2016 Summit County Workforce Housing Demand Update August 2016 !Photo!by!Carl!Scofield! Prepared by: Wendy Sullivan, WSW Consulting San Anselmo, CA wendy@wswconsult.com Melanie Rees, Rees Consulting, Inc. Crested Butte, CO melanie@reesconsultinginc.com 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Table&of&Contents& & INTRODUCTION&.......................................................................................................................&1% REPORT%ORGANIZATION%...................................................................................................................%1% AREA&MEDIAN&INCOME&AND&AFFORDABLE&HOUSING&PAYMENTS&............................................&2% NEW&HOUSING&INVENTORY&.....................................................................................................&4% WORKFORCE%HOUSING%PROJECTS%UNDER/PENDING%CONSTRUCTION%.......................................................%6% WORKFORCE%HOUSING%PROJECTS%IN%THE%PIPELINE%................................................................................%7% OTHER%PIPELINE%PROJECTS%...............................................................................................................%9% JOBS&AND&UNEMPLOYMENT&...................................................................................................&10% JOBS%ESTIMATES%AND%PROJECTIONS%.................................................................................................%10% UNEMPLOYMENT%RATE%..................................................................................................................%11% OWNERSHIP&MARKET&CONDITIONS&........................................................................................&12% HOME%SALES%................................................................................................................................%12% CURRENT%AVAILABILITY%..................................................................................................................%14% RENTAL&MARKET&CONDITIONS&...............................................................................................&18% RENTAL%AVAILABILITY%AND%MARKET%RENTS%.......................................................................................%18% HOUSING&DEMAND&UPDATE&...................................................................................................&20% CATCHUUP%NEEDS%(2016)%..............................................................................................................%20% KEEP%UP%NEEDS%(2016%TO%2020)%...................................................................................................%22% TOTAL%NEEDS%(2016%TO%2020)%......................................................................................................%23% WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % TOC%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Introduction&& % This%study%updates%the%number%of%workforce%housing%units%needed%in%Summit%County% and%its%basins%from%the%2013%Summit%County%Housing%Needs%Assessment.%It%identifies%by% basin:% % • How%many%ownership%and%rental%housing%units%are%needed%by%the%Summit% County%workforce%presently%and%through%2020%and% % • Which%AMI%levels%should%be%targeted%by%affordable%workforce%housing.% % As%in%the%2013%study,%workforce%housing%need%estimates%are%estimated%based%on%average% annual%employment%and%do%not%represent%peak%season%needs%for%seasonal%workers% residing%in%the%area%for%only%a%few%months%during%the%year.% % Report Organization % This%update%was%conducted%by%evaluating%several%components%of%the%housing%and%job% market,%as%summarized%in%the%following%report%sections:% % • Area%Median%Income%and%Affordable%Housing%Payments%–%which%identifies%the% current%affordable%price%point%of%homes%for%purchase%and%rent%for%each%defined% area%median%income%(AMI)%level.%This%is%important%to%understand%the%AMI%level%at% which%market%rate%housing%is%affordable%to%local%households%and%below%which% local%housing%programs%should%target.% % • New%Housing%Inventory%–%which%identifies%the%number%of%housing%units%that%have% been%added%in%Summit%County%since%the%2013%study.%This%includes%affordable% rentals%and%deedUrestricted%ownership%that%have%been%built,%as%well%as% planned/pending%workforce%housing.%Workforce%housing%units%produced%since% 2012%and%pending%development%by%2020%reduce%the%number%of%housing%units% needed%in%Summit%County%to%keep%up%with%estimated%workforce%housing%needs.% % • Jobs%and%Unemployment%–%which%presents%job%growth%since%2013,%projected% growth%through%2020%and%current%unemployment%rates.%% % • Ownership%Market%Conditions%–%which%presents%the%change%in%home%sale%prices% since%the%2013%study%and%the%distribution%of%homes%that%are%currently%for%sale%on% the%market%by%price.%This%is%used%to%understand%at%which%price%points%homes%are% being%undersupplied%by%the%forUsale%market.% % WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % % 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% • Rental%Market%Conditions%–%which%presents%how%much%market%rents%have% increased%since%2013,%the%affordability%of%market%rents%and%the%availability%(or% scarcity)%of%rentals%in%Summit%County.%This%is%used%to%understand%at%which%price% points%rentals%are%being%undersupplied%by%the%market.