her tenants have been in their units for three or more years, and two have been there for more than one year. One of her tenants is struggling as her hours were reduced from when she moved into the unit. Barbara, who manages four complexes indicated that she has very little turnover. A couple people have bought homes. The remaining turnover is due to an inability to keep up with the rent, due to a reduction in hours or a lost job One manager indicated she gets a lot of requests for three-bedroom units at less than $1,000. Another indicated that pets are an issue, because many apartments don’t allow pets. Most of the managers indicated that most of their tenants were either working in the service retail industry or in health care. There were also a few laborers and fishermen. Seasonal laborers have a very difficult time. Many of the tenants are two-wage-earner households. Demographic Analysis - H.U.D.’s State of Cities Data Systems (SOCDS) Comprehensive Housing Affordability Study (CHAS), as of the 2000 Census, provides information for each municipality regarding the number of renter and owner-occupied households by income level (less than 30 percent of median, 30 percent to 50 percent of median, 50 percent to 80 percent, and over 80 percent of median). In addition, they show the ratio of those households that are in housing units with problems, that cost more than 30 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 26 percent of their income, and that cost more than 50 percent of their income. They break these households up into the following demographic categories: Elderly (1 and 2 members), Small related (2 to 4 members), Large Related (5 or more members) and Other. They also break these households up by whether they are renters or owner-occupants. In the analysis of renter households, I assumed that all elderly and Other would occupy one-bedroom units, all Small related would occupy two-bedroom units, and all Large Related would occupy three-bedroom units or larger. Using those figures, I have calculated the number of households for each unit type, as of the 2000 Census, the number of housing units with non-economic problems, and the number of households with a cost burden in excess of 50 percent of their household income, each by income band. Using the Center for Population Research’s estimated population growth from 2000 to 2005 (which for Florence was 2.4 percent per year), I trended the data to 2007. I then subtracted the Tanglewood units, which were completed in 2005. I estimated that one-third of the households living in problem housing units and/or paying in excess of 50 percent of their income toward rent, would not choose to move into affordable housing, and subtracted that from the combined total of problem housing units and households paying in excess of 50 percent of their income toward rent. The net total is the calculated unmet need for that size of housing units at each income band level. Renter Households - The following three tables show those calculations for each of the three rental unit types. This data suggests prospective net unmet need for 72 one-bedroom rental units, 19 two-bedroom rental units, and 8 three-bedroom rental units at rents affordable by households making between less than 60 percent of median. One-bedroom Renter Households - Florence Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% 2000 Other & Elderly HHs 169 103 103 59 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 75 30 30 7 2007 Trended Other & Elderly HHs 200 121 121 70 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 89 35 35 8 Less: New Housing Unit Supply (18) (4) (9) (26) Less: HH that will choose other options (29) (12) (12) (3) Unmet Need - One-bedroom 41 20 15 (21) Source: SOCDS CHAS Data ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 27 Two-bedroom Renter Households - Florence Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% 2000 2 - 4 person HHs 54 35 35 40 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 14 5 5 - 2007 Trended 2 - 4 person HHs 64 41 41 47 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 17 6 6 - Less: New Housing Unit Supply - - - - Less: HH that will choose other options (5) (2) (2) - Unmet Need - Two-bedroom 11 4 4 - Source: SOCDS CHAS Data Three-bedroom Renter Households - Florence Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% 2000 5 + person HHs 10 - - 7 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 10 - - - 2007 Trended 5 + person HHs 12 - - 8 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 12 - - - Less: New Housing Unit Supply - - - - Less: HH that will choose other options (4) - - - Unmet Need - Three-bedroom 8 - - - Source: SOCDS CHAS Data Total Unmet Need for Affordable Rental Housing – The demographic data suggests unmet need for 99 one-bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom units at rents affordable by households making less than 60 percent of median. As discussed earlier, there are an estimated 110 households on the Section 8 waiting list in Lane County that would likely prefer to live in Florence. This is approximately ten percent higher than indicated by the demographic information. The combined total of the waiting lists at the affordable family complexes in Florence is 131 households, though there is likely duplication on these lists. The snapshot vacancy rate at the affordable complexes is low (2.3 percent), with the family units being extremely low (0.7 percent). In fact, with the exception of the new duplexes and the single-family homes, the market-rate apartment units are all at rents that would be affordable by households making less than 60 percent of median. Of the 118 units surveyed this year, none are vacant. Therefore, the ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 28 overall vacancy rate for affordable and market-rate units (266) affordable by households making less than 60 percent of median, is 0.38 percent. Owner-Occupied Housing - The following three tables show those calculations for each of the three categories of owner-occupied housing. This data, which is based on 2000 Census data suggests that there are a significant number of households in owner-occupied housing which they can not afford and/or can not adequate maintain. It suggests prospective net unmet need for 136 units for the Elderly and “Other” householders and 47 units for non- elderly households of two or more persons, with household income of less than 60 percent of median. The vast majority of this demand is due to affordability as opposed to housing with problems. Thus, it is likely that household income dropped subsequent to the purchase of the homes. Elderly & Other Owner Households - Florence Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% 2000 Other & Elderly HHs 168 158 158 122 Housing Units with problems 10 5 5 - Cost burden > 50% 69 33 33 17 2007 Trended Other & Elderly HHs 199 186 186 144 Housing Units with problems 12 6 6 - Cost burden > 50% 82 38 38 20 Less: New Housing Unit Supply - - Less: HH that will choose other op (31) (15) (15) (7) Unmet Need - One-bedroom 63 30 30 13 Source: SOCDS CHAS Data ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 29 Two to Four-Person Owner Households - Florence Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% 2000 2 - 4 person HHs 30 12 12 20 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 20 5 5 3 2007 Trended 2 - 4 person HHs 35 14 14 23 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 24 6 6 4 Less: New Housing Unit Supply - - - - Less: HH that will choose other op (8) (2) (2) (1) Unmet Need - Two-bedroom 16 4 4 3 Source: SOCDS CHAS Data Five-Person or Larger Owner Households - Florence Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% 2000 5 + person HHs 25 5 5 5 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 25 - - - 2007 Trended 5 + person HHs 30 6 6 5 Housing Units with problems - - - - Cost burden > 50% 30 - - - Less: New Housing Unit Supply - - - - Less: HH that will choose other op (10) - - - Unmet Need - Larger Homes 20 - - - Source: SOCDS CHAS Data Total Unmet Need for Affordable Owner-Occupied Housing – The demographic data suggests that 183 owner-occupants can not afford and/or can not maintain their homes. Comments - The anecdotal information suggests that family households making less than 60 percent of median have little if any choices in owner-occupied housing in Florence. While there are houses on the market in the under $140,000 price range most, if not all, are either manufactured homes or recreational vehicles, which are either not financeable and/or are in gated communities where the minimum age is 55 years. Real estate brokers reported receiving numerous phone calls requesting houses for sale at prices of under $150,000, and they were unable to help the prospective buyers. