“Old Approach to Needs Analysis” The standard practice in Oregon has been to extrapolate forward the past 5 or more years in housing production as the

The Housing/Land Needs Model

A Methodology for Calculating and Analyzing Housing and Land Needs

Developed by

Richard Bjelland

Oregon’s Statewide Planning Goal 10

Goal 10 – the Housing goal - provides directionand guidance to the state and its city governmentsabout how to plan for balanced housingopportunities in Oregon communities.

Goal 10 states that “plans shall encourage theavailability of adequate numbers of neededhousing units at price ranges and rent levels whichare commensurate with the financial capabilitiesof Oregon households and allow for flexibility ofhousing location, type and density. “

“Old Approach to Needs Analysis”

The standard practice in Oregon has been to extrapolate forward the past 5 or more years in housing production as the basis for determining a region’s future housing requirements.

“Demand” was assumed to be equivalent to “need”.

“New Methodology”

A guiding principal in the development of the housing needs model was that the methodology for calculating housing needs was to be driven by the demographics of the study area – by people not production.

Housing Need is Defined by Housing Choice Options

Tenure - Rent versus Own

Price - What is an affordable price range

Housing type - What style of housing is desired

Initial Research

Identify those demographic variables that would be highly correlated with housing needs

Two variables – age of head of household (Age - A) and household income (Income – I) - demonstrated significantly stronger correlation with housing tenure than other variables including household size

Household income is the key variable in determining the affordability component of housing needs

Age and Income data is available for each potential study area

Initial Steps Select the age and income ranges that would be used to

break the study area’s population into household cohorts

Seven Age ranges - under 25, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75 and older - were chosen

Seven Income ranges - under $10,000; 10,000-19,999; 20,000-29,999; 30,000-39,999; 40,000-49,999; 50,000-74,999; 75,000 and over - were chosen

These age and income ranges define 49 Age/Income cohorts and were determined to be the most useful ranges for calculating housing needs

Initial Steps (cont.) Find a source of demographic data for the 49

Age/Income cohorts Census 2000 was selected as the source for this

demographic data Households in these 49 Age/Income (AI) cohorts

make significantly different housing tenure choices as reflected by the Census data

Use the choices derived from the Census for each cohort as the basis for tenure parameters in the model

Next Steps Compared model results with Census 2000 data Determined that households in certain types of cities

made different housing tenure choices Created three categories of census places with model

tenure parameters for each category Version U - Urban, college, and resort Version M - Medium Rural (6,750 -22,500) Version S - Small Rural (under 6,750)

Added “wealth” factor to model Added mortgage rate factor for affordability impact