% • Housing%Demand%Update%–%which%calculates%current%and%future%workforce% housing%needs%in%Summit%County,%by%basin,%through%2020.%This%section%uses% information%from%each%of%the%above%sections,%plus%data%and%assumptions% presented%in%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment.%Results%are%presented%for% both%ownership%and%rental%housing%and%by%AMI%level,%as%done%in%the%2013%study.% % Area&Median&Income&and&Affordable&Housing&Payments& ! Area%Median%Income%(AMI)%is%published%annually%by%the%U.S.%Department%of%Housing%and% Urban%Development%(HUD)%and%represents%the%median%family%income%of%an%area.%Many% of%the%incomeU%and%deedUrestricted%housing%units%in%Summit%County%use%AMI%to%qualify% households%for%occupancy%and%establish%affordable%prices.% % The%median%family%income%is%typically%higher%than%the%average%income%of%all%households% in%the%county%because%the%AMI%does%not%incorporate%incomes%from%single%and%nonUfamily% roommate%households.%In%2012,%for%example,%the%median%income%of%all%households%was% about%$23,100%(or%26%)%lower%than%the%median%family%income.1% % In%2012,%about%38%%of%Summit%County%households%earned%less%than%80%%AMI%(i.e.,%low% income).%Another%36%%earned%between%80%and%120%%AMI%(i.e.,%moderateU%to%middleU income).%Income%distribution%varies%by%owners%and%renters,%as%shown%below,%with%more% owners%earning%within%the%higher%AMI%ranges%than%renters.%This%same%income% distribution%is%assumed%for%the%purposes%of%this%update.% % Households&by&AMI& <=30%& 30.1V60%& 60V80%& 80V100%& 100V120& 120V150& 150+& TOTAL& Owners& 1%% 17%% 10%% 20%% 18%% 14%% 20%% 100%% & Renters& 9%% 35%% 12%% 25%% 8%% 7%% 4%% 100%% TOTAL& 4%% 23%% 11%% 21%% 14%% 12%% 15%% 100%% Source:%2012%Household%Survey% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1 %Please%reference%the%2013%Summit%County%Workforce%Housing%Needs%Assessment,%Section%1,%Household% Income%and%Area%Median%Income,%for%more%information.% WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 2%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% The%affordable%housing%payment%at%each%defined%AMI%level%is%lower%in%2016%than%in%2012.% This%is%due%to%two%factors:% % • The%2016%published%AMI%is%about%8%%lower%($82,300)%than%it%was%in%2012% ($89,800)%based%on%the%calculation%methodology%used%by%HUD.%This%change% reduces%the%affordable%price%point%of%homes%at%each%AMI%level.% % • Mortgage%interest%rates%have%increased%slightly.%Interest%rates%on%30Uyear% mortgages%have%fluctuated%since%2012,%but%are%generally%slightly%higher.% Affordable%purchase%prices%assumed%an%interest%rate%of%4.5%%on%a%30Uyear% mortgage%in%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment,%whereas%current%estimates% assume%a%5%%rate.%A%0.5%%rise%in%interest%rate%decreases%the%affordable%purchase% price%for%a%household%by%about%5%.%If%interest%rates%continue%to%rise,%higher% incomes%will%be%required%of%buyers%to%purchase%the%same%priced%home.% % Maximum&Affordable&Housing&Costs:&& 2012&and&2016&Compared& AMI&& Level& 30%& 50%& 60%& 80%& 100%& 120%& 150%& 2012&& Max&Purchase& Max&Rent& Price*& $570% $95,000% $960% $159,000% $1,145% $190,000% $1,380% $229,000% $1,910% $317,000% $2,290% $381,000% $2,865% $476,000% 2016& Max&Purchase& Max&Rent& Price**& $520% $81,400% $865% $135,700% $1,040% $162,800% $1,385% $217,000% $1,730% $271,300% $2,075% $325,600% $2,595% $407,000% Source:%HUD;%Consultant%team% *2012:%Assumes%an%average%2.4Uperson%household%with%a%30Uyear%mortgage%at%4.5%%with% 5%%down%and%20%%of%the%payment%covering%taxes,%insurance%and%HOA%fees.% **2016:%Assumes%an%average%2.4Uperson%household%with%a%30Uyear%mortgage%at%5.0%%with% 5%%down%and%20%%of%the%payment%covering%taxes,%insurance%and%HOA%fees.% ! & WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 3%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% New&Housing&Inventory& ! About%1,200%new%housing%units%(excluding%timeshares)%have%been%constructed%or% approved%in%Summit%County%since%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment.%Of%these,%about% 33%%are%deedUrestricted%ownership%and%incomeU%or%residency/employmentUrestricted% rental%units%for%the%workforce.%Development%of%deedU%or%incomeUrestricted%housing% varies%by%region:% % • About%twoUthirds%of%the%new%deedU%or%incomeUrestricted%rentals%have%been% constructed%or%permitted%in%the%Upper%Blue%region.%% % • Over%60%units%each%have%been%constructed%in%the%Lower%Blue%and%Ten%Mile% regions.% ! • Five%new%incomeUrestricted%rental%units%have%been%built%or%approved%in%the%Snake% River%area.% %% Housing&Units&Constructed/Permitted:&2013&V&2016& Summit&County& Total& Upper& Blue& Snake& River& Lower& Blue& Ten& Mile& 1,195% 592% 118% 313% 172% Market&Rate& 803% 335% 113% 246% 109% Deed&or&IncomeVRestricted& 392% 257% 5% 67% 63% & Total& Sources:%Summit%County%Assessor%data,%Town/County%Planners,%Summit%Combined%Housing%Authority,% Census%Building%Permit%data% ! Of%new%workforce%units%constructed%or%approved%since%the%2013%Housing%Needs% Assessment,%about%oneUthird%are%deedUrestricted%ownership%and%twoUthirds%are%incomeU% and/or%residency/employmentUrestricted%rentals.% % • The%Upper%Blue%includes%a%mix%of%ownership%and%rental%units%provided%at%a%range% of%affordable%price%points.