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 30 Based on data provided earlier in this report, the average home price in Florence increased from $149,987 in 2002 to $261,604 in 2005, an increase of 74.4 percent. During that same time period, median household income in Lane County (figures for Florence are not available) increased from $43,800 to $54,300, an increase of 23.4 percent. Thus, wages have not kept pace with housing ownership costs in Florence. Unfortunately, similar figures are not available for rents. I did survey some of the same apartment complexes in October 2005. Some of them have had rent increases in the last year, but some have not. At least some of the units with increases, have been renovated in the last year. While verifiable statistics are not available, it is likely that those households at the lower end of the income ranges (less than 60 percent of median) are finding it more difficult to find affordable housing in Florence. Some of them have chosen to live outside of the Florence area and commute in, to get better quality housing for less money. This option becomes more challenging as gas prices increase. Again, the demographic unmet need analysis above was based on 2000 Census data. Since that time, housing prices have increased at a much higher rate than wages. It is possible that some of the owner- occupant households that could not afford their homes in 2000 have since sold them and found more affordable housing, possibly in Florence, but likely outside of Florence. It is also possible that owners that could afford their homes in 2000 had adjustable rate mortgages, and now can not afford their homes. Proposed Supply According to the Florence City Planner, there are no apartments proposed in Florence. Conclusion I have estimated that deteriorating conditions since 2000, due to a combination of escalating home ownership costs, adjustable rate mortgages, and wages not keeping up with housing costs have offset any owners who have sold the homes they could not longer afford and moved into affordable housing elsewhere. I have concluded to combined unmet need for rental and owner-occupied housing affordable by households making less than 60 percent of median of 265 units. Since most of the owner-occupants that could not afford their homes in 2000 had household income of less than 30 percent of median, and since there is very few homes available for sale that would be affordable by households making less than 60 percent of median, I have categorized the owner-occupants in the same way as the renter households, with “Elderly” and “Other” households in one-bedroom units, “Two to Four-Person Households in two- bedroom units, and “Five-Person or Larger Households” in three-bedroom units. Thus, the projected unmet need is 191 one-bedroom units, 46 two-bedroom units, and 28 three-bedroom units affordable by households making between less than 60 percent of median. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Residential Market Overview Page 31 Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% One-bedroom 104 50 45 (8) Two-bedroom 27 8 8 3 Three-bedroom 28 - - - Total 159 58 53 (5) Source: SOCDS CHAS Data Projected Unmet Need by Income Band Florence RENT COMPARABLES In looking for rent comparables, I looked for apartment complexes listed in the phone book in Florence. I also drove around Florence looking for apartment complexes, and talked to several local property managers. The first set of comparables includes market-rate apartments, plexes, duplexes, and single- family houses. After a discussion of the market rent comparables, I have included seven affordable comparables. Both set of rent comparables represent the vast majority of apartment complexes and a representative sample of duplexes and single-family homes. It is not an exhaustive survey. The maps on the following page show the location of these rent comparables. The first map includes the main part of Florence and 20 of the 22 comparables. The second map is an area north of the first map. (There is a gap between what is shown on the two maps.) It shows the location of two of the comparables. Details of the individual rent comparables are found on the succeeding pages. Please note that I made numerous attempts to talk to the manager at the Sunset Apartments and left him several messages which he did not return. I did talk to him in October 2005, and have included that information, though it is almost a year out of date. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 32 Florence Market Rent Comparable Map ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 33 Rent Comparable No. 1: Courtyard Apartments Address: 1260 Tenth Street, Florence Number of Units: 23 Year Built: 1970s Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, good condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: One open space per unit plus two visitor spaces, which is inadequate. Common Areas: Laundry room Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, and range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 19 1/1 700 SF $400 0 1 2/1 900 SF Mgr. 0 1 Studio 550 SF $375 0 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage Confirmed By: Susan, 541-997-7368 (8/28/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 34 Comments: She requires tenants make 2.5 times the rent in income with most making close to that amount. This complex was remodeled two years ago, and the owner has decided to convert the complex to condominiums. Thus, as units empty, they will not be re-leased. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 35 Rent Comparable No. 2: Kingwood Apartments Address: 570 Kingwood, Florence Number of Units: 16 Year Built: 1981 Quality/Condition/Style: Average plus quality, good condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: 1.5 spaces per unit, which is adequate Common Areas: Patio and Laundry room Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, range/oven, and disposal Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 11 1/1 700 – 750 SF $475 - $585 0 5 2/1 1,000 SF $600 0 Rent Comments: The difference in rent is due to the size of the unit, whether there is a fireplace, and the timing of when the tenant moved into the complex. These rents are flat from ten months ago. Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 36 Confirmed By: Sue Hogue, 541-991-7773 (8/28/06 SM) Tenant Demographics: She requires tenants make three times the rent in income. Approximately half of her tenants are in service jobs with the other half in professional jobs. She has three on her waiting list. She recently listed the property for sale at $1,300,000. She feels her rents are under market, but is reticent to raise the rents for tenants that have been there for awhile. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 37 Rent Comparable No. 3: Sunset Apartments of Oregon Location: 1340 Ninth, Florence No. of Units: 32 Year Built: 1981 Quality/Condition/Style: Average plus quality, average condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: One per unit, which is adequate Common Areas: Laundry room Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, and range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 32 1/1 550 SF $400 3 Move-in Incentives: None Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage Site Contact: Jason, 541-997-6479 (10/21/05 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 38 Tenant Demographics: Tenants are required to make three times the rent. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 39 Rent Comparable No. 4: Address: 1675 W. 22nd, Florence Number of Units: 6 Year Built: Late 1970s or early 1980s Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, average condition, one-story wood-frame apartment Parking: Open spaces only Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, and range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 6 2/1 N/A $495 0 Rent Comments: Tenants who have been in the units for awhile pay $475, with new tenants paying $495. These rents are flat from ten months ago. Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage Tenant Demographics: She requires tenants make 2.5 times the rent in income, with most making close to that amount. One tenant’s income recently dropped due to a job loss. She is hoping to move into an affordable unit. Three of the ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 40 tenants have been there more than three years, and two have been there more than one year. Confirmed By: Susan, 541-997-7368 (8/28/06 SM) Comments: She feels these are the nicest two-bedroom units in town. She does not keep a waiting list, due to low turnover. When a tenant gives notice, they typically have several friends approach the manager about renting the vacant unit. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 41 Rent Comparable No. 5: Gold Coast Apartments Address: 1575 W. Tenth, Florence Number of Units: 14 Year Built: 1979 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, good condition, one-story wood-frame apartment Parking: Open Parking Common Areas: Laundry room Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, range/oven, and disposal. Units have large patios. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 6 1/1 720 SF $500 0 8 2/1 852 SF $585 0 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage Confirmed By: Barbara, 541-997-8098 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: The two-bedroom rents are up $20 from a year ago. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 42 Barbara manages four complexes. She has very little turnover. Typically, tenants leave to either buy a house or due to their job situation. Some work seasonally, and others get laid off or are unable to keep up with the rent. She will work with tenants, and in some cases accepts a portion of the rent payment three times per month. Typically units are occupied by two wage earners, who work in service retail, restaurants, health care, or fishing. Most work in Florence. Her screening criteria are strictly based on their criminal background. She lets the prospective tenant determine if they can afford the rent. She does not keep a waiting list, but fills units on a first-come, first- served basis. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 43 Rent Comparable No. 6: Colonial Coast Apartments Location: 1475 W. Tenth No. of Units: 8 Year Built: 1978 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, good condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: Open spaces Common Areas: None Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, range/oven, and disposal. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 7 2/1 750 SF $585 0 1 3/1 N/A $650 0 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage Site Contact: Barbara, 541-997-8098 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: The two-bedroom rents are up $35 from a year ago. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 44 Rent Comparable No. 7: Timbers Address: 1750 E. Eighth Florence Number of Units: 25 Year Built: 1979 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, good condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: 1.5 open spaces per unit. Common Areas: Laundry room Unit Amenities: Disposal, refrigerator, and range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 24 2/1 850 SF $585 0 1 3/1 N/A $650 0 Move-in Incentives: None. Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 45 Confirmed By: Barbara, 541-997-8098 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: The two-bedroom rents are up $20 from a year ago. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 46 Rent Comparable No. 8: Pine Grove Condominiums Address: 2153 Tenth, Florence Number of Units: 8 Year Built: 1979 Quality/Condition/Style: Above average quality, average condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: 1.5 open spaces per unit. Common Areas: Laundry room Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, and range/oven. All units have washer/dryer hookups. Some have washer/dryer units. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 8 2/1 900 SF $700 0 Move-in Incentives: None. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 47 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage Confirmed By: Barbara, 541-997-8098 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: These rents are up $75 from a year ago. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 48 Rent Comparable No. 9: Driftwood Address: 1621 W. 22nd, Florence Number of Units: 8 Year Built: 1970s Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, average condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: 1.25 open spaces per unit, which is adequate. Common Areas: Barbecue area Unit Amenities: Disposal, refrigerator, and range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 8 2/1 825 SF $550 - $650 0 Move-in Incentives: None. Rent range depends on whether unit has been rehabilitated. Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage Confirmed By: Shannon, 541-997-1351 (9/6/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 49 Comments: She requires tenants make two times the rent, with most making close to that amount. Most work in the service industry and are single. About half of her tenants are long-term. Typically, those tenants that do leave have rent issues, due to a lost job. She does not keep a waiting list, but does have lots of request for these units. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 50 Rent Comparable No. 10: 3530 Oak Address: 3530 Oak, Florence Number of Units: 6 Year Built: 1970s Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, average condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: Open spaces Common Areas: None Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven, and washer/dryer units Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 6 2/1 900 SF $600 - $625 0 Move-in Incentives: None. Rent range depends on whether unit has been rehabilitated. Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage Confirmed By: Shannon, 541-997-1351 (9/6/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 51 Rent Comparable No. 11: Haseta Apartments Address: 87687 Hwy. 101, Florence Number of Units: 10 Year Built: 1940s Quality/Condition/Style: Below average quality, average condition Parking: Open spaces Common Areas: None Unit Amenities: Refrigerator and range/oven Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 4 1/1 N/A $535 - $545 0* 6 2/1 N/A $535 - $650 0* Rent Comments: Rent range depends on whether unit has been rehabilitated and its size and configuration. Three of the one-bedroom units and one of the two- bedroom units are currently being rehabilitated and are not available for lease. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 52 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage Confirmed By: Linda Westphal, 541-997-8277 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: She requires that tenants make three times the rent in income, with most making close to that amount. Tenants work in Florence. Two work in construction, one is retired, one is in the Coast Guard, and one is a nurse. There are children in one of the units only. She does not keep a waiting list. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 53 Condominium Rent No. 12: 953-955 Jasper Lane Address: 953-955 Jasper Lane, Florence Number of Units: 12 Year Built: 2006 Quality/Condition/Style: Above average quality, excellent condition Parking: One-car garage Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven, microwave, and washer/dryer hookup Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 12 2/2.5 1,200 SF $950 2 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Neuel Rutledge, 541-997-6235 (9/6/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 54 Condominium Rent No. 13: 820 Whispering Pines Address: 820 Whispering Pines, Florence Year Built: 2006 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, excellent condition Parking: Open Parking Only Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven, microwave, and washer/dryer hookup Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant “Several” 2/1.5 1,000 SF $750 - $850 6 Rent Comments: Lower units are $850. Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Neuel Rutledge, 541-997-6235 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: He requires four times the rent in income. These units are also available for sale, with an asking price on the lower units of $184,500. There are 12 to 16 completed units. There will be 44 units when completed. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 55 House Rent No. 14: 122 and 124 Park Village Loop No Picture Available Address: 122 and 124 Park Village Loop, Florence Year Built: 2005 Quality/Condition/Style: Above average quality, very good condition, Parking: Two-car garage Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven, microwave, and washer/dryer hookup Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 1 3/2 1,500 SF $1,100 0 1 4/3 1,700 SF $1,200 0 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Neuel Rutledge, 541-997-6235 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: Similarly-sized homes on this street are selling in the range of $255,000 to $269,000. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 56 House Rent No. 15: 3397 Oak Address: 3397 Oak, Florence Year Built: 2003 Quality/Condition/Style: Above average quality, very good condition, Parking: Two-car garage Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven, microwave, and washer/dryer units Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 2 2/2 1,100 SF $850 0 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Shannon, 541-997-1351 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: She requires a one-year lease on houses. Tenants typically have more professional jobs (as opposed to service retail in the apartments). Some tenants stay in houses for a long time, others leave due to affordability issues. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 57 Prospective tenants looking at houses prefer three-bedroom/two-bath units, which are in short supply (as compared to two-bedroom units). The biggest need in apartments is affordability, which she defines as $450 for one-bedroom units and less than $550 for two-bedroom units. She said there are not enough houses available for prospective tenants. Pets are an issue. Many property owners will not allow pets, and many prospective tenants have them. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 58 House Rent No. 16: 1637 W. 31st Address: 1637 W. 31st, Florence Number of Units: 2 Year Built: 1980s Quality/Condition/Style: Above average quality, average condition Parking: Garage Common Areas: None Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, dishwasher, disposal, and range/oven Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 2 2/1 N/A $900 0 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Linda Westphal, 541-997-8277 (9/6/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 59 House Rent No. 17: 1924 E. 30th Address: 1924 E. 30th, Florence Number of Units: 2 Year Built: 1980s Quality/Condition/Style: Above average quality, average condition Parking: Garage Common Areas: None Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, dishwasher, and range/oven Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 2 2/1 N/A $645 0 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Linda Westphal, 541-997-8277 (9/6/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 60 House Rent No. 18: 2110 E. 23rd Address: 2110 E. 23rd, Florence Year Built: 1996 Quality/Condition/Style: Above average quality, good condition Parking: Two-car garage Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 1 3/2 N/A $1,050 0 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Linda Westphal, 541-997-8277 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: She gets the most calls for three-bedroom/two-bath units at under $1,000. Typically, prospective tenants ask what she has at a certain price, as opposed to unit size. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 61 House Rent No. 19: 1220 Yew Street Address: 1220 Yew Street, Florence Year Built: 1996 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, good condition, Parking: Two-car garage Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven, microwave, and washer/dryer unit Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 1 3/2 1,300 SF $925 0 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Shannon, 541-997-1351 (9/6/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 62 House Rent No. 20: 89379 Shorecrest Dr. Address: 89379 Shorecrest Drive, Florence Year Built: 1992 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, good condition, Parking: Detached garage Unit Amenities: Dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven, microwave, and washer/dryer hookups Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 1 3/2 1,200 SF $875 0 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Shannon, 541-997-1351 (9/6/06 SM) Comments: This is the nicest house on the street. There are five or six older and smaller manufactured homes for sale on the west side of the street, which back onto Hwy. 101. Sutton Lake is two blocks south. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 63 House Rent No. 21: 1938 E. 18th Address: 1938 E. 18th, Florence Year Built: 1970s Quality/Condition/Style: Above average quality, average condition Parking: Two-car garage Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven, fireplace Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 1 3/2 N/A $925 0 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Linda Westphal, 541-997-8277 (9/6/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 64 House Rent No. 22: 2235 23rd Address: 2235 23rd, Florence Year Built: 1972 Quality/Condition/Style: Above average quality, good condition Parking: Two-car garage Unit Amenities: Disposal, dishwasher, refrigerator, range/oven, microwave, and washer/dryer hookup Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 1 3/2 1,70 SF $1,000 0 Utilities Included: None Confirmed By: Neuel Rutledge, 541-997-6235 (9/6/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 65 Year Total No. No. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min Max No. Name/Location Built Units Vacancy Units Unit Type Vacant Rent Rent Unit SF Unit SF Rent/sf Rent/sf 1 Courtyard 1960 23 0 23 1/1 0 $400 $400 750 750 $0.53 $0.53 1260 Tenth Street 0.0% Florence 2 Kingwood 1981 16 0 11 1/1 0 $475 $585 700 750 $0.68 $0.78 570 Sixth 0.0% 5 2/1 0 $600 $600 1,000 1,000 $0.60 $0.60 Florence 3 Sunset Apartments 1981 32 3 32 1/1 3 $400 $400 550 550 $0.73 $0.73 1340 Ninth 9.4% Florence 4 1675 W. 22nd 1970s 6 0 6 2/1 0 $495 $495 N/A N/A N/A N/A Florence 0.0% 5 Gold Coast 1979 14 0 6 1/1 0 $500 $500 720 720 $0.69 $0.69 1575 W. Tenth 0.0% 8 2/1 0 $585 $585 852 852 $0.69 $0.69 Florence 6 Colonial Coast 1978 8 0 7 2/1 0 $585 $585 750 750 $0.78 $0.78 1475 W. Tenth 0.0% 1 3/1 0 $650 $650 N/A N/A N/A N/A Florence 7 Timbers 1979 25 0 24 2/1 0 $585 $585 850 850 $0.69 $0.69 1750 E. Eighth 0.0% 1 3/1 0 $650 $650 N/A N/A N/A N/A Florence 8 Pinegrove 1979 8 0 8 2/1 0 $700 $700 900 900 $0.78 $0.78 2153 Tenth 0.0% Florence 9 Driftwood 1970s 8 0 8 2/1 0 $550 $650 800 850 $0.69 $0.76 1621 W. 22nd 0.0% Florence 10 3530 Oak 1970s 6 0 6 2/1 0 $600 $625 900 900 $0.67 $0.69 Florence 0.0% 11 87687 Hwy 101 1940s 10 0 4 1/1 0 $535 $545 N/A N/A N/A N/A Florence 0.0% 6 2/1 0 $535 $650 N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 953 - 955 Jasper Lane 2006 12 2 12 2/2.5 2 $950 $950 1,200 1,200 $0.79 $0.79 Florence 16.7% 13 820 Whispering Pines 2006 12 6 12 2/1.5 6 $750 $850 1,000 1,000 $0.75 $0.85 Florence 50.0% Summary of Market-Rate Apartment Rent Comparables ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 66 Year Total No. No. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min Max No. Name/Location Built Units Vacancy Units Unit Type Vacant Rent Rent Unit SF Unit SF Rent/sf Rent/sf 14 122 & 124 Park Village 2005 2 0 1 3/2 0 $1,100 $1,100 1,500 1,500 $0.73 $0.73 Loop, Florence 0.0% 1 4/3 0 $1,200 $1,200 1,700 1,700 $0.71 $0.71 15 3397 Oak St. 2004 2 0 2 2/2 0 $850 $850 1,100 1,100 $0.77 $0.77 Florence 0.0% 16 1637 W. 31st 1980s 2 0 2 2/1 0 $900 $900 N/A N/A N/A N/A Florence 0.0% 17 1924 E. 30th 1980s 2 0 2 2/1 0 $645 $645 N/A N/A N/A N/A Florence 0.0% 18 2110 E. 23rd 1996 1 0 1 3/2 0 $1,050 $1,050 N/A N/A N/A N/A Florence 0.0% 19 1220 Yew St. 1996 1 0 1 3/2 0 $925 $925 1,300 1,300 $0.71 $0.71 Florence 0.0% 20 89379 Shorecrest 1992 1 0 1 3/2 0 $875 $875 1,200 1,200 $0.73 $0.73 Florence 0.0% 21 1938 E. 18th 1970s 1 0 1 3/2 0 $925 $925 N/A N/A N/A N/A Florence 0.0% 22 2235 23rd 1972 1 0 1 3/2 0 $1,000 $1,000 1,700 1,700 $0.59 $0.59 Florence 0.0% Summary of Market-Rate House/Duplex Rent Comparables ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 67 Rents The spreadsheets on the previous two pages summarize the pertinent details regarding the market rent apartment and house/duplex comparables. The only two apartment complexes that have been built since 1981 in Florence, were both built as condominiums, and are a series of four-plexes. The ones on Jasper Lane are two-bedroom 2.5-bath units with attached garages. They are 1,200 square feet and rent for $950 ($0.79 per square foot). The ones on Whispering Pines are two-bedroom 1.5-bath units with open parking only. They are 1,000 square feet and rent for $750 to $850 ($0.75 to $0.85 per square foot). The remaining complexes were built between the 1940s and 1981. They indicated one-bedroom rents in the range of $400 to $585; two-bedroom rents in the range of $495 to $700; and two three-bedroom units that rent for $650. As you can see, there is considerable overlap in rents with quality and condition contributing to the differences. Some of the owners are in the process of or have rehabbed their units. They are able to get significant premiums for the rehabbed units. Rents for two-bedroom homes or duplexes range from $645 to $900. Rents for three-bedroom homes range from $875 to $1,100. One four-bedroom home rents for $1,200. With the exception of the four-plexes on Jasper Lane and Whispering Pines, which are in initial lease-up, there are not any vacant apartment units. (I was unable to reach the manager at Sunset Apartments, though there was no vacancy sign, and no listing in the newspaper. Ten months ago, he had three vacancies.) Affordable Rent The map on the following page shows the location of the affordable rent comparable. Write-ups of the comparables follow the map. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 68 Florence Affordable Rent Comparable Map ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 69 Rent Comparable No. 1: Oak Terrace Apartments Address: 2350 – 2490 Oak, Florence Project Type: Section 42 Number of Units: 48 Year Built: 1999 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, good condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: There are 1.5 spaces per unit. Common Areas: Playground, community room, garden, and laundry Unit Amenities: Refrigerator and range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 24 2/1 852 SF $370 0 24 3/2 1,242 SF $425 1 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and garbage. Confirmed By: Melissa at St. Vincent de Paul, 866-739-0867 (8/29/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 70 Tenant Demographics: Five percent of tenants are singles, five percent are couples, with the remaining 90 percent families. Approximately one third of the tenants are on S.S.I. due to being either disabled or seniors. The remaining two thirds typically work in service retail, including 7-11, restaurants, and the St. Vincent de Paul Store. (Employees at the St. Vincent de Paul store that work 32 hours a week or more receive health benefits.) With the exception of less than a handful of all tenants who have lived at Oak Terrace since it opened, all lived in Florence prior to moving to Oak Terrace. A few had lived in Florence, moved out of Florence to obtain affordable housing, and then returned to Florence due to the availability of Oak Terrace. The on-site managers are one of the tenants that moved from outside of Florence. Maximum income is 50 percent of median. She has 33 people on the waiting list. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 71 Rent Comparable No. 2: The Pines Address: 1550 15th, Florence Project Type: Section 8 Number of Units: 25 Year Built: 1970s Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, average condition, one-story wood-frame apartment Parking: Open parking only Common Areas: None Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, and range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 11 2/1 760 SF 30% of income 0 14 3/1 840 SF 30% of income 0 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage. Wait List: His waiting list ranges from ten to 100. Tenant Demographics: All of the tenants are families. Ninety percent work, all in Florence. They are a mix of labor and service retail jobs. Confirmed By: Bob, 541-997-2022 (9/7/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 72 Rent Comparable No. 3: Laurelwood Homes Address: 11th and Maple, Florence Project Type: Public Housing Number of Units: 30 Year Built: 1961 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, average condition, one-story wood-frame duplexes Parking: Open parking only Common Areas: Playground and community room Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, and range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 