Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-09-14 Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board Agenda with materials
City of Bozeman Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board (CAHAB) Agenda July 9, 2014 8:00 am – 9:00 am Commission Room, Bozeman City Hall A. Call to Order – 8:00 am, Commission Room, Bozeman City Hall B. Changes to agenda C. Approval of Minutes from 6-11-14 D. Public Comment – please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less. E. Action Items 1) Request for letter of support to Montana Board of Housing Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program for Stoneridge Apartments – Summit Housing 2) Request for impact fee support for units renting for less than 40% AMI by Stoneridge Apartments – Summit Housing 3) Department of Community Development request for letter of support for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Planning Grant application seeking funds to study the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) and the effect of the program on the supply of affordable housing in the district. F. Non-Action Items – none G. FYI/Discussion H. Adjourn Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact our ADA Coordinator, James Goehrung, at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301). STONERIDGE APARTMENTS BOZEMAN, MONTANA A 48 UNIT TAX CREDIT RENTAL COMMUNITY MARKET STUDY AUGUST 2013 PREPARED BY: PROPERTY DYNAMICS - WOODINVILLE, WASHINGTON PROJECT SPONSOR: SUMMIT HOUSING GROUP, INC. MISSOULA, MONTANA TABLE OF CONTENTS ************************************************************************** Table of Contents................................................................................................. 1 - 2 Disclaimer............................................................................................................ 3 Market Study Cover/Summary Sheet.................................................................. 4 - 5 SECTION A - ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Market Study Requirements I. Executive Summary....................................................................................... A1 - 3 II. Project Description........................................................................................ A4 - 15 a. Description of Market Area..................................................................... A4 b. Site Amenities.......................................................................................... A5 - 11 c. Description of Improvements................................................................... A12 - 15 III. Market Area Economy................................................................................... A16 - 38 a. Delineation of Market Area..................................................................... A16 b. Population and Household Trends........................................................... A16 - 24 c. Housing Trends........................................................................................ A25 -26 d. Supply and Demand Analysis.................................................................. A26 - 38 1. Market Rate Supply........................................................................... A26 - 27 2. Market Rate Demand......................................................................... A27 - 28 3. Rent-Restricted Supply...................................................................... A28 4. Rent-Restricted Demand.................................................................... A29 - 38 5. Analysis of Project’s Special Needs Set Asides................................ A38 6. Conclusion......................................................................................... A38 IV. Competitive Rental Market............................................................................ A39 - 40 V. Analysis of Rent Gap..................................................................................... A41 VI. Analysis of the Project’s Effect on the Market Area..................................... A42 VII. Conclusion..................................................................................................... A43 - 47 a. Specific Questions.................................................................................... A43 - 44 1. Is the Project, as Proposed, Viable?................................................... A43 2. Does the Project Meet a Current of Project Market Need?............... A43 3. Does the Project Supply Units Below Market Rate?......................... A43 - 44 4. If not, Does the Project Provide Some Other Public Benefit?............ A44 b. Summary................................................................................................... A44 - 47 1. Recap of Project.................................................................................. A44 2. Conclusion and Recommendations...................................................... A44 - 47_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page 1______________________________________________ August 2013 SECTION B - POPULATION AND HOUSING A. Montana Counties Population 2000 - 2012....................................................... B1 - 2 B. Gallatin County Population 1990 - 2012.......................................................... B3 C. Montana Population - Cities Over 3,000 Population 2000 - 2012.................... B4 D. City of Bozeman Population 1990 - 2012......................................................... B5 E. City of Bozeman Building Permits 2003 - 2013............................................... B6 F. City of Bozeman Housing Characteristics........................................................ B7 - 8 SECTION C - APARTMENTS A. Summary of Apartments Surveyed................................................................... C1 - 3 B. Details of Apartments Surveyed....................................................................... C4 - 18 SECTION D - ECONOMIC DATA A. Unemployment Rate Comparisons................................................................... D1 B. Annual Changes for Employment.................................................................... D2 C. Employment by Industry.................................................................................. D3 D. Bozeman Area Major Employers..................................................................... D4 SECTION E - APPENDIX A. Sources of Information.................................................................................... E1 B. Census Profiles of Characteristics: 2010......................................................... E2 -5 C. Nielsen/Ribbon Demographics - Demographic Profiles................................. E6 - 17 D. Property Dynamics General Information - Statement of Experience.............. E18 - 20 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page 2______________________________________________ August 2013 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page 3______________________________________________ August 2013 COVER / SUMMARY SHEET - LOCATION OF ITEMS IN MARKET STUDY Project/Unit Amenities:Reference Page A-12 Unit Amenities: Refrigerator Air conditioning Range (stove/oven) Balcony/patio Dishwasher Mini blinds Disposal Ceiling fans Microwave Carpets Washer/dryer Extra storage Common Area Amenities: Community room w/kitchen Computer area Manager’s office Children’s play area Covered parking Expected Date of Market Entry: April 2015 Profit or Non-profit Status: For Profit Total Years of Commitment: 46 Target Audience: 61 & under Home Ownership Option: No Average (comparable) Market Rents in Immediate Area:Reference Page A-40 & C-1 Average Net Adjusted Proposed Rent* Market Rent Stoneridge (net rents) Two bedroom two bath $ 875.00 $ 920.00 $ 519.00 - 743.00 Three bedroom two bath $ 1,029.00 $ 1,005.00 $ 583.00 - 816.00 * From our Property Dynamics