%Units%are%designed%to%meet%the%needs%of%a%variety%of% household%types%(singles,%families,%etc.)%at%different%income%ranges.% % • The%63%units%constructed%in%the%Ten%Mile%include%mostly%deedUrestricted% ownership%(60%units),%plus%three%workforce%restricted%rentals.%This%includes%buildU out%of%Peak%One%development%in%Frisco,%townhomes%under%construction%at% Copper%and%various%units%provided%through%Frisco’s%voluntary%density%bonus% ordinance.% % WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 4%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% • All%restricted%units%constructed%in%the%Lower%Blue%are%rentals,%with%most%of%them% (64%units)%located%in%Sierra%Madre%Phase%2%apartments%for%households%earning% from%40%%to%60%%AMI.% • The%five%units%in%the%Snake%River%area%include%three%incomeUrestricted% apartments%that%are%pending%construction%and%a%couple%of%scattered% condominiums.% % & Deed&Restricted&Workforce&Housing&Units&Constructed/Approved/Permitted:& 2013V2016& && Summit&County& Total& Upper& Blue&& Snake& River& Lower& Blue& Ten& Mile& <=60%% 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% 60.1U80%% 30% 17% 0% 0% 13% 80.1U100%% 64% 37% 0% 0% 27% 100.1U120%% 41% 23% 0% 0% 18% 120.1%to%160%% 3% 1% 0% 0% 2% Live/work%restriction%only% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% TOTAL&Ownership& 140& 80& 0& 0& 60& <=60%% 175% 111% 0% 64% 0% 60.1U80%% Residency/employment% restriction%only% TOTAL&Rental& 56% 56% 3% 0% 0% 21% 10% 2% 3% 3% 252& 177& 5& 67& 3& 392& 257& 5& 67& 63& OWNERSHIP&& RENTAL&& ALL&Workforce&Units& ! When%the%new%workforce%housing%developments%are%complete,%there%will%be%just%under% 2,500%restricted%housing%units%for%the%workforce%in%Summit%County.%This%equates%to% about%20%%of%occupied%housing%in%the%county.%% % Total&Workforce&Housing&Units&by&Region:&2016+& Summit&County& Total& Upper& Blue& Snake& River& Lower& Blue& Ten& Mile& Ownership& 692% 451% 44% 14% 188% Rental& 1,748% 532% 541% 278% 398% Total&#& 2,446% 983% 585% 292% 586% Total&%& 100%% 40%% 24%% 12%% 24%% & Sources:%Summit%County%Assessor%data,%Town/County%Planners,%Summit%Combined%Housing%Authority,% Census%Building%Permit%data,%Consultant%team! WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 5%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% 62 0 62 66 26 0 Rent 0 Description Construction began summer 2016 on 15 two-bedroom/two-bathroom for-sale townhomes at Copper Mountain. The first five units are anticipated to be completed by the end of 2016. Units will be deed restricted for the workforce at 100% and 110% AMI, ranging in price from about $281,300 to $315,500. Workforce(Housing(Units(Under/Pending(Construction( Upper Blue Wellington Lincoln Park 26 0 30 Another phase of the Wellington neighborhood development is under construction. Seven (7) of 62 total homeownership units have been completed so far in 2016, with another 12 units scheduled to be built this fall. Units will be available for households earning under 80% AMI, 100% AMI and 110% AMI. This 26-unit apartment project is a joint development of the Town of Breckenridge and Summit County on land that was previously the site for a recycling facility. Construction will start this summer on the two-bedroom apartments and be completed by summer 2017. The rents will be affordable to households at 80% AMI. A LIHTC project with rentals restricted at 30% through 60% AMI. Units will be a mix of 2- and 3bedrooms, expanding affordable rental options for families. Studio and one-bedroom apartments, the restrictions for which have not been finalized. This project may involve a partnership with CMC. The focus is on students and younger singles or couples. - Own 15 Huron Landing 66 0 122 # Units 15 Denison Placer 1 30 77 Ten Mile Copper Point Townhomes Denison Placer 2 199 % TOTAL under development % 6% Workforce Housing Projects Under/Pending Construction ! Included%in%the%above%tables%are%several%projects%that%are%presently%under%construction%and%scheduled%for%completion%by%2018.%This% includes%about%200%units%in%the%Ten%Mile%and%Upper%Blue%regions.%About%60%%of%the%units%will%be%affordable%rentals%in%the%Upper%Blue% area.% ! ! ! ! ! WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Rent - Description The nearly 45-acre parcel near Frisco between I-70 and the Dam Road was purchased from the US Forest Service by Summit County for $1.75 million. The concept plan for the development, which may have as many as 400 to 600 residential units, is scheduled for completion in September 2016. Workforce(Housing(Units(in(the(Planning(Phase( - Owned by the Town of Silverthorne, this parcel is zoned for up to 309 residential units. The Town considered proposals from developers; however, high infrastructure costs and funding uncertainties stalled the development. With reauthorization of 5A, the Town is reconsidering Smith Ranch. Own - 40 Ten Mile Lake Hill 65 - # Units 400 to 600 (est) 105 - - - Upper Blue Stan Miller 250 (est) - Through an annexation agreement with the Town of Breckenridge 105 deed restricted units will be developed on the Stan Miller tract. As planned, 40 of these units will be rentals. Ownership units will be restricted for households earning between 100% and 180% AMI. Block 11 is a parcel along the Blue River owned by the Town of Breckenridge. After construction of Denison Placer 1 and 2, the parcel may contain up to an additional 250 units. The town is planning for additional phases of workforce housing development on this parcel. The 128-acre McCain property, owned by the Town of Breckenridge, is located at the northern end of Town. The modified Master Plan identifies the appropriate location for the Town’s new water treatment plant, overflow parking, open space and trails, solar gardens, some Public Works facilities, affordable housing, and a habitat corridor along the Blue River. The county is reviewing an application for 30 market rate and 20 deed restricted employee units for a parcel near Breckenridge. 