Number of Census Places

2000 Population

% Population

% Owner-occupied Housing

% Renter-occupied housing

Persons per

Household

Population outside Census Places 855,704 25.0% 80.5% 19.5% 2.671

Census Places Under 1,000 117 48,240 1.4% 73.5% 26.5% 2.498

Census Places 1,000-2,499 68 111,213 3.3% 71.2% 28.8% 2.552

Census Places 2,500-4,999 35 126,957 3.7% 68.4% 31.6% 2.653

Census Places 5,000-9,999 39 276,049 8.1% 61.2% 38.8% 2.518

Census Places 10,000-19,999 26 373,197 10.9% 61.6% 38.4% 2.607

Cities 20,000-49,999 14 421,534 12.3% 60.3% 39.7% 2.611

Cities 50,000-99,999 6 404,567 11.8% 54.3% 45.7% 2.595

Cities over 100,000 3 803,938 23.5% 55.3% 44.7% 2.418

All Census Places 308 2,565,695 75.0% 59.1% 40.9% 2.532

Oregon 3,421,399 100.0% 64.3% 35.7% 2.565

Analysis of Housing Tenure in Oregon by Census Place Size

Number of Census

Places

2000 Population

% Population

% Owner-occupied Housing

% Renter-occupied housing

Persons per

Household

Population outside Census Places 855,704 25.0% 80.5% 19.5% 2.67

Census Places Under 5,000 220 286,410 8.4% 70.4% 29.6% 2.59

Census Places 5,000-49,999 79 1,070,780 31.3% 61.0% 39.0% 2.59

Cities over 50,000 9 1,208,505 35.3% 55.0% 45.0% 2.47

Oregon 3,421,399 100.0% 64.3% 35.7% 2.57

2000 Census Data

Oregon Census Places Grouped by Similar Housing Tenure

HHr 15 to 24 years

HHr 25 to 34 years

HHr 35 to 44 years

HHr 45 to 54 years

HHr 55 to 64 years

HHr 65 to 74 years

HHr 75 years +

URC 7.8% 34.9% 58.5% 70.0% 74.5% 76.4% 67.1%

M 20.7% 52.5% 64.5% 72.4% 77.5% 81.4% 70.1%

S 27.2% 54.7% 67.1% 76.8% 81.1% 84.9% 78.2%

Less than $10,000

$10,000 to $19,999

$20,000 to $24,999

$25,000 to $34,999

$35,000 to $49,999

$50,000 to $74,999

$75,000 and up

URC 23.1% 34.0% 39.9% 45.7% 57.0% 71.5% 85.8%

M 31.6% 45.6% 54.5% 59.4% 67.6% 79.5% 89.2%

S 47.1% 58.1% 64.7% 69.9% 74.9% 83.7% 89.6%

Data Set: Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) - Sample Data

Percentage of Households Who are Homeowners by Age of Householder

Oregon Households in Census Places

Percentage of Households Who are Homeowners by Household Income

15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

<10k 2.9% 7.9% 16.0% 25.0% 43.0% 46.1% 40.0%

10k<20k 3.6% 12.7% 25.0% 37.0% 47.0% 61.0% 56.2%

20k<30k 6.0% 16.6% 36.0% 45.0% 54.0% 73.2% 67.1%

30k<40k 7.9% 23.9% 48.0% 53.7% 60.0% 74.4% 70.1%

40k<50k 10.8% 32.9% 58.1% 62.4% 80.0% 91.0% 84.0%

50k<75k 22.5% 49.9% 72.0% 82.9% 88.6% 92.1% 91.2%

75k+ 32.0% 75.0% 83.0% 92.0% 96.0% 97.0% 93.0%

Oregon Census Places 2000 Parameters

Urban Resort College

Homeownership Percentage by Age and Income Cohorts

Model Assumptions Housing need is defined by cohort tenure choices and is

equivalent to the actual cohort tenure data found within a large regional area

While the local supply of rental versus ownership housing may not be in equilibrium with tenure need in some markets, on a larger regional basis it is in equilibrium

Housing that is at “price ranges and rent levels commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households” means that no more than 30% of a household’s income should be spent on housing costs, i.e., is affordable

The seven Income ranges in conjunction with the 30% limit on housing costs establishes the price ranges and rent levels used in the model to calculate the housing units needed at each price point

Model Design Goals Model structure should employ individual modules for each analytical

component by using Excel templates. Data needed to drive the model must be available. Data gathering requirements for each locality should be minimized. Parameters in the model should be easy to update and modify. Model should be a user-friendly tool for city staff or interested parties. Model should allow users to easily test out different growth scenarios. Model should automatically produce tables and graphs that can be used

as printed material for public dissemination of model results. Model should reflect local conditions and characteristics. Model should work for any size city and location. Model should accommodate interaction with other planning goals. Model should be flexible and have a variety of uses beyond satisfying

Goal 10.

Model Housing Types

Single Family Units – either site built or manufactured single family dwellings on their own lot

Manufactured Dwelling Park Unit – a single family dwelling unit located in a rental park

Duplex Unit – a two-family dwelling unit located on its own lot

Tri-plex or Quad-plex Unit – a three or four-family dwelling unit

5+ Multi-family Unit – dwelling units in buildings with 5 or more units per building

Five housing types have been identified for use in the model to categorize a community’s existing inventory of dwelling units. Each of these housing types can be owner occupied or renter occupied.

Why cities should use the Model

The model represents a methodology that guides cities through a process that appropriately determines their housing needs in a way that compels them to address the types of housing needed to support their population

The output of the housing needs module then drives the land use module which calculates the land needed within their UGB for housing

User Inputs for Running Model Housing inventory by Housing Type and Price Point Out Factor adjustment for reflecting local lifestyle

choices - optional Future population projection and household

Income/Age distribution Planned distribution of new housing units by

housing type, tenure, and price point Planned housing density by land use zone Housing inventory by land use zone Planned distribution of new housing units by zone Buildable land inventory by land use zone

Model templates color scheme

Label or data descriptor for data element

Model parameter such as the percentage of Households in this Age / Income cohort that will own or rent

A model input requirement such as the percentage of Households that are in this Age / Income cohort

A number produced by the Housing Needs Analysis template reflecting the data, assumptions, and estimates used in this scenario

Housing/Land Needs Templates

• The following slides demonstrate the templates and graphs used in the model to calculate and display housing and land needs.

• These slides are taken from several model runs and will not be internally consistent.

• The model contains additional templates and graphs that are similar to those that follow.

Name identifying the area of interest for this needs analysis

Date of time frame of data used to define Current Housing Status

Date or year that represents the end of the planning period

Vacancy factor for ownership units used for this scenario

Vacancy factor for rental units used for this scenario

Name assigned to this scenario that will be displayed on output

Mortgage rates are high

Mortgage rates are low

Average historical mortgage rate

2.0%

6.0%

Historical 1

Click on the appropriate button below to select the mortgage assumptions to be used in this model run to set the Ownership price points for this scenario's time period

2000

2020

The Housing Needs Model - Version M©

A Methodology and Model for Calculating and Analyzing Housing Needs

Model Parameters Input Sheet

Scenario Parameters

Cascadia

High

Low

Historic

Home

CACurrent

Population

CBPersons in

Group Quarters

CCOccupied Dwelling Units* /

Households

CDPersons

per Household

CEVacant Units

CFCurrent

Total Dwelling Units**

CGCurrent Vacancy

Rate

Actual or estimated

Actual or estimated

Actual or estimated

(CA-CB)/CCActual or estimated

CC+CE CE/CF

28,650 190 11,345 2.509 600 11,945 5.02%

* Number of non-Group Quarter Occupied Dwelling Units = Number of Households** Excludes Group Quarter Dwelling Units

Template 1

Housing Needs ©

Current Housing Status

For Cascadia

Scenario Historical 1

as of 2000

Home

FAFuture

Population

FB Future

Persons in Group

Quarters

FCFuture

Persons per Household

FD Future

Occupied Dwelling

Units*

FE Current

Total Dwelling

Units

FF Dwelling

Units Removed

FG New

Dwelling Units

Needed**Estimated Estimated Estimated (FA-FB)/FC CF Estimated FD-FE+FF

42,100 285 2.45 17,067 11,945 340 5,462

* Number of non-Group Quarter Occupied Dwelling Units** Excludes Group Quarter Dwelling Units

as of 2020

Projected Future Housing Status

HHs in Cohort as % of all

AI Cohort HHs

AgeIncome (Note 1)