survey taken on August 8, 2013 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page 4______________________________________________ August 2013 Vacancy Rate: Reference Page A-27,28,29 & C-2 August 2013 Conventional Vacancy Rate 0.0 % Family Tax Credit Vacancy Rate 0.0 % Low Income Vacancy Rate 0.0 % Overall Vacancy Rate 0.0 % Total Units Surveyed 1,237 Capture Rate: 12.0 % Reference Page A-37 (proposed units / projected income eligible tenants who will move in next year) Units Needed in Market Area: 149* Reference Page A-37 * in 2013, by projected opening in 2015 - 160 Absorption Rate: 31.5 % Reference Page A-37 (proposed units / existing LIH market area units required) Penetration Rate: 21.3 % Reference page A-38 (existing LIH units/total eligible households) Number of LI renter tenure households that can afford rent of proposed project: 1,129 Reference page A-32 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page 5______________________________________________ August 2013 SECTION A ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Stoneridge Apartments - Bozeman, Montana Client Summit Housing Group, Inc. 283 W. Front Street Suite 1 Missoula, Montana 59802 Summary of Subject Property The proposed Stoneridge Apartments to be located in Bozeman, Montana will be a forty- eight (48) unit LIHTC family community. Six (6) of the units will designated for households at the 40 % AMI level, with twenty-nine (29) units at 50 % AMI and twelve (12) units will at 60 %, with one additional three bedroom manager’s unit. Thirty (30) of the units will be two bedroom two bath @ 950, with the remaining eighteen (18) units being three bedroom two bath @ 1,100 S.F. The project will include a community building with a community room, computer room and manager’s office, as well as a children’s play area and covered parking. Unit amenities will include all appliances including a refrigerator, range, dishwasher, disposal and microwave, as well as washer/dryers in the units, AC, ceiling fans, carpets, blinds, a patio/balcony and additional storage. The subject property is located on the west side of 27th Avenue, between Turbulence Lane (on the north) & Tschache Lane (on the south), in the northwestern part of the City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, State of Montana. The City of Bozeman is located in the southwest part of Montana and is the State’s 4th most populous city. All major services are available in Bozeman including a regional shopping mall, big box retailers including Wal- Mart, Costco and Target, banking, national grocery stores, education (public and private), a regional hospital are available in Bozeman. The City is also home to Montana State University. Purpose of Study The purpose of this study is to show continued need and demand for affordable family rental units in the Bozeman, Montana area. This study will establish the position of the subject project, Stoneridge Apartments within both the conventional multi-family rental market, as well as the existing affordable housing market. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-1______________________________________________ August 2013 Conclusion It is our opinion in looking at all of the factors in this report, that the subject Stoneridge Apartments will fill a very strong need in the Bozeman area, affordable rental units for very low to low income families. The subject will provide good quality affordable housing with rents running from 19 to 44 % below market. This will be accomplished while offering a strong amenity package. The subject parcel is well located in a residential area of similar uses, but is just a few blocks from area services and employment opportunities including Costco, Target, Home Depot, Lowes and many other retail and commercial business’s. In looking at other areas of the Bozeman rental market, it is clear that there is also a need for affordable senior housing, with existing projects being fully occupied and including wait lists. The vacancy rate at market rate projects is also at 0 % with a couple of these projects also including wait lists. Renters in the Bozeman area currently have very few options, and in most cases simply have to take what’s available (if anything) with no choice of floor or location in the complex. The vacancy rate at the area’s five family tax credit communities is at 0 %, although just one of the five reported a wait list. Managers at these communities noted that they receive a good number of inquiries on a daily basis from persons looking for a unit, most of whom are in immediate need. Lastly, all of the low income government subsidized family projects were 100 % occupied, with all including wait lists. All of the project managers at existing income restricted projects expressed their support for a new development and did not feel it would have any real effect on their project. Since December 2010, rents at the area’s two bedroom units have increased by 5 % on average, while three bedrooms increased by about 2 % (5 % over the past year). These increases are making it increasingly difficult for very low to low income households to find good quality affordable units in the City. As the population of the Bozeman area increases over the next 2 - 3 years, we would expect rents to continue to climb as demand grows. This will make the subject’s below market rents even more attractive, especially given its strong location and amenity package. Taking into account all of the information in this study, we feel that this proposed project should prove very successful if built as planned. The subject is located in one of the fastest growing cities in the State, and while growth has slowed in recent years, the population of Bozeman continues to increase. Over the past two years (2010 - 2012), Bozeman’s population increased by 1,415 or 3.8 %, ranking _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-2______________________________________________ August 2013 it 3rd by total increase and 3rd by percentage increase among all cities in the State with a population of 3,000 or more. We should note that the two cities with a higher percentage increase, Sidney & Glendive are located in the eastern part of the State near the Bakken oilfield. The annual average increase over the past two years was 1.8 % and compared to growth of 3.55 % per year on average from 2000 to 2010. Using the projects pre- determined income ranges, we have determined that there are currently 1,129 age, tenure and income qualified households in the market area for this proposed project. In addition by the projected opening in 2015, another 22 eligible households will be added to the market. Using our “New Unit Annual Demand Estimate” we have determined that there is currently a need for 149 two and three bedroom units at 40 - 60 % in the market area. That need will increase to 160 by 2015. Absorption We unfortunately do not have the luxury of looking at a recent lease up of a similar project in the City. The last family tax credit project to open was the 48 unit Baxter project which opened in 2005. However, in looking at all of the factors in this report and taking into account its strong location and below market rents, we feel the subject will lease at a rate of about 14 - 16 units per month with stable occupancy achieved in three months. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-3______________________________________________ August 2013 II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION a. Description of Market Area We have determined that the primary market area will be the entire City of Bozeman. Over the years that we have been completing market studies for affordable housing, we have learned that potential residents are typically willing to relocate to different areas of a given city in order to find quality affordable housing. For conventional housing or market rate apartments, potential residents are more likely to stay in certain areas, near work or certain schools, etc. The subject parcel is located in the northwestern part of the City of Bozeman. This area of the City includes a mix of newer residential uses as well as a high number of retail businesses including Costco, Target, Lowes and Home Depot. Additionally, there are grocery stores, banks, hotels and smaller retail businesses in this part of the City. Most of these businesses are located along 19th Avenue, just a few blocks east of the subject’s location on 27th Avenue. Bozeman is the State’s 4th most populous City with all services available. Those services include a regional shopping mall, hospital, big box retailers including Wal-Mart, Big K, Costco, Home Depot, Lowes and Target. The City also includes major banks, grocery stores and all schools including public, private and higher education (Montana State University). The market area also has a good mix of both single family and multi-family units including apartment rentals and condominiums. According to the 2010 Census there were 17,464 total housing units in the City of Bozeman, an increase of 5,820 from the 2000 Census total of 11,644. In addition, when looking at the building permits issued since the April 2010 Census (through June 2013), approximately 782 housing units have been added for an estimated total of 18,246. The average age of housing in Bozeman is very new with 72.8 % being built after 1970 and 36.2 % since 2000. Conversely, 20.1 % were built prior to 1960 and 10.6 % before 1940. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-4______________________________________________ August 2013 b. Site Amenities Property Address: TBD - Tschache Lane Property Identification: West Winds Major Subdivision NW 1/4 of Section 02 Township 02S Range 05E Geo-Code - 06079802242010000 Land Area: 2.31 acres Zoning Classification: The subject parcel is currently zoned R-3 / PUD Lot Description The proposed lot is level and is cleared of all trees. Surrounding uses: The subject parcel is located in a mainly residential area of new attached and detached single family homes and apartments. Vacant R-4 zoned land (multi-family) is to the east across 27th Avenue with new duplex and attached single family homes to the north, west and south. A new apartment community is under construction farther to the south. Inspection Date: The site was personally visited by Property Dynamics on August 8, 2013 There will be no problems with access and visibility to the site _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-5______________________________________________ August 2013 Montana Cadastral Mapping Project_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-6______________________________________________ August 2013 feet km 3000 1 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-7______________________________________________ August 2013 SITE PICTURES SITE LOOKING WEST ALONG TURBULENCE LANE SITE LOOKING NORTH ALONG WEST BORDER _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-8______________________________________________ August 2013 SITE LOOKING NORTH ALONG 27TH AVENUE SITE LOOKING EAST ALONG TSCACHE LANE_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-9______________________________________________ August 2013 NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES Distances to Site: 1. 0.3 Post Office 2. 0.4 Town Pump/Conoco Convenience Store 3. 0.4 Elementary School 4. 0.6 Mountain West Bank 5. 0.6 Smiths Grocery/pharmacy, Heritage Bank, Gap & 16 additional stores 6. 0.7 Fire Station 7. 1.2 Target, Ross, Etc. 8. 1.4 Middle School 9. 1.4 Costco 10. 1.7 High School 11. 3.4 Library 12. 4.6 Hospital Distances calculated along dedicated roads - actual driving miles City bus service (Streamline) is available along 19th, 0.3 miles from the subject location Distances calculated by Property Dynamics _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-10______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman Services 0 mi 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-11______________________________________________ August 2013 c. Description of Improvements The proposed Stoneridge Apartments will include forty-eight (48), two and three bedroom tax credit units. The project will include the following mix: Proposed Unit Mix: Sq. Ft. 30 - Two bedroom two bath units 950 S.F. 18 - Three bedroom two bath units* 1,100 S.F. 48 * One of the three bedroom units will be designated for a manager Unit Amenities: Refrigerator Range (oven/stove) Dishwasher Disposal Microwave Washer/dryer Air conditioning Ceiling fans Mini blinds Carpets Patio/balcony Extra storage Common Area Amenities: Manager’s office Children’s play area Covered parking Utilities: Heat Source: Gas Tenant Paid: Electric/gas/phone/ cable Owner Paid Utilities: Water/sewer/trash Expect Date of Market Entry April 2015_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-12______________________________________________ August 2013 PROPOSED RENTS / INCOME LEVELS Utility Mkt. Gross Rent Allowance Adjust. Net Rent 3 - Two bdrm units @ 40/49 % of Median $ 614.00 $ 95.00 $ 0.00 $ 519.00 19 - Two bdrm units @ 50/55 % of Median $ 767.00 $ 95.00 $ 0.00 $ 672.00 8 - Two bdrm units @ 60 % of Median $ 921.00 $ 95.00 $ 83.00 $ 743.00 3 - Three bdrm units @ 40/49 % of Median $ 709.00 $ 126.00 $ 0.00 $ 583.00 10 - Three bdrm units @ 50/55 % of Median $ 886.00 $ 126.00 $ 0.00 $ 760.00 4 - Three bdrm units @ 60 % of Median $ 1,064.00 $ 126.00 $ 122.00 $ 816.00 1 - Three bdrm manager unit 48 - Total units Units by Income Range: 40 % Units - 6 50 % Units - 29 60 % Units - 12 Projected Income: 3 - Two bedroom units @ $ 519.00 = $ 1,557.00 x 12 months = $ 18,684.00 19 - Two bedroom units @ $ 672.00 = $ 12,768.00 x 12 months = $ 153,216.00 8 - Two bedroom units @ $ 743.00 = $ 5,944.00 x 12 months = $ 71,328.00 3 - Three bedroom units @ $ 583.00 = $ 1,749.00 x 12 months = $ 20,988.00 10 - Three bedroom units @ $ 760.00 = $ 7,600.00 x 12 months = $ 91,200.00 4 - Three bedroom units @ $ 816.00 = $ 3,264.00 x 12 months = $ 39,168.00 1 - Three bdrm manager @ $ 0.00 = $ 0.00 x 12 months = $ 0.00 48 - Total $ 32,882.00 x 12 months = $ 394,584.00 Less 7 % Vacancy & Collection Loss $ (27,621.00) Annual Forecasted Revenue $ 366,963.00 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-13______________________________________________ August 2013 2. Comparison to Market Rate Projects The subject Stoneridge Apartments will be very similar to existing market rate projects in the City in terms of condition and finishes. The eight market rate projects surveyed were a mix of older communities to newly built (within the past five years) and as noted, all would be considered as comparable to the subject in terms of condition. The eight projects surveyed included 767 units for an average of 96 units. The projects however range in size from 48 to 161 units and compared to 48 at the subject. Project Amenities The subject Stoneridge Apartments will include a 1,200 Sq. Ft. community building with a kitchen, computer area and manager’s office as well as a children’s play area, and covered parking. On average, existing market rate projects in Bozeman would be considered as slightly superior to the subject in terms of project based amenities. Of the eight market rate projects surveyed, four included laundry facilities, a community room and fitness center with three including BBQ/picnic areas. Two included extra storage and a children’s play area with one including a business center, garages and a pool or spa. We should note that two of the projects in our survey would be superior to the subject when comparing project amenities. Those two projects, Mountain View and Trout Meadows include a business center, fitness center and community room, with Trout Meadows including a pool and spa. Rents at those two projects are among the highest in the area and run about 25 - 50 % above the subject. Unit Amenities The subject will include all basic kitchen appliances including refrigerator, range, dishwasher, disposal and microwave as well as a washer/dryer in the unit, carpets, blinds, ceilings fans, air conditioning, a patio/balcony and additional storage. At the market rate projects surveyed, all eight included carpets/blinds, all basic kitchen appliances with seven of the eight including a dishwasher and/or disposal. Five included a microwave and patio or balcony (three w/outside storage) with three including washer/dryers in the units and ceiling fan. Two included washer/dryer hookups, AC and walk-in closets. We would rate unit features at the subject as slightly superior on average to these eight projects. However, it would be considered as equal to three projects, Brookside, Kagy Village and Trout Meadows, all of which include washer/dryers in the units._______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-14______________________________________________ August 2013 Unit Size Comparison Range Average Subject Two bedroom two bath 900 - 1,052 S.F. 976 S.F. 950 S.F. Three bedroom two bath 1,000 - 1,224 S.F. 1,147 S.F. 1,100 S.F. Both the two and three bedroom units at the subject are smaller on average than existing market rate units in the area, but well within the range of existing projects. The two bedrooms units at the subject will run about 3 % smaller than the area average, while three bedrooms run 4 % smaller. 3. Comparison to Other Rent Restricted Projects In the market area there are five existing family tax credit communities with 340 total units. That is an average project size of 68 and compared to 48 at the subject (note: two of the projects were built in multiple phases). All of the existing projects are in good condition and in general we would consider project amenities as about equal to the subject, while unit based amenities would be inferior. Project Amenities As noted, the subject Stoneridge Apartments will include a community room with a kitchen, computer area and manager’s office, as well as covered parking and a children’s play area. At the five existing projects, all included a community room, laundry facilities, a BBQ/picnic area and a children’s play area, with one including a business center, basketball court and bike racks. Unit Amenities The subject will include all basic kitchen appliances including dishwasher, disposal and microwave as well as washer/dryers in the units, carpets, blinds, ceilings fans, air conditioning, a patio/balcony and additional storage. At the five family projects, all included all appliances including a dishwasher and/or disposal, carpets and blinds. Two included a patio/balcony, air conditioning with one including washer/dryer hookups. None of the existing projects include washer/dryers or microwaves, as does the subject. Unit Size Comparison Range Average Subject Two bedroom two bath 800 - 879 S.F. 839 S.F. 950 S.F. Three bedroom two bath 1,000 - 1,136 S.F. 1,062 S.F. 1,100 S.F. The subject’s two bedroom two bath units are larger on average than existing competitive units in the market area on average by 13 %, while the three bedroom units are about 4 % larger on average. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-15______________________________________________ August 2013 III. MARKET AREA ECONOMY a. Delineation of Market Area We have determined that the primary market area will be the entire City of Bozeman. Over the years that we have been completing market studies for affordable housing, we have learned that potential residents are typically willing to relocate to different areas of a given city in order to find quality affordable housing. For conventional housing or market rate apartments, potential residents are more likely to stay in certain areas, near work or certain schools, etc. b. Population and Household Trends Gallatin County With a 2012 Census population of 92,614, Gallatin County is the State’s 3rd most populous County, following only Yellowstone (City of Billings) and Missoula Counties. Growth in Gallatin has been very strong and steady over at least the past 22 years (1990 - 2012), with its population increasing by 42,151 or 83.5 %. Since 2000, the County population has increased by 24,783 or 36.5 %, a very good 3.0 % annually, and compared to growth of 3.4 % per year on average between 1990 and 2000. Over that decade (1990's), the Gallatin County population increased by 17,368 or 34.4 %. Between 2010 and 2012, the Gallatin County population increased by 3,101 or 3.5 %, from 91,354 in 2010 to 92,614, a 1.75 % annual rate of growth. Over the past two years (2010 - 2012), Gallatin was the State’s 2nd fastest growing County by overall increase, following only Yellowstone County, and was 6th by percentage increase. In 2010 (Census), 20.9 % of the Gallatin County population was under age 18 while 9.5 % were 65 years of age or older. The median age in the County was 32.5. By race, 95.1 % were White, 0.9 % being American Indian, 1.9 % were of Two or More Races and 2.8 % were listed as Hispanic Origin. City of Bozeman According to the U.S. Bureau of Census, the 2012 population for the City of Bozeman was 38,695, making it the State’s 4th most populous city and largest of Gallatin County’s five incorporated cities. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-16______________________________________________ August 2013 Like Gallatin County, the City of Bozeman has enjoyed very strong population growth over at least the past 23 years with its population increasing by 16,035 or 70.8 %. The majority of that growth occurred from 2000 to 2010, when its population increased by 35.5 % or a very good 3.55 % annually. That increased compared to a growth of 2.1 % per year on average between 1990 and 2000. More recently, from 2010 to 2012, the City’s population increased by 1,415 or 3.8 % or 1.9 % annually, from 37,280 in 2010 to 38,695 in 2012. Over the past two years (2010 - 2012), Bozeman had the 3rd largest overall numeric increase of any city in the State with its population increasing by 1,415. In addition, the City also ranked 3rd in percentage increase over the same period (among cities with a population 3,000 or more). In 2012, the City of Bozeman population made up 41.8 % of the entire Gallatin County population, up slightly from 41.6 % in 2000. While the State does not make projections at the city level, Nielsen is projecting an increase of 6.0 % or 1.2 % annually over the next 5 years (2013 - 2018). In 2010 (Census), 15.7 % of the population was under age 18, while 28.2% were age 18 - 24 and 8.1 % were age 65+. By race 93.6 % were White, 1.1 % were American Indian, 2.1 % were of Two or More Races and 2.9 % were of Hispanic. Market Area We have asked Nielsen/Ribbon Demographics to provide us with the latest demographic data on the defined market area (City of Bozeman). Note: Nielsen figures for the City are slightly different from the Census figures. In 2013, Nielsen has estimated the market area/city population at 39,315, an increase of 1,609 or 4.3 % from the 2010 Census figure of 37,706. The 2013 estimate of population makes up 42 % of the entire Gallatin County population (based on the 2012 Census estimate). The annual average increase for the market area over the past three years was 1.4 % and compared to a 3.7 % annual increase from 2000 to 2010. Nielsen has projected that between 2013 and 2018, the market area population will continue to increase, although at a slightly slower annual rate as seen over the past three years. Over the next five years they are projecting the market area population to grow to 41,687, an increase of 2,372 or 6.0 % or 1.2 % per year on average. In the market area in 2013, 16.7 % of the population was under the age of 18, while 23.8 % were age 18 - 24 (Note: as Bozeman is home to Montana State University, this percentage is higher than average), with 8.8 % being 65 