300+ (est) Block 11 100+/- 20 Lower Blue Smith Ranch McCain Property 20 % Berlin Placer ! % 7% Workforce Housing Projects in the Pipeline ! Projects%in%the%planning%phase%or%under%consideration%have%the%ability%to%increase%workforce%housing%units%in%Summit%County%by%over% 1,300%homes.%This%includes%a%range%of%projects%in%each%region%of%the%county.%Workforce%units%have%yet%to%be%approved.%Development% will%extend%beyond%the%year%2020%–%the%limit%of%projections%provided%in%this%report.% % ! ! WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% Rent 3 Vail Resorts has entered into a partnership with Gorman Company to develop 200 apartments. The County is looking to partner with a private builder to build at least 25 for sale units. Description Three (3) affordable rentals are proposed as part of a 65-unit condominium PUD. 8% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Workforce(Housing(Units(in(the(Planning(Phase((continued)( Own 200 - ! 3 25 - # Units Snake River PUD in Dillon 200 25 - ! - % 1,300+ % Keystone rentals County owned land (Keystone area) TOTAL potential (all regions) WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Other Pipeline Projects ! There%are%several%commercial%and%other%projects%in%the%development%pipeline% throughout%the%county.%Commercial%development%brings%new%jobs%to%the%area%and% impacts%the%need%for%workforce%housing.%% % • A%mixedLuse%development%has%been%approved%in%Dillon,%to%include%a%large% restaurant,%two%commercial%spaces,%48%condominiums%and%17%apartments,% including%3%incomeLrestricted%rentals;%% % • A%15,000%square%foot%commercial%office%building%is%under%construction%in% Frisco.%Other%proposals%comprise%a%total%of%5%townhomes%and%8%rentals;%% % • Silverthorne%has%several%projects%under%construction%or%in%the%pipeline,% including:% o Redevelopment%of%McDonald’s%restaurant;% o A%46Lunit%condo/townhome%residential%project;% o Maryland%Creek%Ranch%has%begun%construction%of%a%large% neighborhood%on%the%north%end%of%town.%It%is%slated%for%240%single% family,%duplex,%townhome%units;% o 31%luxury%condominiums%at%Rivers%Edge%Condos;% o %Angry%James%Brewery%–%a%small%craft%brewery;%and% o A%new%performing%arts%center%for%the%Lake%Dillon%Theater%Company% called%Silverthorne%Performing%Arts%Center.% % • Breckenridge%also%has%several%projects%under%construction%or%pending% approval,%including:% o A%new%MarriottL%hotel%(129%rooms);% o Over%370%timeshare%units%in%the%Welk,%Grand%Lodge%at%Peak%8,%and% East%Lodge%at%Peak%8%developments;% o Three%new%Restaurants:%OnLmountain%at%Peak%6,%Elk%Restaurant%and% new%Brewery%on%Airport%Rd;%and% o Several%large%capital%public%projects,%including:% ! Iron%Springs%Highway%9%Realignment% ! Blue%River%Corridor%Realignment% ! Rec%Center%Remodel% ! ! ! ! WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 9%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Jobs%and%Unemployment% ! Jobs Estimates and Projections ! There%are%about%25,870%jobs%in%Summit%County%in%2016.%By%2014,%the%number%of%jobs%in% Summit%County%had%fully%recovered%to%preLrecession%levels%based%on%job%estimates%from% the%Colorado%State%Demographer.%% % Job%growth%estimates%are%used%to%project%how%many%housing%units%will%be%needed%to% house%workers%filling%new%jobs.%In%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment,%it%was%estimated% that%between%2,140%and%3,600%new%jobs%would%be%added%by%2016.%This%assumed%both%a% slowLgrowth%rate%based%on%estimated%job%recovery%since%2010%(2.2%%per%year)%and%a% highLgrowth%rate%based%on%State%Demographer%estimates%(estimated%3.7%%per%year).% Revised%State%Demographer%estimates%show%that%estimated%job%growth%occurred%near% the%midLpoint%of%this%range%(2.9%).%More%specifically:% % • In%2012,%the%State%Demographer%projected%jobs%would%increase%by%3,600%jobs%by% 2016.%Revised%estimates%show%that%a%lower%2,755%jobs%have%been%added.%% % • Projections%through%2020%have%also%been%revised%downward.%Just%over%1,800%jobs% are%projected%to%be%added%through%2020,%an%average%increase%of%about%1.7%%per% year.%% ! Average%Annual%Jobs%Estimates%and%Projected%Increase:%% Summit%County,%2005%–%2020% 30,000 2012 jobs estimates 2016 jobs estimates Number of Jobs 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 Source:%Colorado%Department%of%Local%Affairs%(DOLA),%State%Demography%Section% Note:%Actual%job%counts%are%provided%through%2014,%with%estimates%provided%for%later%years.% WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % ! 