6 1/1 N/A 30% of income 0 14 2/1 N/A 30% of income 0 6 3/1 N/A 30% of income 0 4 4/1 N/A 30% of income 0 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 73 Wait List: There is one waiting list for public housing for all of Lane County. Applicants can express willingness to locate outside the Eugene/Springfield area and have a shorter wait for housing. For outlying areas, the wait is six months to a year. Tenant Demographics: Maximum income is 50 percent of median. There are 35 adults, of which ten have jobs and an additional two are aides at the complex and receive a small stipend. Two receive temporary assistance, three have pensions, nine receive SSI, twelve receive Social Security, two receive child support, and three receive income from a category not previously listed. Confirmed By: John Dimboni (HACSA), 541-682-2585 (9/08/06 SM) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 74 Rent Comparable No. 4: Siuslaw Dunes Apartments Address: 1750 43rd, Florence Project Type: Section 8 Family Number of Units: 45 Year Built: 1982 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, good condition, two-story wood-frame apartments Parking: Open parking only Common Areas: Playground Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, and range/oven Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 6 1/1 500 SF 30 % of income 0 31 2/1 804 - 829 SF 30 % of income 0 8 3/1.5 1,040 SF 30 % of income 0 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and Garbage. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 75 Confirmed By: Ken, 541-997-6036 (8/29/06 SM) Tenant Demographics: Two percent of the tenants are singles, 3 percent are couples, and 95 percent are families. The maximum income is 50 percent of median. She has 20 on the waiting list for one-bedroom units, ten for two- bedroom units, and 18 for three-bedroom units. She loses six to ten tenants per year. Approximately half of her tenants are employed, working at the casino, Subway, Elks Lodge and other service retail jobs. Prospective tenants are living with relatives, commuting from out of town, etc. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 76 Rent Comparable No. 5: Windsong Senior Apartments Address: 1365 Spruce, Florence Project Type: Section 42 Number of Units: 32 Year Built: 1994 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, good condition, two-story wood-frame, central hall-plan apartment Parking: Open spaces Common Areas: Community room Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, and range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 29 1/1 625 SF 30% of Income 0 3 2/1 810 SF 30% of Income 0 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and garbage. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 77 Confirmed By: Katy, 541-997-5398 (8/29/06 SM) Tenant Demographics: Three percent of tenants are couples, with the remaining 97 percent being singles. The maximum income is 60 percent of median. Wait List: She has 19 people on her waiting list. She has lost two tenants since February 2006. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 78 Rent Comparable No. 6: Tanglewood Senior Apartments Address: 1956 16th, Florence Project Type: Section 42 Elderly Number of Units: 40 Year Built: December 2005 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, excellent condition, two-story wood-frame, central hall- plan apartment Parking: Open spaces Common Areas: Community rooms (2) Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, range/oven, and dishwasher. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 36 1/1 742 SF $262, $363, $465, $481 0 3 2/1 1,014 SF $313, $436, $558, $619 2 Rent Comments: Rents are at 30 percent, 40 percent, 50 percent and 60 percent of median. Twenty-six of the units are at the 60 percent rents. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 79 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and garbage. Confirmed By: Betty, 541-997-8817 (8/29/06 SM) Tenant Demographics: Five percent of tenants are couples, with the remaining 95 percent being singles. The maximum income is 60 percent of median. Wait List: She has 8 people on her waiting list for one-bedroom units at the lower rent levels. Absorption: They have absorbed 38 of the 40 units since completion in December 2005, for an average absorption rate of four units per month. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 80 Rent Comparable No. 7: Munsel Park Apartments Address: 2021 12th Street, Florence Project Type: Disabled and Elderly Number of Units: 44 Year Built: 1976 and 1980 Quality/Condition/Style: Average quality, average condition, two-story wood-frame apartment Parking: Open parking only. Common Areas: Community Room Unit Amenities: Refrigerator, range/oven. Unit Rents No. Bed/Baths Sq. Ft. Rent # Vacant 36 1/1 648 SF 30% of income 2 8 2/1 748 SF 30% of income 0 Rent Comments: The maximum rent is $410 for the one-bedroom units and $460 for the two-bedroom units. None of the tenants are paying the maximum rent. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 81 Utilities Included: Water/sewer and garbage. Confirmed By: Ken, 541-997-2661 (8/29/06 SM) Tenant Demographics: 95 percent are singles and 5 percent are couples. The maximum income is 60 percent of median. He has 20 people on the waiting list. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 82 Year Total Type Wait No. Unit Min. Max. Min. Max. No. Name/Location Built Units Complex Program Vacancy List Units MFI Type Aff. Aff. S.F. S.F. 1 Oak Terrace 1999 48 Family LIHTC 1 33 24 50% 2/1 $370 $370 852 852 2350 Oak Garden Family 2.1% 35 3/2 $425 $425 1,242 1,242 Florence Walkup 2 The Pines 1970s 25 Family Section 8 0 50 11 50% 2/1 760 760 1550 15th Garden Family 0.0% 14 3/1 840 840 Florence Walkup 3 Laurelwood Homes 1961 30 Family PHA 0 N/A 6 50% 1/1 N/A N/A 11th & Maple Garden Family 0.0% 12 2/1 N/A N/A Florence Walkup 34 3/1 N/A N/A 8 4/1 N/A N/A 4 Siuslaw Dunes 1982 45 Family Section 8 0 20 6 50% 1/1 500 500 1750 43rd Garden Family 0.0% 10 31 2/1 804 829 Florence Walkup 18 8 3/1.5 1,040 1,040 5 Windsong Senior 1994 32 Elderly LIHTC 1 19 29 60% 1/1 625 625 1365 Spruce Elevator 3.1% 3 2/1 810 810 Florence Central Hall 6 Tanglewood 2005 40 Elderly LIHTC 2 8 36 30% 1/1 $262 $481 742 742 1956 16th Elevator 5.0% 4 to 2/1 $313 $619 1,014 1,014 Florence Central Hall 60% 7 Munsel Park 1976 44 Elderly Section 8 2 35 36 60% 1/1 648 648 2021 12th St. 1980 Garden 4.5% 8 2/1 748 748 Florence Walk up Summary of Low-Income Apartment Rent Comparables 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income 30% of income ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 83 Subsidized Rent Analysis The chart on the preceding page summarizes the rental information from the seven subsidized rent comparables. As you can see, four of the complexes are family complexes, and three are senior/disabled complexes. Five of the seven charge tenants 30 percent of their income toward rent and utilities, while the other two have set rents. Oak Terrace is the only family complex with set rents. At $370 for two- bedroom units and $425 for three-bedroom units, these rents are significantly lower than the older market- rate two-bedroom rents ($495 to $700) and three-bedroom rents ($650). The maximum allowed household income for tenants at Oak Terrace is 50 percent of median, which for a household of 3 persons (two-bedroom unit) is $24,600 and for a household of 4.5 persons (three-bedroom unit) is $28,450. Not surprisingly, the manager has 33 people on her waiting list. H.U.D. assumes that 1.5 persons per bedroom, in their calculation of affordable rents. Thus, they assume 1.5 persons in a one-bedroom unit, three persons in