Renter %

Homeowner %

11,345 Number Rental Owned% of HHs (Note 2)

Owned Units Out

Remaining Units

<10k 96.7% 3.3% 0.9181% 104 100.7 3.4 0 - 199 <28.3k 20% 0.7 2.7

10k <20k 88.5% 11.5% 1.4075% 160 141.3 18.4 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k 20% 3.7 14.7

20k <30k 82.8% 17.2% 1.2955% 147 121.7 25.3 430 - 664 56.7k <85k 15% 3.8 21.5

30k <40k 77.3% 22.7% 0.8863% 101 77.7 22.8 665 - 909 85k <113.3k 15% 3.4 19.4

40k <50k 67.6% 32.4% 0.8517% 97 65.3 31.3 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k 8% 2.5 28.8

50k <75k 63.0% 37.0% 0.8476% 96 60.6 35.6 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k 5% 1.8 33.8

75k+ 51.1% 48.9% 0.1977% 22 11.5 11.0 1765+ 212.5k+ 5% 0.5 10.4

<10k 81.2% 18.8% 1.2098% 137 111.4 25.8 0 - 199 <28.3k 20% 5.2 20.6

10k <20k 68.2% 31.8% 2.0587% 234 159.3 74.3 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k 20% 14.9 59.4

20k <30k 65.2% 34.8% 2.6754% 304 197.9 105.6 430 - 664 56.7k <85k 15% 15.8 89.8

30k <40k 57.5% 42.5% 3.1040% 352 202.5 149.7 665 - 909 85k <113.3k 15% 22.4 127.2

40k <50k 48.0% 52.0% 2.9768% 338 162.1 175.6 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k 8% 14.0 161.6

50k <75k 31.5% 68.5% 4.6830% 531 167.4 363.9 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k 5% 18.2 345.7

75k+ 16.0% 84.0% 2.5814% 293 46.9 246.0 1765+ 212.5k+ 5% 12.3 233.7

<10k 78.8% 21.2% 1.3246% 150 118.4 31.9 0 - 199 <28.3k 20% 6.4 25.5

10k <20k 66.0% 34.0% 2.0449% 232 153.1 78.9 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k 20% 15.8 63.1

20k <30k 56.1% 43.9% 2.2412% 254 142.6 111.6 430 - 664 56.7k <85k 15% 16.7 94.9

30k <40k 45.0% 55.0% 3.0487% 346 155.6 190.2 665 - 909 85k <113.3k 15% 28.5 161.7

40k <50k 34.0% 66.0% 3.0390% 345 117.2 227.6 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k 8% 18.2 209.3

50k <75k 20.0% 80.0% 5.9799% 678 135.7 542.7 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k 5% 27.1 515.6

75k+ 13.9% 86.1% 4.2101% 478 66.4 411.2 1765+ 212.5k+ 5% 20.6 390.7

<10k 72.3% 27.7% 1.1393% 129 93.4 35.8 0 - 199 <28.3k 30% 10.7 25.1

10k <20k 60.0% 40.0% 1.4932% 169 101.6 67.8 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k 30% 20.3 47.4

20k <30k 49.1% 50.9% 1.9288% 219 107.4 111.4 430 - 664 56.7k <85k 20% 22.3 89.1

30k <40k 41.0% 59.0% 2.3256% 264 108.2 155.7 665 - 909 85k <113.3k 15% 23.3 132.3

40k <50k 27.5% 72.5% 2.4044% 273 75.0 197.8 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k 15% 29.7 168.1

50k <75k 13.9% 86.1% 4.9540% 562 78.1 483.9 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k 15% 72.6 411.3

75k+ 6.7% 93.3% 4.6152% 524 35.1 488.5 1765+ 212.5k+ 10% 48.9 439.7

Units Indicated Adjustment for HHs Without Mortgages

Dwelling Unit Needs Indicated by Tenure Choice and Affordable Cost ©

For Cascadia as of April 2000


Cohort Rent Range

(Note 1)

Price Range

(Note 1)

TenureUnits Indicated

by Housing Type

<25

25 <35

35 <45

45 <55

Home

<10k 53.6% 46.4% 0.9734% 110 59.2 51.2 0 - 199 <28.3k 70% 35.9 15.4

10k <20k 47.0% 53.0% 1.2637% 143 67.4 76.0 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k 50% 38.0 38.0

20k <30k 40.0% 60.0% 1.3605% 154 61.7 92.6 430 - 664 56.7k <85k 35% 32.4 60.2

30k <40k 30.1% 69.9% 1.7089% 194 58.4 135.5 665 - 909 85k <113.3k 35% 47.4 88.1

40k <50k 11.0% 89.0% 1.3605% 154 17.0 137.4 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k 30% 41.2 96.2

50k <75k 8.0% 92.0% 2.6007% 295 23.6 271.4 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k 30% 81.4 190.0

75k+ 5.0% 95.0% 2.3491% 267 13.3 253.2 1765+ 212.5k+ 15% 38.0 215.2

<10k 49.4% 50.6% 1.2264% 139 68.7 70.4 0 - 199 <28.3k 80% 56.3 14.1

10k <20k 32.8% 67.2% 2.0311% 230 75.6 154.8 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k 60% 92.9 61.9

20k <30k 12.0% 88.0% 2.0919% 237 28.5 208.8 430 - 664 56.7k <85k 75% 156.6 52.2

30k <40k 10.0% 90.0% 1.4144% 160 16.0 144.4 665 - 909 85k <113.3k 60% 86.7 57.8

40k <50k 5.5% 94.5% 1.0259% 116 6.4 110.0 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k 55% 60.5 49.5