10%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Unemployment Rate ! Unemployment Rate ! In%2012,%the%local%unemployment%rate%was%about%6%.%Unemployment%has%been%falling% since%that%time.%The%unemployment%rate%is%now%near%2.25%%and%is%lower%than%it%was%in% 2007,%just%prior%to%the%recession.%Because%unemployment%is%so%low,%workers%filling%new% jobs%will%be%coming%from%outside%the%area%and%most%will,%therefore,%need%to%find%housing.% % Unemployment%Rate:%2005%–%June%2016% 8% 6.70% 6.50% 7% 6.10% 6.00% 6% 5.00% 5% 4% 3.70% 3% 3.80% 2% 3.10% 3.40% 2.70% 2.50% 2.25% 1% 0% Year Source:%Colo%Dept%of%Labor%and%Employment,%LAUS% ! ! % WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 11%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Ownership%Market%Conditions% % This%section%evaluates%how%much%home%sale%prices%have%changed%since%2012%to% understand%the%extent%to%which%homes%may%have%become%more%or%less%affordable%to%the% workforce.% % It%also%summarizes%units%currently%advertised%for%sale%in%Summit%County%compared%to% units%available%in%2012.%This%shows%how%the%availability%of%homes%both%in%terms%of%price% points%and%volume%has%changed%since%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment.% Home Sales % The%average%price%of%homes%sold%in%2015%were%12%%to%13%%higher%than%those%sold%in% 2012.%This%equates%to%an%average%increase%of%3.8%%per%year.%% % Change%in%Sale%Prices:%2012%to%2015% 2012% 2015% %%Change% % Single%Family% % % % Median%sale%price% $619,000% $685,000% 11%% Average%sale%price% $764,445% $855,925% 12%% Condo/MultiMfamily% % % % Median%sale%price% $315,000% $339,000% 8%% Average%sale%price% $353,339% $399,232% 13%% Source:%Land%Title%Guarantee% % Prices%in%all%towns%rose.%The%increase%in%average%sale%prices%varied%from%about%4%%in% Silverthorne%to%over%20%%in%Breckenridge%and%Frisco.%% % % % WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 12%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Average%Residential%Sale%Price:%2012%and%2015% $800,000 $724,251 2012 Average Sale Price $700,000 2015 $627,317 $554,432 $600,000 $546,678 $500,000 $369,037 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 $0 Town % ! Source:%Land%Title%Guarantee% % Sales%volume%is%also%up%significantly.%% % • The%number%of%sales%more%than%doubled%in%2015%compared%to%2012.%% % • Condominiums%showed%a%large%77%%increase%in%sales%volume.%% % • Total%sales%are%still%below%the%peak%sales%year%in%2007%(2,580%units).% % Number%of%Sales:%2012%and%2016% 2012% 2015% %%Change% % Single%Family% 509% 678% 33%% Condo/MultiMfamily% 805% 1,422% 77%% All%Residential% 1,314% 2,100% 60%% Source:!Land!Title!Guarantee! % Sales%in%2015%show%a%similar%distribution%by%price%point%as%units%sold%in%2012.%This%is% largely%due%to%the%higher%rate%of%growth%in%lowerLpriced%condominium%sales%than%singleL family%homes.%% % • A%slightly%lower%percentage%of%sales%in%2015%were%priced%under%$300,000%(30%)% than%in%2012%(33%).% WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 13%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% ! • % A%slightly%higher%percentage%were%priced%over%$600,000%in%2015%(30%)%than%in% 2012%(26%).% Percentage%of%Sales%by%Price:%2012%and%2016% 25% 2012 Percent of Sales 20% 2015 15% 10% 5% 0% Sale Price % Source:%Land%Title%Guarantee% % Current Availability % There%is%a%much%lower%inventory%of%homes%for%sale%in%the%current%market%than%in%2013% and%homes%listed%for%sale%are%more%expensive.% % • The%number%of%listing%in%July%2016%(564)%is%60%%lower%than%in%January%2013%(950);% % • About%22%%of%listings%in%2013%were%priced%over%$1%million%compared%to%39%%in% 2016;%% % • About%50%%of%listings%in%2013%were%priced%under%$500,000%(500%units)%compared% to%only%28%%in%2016%(160%units);%and%% ! • There%is%a%significant%shortage%of%homes%priced%under%$400,000%(18%%of%listings)% compared%to%sales%in%2015%(47%%of%sales),%equating%to%about%a%1.2Lmonth%supply% of%homes%at%this%price%point.% % WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 14%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Residential%ForMSale%Listings:%January%2012%and%July%2016% Number of Homes Listed For Sale % 250 200 January 2012 July 2016 150 100 50 0 Listed Sale Price % Source:%July%30,%MLS%(breckenridgerealestatecompany.com);%Consultant%team% % % A%significant%majority%of%units%for%sale%in%July%2016%that%are%priced%under%$400,000%are% condominiums.%This%was%also%the%case%in%2013.%These%units%also%tend%to%be%older.%About% 70%%were%built%prior%to%1990,%with%an%average%year%built%of%1982.%% % With%few%exceptions,%singleLfamily%homes%and%townhomes%are%priced%over%$400,000.% % % % WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 15%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Residential%ForMSale%Listings%by%Type:%% Summit%County,%July%2016% %% Condominiums% <=$200,000% $200,001M300,000% $300,001M400,000% $400,001M500,000% $500,001M600,000% $600,001M700,000% $700,001M800,000% $800,001M900,000% $900,001M1,000,000% >$1%million% TOTAL% Median%List%Price% Average%List%Price% 19% 34% 39% 41% 19% 21% 11% 5% 7% 22% 218% $444,450% $550,870% Single%Family/% TOTAL% TOTAL%%% Townhomes% 0% 19% 3%% 3% 37% 7%% 7% 46% 8%% 16% 57% 10%% 19% 38% 7%% 28% 49% 9%% 31% 42% 7%% 28% 33% 6%% 16% 23% 4%% 198% 220% 39%% 346% 564% 100%% $1,244,450% $797,000% L% $1,506,839% $1,137,333% L% Source:%July%30,%MLS%(breckenridgerealestatecompany.com);%Consultant%team% % In%2013,%there%was%a%shortage%of%homes%available%priced%for%households%earning%120%% AMI%or%below.