a two-bedroom unit, etc. They assume that a family can afford 30 percent of their monthly household income for rent and utilities. The utility allowances were provided by Housing and Community Services, the Section 8 provider in Lane County. The table below shows the Lane County 2006 calculated rents at various income levels for one-bedroom, two- bedroom, three-bedroom, and four-bedroom units. Median Family Income and Rents Lane County 2006 Less 2006 Family Sizes/ Incomes Allowed Utility Adjusted Median Income 2006 Rents Allow Rents Family of 1.5 40% $16,420 $411 (46)$ $365 50% $20,525 $513 (46)$ $467 60% $24,630 $616 (46)$ $570 Family of 3 40% $19,680 $492 (57)$ $435 50% $24,600 $615 (57)$ $558 60% $29,520 $738 (57)$ $681 Family of 4.5 40% $22,760 $569 (64)$ $505 50% $28,450 $711 (64)$ $647 60% $34,140 $854 (64)$ $790 Family of 6 40% $25,400 $635 (73)$ $562 50% $31,750 $794 (73)$ $721 60% $38,100 $953 (73)$ $880 ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Rent Comparables Page 84 Conclusions In determining the unmet demand for affordable housing units in Florence, I used HUD SOCDS data from the 2000 Census, surveyed property managers of market-rate and affordable rental housing in Florence, and surveyed several of the major employers in Florence to estimate the unmet need. The following table details my estimate of the allocation of unmet need for 265 affordable housing units in Florence. Type < 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% 50% to 60% One-bedroom 104 50 45 (8) Two-bedroom 27 8 8 3 Three-bedroom 28 - - - Total 159 58 53 (5) Source: SOCDS CHAS Data Projected Unmet Need by Income Band Florence The only two apartment complexes that have been built since 1981 in Florence, were both built as condominiums, and are a series of four-plexes. The ones on Jasper Lane are two-bedroom 2.5-bath units with attached garages. They are 1,200 square feet and rent for $950 ($0.79 per square foot). The ones on Whispering Pines are two-bedroom 1.5-bath units with open parking only. They are 1,000 square feet and rent for $750 to $850 ($0.75 to $0.85 per square foot). The remaining complexes were built between the 1940s and 1981. They indicated one-bedroom rents in the range of $400 to $585; two-bedroom rents in the range of $495 to $700; and two three-bedroom units that rent for $650. As you can see, there is considerable overlap in rents with quality and condition contributing to the differences. Some of the owners are in the process of or have rehabbed their units. They are able to get significant premiums for the rehabbed units. Rents for two-bedroom homes or duplexes range from $645 to $900. Rents for three-bedroom homes range from $875 to $1,100. One four-bedroom home rents for $1,200. With the exception of the four-plexes on Jasper Lane and Whispering Pines, which are in initial lease-up, there are not any vacant apartment units. (I was unable to reach the manager at Sunset Apartments, though there was no vacancy sign, and no listing in the newspaper. Ten months ago, he had three vacancies.) Oak Terrace is the only family complex with set rents. At $370 for two-bedroom units and $425 for three-bedroom units, these rents are significantly lower than the older market-rate two-bedroom rents ($495 to $700) and three-bedroom rents ($650). The maximum allowed household income for tenants at Oak Terrace is 50 percent of median, which for a household of 3 persons (two-bedroom unit) is $24,600 and for a household of 4.5 persons (three-bedroom unit) is $28,450. Not surprisingly, the manager has 33 people on her waiting list. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Conclusions Page 85 This report is subject to the Limiting Conditions, Certification and Special Assumptions contained herein. It has been made in conformity with, and is subject to, the requirements of the Appraisal Institute. This report is meant to comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ SCM 06-383 – City of Florence Conclusions Page 86 4535 S.W. 96th Avenue Phone 503-643-8200 Beaverton, OR 97005-3329 Fax 503-643-8333 Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI Real Estate Appraiser and Consultant APPRAISAL EXPERIENCE I have specialized in the appraisal and review of complex income-producing real estate, including Section 42 L.I.H.T.C. affordable apartment complexes, since 1991. In addition, I do market studies of proposed affordable apartment complexes. Between 1988 and 1991, I primarily reviewed appraisal seminars for the Appraisal Institute. Between 1983 and 1987, I appraised income-producing properties. My clients have included several large and small banks, several government agencies (federal, state, and local), and several private clients, including community development corporations. A list of some of the properties appraised and reviewed over the last several years is found on the following pages. EDUCATION Courses: All courses required for the MAI designation of the Appraisal Institute. Courses were taken between 1980 and 1985. Standards of Professional Practice was taken most recently in 2000. Highest and Best Use and Market Analysis was taken in 2003. Seminars: Numerous seminars on a wide variety of topics. Most recently took Scope of Work, 2006; USPAP Update, 2005; The Road Less Traveled: Special Purpose Properties, 2005; Analyzing Distressed Real Estate, 2005; Affordable Housing Conference, 2005; Introduction to GIS Applications for Real Estate Appraisal, 2004; Real Estate Fraud, 2001; Attacking and Defending an Appraisal, 2001; State of the Valuation Profession, 2001; Affordable Housing, 1999; Online Internet Search Strategies for Real Estate, 1999; Appraising from Blueprints, 1998. General: University of California at Davis - Bachelor of Arts 1975 Portland State University - Master of Business Administration 1980 EXPERIENCE Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI; Appraisal and Consultation 1994 - Anderson, Ostly & Glanville; Appraisal & Consultation 1990 - 1994 Appraisal Institute; Seminar Consultant 1988 - 1991 Property Counselors, Inc.; Appraisal & Consultation 1983 - 1987 Old Stone Mortgage Corporation; Loan Officer 1980 - 1983 PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS Member, Appraisal Institute (MAI) Have held numerous volunteer committee chair and committee member positions for State Chapter of the Appraisal Institute LICENSE & CERTIFICATION State Certified Appraiser, State of Oregon, Certificate No. C000044 State Certified Appraiser, State of Washington, Certificate No. 1100131 Real Estate Broker, State of Oregon Oregon Certified Women Business Enterprise, No. 1305 Assignment Exist/ Property Name Type Prop Property Type City State SUBSIDIZED MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTIES Esperanza Court Market Study Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Royal Building Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Springfield Oregon Town Center Station Market Study Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Broadway Mixed Use Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Salem Oregon New Winds Market Study Proposed Section 42 Special Needs Florence Oregon West Town on Eighth Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Eugene Oregon Sabin C.D.C. Scattered Site Appraisal Existing Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Rickreal Creek Market Study Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Dallas Oregon Mountain Laurel Lodge Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Elderly Apartments Bend Oregon Mount Scott Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Hillside Terrace Market Study Existing Section 42 Family Apartments Coquille Oregon Jefferson Park Market