50k <75k 5.0% 95.0% 1.0840% 123 6.1 116.8 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k 45% 52.6 64.3

75k+ 4.0% 96.0% 0.6111% 69 2.8 66.6 1765+ 212.5k+ 45% 30.0 36.6

<10k 56.9% 43.1% 2.1486% 244 138.7 105.1 0 - 199 <28.3k 80% 84.0 21.0

10k <20k 39.8% 60.2% 4.1313% 469 186.5 282.2 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k 80% 225.7 56.4

20k <30k 22.0% 78.0% 2.4943% 283 62.3 220.7 430 - 664 56.7k <85k 85% 187.6 33.1

30k <40k 11.1% 88.9% 1.4490% 164 18.2 146.1 665 - 909 85k <113.3k 90% 131.5 14.6

40k <50k 9.7% 90.3% 0.7646% 87 8.4 78.3 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k 80% 62.7 15.7

50k <75k 8.1% 91.9% 0.8476% 96 7.8 88.4 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k 80% 70.7 17.7

75k+ 7.2% 92.8% 0.6208% 70 5.1 65.4 1765+ 212.5k+ 70% 45.8 19.6

100.0% 11,345 4,046 7,299

Note 1-Income, Rent, and Price are stated in 1999 dollars. Rent and Price Ranges for each Income cohort represent the upper limits for affordable housing for that cohort, i.e., housing

that is non-cost burdened where no more than 30% of the household income is spent on housing.

Note 2 - Percent of owner households in this cohort estimated to live in a housing unit at a higher price point and can afford that unit due to no or low mortgage payments.


Model parameter such as the percentage of Households in this Age / Income cohort that will own or rent

The percentage of Households that are in this Age / Income cohort as of the above time period


Totals

75 +

55 <65

65 <75

Rent* # Units % of Units Cum % Price* # Units % of Units Cum %

0 - 199 652 15.4% 15.4% <28.3k 127 1.7% 1.7%

200 - 429 941 22.3% 37.7% 28.3k <56.7k 348 4.7% 6.4%

430 - 664 768 18.2% 55.9% 56.7k <85k 1,073 14.4% 20.8%

665 - 909 677 16.0% 72.0% 85k <113.3k 1,058 14.2% 35.0%

910 - 1149 480 11.4% 83.4% 113.3k <141.7k 1,094 14.7% 49.7%

1150 - 1764 510 12.1% 95.4% 141.7k <212.5k 1,844 24.8% 74.4%

1765+ 193 4.6% 100.0% 212.5k+ 1,904 25.6% 100.0% All Units

Totals 4,221 % of All 36.2% Totals 7,448 % of All 63.8% 11,669

* Housing Units Indicated is based on the 'Calculation of Dwelling Unit Needs Indicated by Tenure

Choice and Affordable Cost' template and incorporates the inclusion of a vacancy factor.

The numbers represent the units that could be afforded at that cost.

** Rent and Price Ranges are stated in 1999 dollars and are the upper limits for affordable housing

Rental Ownership

Housing Units Indicated by Tenure & Cost**

RentOut

Factor**Tenant

Vouchers***Needed

Units% of Units Cum % Price

Out Factor**

Needed Units

% of Units Cum %

0 - 199 0% 35 664 15.7% 15.7% <56.7k 0% 529 7.1% 7.1%

200 - 429 5% 30 903 21.4% 37.1% 56.7k <85k 5% 1,072 14.4% 21.5%

430 - 664 5% 25 838 19.8% 56.9% 85k <113.3k 5% 1,081 14.5% 36.0%

665 - 909 10% 755 17.9% 74.8% 113.3k <141.7k 7% 1,165 15.6% 51.7%

910 - 1149 25% 711 16.9% 91.7% 141.7k <212.5k 8% 1,982 26.6% 78.3%

1150 + 50% 351 8.3% 100.0% 212.5k+ 15% 1,619 21.7% 100.0%

Totals 90 4,221 % of All 36.2% 7,448 % of All 63.8%

* Housing Units Needed is based on the 'Housing Units Indicated by Tenure and Cost' table and incorporates an adjustment factor to reflect

that some households will choose to occupy a housing unit in a lower cost category than the one they could afford.

** The adjustment factor represents the percentage adjustments needed to reflect households who could afford that cost level but chose a

lower cost unit (Out Factor).

*** Estimated number of Section 8 Vouchers/Certificates or similar subsidies used to lower tenant paid rents to this price point


The percentage of Households that could afford a unit at this housing cost but chose a lower cost unit