%It%was%noted%that%as%home%prices%continued%to%recover%from%the%recession% that%it%may%again%become%necessary%to%assist%households%earning%over%120%%AMI,%as%was% needed%prior%to%the%recession.%% % In%2016,%there%is%currently%a%deficit%of%homes%priced%under%about%$400,000,%which%are% affordable%for%households%earning%under%150%%AMI.%The%below%table%shows%that%this%is% consistent%across%all%Summit%County%regions.%The%Snake%River%area%has%the%most%units% within%this%lower%price%range;%however,%nearly%all%of%these%units%are%older% condominiums,%which%can%pose%challenges%for%local%workforce%housing%as%noted%in%the% 2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment.% % % % WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 16%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Residential%ForMSale%Listings%by%AMI%and%Location:%% Summit%County,%July%2016% AMI%Level% Under%60%%AMI%% 60.1%M%80%% 80.1%M%100%% 100.1%M%120%% 120.1%M%150%% Over%150%%AMI% TOTAL% Lower%Blue% Snake%River% Ten%Mile% Upper%Blue% 1% 2% 1% 5% 4% 57% 70% Median%value:% Average%value:% $732,000% $959,335% Median%PPSF% Average%PPSF% $343% $342% 4% 9% 13% 5% 8% 81% 120% 1% 3% 3% 3% 11% 70% 91% 0% 1% 2% 3% 8% 269% 283% $634,000% $500,000% $1,049,000% $828,744% $813,603% $1,416,308% $360% $368% $439% $461% $462% $511% Summit%County%% #% %% 6% 1%% 15% 3%% 19% 3%% 16% 3%% 31% 5%% 477% 85%% 564% 100%% % $797,000% $1,137,333% $413% $451% % Source:%July%30,%MLS%(breckenridgerealestatecompany.com);%Consultant%team% % ! ! % WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 17%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Rental%Market%Conditions% ! This%section%evaluates%how%much%market%rents%have%increased%since%2013%and%how% availability%of%units%has%changed.%It%is%used%to%understand%the%current%affordability%of% market%rents%to%the%workforce%and%whether%available%units%are%meeting%demand.%% % Rental Availability and Market Rents ! The%rental%market%rebounded%strongly%after%the%Recession.%Vacancies%dropped%sharply% and%rents%began%to%rise%in%2012.%At%the%time%of%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment:% % • Vacancies%were%very%low%–%under%2%;% % • Market%rents%had%risen%to%equal%or%exceed%preLrecession%levels;%and% % • Market%rents%averaged%$1,280%in%the%county,%which%was%affordable%for% households%earning%80%%AMI%or%higher.% % Under%current%conditions,%vacancy%rates%have%remained%below%2%:% % • In%2015,%rental%vacancy%rates%in%Summit%County%were%near%zero%percent.%The% Summit%Combined%Housing%Authority%(SCHA)%reported%no%vacancies%in%2015% through%their%rental%database%of%approximately%900%units.%The%Colorado%Division% of%Housing%reported%a%vacancy%rate%of%0.5%%in%the%third%quarter%of%2015.%% % • In%March%and%the%first%half%of%April%2016,%101%units%were%advertised%for%rent%or%as% coming%available%for%rent%in%local%papers,%Zillow%and%Craigslist.%This%equates%to%a% less%than%2%%vacancy%rate%at%the%tail%end%of%the%winter%season.% % Due%to%the%shortage%of%units,%rents%have%continued%to%increase.%Households%must%now% earn%over%100%%AMI%to%afford%median%market%rents:% % • In%the%7Lmonth%period%between%April%and%November%2015,%market%apartment% rents%increased%6.2%%and%rents%for%condo/duplex/singleLfamily%homes%increased% 7.4%%based%on%the%SCHA%rental%database.%This%indicates%rents%are%increasing%at% annual%rates%exceeding%10%.%% % • Available%units%were%advertised%at%a%median%countyLwide%rent%of%$1,898%per% month.%This%is%affordable%for%an%averageLsized%household%earning%about%110%% AMI.%By%bedroom%size,%advertised%rents%are%affordable%for%households%earning% between%about%95%%and%140%%AMI.% % % % WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 18%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Market%Rents%of%Vacant%Units%by%Bedroom%Size:%% Summit%County,%Mar/Apr%2016% % Studio/1%BR% 2%BR% 3+%BR% Total%Listings% Units% 32% 38% 31% 101% Median% Rent% $1,475% $1,895% $3,000% $1,898% AMI% Affordability% 95%% 100%% 140%% 110%% Sources:%Summit%Daily%News,%Zillow%and%Craigslist;%2012%Housing%Survey% ! The%current%rental%market%is%underserving%households%with%incomes%at%or%below%80%% AMI,%which%is%the%core%rental%market%in%most%communities.%The%majority%of%available% listings%(87%)%were%priced%for%households%earning%80%%AMI%or%above.%% ! Market%Rents%of%Vacant%Units%by%AMI:%% Summit%County,%Apr/Mar%2016% % Studio/% 2Mbedroom% 3+Mbedroom% Total%listings% %%listings% 1Mbedroom% <60%% 1% 0% 0% 1% 1%% 60.1M80%% 9% 2% 1% 12% 12%% 80.1M100%% 8% 16% 2% 26% 26%% 100.1M120%% 12% 12% 5% 29% 29%% >120%% 3% 7% 23% 33% 33%% Total% 33% 37% 31% 101% 100%% %% Sources:%Summit%Daily%News,%Zillow%and%Craigslist% ! ! ! WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 19%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Housing%Demand%Update% % This%section%updates%the%current%and%future%workforce%housing%needs%in%Summit%County,% by%basin,%through%2020.