Study Existing Section 42 Elderly Apartments Cottage Grove Oregon Vintage at Vancouver Appraisal Existing Section 42 Elderly Apartments Vancouver Washington Oleson Woods Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Lincoln Woods Market Study Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Santa Clara Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Eugene Oregon Maya Angelou Appraisal Existing Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Country View Appraisal Existing Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Kateri Park Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Hotel Alder Market Study Existing Section 42 SRO Portland Oregon Foster Townhomes Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Caritas Market Study Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Grand Hotel Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Roseburg Oregon Tower at Station Place Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Elderly Apartments Portland Oregon Cascadia Village Apartments Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Vancouver Washington Newell Creek Apartments Market Study Existing Section 42 Family Apartments Oregon City Oregon Carolina 100 Apartments Appraisal Existing Affordable Family Apartments Lebanon Oregon Biltmore Hotel Market Study Existing Section 42 SRO Portland Oregon Douglas Meadows Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Ridgeview Commons Review Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Prineville Oregon Villa Capri Apartments Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Hillsboro Oregon Sheldon Village I & II Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Eugene Oregon Redwood Commons Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments McMinnville Oregon Mountain View Estates Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Maya Angelou Appraisal Existing Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Villa del Mar Appraisal Existing Section 42 Family Apartments Astoria Oregon Blue Ridge Appraisal Existing Section 42 Family Apartments Winston Oregon Housing Our Families Plexes Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Plexes Portland Oregon Meriwether Village Elderly Appraisal Existing Affordable Elderly Apartments Astoria Oregon Villa St. Rose Elderly Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Elderly Apartments Portland Oregon Rosemont Family Units Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon PCRI Plexes Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Plexes Portland Oregon Northslope Apartments Appraisal Rehab Section 42 Family Apartments Sutherlin Oregon Stagecoach Apartments Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Canyonville Oregon Rosemont Elderly Market Study Proposed Section 42 Elderly Apartments Portland Oregon Rondel Court Apartments Review Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Mollala Oregon Sabin CDC Plexes Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Plexes Portland Oregon Oakwood Manor Apartments Appraisal Rehab Section 42 Family Apartments Eugene Oregon Russellville Commons Market Study Proposed Market/Affordable Apartments Portland Oregon West Park Orchards Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Elderly Apartments The Dalles Oregon Woodleaf Village Apartments Review Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Eugene Oregon Family Apartments Mkt Study Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Riddle Oregon Elderly Apartments Mkt Study Proposed Section 42 Elderly Apartments Winston Oregon Hacienda Large Family Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Queens Heights Apartments Appraisal Rehab Section 42 Family Apartments Hood River Oregon Camar Apartments Appraisal Rehab Section 42 Family Apartments Portland Oregon Vuecrest Apartments Mkt Study Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Hermiston Oregon Myrtle Terrace Apartments Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Myrtle Creek Oregon Sommerville Place Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Harrisburg Oregon Hailey Place Apartments Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Family Apartments Pendleton Oregon Wygant Street Housing Appraisal Proposed Affordable Apartments Portland Oregon GBC Senior Center Appraisal Proposed Section 42 Elderly Apartments Portland Oregon Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI List of Recent Appraisal and Consulting Assignments Sylvia C. McFarland, MAI List of Recent Appraisal and Consulting Assignments Assignment Exist/ Property Name Type Prop Property Type City State COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES Downtown Pendleton Market Study Proposed Mixed Use Commercial/Housing Pendleton Oregon Cimmiyotti Building Appraisal Existing Mixed Use Retail/Apartments Pendleton Oregon Standard Dairy Appraisal Proposed Mixed Use Section 42/Lofts/Retail Portland Oregon The Planing Mill Review Existing Mixed-Use Industrial & Retail Eugene Oregon Belmont Dairy Review Proposed Mixed Use Section 42/Lofts/Retail Portland Oregon LeMaster Daniels Building Appraisal Existing Single-Tenant Office Yakima Washington H.A.P. Building Appraisal Existing Single-Tenant Office Portland Oregon 7700 Group Building Appraisal Existing Single-Tenant Office Portland Oregon LaClinica Appraisal Proposed Multi-Tenant Office Portland Oregon S.W. Family Clinic Appraisal Existing Single-Tenant Office Tigard Oregon Schwartz/Fujji Appraisal Exist/Prop Multi-Tenant Office Corvallis Oregon Tennant Office Building Appraisal Existing Multi-Tenant Office Bend Oregon Willamette Dental Office Building Appraisal Existing Single-Tenant Office Beaverton Oregon Parr Lumber Review Proposed Retail Hillsboro Oregon Ernst Home Improvement Review Proposed Retail Salem Oregon Walnut Avenue Mall Review Existing Retail Sun Valley Idaho Wells Fargo Bank Branch Appraisal Existing Bank Branch Pendleton Oregon Twin Cedars Mobile Home Park Appraisal Existing Manufactured Housing Park Lebanon Oregon Wells Fargo Bank Branch Appraisal Existing Bank Branch Yakima Washington First Interstate Bank Branch Review Existing Bank Branch Boise Idaho Parkside Subdivision Appraisal Proposed Subdivision LaCenter Washington Helen's View Subdivision Appraisal Proposed Subdivision Clark County Washington INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES Dynagraphics Appraisal Existing Warehouse Portland Oregon HLW Teton Building Appraisal Existing Warehouse Tualatin Oregon Lake Oswego Commerce Center Appraisal Existing Industrial Park Lake Oswego Oregon Leonetti Building Appraisal Existing Warehouse Beaverton Oregon McFadden Building Appraisal Existing Office/Warehouse Beaverton Oregon Blue Bird Transfer Building Appraisal Existing Warehouse Tigard Oregon E.J. Bartells Building Appraisal Existing Warehouse Portland Oregon Columbia Stone Development Appraisal Proposed Warehouse Tualatin Oregon Boden Store Fixtures Appraisal Proposed Warehouse and Manufacturing Portland Oregon Wood Tape Manufacturing Fac. Review Proposed Industrial Manufacturing Everett Washington Chamberlain Manufacturing Review Existing Industrial Manufacturing Forest Grove Oregon U.S. Postal Service Rent Survey Existing Industrial Portland Oregon 138th & Marine Drive Appraisal Vac Land Industrial Portland Oregon MARKET-RATE MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTIES Port St. Johns Apartments Appraisal Existing Apartments Portland Oregon Marshall Arms Apartments Appraisal Existing Apartments Portland Oregon Raliegh Court Apartments Appraisal Existing Apartments Portland Oregon Willow Pointe Appraisal Proposed Apartments Vancouver Washington Cable Village Apartments Appraisal Proposed Apartments Portland Oregon