years of age or older. The _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-17______________________________________________ August 2013 median age for the market area in 2013 was 29.5. By race, 93.3 % were White, with 1.1 % American Indian, 2.1 % Asian or Pacific Islander, 0.7 % being Some Other Race, 2.3 % were of Two or More Races and 3.1 % were of Hispanic Origin. We have included later in this report a “Market Area Profile” with additional detailed information, as well as a map showing the market area. Households According to Nielsen/Ribbon, the total number of households in the primary market area in 2013 was 16,841, an increase of 937 or 5.9 % from the 2010 Census figure of 15,904. Between 2010 and 2013 the annual average increase was 312 households and compared to 512 annually between 2000 and 2010. Of the total households in the market area in 2013, 13,849 or 82.2 % were non-senior, with the remaining 2,992 or 17.8 % being senior (62+). In 2013, renter tenure for all households in the market area was a very high 54.62 %, with the non-senior renter tenure at 60.37 %. So: 60.37 % x 13,849 (existing non-senior households) = 8,361 total non-senior renter tenure households in 2013. Nielsen has projected that by the year 2018, the total number of households will grow to 18,038, an increase of 1,197 from the 2013 estimate, or an annual average increase of 239 new households. Of the new households entering the market area over the next five years, Ribbon is projecting that 671 or 134 annually will be non-senior. Of those, they are projecting that 106 per year on average will be renter tenure. So in total by 2015 (expected date of project opening), there is projected to be 14,061 non-senior renter households in the market area: 212 (106 x 2 years) + 13,849 = 14,061. Again when looking at these figures, note that the City is home to Montana State University, so many of renter households are students and not eligible for this proposed project. Economic Overview While economic conditions in the area are fairly stable due to the presence of Montana State University and Bozeman Deaconess Hospital, like the rest of the State and Country, the Bozeman area saw its overall economy slow from about 2007 to 2010, before increasing over the past two years. Over the past ten years (2002 - 2012), total employment in the County increased by 7,146 or 17.6 %, from 40,497 in 2002 to 47,643 in 2012 (both annual averages), an annual average increase of 1.76 %. After slow steady growth during the early part of the decade (2002 - 2004), employment in the County_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-18______________________________________________ August 2013 increased strongly between 2004 and 2007 growing by 6,219 or 14.5 % or 4.8 % annually. Then as noted, employment decreased substantially from 2007 to 2010, dropping by 4,090 or (8.3)%, with the majority of those losses, 3,807 or (7.8)%, occurring between 2008 and 2009. While employment decreased again between 2009 and 2010, those losses slowed to just (0.6)%. Between 2010 and 2012, employment has again increased, growing by 2,652 or 5.9 %, a very good 2.9 % annually. The latest monthly figure available for Gallatin County employment is from June 2013, which showed total employment at 48,742, an increase of 537 or 1.1 % when compared to the June 2012 figure. While not a large increase, it is a good sign economic conditions in the area are improving. Since at least 2002, the unemployment rate for the County has remained below both State and National averages. Between 2002 and 2012, the County unemployment rate has averaged 4.1 % and compared to 4.8 % for the State and 6.8 % for the National average. The rate in Gallatin County remained very steady between 2003 and 2007 ranging from a decade low of 2.3 % in 2006, to a high of 3.3 % in 2003. However, in 2008 the rate saw a jump to 3.7 %, (from 2.5 % in 2007), and then a significant increase to 6.1 % in 2009 and a smaller increase to 6.5 % in 2010. The rate then dropped over the past two years to 5.9 % in 2011 and to 5.3 % in 2012 (latest annual figure). The latest monthly figure available is from June 2013, which showed the unemployment rate at 4.5 %, down from 5.5 % in June 2012. Employment by Industry between 2002 and 2012 showed an overall increase of 24.3 % for all Industries. The largest increase by sector, was in Health Care & Social Services which grew by 1,728, followed by Professional & Technical Services with an increase of 1,373 and Retail Trade with an increase of 1,118. By percentage increase, Management of Companies & Enterprises led the way increasing by 618 %, followed by Mining at 450 % and Education Services with an 99.7 % increase. The lowest sector increase came from Manufacturing, which increased by just 1.5 %. The largest sector employer in the County in 2012 was Government at 7,675, followed by Retail Trade at 6,781 and Accommodation & Food Services at 5,739. Together those three sectors made up 45.1 % of the total. We have included on page D-3, the average wage by industry. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-19______________________________________________ August 2013 Overall, we would rate economic conditions in the County as good. Total employment in the County increased by 5.8 % or 2.9 % annually from 2010 to 2012 and was up by 1.1 % when comparing June 2013 to June 2012. In addition, the unemployment rate dropped from its decade high 6.5 % in 2010 to 5.3 % in 2012 and was down when comparing June 2013 to June 2012 (5.5 % to 4.5 %). _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-20______________________________________________ August 2013 MARKET AREA PROFILE - CITY OF BOZEMAN Population: Change % Change 2000 (Census) 27,292 2010 (Census) 37,706 10,414 37.3 % 2013 (Estimate) 39,315 1,609 4.3 % 2018 (Projection) 41,687 2,372 6.0 % Population by Race: 2000 2013 2018 White 95.1 % 93.3 % 92.8 % Black 0.3 % 0.5 % 0.5 % American Indian 1.2 % 1.1 % 1.2 % Asian or Pacific Islander 1.5 % 2.1 % 2.2 % Other Race 0.5 % 0.7 % 0.7 % Two or More races 1.4 % 2.3 % 2.5 % Hispanic Ancestry 1.6 % 3.1 % 3.4 % Population by Age: 0 - 17 15.7 % 16.7 % 18.3 % 18 - 24 32.3 % 23.8 % 17.3 % 25 - 34 16.6 % 21.0 % 22.0 % 35 - 44 11.6 % 12.1 % 14.2 % 45 - 54 10.6 % 9.1 % 19.5 % 55 - 64 4.8 % 8.6 % 8.7 % 65 - 74 3.6 % 4.6 % 6.2 % 75 & Older 4.9 % 4.2 % 3.9 % Total 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % Median Age - 26.3 29.5 31.6 Households: Change % of Change 2000 (Census) 10,783 2010 (Census)15,904 5,121 47.5 % 2013 (Estimate)16,841 937 5.9 % 2018 (Projection)18,038 1,197 7.1 % 2000 2013 2018 Average Household Size - 2.26 2.15 2.14 2013 2018 Non-Senior Households 13,849 82.2 % 14,520 80.5 % Senior Households (62+) 2,992 17.8 % 3,518 19.5 % 16,841 100.0 % 18,038 100.0 %_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-21______________________________________________ August 2013 2013 % Households With 1 person 34.3 % With 2 persons 35.8 % With 3 persons 16.2 % With 4 persons 9.5 % With 5 persons 3.0 % With 6 persons 0.9 % With 7+ persons 0.3 % 2013 Housing Units: Total Housing Units 18,572 Occupied Housing Units 16,841 - 90.7 % Owner Occupied 7,642 - 45.4 % Renter Occupied 9,199 - 54.6 % Vacant Housing Units 1,731 - 9.3 % 2013 - Units in Structure: One unit detached 47.2 % One unit attached 8.0 % Two units 8.0 % Three - Four 13.0 % Five - Nineteen 13.6 % Twenty - Forty-nine 2.0 % Fifty or more 3.2 % Mobile Homes 5.0 % Other 0.0 % Household Income: 2000 2013 2018 $ 0 - $ 14,999 2,082 19.3 % 2,600 13.9 % 2,745 13.3 % $ 15,000 - $ 24,999 1,950 18.1 % 2,513 14.9 % 2,686 14.1 % $ 25,000 - $ 34,999 1,739 16.1 % 2,204 12.6 % 2,349 12.4 % $ 35,000 - $ 49,999 1,972 18.3 % 2,488 18.5 % 2,652 18.2 % $ 50,000 - $ 74,999 1,741 13.2 % 2,916 19.5 % 3,133 19.7 % $ 75,000 - $ 99,999 729 6.8 % 1,774 9.5 % 1,916 9.9 % $ 100,000 + 565 5.2 % 2,346 13.9 % 2,557 12.4 % 10,778 100.0 % 16,841 100.0 % 