%This%section:% % • Updates%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment%projections%of%total%needs%for%2012% through%2016;% % • Identifies%how%many%workforce%housing%units%have%been%constructed%or% approved%during%this%time;%% ! • Calculates%how%many%units%are%still%needed%to%address%the%housing%deficit% identified%in%2013%(e.g.,%total%needs%minus%the%number%of%workforce%housing%units% provided%or%to%be%built%by%2020);%and%% ! • Projects%how%many%units%will%be%needed%to%keep%up%with%job%growth,%retiring% employees%and%loss%of%homes%to%second%homeowners,%utilizing%the%same% assumptions%from%the%2013%study,%where%applicable.%% % Results%are%presented%for%both%ownership%and%rental%housing%and%by%AMI%level,%as%done% in%the%2013%study.%The%prior%study%should%be%referenced%for%more%detail%on%these% assumptions.% % Catch-Up Needs (2016) % Catch%up%in%2016%refers%to%the%number%of%units%needed%to%catch%up%to%meet%current% workforce%housing%needs%that%are%in%short%supply.%Currently%about%660%units%are%needed% to%catch%up%to%current%needs.% % For%the%purposes%of%this%update,%catchLup%is%calculated%by:% % • Updating%the%total%housing%needs%calculated%in%the%2013%Housing%Needs% Assessment%for%the%time%period%between%2012%and%2016%and% % • Subtracting%the%number%of%workforce%housing%units%constructed%or%approved% since%the%2013%study%from%total%needs.% % Updated%2013%Study%Estimates% % In%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment,%both%a%lower%and%upper%count%of%housing%needs% was%identified.%Estimates%assumed%both%a%slowLgrowth%rate%based%on%job%recovery%since% 2010%and%a%highLgrowth%rate%based%on%State%Demographer%projections.%Revised%State% WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 20%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% Demographer%estimates%show%that%job%growth%occurred%near%the%midLpoint%of%this% range.%Updated%estimates%are%based%on:% % • A%fourLyear,%rather%than%5Lyear,%need.%Estimates%presented%in%the%2013%study% covered%from%2012%to%2017.%Revised%estimates%show%needs%from%2012%through% the%current%year%(2016);% % • Updated%actual%and%estimated%job%growth%between%2012%and%2016%from%the% State%Demographer,%showing%that%a%total%of%2,755%jobs%have%been%added;%and% % • Revised%estimates%of%units%lost%to%second%homeowners%through%the%sale%of% homes%by%locals.%Updated%counts%from%assessor%records%indicate%a%lower%loss%of% 56Lunits%per%year,%rather%than%86Lunits%per%year.% % These%estimates%do%not%include%an%estimate%of%resident%housing%lost%due%to%conversion% to%shortLterm%rentals,%a%topic%of%concern%in%Summit%County%and%many%other% communities.%Insufficient%data%is%currently%available%to%be%able%to%provide%these% estimates.%% % Updated%Workforce%Housing%Needs%for%the%Period%From%2012%to%2016% % TOTAL% 2013%Estimated%Total%Need%(2012M2016)% Ownership%(120%%or%below)% 415%–%660% Rentals%(80%%or%below)% 410L770% TOTAL%below%market%units% 825%–%1,430% %% % Updated%Total%Need%(2012M2016)% Ownership%(120%%or%below)% 485% Rentals%(80%%or%below)% 563% TOTAL%below%market%units% 1,048% Lower% Blue% 90%–%150% 55%–%105% 145%–%255% Snake% River% % Ten%% Mile% % 70%–%105% 115%–%185% 70%–%130% 130%–%245% 140%–%235% 245%–%430% Upper% Blue% % 140%L%225% 160%L%295% 300%L%520% % % % % 105% 75% 180% 80% 95% 175% 135% 175% 310% 165% 215% 380% NOTE:%differences%are%due%to%rounding% % 2016%CatchLUp%Estimates% % Revised%estimates%of%need%for%2012%to%2016%show%that%about%1,048%workforce%housing% units%were%needed%to%address%deficiencies%in%2012%and%keep%up%with%job%growth%and%loss% of%resident%units%through%2016.%A%total%of%389%of%these%units%have%been%built%or%are% pending%development%in%Summit%County%by%2018.2%Therefore,%another%659%units%are% needed%to%address%the%remaining%needs.% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2 %Because%these%units%are%either%built%or%will%be%completed%before%the%year%2020,%removing%all%of%these% units%from%the%catchLup%figure%will%have%the%same%endLresult%as%removing%just%those%units%currently% constructed%from%catchLup%and%units%pending%completion%by%2020%from%the%keepLup%number.%A%combined% WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 21%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% % Estimated%CatchMUp%Workforce%Housing%Needs:%2016% % TOTAL% Updated%Total%Need%(2012M2016)% % Ownership%(120%%or%below)% 485% Rentals%(80%%or%below)% 563% TOTAL%below%market%units% 1,048% MINUS% Workforce%Units%Built/Approved%(2012M2016)% % % Ownership%(120%%or%below)% 137% Rentals%(80%%or%below)% 252% TOTAL% 389% EQUALS% CATCHMUP:%2016%(remaining%units%needed)% % % Ownership%(120%%or%below)% 348% Rentals%(80%%or%below)% 311% TOTAL% 659% Lower% Blue% % 105% 75% 180% 0% 67% 67% 105% 8% 113% Snake% River% % 80% 95% 175% % % 0% 5% 5% 80% 90% 170% Ten% Mile% % 135% 175% 310% % % Upper% Blue% % 165% 215% 380% %% 58% 3% 61% 79% 177% 256% %% 77% 172% 249% 86% 38% 124% NOTE:%Differences%are%due%to%rounding% % Keep Up Needs (2016 to 2020) % It%is%estimated%that%about%1,025%workforce%housing%units%are%needed%to%keep%up%with% changes%through%2020.%As%done%in%the%2013%study,%the%need%for%workforce%housing%units% through%2020%is%based%on:% % • Projected%job%growth.%The%State%Demographer%estimates%about%1,800%jobs%will%be% added%through%2020%–%fewer%jobs%added%than%during%the%past%four%years,%but%still% significant;% % • The%need%to%fill%jobs%vacated%by%retirees.