OwnershipRental

Housing Units Needed by Tenure & Cost* ©

Cascadia Rental Units Needed in 2000

664

903838

755711

351

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

0 - 199 200 - 429 430 - 664 665 - 909 910 - 1149 1150 +

Monthly Rent

Un

its

Cascadia Rental Units Needed in 2000

642

886 917

760

855

462

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

0 - 199 200 - 429 430 - 664 665 - 909 910 - 1149 1150 +

Monthly RentU

nit

s

Cascadia Ow nership Units Needed in 2000

529

1,072 1,081 1,165

1,982

1,619

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

<56.7k 56.7k <85k 85k <113.3k 113.3k<141.7k

141.7k<212.5k

212.5k+

Housing Cost

Un

its

Historical 1

RentSingle

Family Units

Manufactd Dwelling

Park Units

Duplex Units

Tri-Quadplex Units

5+ Multi-Family Units

Total Units % of UnitsCumulative

%

10 10 40 40 210 310

3.2% 3.2% 12.9% 12.9% 67.7% 100.0%

80 20 45 100 200 445

18.0% 4.5% 10.1% 22.5% 44.9% 100.0%

260 45 115 245 425 1,090

23.9% 4.1% 10.6% 22.5% 39.0% 100.0%

370 25 135 190 340 1,060

34.9% 2.4% 12.7% 17.9% 32.1% 100.0%

480 25 120 100 245 970

49.5% 2.6% 12.4% 10.3% 25.3% 100.0%

355 10 15 10 60 450

78.9% 2.2% 3.3% 2.2% 13.3% 100.0%

Totals 1,555 135 470 685 1,480 4,325 % of All 36.2%

Percentage 36.0% 3.1% 10.9% 15.8% 34.2% 100.0%

67.2%

22.4% 89.6%

10.4% 100.0%

7.2%

10.3% 17.5%

25.2% 42.7%

665 - 909

910 - 1149

1150 +

7.2%

24.5%

Scenario

For Cascadia as of April 2000

Rental

Current Inventory of Dwelling Units ©

0 - 199

200 - 429

430 - 664

Home

Price *Single

Family Units

Manufactd Dwelling

Park Units

Duplex Units

Tri-Quadplex Units


Total Units % of UnitsCumulative

%

350 265 20 20 10 665

52.6% 39.8% 3.0% 3.0% 1.5% 100.0%

410 210 30 25 50 725

56.6% 29.0% 4.1% 3.4% 6.9% 100.0%

830 180 20 20 60 1,110

74.8% 16.2% 1.8% 1.8% 5.4% 100.0%

1,220 110 5 5 10 1,350

90.4% 8.1% 0.4% 0.4% 0.7% 100.0%

1,995 55 10 5 10 2,075

96.1% 2.7% 0.5% 0.2% 0.5% 100.0%

1,690 0 5 1,695

99.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 100.0%

Totals 6,495 820 85 75 145 7,620 % of All 63.8%

Percentage 85.2% 10.8% 1.1% 1.0% 1.9% 100.0%

Single Family Units

Manufactd Dwelling

Park Units

Duplex Units

Tri-Quadplex Units


Total Units**

Total Dwelling

Units**

Inventory Check

Totals 8,050 955 555 760 1,625 11,945 11,945 Correct

Percentage 67.4% 8.0% 4.6% 6.4% 13.6% 100.0%

27.2% 77.8%

22.2% 100.0%

141.7k <212.5k

212.5k+

8.7% 8.7%

9.5% 18.2%

14.6% 32.8%

17.7% 50.5%

<56.7k

56.7k <85k

85k <113.3k

113.3k <141.7k

Ownership

RentCurrent

Unmet Need / (Surplus)

% of Need Met

Cumulative Units

NeededPrice

Current Unmet Need

/ (Surplus)

% of Need Met

Cumulative Units

Needed

0 - 199 354 46.7% 354 <56.7k 179 66.2% 179

200 - 429 508 43.8% 861 56.7k <85k 7 99.4% 185

430 - 664 (252) 130.1% 609 85k <113.3k 31 97.1% 217

665 - 909 (305) 140.5% 304 113.3k <141.7k (340) 129.2% (123)

910 - 1149 (219) 130.7% 85 141.7k <212.5k (878) 144.3% (1,001)

1150 + (59) 116.7% 26 212.5k+ 699 56.8% (302)

Current Unmet Need = Needed Units (Housing Units Needed by Tenure & Cost template) - Current Units

% of Need Met = Percentage that Current Units are of Needed Units - goal is 100 %

Cumulative Units Needed measures relative need both by cumulative price point and by tenure

Rental Ownership

Current Unmet Housing Needs ©Housing Units Needed less Current Inventory

Income** Rent # Units % of Units Cum % # Units % of Units Cum %

<10k 0 - 199 76 35.5% 35.5% 156 34.7% 34.7%

10k <20k 200 - 429 77 35.9% 71.4% 190 42.2% 76.9%

20k <30k 430 - 664 30 14.0% 85.4% 64 14.3% 91.2%

30k <40k 665 - 909 17 7.9% 93.3% 20 4.3% 95.5%

40k <50k 910 - 1149 10 4.5% 97.8% 13 3.0% 98.5%

50k + 1150 + 5 2.2% 100.0% 7 1.5% 100.0%

Totals 215 % of All 32.3% 450 % of All 67.7% 665

Current Senior Rental Housing Units Needed by Cost* ©

Householder Age 75 +

For Cascadia as of April 2000Scenario Historical 1

Template 8

Householder Age 65 - 74

Home

Senior Rental Units Needed

76 77

3017

10 5

156

190

64

20 137

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

0 - 199 200 - 429 430 - 664 665 - 909 910 - 1149 1150 +

Rent

Un

its

Householder 65-74 Householder 75 and older


HHs in Cohort as % of all

AI Cohort HHs

AgeIncome (Note 1)

Renter %

Homeowner %

17,067 Number Rental Owned

<10k 96.7% 3.3% 0.92% 157 151.5 5.2 0 - 199 <28.3k

10k <20k 88.5% 11.5% 1.41% 240 212.6 27.6 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k

20k <30k 82.8% 17.2% 1.30% 221 183.1 38.0 430 - 664 56.7k <85k

30k <40k 77.3% 22.7% 0.89% 151 116.9 34.3 665 - 909 85k <113.3k

40k <50k 67.6% 32.4% 0.85% 145 98.3 47.1 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k