18,038 100.0 % Median Household Income $ 32,803 $ 41,653 $ 42,008 Average Household Income $ 40,875 $ 60,248 $ 60,667 Source: Nielsen 06/30/13_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-22______________________________________________ August 2013 Households by Income Market Area Renter Households by Household Size - 2013 Age 61 & Under 1-Person 2-Persons 3-Persons 4-Persons 5 Persons $ 0 - 10,000 537 179 47 123 6 $ 10,000 - 20,000 856 539 219 159 3 $ 20,000 - 30,000 892 443 244 39 7 $ 30,000 - 40,000 447 246 265 39 24 $ 40,000 - 50,000 227 403 205 83 36 $ 50,000 - 60,000 55 259 74 52 25 $ 60,000+ 209 716 391 131 107 Totals 3,223 2,785 1,445 626 208 Renter Households by Household Size - 2015* Age 61 & Under 1-Person 2-Persons 3-Persons 4-Persons 5 Persons $ 0 - 10,000 540 3180 47 122 5 $ 10,000 - 20,000 888 548 219 154 3 $ 20,000 - 30,000 925 442 249 41 7 $ 30,000 - 40,000 467 247 269 39 25 $ 40,000 - 50,000 235 408 209 84 38 $ 50,000 - 60,000 59 262 75 51 25 $ 60,000+ 218 744 411 141 109 Totals 3,332 2,831 1,479 642 212 For the 2015 figures, we have simply pro-rated the difference between the 2013 and 2018 Renter Households by Household Size - 2018 Age 61 & Under 1-Person 2-Persons 3-Persons 4-Persons 5 Persons $ 0 - 10,000 544 182 48 120 3 $ 10,000 - 20,000 937 561 219 171 2 $ 20,000 - 30,000 974 439 257 44 6 $ 30,000 - 40,000 498 250 274 41 28 $ 40,000 - 50,000 246 415 216 86 42 $ 50,000 - 60,000 64 266 78 48 27 $ 60,000+ 232 786 442 155 113 Totals 3,495 2,899 1,534 665 221 Source: Ribbon Demographics _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-23______________________________________________ August 2013 Area MapPlace See Appendix for Geographiesof© 2006-2012 TomTomPrepared By: © 2013 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved.Nielsen Solution Center 1 800 866 651121PageSun Jun 30, 2013Prepared For: Property DynamicsProject Code: Bozeman, MTPrepared on:_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-24______________________________________________ August 2013 c. Housing Trends According to Bozeman Associate Planner Doug Riley, there are currently three larger apartment projects in planning in the City with just over 300 total units. There are also several smaller projects with units under construction including an 11 unit family tax credit community, located on Haggerty Lane in the extreme eastern part of the City. Additionally, there are 24 market rate units under construction just south of the subject location on 27th Avenue. Mr. Riley also noted that interest has picked up regarding single family development with several projects that were stopped in 2007 to 2010, now being revived. Many of these are mixed use with residential, retail and commercial. Mr. Riley expected new housing starts to increase over the next several years as economic conditions in the area improve. Housing Units - City of Bozeman According to the 2010 Census there were 17,464 total housing units in the City of Bozeman, an increase of 5,820 from the 2000 Census total of 11,644. In addition, when looking at the building permits issued since the 04/2010 Census (through June 2013), approximately 782 housing units have been added for an estimated total of 18,246. The average age of housing in Bozeman is newer with 72.8 % being built after 1970 and 36.2 % since 2000. Conversely, 20.1 % were built prior to 1960 and 10.6 % before 1940. Sub-standard and Rent Overburden Housing Units - Renter Occupied (2009-2011 ACS) Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities - 90 or 1.1 % Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities - 172 or 2.2 % Over Crowded - More than 1.01 persons per room - 163 or 2.0 %. That figure is fairly typical for a city of this size. Rent Overburden - paying more than 35 % of Household income to rent - 42.7 %. That percentage is high with the average typically in the 25 - 35 % range. Building Permits Between 2003 and 2012, the City of Bozeman issued permits for 5,011 new residential units (single & multi-family). Of that total, 2,421 or 48.3 % were single family with the remaining 2,590 or 52 % being multi-family units. Over the past ten years the City has averaged about 259 multi-family units per year, with the majority of those units permitted in the early to middle part of the decade. From 2003 to 2007 the City averaged 428 new_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-25______________________________________________ August 2013 units, compared to 72 per year on average from 2008 to 2011. In 2012 the City permitted 154 units. One thing to keep in mind when looking at these multi-family numbers, is that a good number of the multi-family units permitted over the past decade were for condominiums. Since 2003, Bozeman has averaged a very strong 242 single family permits, again with the majority of those being issued from 2003 to 2007. In 2012 the City permitted 285 single family homes, up from 164 in 2011. Through June 2013 the City has permitted another 331 residential units, with 238 single family homes and 93 multi-family units. d. Supply and Demand Analysis 1. Market Rate Supply a. Existing - In 2013 the market area included 9,199 or 54.6 % rental units out of the total 18,572 occupied housing units. These units include all types of rental housing including mobile homes, single family homes and apartment complexes. The Bozeman area has a very high number of rentals due mainly to the student population at Montana State University. In 2013, duplex units in the market area made up 8 % or 1,486 units of the total, while 3 - 4 unit buildings made up 13.0 % or 2,414 units and structures with 5 or more units made up 18.8 % of the total or 3,492 units. In total, there are 7,392 multi-family units in the market area. Again, keep in mind that many of these are owner occupied condominium units. In looking at current vacancy rate of 0.0 %, it is very clear that there is a shortage of market rate units in the City. The eight multi-family rental projects we surveyed in the Bozeman area were a mix of older projects (built in the 1970's to 1980's), to newly built (since 2000). That is very similar to the overall rental market in the City. There are a good number of older projects in the City, however with most being in good condition. Additionally, there were a large number of projects built over the past 8 - 10 years. As noted, since 2003, the City has permitted 2,683 multi-family units. We should note that some of these units are restricted to the student population at MSU, although the majority of rentals are open to anyone. In the market area there is a also good variety of unit sizes (1, 2, 3 and 4 bedrooms), with the majority of projects being 1 - 3 story garden style communities. The majority of these units are flats, although there are several townhome style units in the City. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-26______________________________________________ August 2013 b. Potential/Developing According to Bozeman Associate planner Doug Riley, there are currently three large apartment projects in planning, or under construction in the City. The first project will include 48 units with 24 currently under construction. The remaining 24 units are approved and should start in Fall 2013. This project is located just one block south of the subject and will be 2 & 3 bedrooms with detached garages. The second is an 84 unit addition to an existing 16 units (Saddleview) located on Haggerty Lane in the extreme eastern part of the City. Sixteen units are approved and will begin construction in August/September 2013, with the remaining 68 units to follow over the next several months. All of these units are market rate with all being two bedroom two bath. The third project, Sundance Apartments is the largest and will include 195 total market rate units. Units will be 1, 2 & 3 bedroom and will include a strong amenity package including a community room, children’s play area and pool. This project is also near the subject, at Baxter Lane & Davis Lane. It has received all approvals and building permits are in the process of being issued. 