%This%was%estimated%to%be%about%200%jobs% per%year%in%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment;%and% % • The%need%to%replace%units%lost%to%second%homeowners%through%the%sale%of%homes% by%locals%(about%56%units%per%year).% % The%same%assumptions%regarding%the%mix%of%units%by%ownership%and%rental,%by%AMI%price% point%and%by%Summit%County%region%are%the%same%as%those%used%in%the%2013%Housing% Needs%Assessment,%which%can%be%referenced%for%more%detail.%This%includes:% % !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! total%of%389%rentals%below%80%%AMI%plus%ownership%below%120%%AMI%would%be%subtracted%through%either% method.% WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 22%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% • • % • ! Rentals%should%comprise%about%56%%of%new%units,%on%average,%to%accommodate% the%various%characteristics%of%households%filling%these%new%homes%–%whether%they% are%new%employees%to%the%area%filling%new%jobs%or%jobs%of%retirees,%inLcommuters% relocating%to%Summit%County,%or%households%occupying%homes%built%to%replace% ones%lost%to%second%homeowners;% % Workforce%housing%units%are%now%needed%for%owners%earning%under%150%%AMI% and%renters%earning%under%100%%AMI%based%on%continued%rising%housing%costs% and%scarce%supply%since%the%2013%Housing%Needs%Assessment;3%and% Units%are%distributed%based%on%maintaining%a%balance%of%where%workers%live%and% where%jobs%are%located%within%each%region%of%the%county.% Estimated)Keep,Up)Workforce)Housing)Needs:)2016)to)2020) )) Summit) County) Lower)Blue) Snake)River) Ten)Mile) Upper)Blue) Ownership%(150%%or%below)% 430% 95% 70% 120% 145% Rentals%(100%%or%below)% 595% 80% 100% 185% 230% TOTAL) 1,025) 175) 170) 310) 375) NOTE:%differences%are%due%to%rounding% Total Needs (2016 to 2020) ! About%1,685%catchLup%and%keepLunits%are%needed%in%Summit%County%through%2020%to% house%about%3,035%employees%filling%local%jobs.%4%This%represents%workforce%housing%units% at%price%points%that%the%market%will%not%provide%through%2020,%including%below%150%% AMI%for%ownership%and%below%100%%AMI%for%rentals.%This%will%allow%Summit%County%to% address%both%current%housing%needs%and%keep%up%with%annual%average%job%growth% through%2020.%Just%as%in%the%2013%needs%assessment,5%this%includes:% % • Addressing%the%deficiency%in%belowLmarket%rental%and%ownership%housing%for% residents.%This%does%not%address%the%need%for%seasonal%worker%housing%during% peak%periods;% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3 %Only%the%town%of%Breckenridge%has%workforce%units%pending%development%by%2018%that%will%serve% household%earning%over%120%%AMI,%which%has%been%subtracted%from%the%keepLup%totals%(13Lunits%at%Stan% Miller).%% 4 These%are%employees%filling%average%yearLround%jobs%and%not%peak%seasonal%jobs.%Housing%for%these% employees%need%to%accommodate%a%variety%of%household%sizes,%types%and%preferences.%The%2013%Summit% County%Housing%Needs%Assessment%provides%more%detail%on%the%types%of%homes%needed%by%these% employees.%See%in%particular%Section%4%(What%Employees%Want%–%Design%and%Pricing%of%Workforce%Housing)% and%Section%8%(Type).% 5 %Section%7%Workforce%Housing%Catch%Up%and%5LYear%Keep%Up%Needs%of%the%2013%Summit%County% Workforce%Housing%Needs%Assessment%can%be%referenced%for%more%detail.%% WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 23%% 2016%Summit%County%Housing%Demand%Update,%August%2016% • Housing%the%5%%to%10%%of%inLcommuters%that%would%prefer%to%move%to%Summit% County;% ! • Housing%employees%hired%to%replace%retiring%workers;% ! • Replacing%the%loss%of%residentLowned%homes%that%have%been%sold%to%second% homeowners.%This%does%not%include%making%up%for%the%loss%of%longLterm%rentals% to%the%shortLterm%rental%market%due%to%the%current%lack%of%information%to% estimate%this%loss;% ! • Housing%80%%of%the%employees%that%are%needed%to%fill%new%jobs%within%Summit% County%–%this%assumes%that%20%%of%workers%will%continue%to%inLcommute;6%and% % • Distributing%housing%needs%among%each%basin%based%on%multiple%factors% including:%each%area’s%share%of%jobs%in%the%county,%where%workers%prefer%to%live% and%maintaining%a%mix%of%incomes%within%each%basin.% % Total%Needs:%CatchMUp%Plus%KeepMUp:%2016%–%2020% % CatchLUp%(2016)% KeepLUp%(2016%–%2020)% TOTAL%Housing%Units%% Average%employees%per% household*% #%of%Employees%Housed%% <=60%% 60.1L80%% 80.1L100%% 100.1L120%% 120.1L150%% TOTAL%% <=60%% 60.1L80%% 80.1L100%% TOTAL% Summit% County% 659% 1,025% 1,685% Lower% Blue% 113% 175% 290% Snake% Ten%Mile% River% 170% 249% 170% 310% 335% 560% Upper% Blue% 124% 375% 500% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 3,035% 520% OWNERSHIP% 227% 51% 99% 29% 194% 57% 185% 50% 76% 17% 780% 205% RENTALS% 593% 39% 130% 25% 182% 24% 905% 85% 605% 1,010% 900% 37% 21% 41% 36% 12% 145% 64% 23% 45% 45% 21% 200% 75% 27% 50% 53% 26% 230% 128% 29% 30% 185% 242% 62% 57% 360% 185% 14% 70% 270% NOTE:%differences%are%due%to%rounding% *Source:%2012%Household%Survey% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 6 %About%20%%of%workers%commuted%in%from%residences%located%outside%of%Summit%County%in%2012.%Because% some%workers%will%prefer%commuting%for%multiple%reasons,%this%ratio%was%kept%consistent%in%the%2013% report%and%in%the%current%update.% WSW%Consulting;%Rees%Consulting,%Inc.% % 24%%