50k <75k 63.0% 37.0% 0.85% 145 91.1 53.5 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k

75k+ 51.1% 48.9% 0.20% 34 17.2 16.5 1765+ 212.5k+

<10k 81.2% 18.8% 1.21% 206 167.7 38.8 0 - 199 <28.3k

10k <20k 68.2% 31.8% 2.06% 351 239.6 111.7 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k

20k <30k 65.2% 34.8% 2.68% 457 297.7 158.9 430 - 664 56.7k <85k

30k <40k 57.5% 42.5% 3.10% 530 304.6 225.2 665 - 909 85k <113.3k

40k <50k 48.0% 52.0% 2.98% 508 243.9 264.2 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k

50k <75k 31.5% 68.5% 4.68% 799 251.8 547.5 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k

75k+ 16.0% 84.0% 2.58% 441 70.5 370.1 1765+ 212.5k+

<10k 78.8% 21.2% 1.32% 226 178.1 47.9 0 - 199 <28.3k

10k <20k 66.0% 34.0% 2.04% 349 230.3 118.7 200 - 429 28.3k <56.7k

20k <30k 56.1% 43.9% 2.24% 383 214.6 167.9 430 - 664 56.7k <85k

30k <40k 45.0% 55.0% 3.05% 520 234.1 286.2 665 - 909 85k <113.3k

40k <50k 34.0% 66.0% 3.04% 519 176.4 342.3 910 - 1149 113.3k <141.7k

50k <75k 20.0% 80.0% 5.98% 1,021 204.1 816.5 1150 - 1764 141.7k <212.5k

75k+ 13.9% 86.1% 4.21% 719 99.9 618.7 1765+ 212.5k+

TenureUnits Indicated

by Housing Type

For Cascadia as of 2020

Rent Range

(Note 1)

CohortPrice Range

(Note 1)

Future Dwelling Unit Needs Indicated by Tenure Choice and Affordable Cost ©

<25

25 <35

35 <45

Home

National Average Sale Price Existing Single Family Home Index

Oregon Repeat

Purchase Housing

Price Index

Indexed Oregon

Personal Income

Indexed Oregon Wage & Salary

1980 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

1990 1.583 1.247 1.789 1.661

2002 2.750 2.764 2.830 2.728

1980-1990 Increase 58.3% 24.7% 78.9% 66.1%

1990-2002 Increase 73.7% 121.7% 58.2% 64.3%

1980-2002 Increase 175.0% 176.4% 183.0% 172.8%

Analysis of Oregon Housing Cost versus Income

Source - Economic Indicators used in Oregon Economic and Revenue Forecast prepared by the Office of Economic Analysis, DAS

Scenario 1

Rent* # Units % of Units Cum % Price* # Units % of Units Cum %

0 - 199 899 13.2% 13.2% <28.3k 555 5.0% 5.0%

200 - 429 1,332 19.6% 32.8% 28.3k <56.7k 1,256 11.3% 16.2%

430 - 664 1,340 19.7% 52.5% 56.7k <85k 1,600 14.3% 30.5%

665 - 909 1,051 15.5% 68.0% 85k <113.3k 1,593 14.3% 44.8%

910 - 1149 788 11.6% 79.6% 113.3k <141.7k 1,366 12.2% 57.0%

1150 - 1764 814 12.0% 91.5% 141.7k <212.5k 2,191 19.6% 76.7%

1765+ 576 8.5% 100.0% 212.5k+ 2,605 23.3% 100.0% All Units

Totals 6,801 % of All 37.9% Totals 11,165 % of All 62.1% 17,966

Rental Ownership

Housing Units Indicated by Tenure Choice and at an Affordable Cost**


RentOut

Factor**Tenant

Vouchers***Needed

Units% of Units Cum % Price

Out Factor**

Needed Units

% of Units Cum %

0 - 199 0% 45 1,139 17.6% 17.6% <56.7k 0% 1,733 15.5% 15.5%

200 - 429 5% 40 1,356 21.0% 38.6% 56.7k <85k 5% 1,381 12.3% 27.8%

430 - 664 5% 40 1,254 19.4% 57.9% 85k <113.3k 5% 1,577 14.1% 41.9%

665 - 909 10% 1,182 18.3% 76.2% 113.3k <141.7k 7% 1,694 15.1% 57.0%

910 - 1149 25% 1,047 16.2% 92.4% 141.7k <212.5k 8% 2,834 25.3% 82.3%

1150 + 50% 493 7.6% 100.0% 212.5k+ 15% 1,989 17.7% 100.0%

Totals 6,472 % of All 36.6% Totals 11,208 % of All 63.4%

* Housing Units Needed is based on the 'Housing Units Indicated by Tenure and Cost' table and incorporates an adjustment factor

to reflect that some households will choose to occupy a housing unit in a lower cost category than the one they could afford.

** The adjustment factor represents the percentage adjustments needed to reflect households who could afford that cost level but

chose a lower cost unit (Out Factor).