2. Market Rate Demand A. Vacancy Rates, Incentives - Our latest survey of the Bozeman area includes eight (8) market rate projects with 767 total units, an average complex size of 96 units and compared to 48 at the subject. However, the projects surveyed ranged in size from 48 to 161 units. In this most recent survey, we found no vacancies for a 0 % vacancy rate, compared to a 1.3 % rate in December 2011, when we found ten (10) vacancies and a 1.8 % rate in December 2010 with fourteen (14) vacancies found. Obviously, with a 0 % vacancy rate all unit sizes, 1, 2 & 3 bedroom were also at 0 %. Just one of the projects surveyed was offering rental incentives. That was ½ month free with a 12 month lease at the Trout Meadows Apartments. That is the same result as in December 2010 and December 2011, when just Trout Meadows was offering the same special. B. Rent Trends - Since December 2011 (time of our last survey of the Bozeman area), rents at the area’s one bedroom units have increased by about 2 % on average, while two bedroom one bath rents increased by 5 %. Rents at the area’s two bedroom two _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-27______________________________________________ August 2013 bath units saw the largest increase at 8 %, with three bedroom units also increasing by 5 % over the past 18 months. We have listed below a summary of rents we obtained in our rental survey of the Bozeman area. In addition, we have listed a “Net Adjusted Market Rent,” that is what we feel the rents would be at the proposed Stoneridge Apartments, if leased as a market rate project. We have taken into account, unit sizes, age of the project, comparable unit and project amenities. We should also note that the average two bedroom one bath rent was higher than the average two bedroom two bath. That was due to the fact that we were able to find just two (2) two bedroom two bath comparables with both being in older complexes with both including much smaller units than the subject, and amenities that are inferior to the subject (both unit and project). Average Net Adjusted Proposed Rent Market Rent Stoneridge (net rents) Two bedroom two bath $ 875.00 $ 920.00 $ 519.00 - 743.00 Three bedroom two bath $ 1,029.00 $ 1,005.00 $ 583.00 - 816.00 C. Absorption - NA We were not able to obtain any absorption information from existing market rate projects in the area. While there are several newly built projects in our survey, those were built in 2003 - 2007 and existing management were not aware of the lease-up on these properties. 3. Rent Restricted Supply A. Existing - The market area consists of seven income restricted family housing projects with 454 total units. Five of the projects are family tax credit communities with two low income government subsidized projects. The five tax credit projects include 340 total units and the two low income family projects include 114 units. B. Potential/Developing - According to Doug Riley, an Associate Planner with the City of Bozeman, there is an 11 unit family tax credit community located on Haggerty Lane in the extreme eastern part of the City. That project, Haggerty Lane Apartments will include 1 & 2 bedrooms units at 40 - 60 % AMI. Haggerty Lane is scheduled to open in Fall 2013. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-28______________________________________________ August 2013 4. Rent Restricted Demand A. Vacancy Rates - In our survey of the five existing tax credit projects in Bozeman, we found no vacancies for a 0 % vacancy rate, compared to two (2) vacancies and a 0.6 % rate in a December 2011 survey of the same projects. In December 2010, the rate was at 1.2 % with four vacancies found. All of the projects in our survey were 100 % occupied with one of those five, including a wait list. Lastly, we surveyed the two existing low income family communities with 114 total units. Both projects were 100 % occupied and included wait lists, ranging from 6 to 30 names. HRDC of Bozeman currently handles 400 section 8 vouchers. According to Section 8 Program Coordinator Bob Ballard, all of the vouchers are currently in use and they have a wait list of 1,740 names. That was up from 900 in December 2011. B. Market Penetration Analysis Calculation of Eligible Households For the purposes of this report we will calculate the number of eligible households based on income of 40/49, 50/55 and 60 % AMI. The Stoneridge apartment project located in Bozeman, Montana will consist of forty-seven (47) rentable Tax Credit units and one manager’s unit. Unit mix with net rents: 3 - Two bedroom two bath @ 40/49 % of Median $ 519.00 19 - Two bedroom two bath @ 50/55 % of Median $ 672.00 8 - Two bedroom two bath @ 60 % of Median $ 743.00 3 - Three bedroom two bath @ 40/49 % of Median $ 583.00 10 - Three bedroom two bath @ 50/55 % of Median $ 760.00 4 - Three bedroom two bath @ 60 % of Median $ 816.00 1 - Three bedroom manager unit. 48 - Total units _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-29______________________________________________ August 2013 2013 - Income Limits Gallatin County Three Persons $ 24,560 - 40 % $ 30,086 - 49 % $ 30,700 - 50 % $ 33,770 - 55 % $ 36,840 - 60 % Five Persons $ 29,480 - 40 % $ 36,113 - 49 % $ 36,850 - 50 % $ 40,535 - 55 % $ 44,220 - 60 % Source: Montana Board of Housing - Effective December 11, 2012 For purposes of this report we will make our calculations based on 3 person for the two bedroom unit and 5 persons for the three bedroom units. Minimum For the calculation of number of eligible households for the tax credit units, we will consider that prospective residents will spend no more than 30 % of their income on housing. Two bedroom units @ 40 % = $ 519.00 divided by .30 x 12 months = $ 20,760 Two bedroom units @ 50 % = $ 672.00 divided by .30 x 12 months = $ 26,880 Two bedroom units @ 60 % = $ 743.00 divided by .30 x 12 months = $ 29,720 Three bedroom units @ 40 % = $ 583.00 divided by .30 x 12 months = $ 23,320 Three bedroom units @ 50 % = $ 760.00 divided by .30 x 12 months = $ 30,400 Three bedroom units @ 60 % = $ 816.00 divided by .30 x 12 months = $ 32,640 Qualifying Ranges For the maximum income level, MBOH allows the 40 % units to qualify up to 49 % and the 50 % units up to 55 %: Two bedroom units @ 40 % = $ 20,760 to $ 30,086 (based on 3 persons @ 49 %) Two bedroom units @ 50 % = $ 26,880 to $ 33,770 (based on 3 persons @ 55 %) Two bedroom units @ 60 % = $ 29,720 to $ 36,840 (based on 3 persons @ 60 %) _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-30______________________________________________ August 2013 Three bedroom units @ 40 % = $ 23,320 to $ 36,113 (based on 5 persons @ 49 %) Three bedroom units @ 50 % = $ 30,400 to $ 40,535 (based on 5 persons @ 55 %) Three bedroom units @ 60 % = $ 32,640 to $ 44,220 (based on 5 persons @ 60 %) Note: We have narrowed the income ranges for the proposed units so as not to double count households. Two bedroom units @ 40 % = $ 20,760 to $ 28,000 Two bedroom units @ 50 % = $ 28,000 to $ 32,420 Two bedroom units @ 60 % = $ 32,420 to $ 36,840 Three bedroom units @ 40 % = $ 23,320 to $ 31,000 Three bedroom units @ 50 % = $ 31,000 to $ 38,110 Three bedroom units @ 60 % = $ 38,110 to $ 44,220 In narrowing the income ranges, we have tried to maintain the original ranges Determining the Number of Eligible Households Although some of the potential residents will come from outside the market area, we have asked Nielsen/Ribbon Demographics to provide us with the number of households, as well as the incomes for the primary market area, which we have previously mentioned will be the City of Bozeman. The data we have received is based on 2013 figures. Income limits are also from 2013. Eligibility for Tax Credit Units Step One - According