*** Estimated number of Section 8 Vouchers/Certificates or similar subsidies used to lower tenant paid rents to this price point

Rental Ownership

Future Housing Units Needed by Tenure & Cost* ©


RentNeeded

Units

Single Family Units

Manufactd Dwelling

Park Units

Duplex Units

Tri-Quadplex

Units


Total Units

3.0% 3.0% 13.0% 13.0% 68.0% 100.0%

33 33 145 145 757 1,114

15.0% 5.0% 10.0% 20.0% 50.0% 100.0%

197 66 131 263 657 1,313

32.0% 5.0% 10.0% 18.0% 35.0% 100.0%

404 63 126 227 442 1,262

37.0% 3.0% 12.0% 18.0% 30.0% 100.0%

420 34 136 205 341 1,136

51.0% 3.0% 11.0% 10.0% 25.0% 100.0%

540 32 116 106 265 1,059

80.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 13.0% 100.0%

418 10 16 10 68 523

Totals 6,407 2,013 239 671 956 2,529 6,407

31.4% 3.7% 10.5% 14.9% 39.5% 100.0%

1,136

1,059

523

200 - 429

430 - 664

1150 +

665 - 909

910 - 1149

0 - 199 1,114

1,313

1,262

Percentage

Future Housing Units Planned by Housing Type ©


Rental

Existing Units plus New Units Added

Home

PriceNeeded

Units

Single Family Units

Manufactd Dwelling

Park Units

Duplex Units

Tri-Quadplex

Units


Total Units

50.0% 40.0% 3.0% 3.0% 4.0% 100.0%

887 709 53 53 71 1,773

58.0% 29.0% 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 100.0%

808 404 56 56 70 1,393

75.0% 18.0% 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 100.0%

1,145 275 31 31 46 1,527

88.0% 9.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 100.0%

1,454 149 17 17 17 1,652

94.0% 3.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 100.0%

2,950 94 31 31 31 3,138

96.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 100.0%

1,992 21 21 21 21 2,075

Totals 11,558 9,236 1,652 208 208 255 11,558

79.9% 14.3% 1.8% 1.8% 2.2% 100.0%

Needed Units

Single Family Units

Manufactd Dwelling

Park Units

Duplex Units

Tri-Quadplex

Units


Total Units

Totals 17,966 11,249 1,890 879 1,164 2,784 17,966

62.6% 10.5% 4.9% 6.5% 15.5% 100.0%

113.3k <141.7k

141.7k <212.5k

212.5k+

1,773

1,393

1,527

1,652

3,138

2,075

85k <113.3k

<56.7k

56.7k <85k

Total Rental and Ownership Units

% of Total Units

Percentage

Ownership

New Housing Needs

Cascadia New Rental Units Needed by 2020

955

1253

1078

783 796

335

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0 - 199 200 - 429 430 - 664 665 - 909 910 - 1149 1150 +

Monthly Rent - 1999 Dollars

Un

its

Cascadia New Ow nership Units Needed by 2020

1491

1069984

265

596674

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

<56.7k 56.7k <85k 85k <113.3k 113.3k<141.7k

141.7k<212.5k

212.5k+

Housing Cost - 1999 Dollars

Un

its


RentNeeded

UnitsSingle

Family Units

Manufactd Dwelling

Park UnitsDuplex Units

Tri-Quadplex

Units


Total Units

0 - 199 804 23 23 105 105 547 804

200 - 429 868 117 46 86 163 457 868

430 - 664 172 144 18 11 (18) 17 172

665 - 909 76 50 9 1 15 1 76

910 - 1149 89 60 7 (4) 6 20 89

1150 + 73 63 0 1 0 8 73

Totals 2,082 458 104 201 271 1,049 2,082

22.0% 5.0% 9.6% 13.0% 50.4% 100.0%Percentage

New Housing Units Needed by Housing Type ©


New Rental Units Needed

Home

PriceNeeded

UnitsSingle

Family Units

Manufactd Dwelling


Tri-Quadplex

Units


Total Units

<56.7k 1,108 537 444 33 33 61 1,108

56.7k <85k 668 398 194 26 31 20 668

85k <113.3k 417 315 95 11 11 (14) 417

113.3k <141.7k 302 234 39 12 12 7 302

141.7k <212.5k 1,063 955 39 21 26 21 1,063

212.5k+ 380 302 21 21 21 16 380

Totals 3,938 2,741 832 123 133 110 3,938

69.6% 21.1% 3.1% 3.4% 2.8% 100.0%

Needed Units

Single Family Units

Manufactd Dwelling


Tri-Quadplex

Units


Total Units

Totals 6,021 3,199 935 324 404 1,159 6,021

53.1% 15.5% 5.4% 6.7% 19.3% 100.0%

New Ownership Units Needed

Total New Rental and Ownership Units

% of Total Units

Percentage


65

190

140

90

260

185

1030

15 5 0 5

6090

3515 10 0

60

160

5535 25 15

460

418

8 3

51 40

050

100150

200250300

350400

450500

0 - 199 200 - 429 430 - 664 665 - 909 910 - 1149 1150 +

Monthly Rent (1999 $)

Single Family Units Manufactd Dwelling Park Units

Duplex Units Tri-Quadplex Units



65

190

140

90

260

185

1030

15 5 0 5

6090

3515 10 0

60

160

5535 25 15

460

418

8 3

51 40

050

100150

200250300

350400

450500

0 - 199 200 - 429 430 - 664 665 - 909 910 - 1149 1150 +

Monthly Rent (1999 $)




Cascadia New Ownership Units Needed by 2020

156 145

284

25

366

454

8569

50

025

10

220

11580

0 5 15

240

130

75

200

20

425

240

85

15

5575

050

100150200250300350400450500

<56.7k 56.7k <85k 85k <113.3k 113.3k<141.7k

141.7k<212.5k

212.5k+

Price (1999 $)




Local Code

Planned Density

RS1 3.5

RS2 5

RS3 6.5

RM1 12

RM2 16

RM3 24

MDP 7.5

CO/CR 5

OtherNon-residential zones such as Industrial or Commercial with existing units

Planned Housing Density by Local Zoning District ©

Local Zoning District Description

Single family large lot

Single family 6000 Sq ft lot min

Single family 4500 Sq ft lot min

Mulifamily low density

Multifamily

Multifamily high density

Manufactured Dwelling Park

Commercial Office/Retail allowing mixed uses

Existing RS1 RS2 RS3 RM1 RM2 RM3 MDP CO/CR Other Total

Single Family Units 8,855 1,830 4,035 2,760 85 45 25 5 45 25 8,855

Manufactured Dwelling Park Units

490 80 90 320 490

Duplex Units 680 150 210 114 134 48 24 680

Tri-Quadplex Units 735 165 240 330 735


1,185 95 265 825 1,185

Total Units 11,945 1,980 4,245 2,874 559 688 1,204 325 45 25 11,945

20.7% 45.6% 31.2% 1.0% 0.5% 0.3% 0.1% 0.5% 0.3% 100%

16.3% 18.4% 65.3% 100%

22.1% 30.9% 16.8% 19.7% 7.1% 3.5% 100%

22.4% 32.7% 44.9% 100%

8.0% 22.4% 69.6% 100%

16.6% 35.5% 24.1% 4.7% 5.8% 10.1% 2.7% 0.4% 0.2% 100%

% Tri-Quadplex Units

% 5+ Multi-Family Units

Housing Inventory by Land Use Type

% Total Units

Percent of Existing Inventory by Land Use Type

% Single Family Units

% Manufactured Dwelling Park Units

% Duplex Units

Single Family Units

All Units % in RS1 % in RS2 % in RS3 % in RM1 % in RM2 % in RM3 % in MDP% in

CO/CROther Total %

Lower Priced1 1,821 10.0% 40.0% 47.5% 1.0% 0.5% 1.0% 100.0%

Mid Priced2 563 20.0% 48.5% 30.0% 1.0% 0.5% 100.0%

Higher Priced3 1,143 40.0% 44.0% 15.0% 1.0% 100.0%

Total 3,527 21.3% 42.7% 34.2% 1.0% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 0.0% 100.0%

20.7% 45.6% 31.2% 1.0% 0.5% 0.3% 0.1% 0.5% 0.3% 100.0%

MDP Units All Units % in RS1 % in RS2 % in RS3 % in RM1 % in RM2 % in RM3 % in MDP% in

CO/CROther Total %

Lower Priced1 162 10% 15% 75% 100.0%

Mid Priced2 123 10% 15% 75% 100.0%

Higher Priced3 52 50% 40% 10% 100.0%

Total 337 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 16.2% 18.9% 0.0% 64.9% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

16.3% 18.4% 65.3% 100.0%

Duplex Units All Units % in RS1 % in RS2 % in RS3 % in RM1 % in RM2 % in RM3 % in MDP% in

CO/CROther Total %

Lower Priced1 323 20% 30% 20% 20% 6% 4% 100.0%

Mid Priced2 54 30% 50% 10% 10% 100.0%

Higher Priced3 23 50% 25% 5% 15% 5% 100.0%

Total 401 23.1% 32.4% 17.5% 17.8% 5.7% 3.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

22.1% 30.9% 16.8% 19.7% 7.1% 3.5% 100.0%

Projected Distribution of New Housing by Land Use Type ©

Existing Distribution



RS1 RS2 RS3 RM1 RM2 RM3 MDP CO/CR Other Total

Single Family Units 752 1,504 1,205 35 9 0 0 21 0 3,527

Manufactured Dwelling Park Units

0 0 0 55 64 0 218 0 0 337

Duplex Units 93 130 70 71 23 14 0 0 0 401

Tri-Quadplex Units 0 0 0 93 137 202 0 0 0 432


0 0 0 91 240 707 0 0 0 1,038

Total Units Needed 844 1,634 1,276 345 473 923 218 21 0 5,735

Projected New Housing Units by Land Use Type ©


Current UGB Acres 654.0 1,020.0 545.5 75.6 64.0 72.6 48.5 10.4 2,490.6

Acres in Use 577.8 866.0 486.5 52.7 47.0 51.1 39.9 10.4 2,131.4

Constrained Acres 3.5 16.2 1.9 0.0 3.2 0.8 1.6 0.0 27.2

Available Acres 72.7 137.8 57.1 22.9 13.8 20.7 7.0 0.0 0.0 332.0

Current Acres % 26.3% 41.0% 21.9% 3.0% 2.6% 2.9% 1.9% 0.4% 0.0% 100.0%

Acres in Use % 27.1% 40.6% 22.8% 2.5% 2.2% 2.4% 1.9% 0.5% 0.0% 100.0%

Available Acres % 21.9% 41.5% 17.2% 6.9% 4.2% 6.2% 2.1% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

Existing Units per Acres in Use

3.43 4.90 5.91 10.61 14.64 23.56 8.15 4.33 5.60


Acres Needed 241.2 326.9 196.2 28.7 29.5 38.5 29.1 4.2 0.0 894.4

New Acres Needed 168.5 189.1 139.1 5.8 15.7 17.8 22.1 4.2 0.0 562.4

Land Needed by Land Use Type

Buildable Lands Inventory for Housing

Additional Acres Needed in UGB by Land Use Type

168.5

189.1

139.1

5.815.7 17.8 22.1

4.2

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

RS1 RS2 RS3 RM1 RM2 RM3 MDP CO/CR

Ac

res

Documents

“Old Approach to Needs Analysis” The standard practice in Oregon has been to extrapolate forward the past 5 or more years in housing production as the