to Nielsen/Ribbon, in 2013 the total number of households in the primary market area was 16,841. Of the total households, 13,849 or 82.2 % were non-senior (under age 62). Step Two - We will now determine the total eligible by tenure. Renter tenure for the market area in 2013 according to Nielsen is 54.6 %, however for non-seniors it was 60.37 %, so: 13,849 - Existing non-senior households in market area in 2013 x 60.37 % - Market area renter tenure = 8,361 - Non-senior households with renter tenure in the market area _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-31______________________________________________ August 2013 Of the total existing renter tenure non-senior households in the market area, 4,230 include 2 - 3 persons, with 834 including 4 - 5 persons. That is a total of 5,064 two to five person renter households or 60.57 % of the total non-senior households in the market area. Step Three - We will now calculate the total number of income eligible households. That is, the total number of the lowest to highest ranges of those households whose incomes range between $ 20,760 and $ 44,220 (minimum based on a two bedroom 40 % rent of $ 519.00 per month and the maximum based on the 60 % income limit for 5 persons). The number of non-senior households that fit the project’s predetermined income range = 22.29 %. 5,064 - Existing 2-5 person non-senior renter tenure households in market area in 2013 x 22.29 % - Percentage of 2013 households with incomes between $ 20,760 & $ 44,220 = 1,129 - Income eligible non-senior renter households Summary - The current number of size, income and renter tenure eligible non-senior households in the market area = 1,129 out of a total of 8,361 non-senior renter households in the primary market area. As a result, 13.5 % of the total non-senior renter households in the primary market area would be eligible for the forty-seven (47) tax credit units at the Stoneridge Apartments. Household Projection Between 2013 and 2018, Nielsen/Ribbon has projected that an additional 671 non- senior households will enter the market area. Of those, they have projected that 528 will be renter tenure, with 255 including two - five persons, an annual average increase of 51 two to five person non-senior households. So by 2015 (expected year of lease- up), the number of 2 to 5 person renter tenure households in the market area will increase by 102. Of those, we will assume that 22.29 % or 22 being income and tenure eligible for this proposed project. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-32______________________________________________ August 2013 We will now calculate the number of eligible households by bedroom size: As noted, we have narrowed the income ranges so as to not double count households: Eligibility for Three (3) Two Bedroom Units @ 40/49 % of Median: Monthly rent: $ 519.00 Income eligible range: $ 20,760 - $ 28,000 (minimum and maximum) Targeted group: Non-Senior Households Total existing non-senior households: 13,849 Renter tenure: 60.37 % x 13,849 = 8,361 total eligible households with renter tenure Household size: (2-3 persons) 50.6 % x 8,361 = 4,230 Financially eligible: 11.7 % x 4,230 = 497 eligible households ********************************************************************* Eligibility for Nineteen (19) Two Bedroom Units @ 50/55 % of Median: Monthly rent: $ 672.00 Income eligible range: $ 28,000 - $ 32,420 (minimum and maximum) Targeted group: Non-Senior Households Total existing non-senior households: 13,849 Renter tenure: 60.37 % x 13,849 = 8,361 total eligible households with renter tenure Household size: (2-3 persons) 50.6 % x 8,361 = 4,230 Financially eligible: 6.17 % x 4,230 = 261 eligible households ********************************************************************* Eligibility for Eight (8) Two Bedroom Units @ 60 % of Median: Monthly rent: $ 743.00 Income eligible range: $ 32,420 - 36,840 (minimum and maximum) Targeted group: Non-Senior Households Total existing non-senior households: 13,849 Renter tenure: 60.37 % x 13,849 = 8,361 total eligible households with renter tenure Household size: (2-3 persons) 52.48 % x 8,361 = 4,230 Financially eligible: 5.34 % x 4,230 = 226 eligible households _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-33______________________________________________ August 2013 Eligibility for Three (3) Three Bedroom Units @ 40/49 % of Median: Monthly rent: $ 583.00 Income eligible range: $ 23,320 - $ 31,000 (minimum and maximum) Targeted group: Non-Senior Households Total existing non-senior households: 13,849 Renter tenure: 60.37 % x 13,849 = 8,361 total eligible households with renter tenure Household size: (4-5 persons) 9.97 % x 8,361 = 834 Financially eligible: 4.56 % x 834 = 38 eligible households ********************************************************************* Eligibility for Ten (10) Three Bedroom Units @ 50/55 % of Median: Monthly rent: $ 760.00 Income eligible range: $ 31,000 - $ 38,110 (minimum and maximum) Targeted group: Non-Senior Households Total existing non-senior households: 13,849 Renter tenure: 60.37 % x 13,849 = 8,361 total eligible households with renter tenure Household size: (4-5 persons) 9.97 % x 8,361 = 834 Financially eligible: 5.4 % x 834 = 45 eligible households ********************************************************************* Eligibility for Four (4) Three Bedroom Units @ 60 % of Median: Monthly rent: $ 816.00 Income eligible range: $ $ 38,110 - 44,220 (minimum and maximum) Targeted group: Non-Senior Households Total existing non-senior households: 13,849 Renter tenure: 60.37 % x 13,849 = 8,361 total eligible households with renter tenure Household size: (4-5 persons) 9.97 % x 8,361 = 834 Financially eligible: 7.43 % x 834 = 62 eligible households ********************************************************************* Summary of Eligible Households Proposed Eligible Capture AMI Units Households Rate Two bedroom 40/49 % 3 497 1.5 % Two bedroom 50/55 % 19 261 7.3 % Two bedroom 60 % 8 226 3.5 % Total two bedroom units 30 984 2.8 % _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-34______________________________________________ August 2013 Proposed Eligible Capture AMI Units Households Rate Three bedroom 40/49 % 3 38 7.9 % Three bedroom 50/55 % 10 45 22.2 % Three bedroom 60 % 4 62 6.5 % Total three bedroom units 17 145 11.7 % Total 47 1,129 4.2 % As noted, we have narrowed income limits so as to not double count households, so the actual number of income eligible households in each category is much higher. Because we have narrowed the ranges, it is important to look at the total eligible households and capture rate for each bedroom size. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-35______________________________________________ August 2013 NEW UNIT ANNUAL DEMAND ESTIMATE *************************************************************************** DEMAND FROM EXISTING HOUSEHOLDS: 1. Number of existing non-senior households for 2013 in market area 13,849 2. Number of renters - 60.37 % x 13,849 = 8,361 3. Household Size Eligible (2 - 5 persons) - 60.56 % x 8,361 = 5,064 4. Number of income qualified renters 22.29 % x 5,064 = 1,129 ($ 20,760 - $ 44,220) 5. Movership/turnover rate - 34.7 % (2009-2011 Geographic Mobility 392 for Gallitan County for renter tenure households - U.S. Census Bureau) 6. Estimated demand from existing rental households 392 DEMAND FROM NEW HOUSEHOLD GROWTH: The figures above represent the total number of existing qualified households. If we look only at new demand from growth, we will use projected new households who will move into the market area by 2015. Demand from New Households for Tax Credit Units: 1. Estimated number of new non-senior 2-5 persons renter tenure households that will enter market area between 2013 & 2015 102 2. Annual demand - 2 years divided by 102 = 51 3. Number of income qualified households - 22.29 % (percentage of households that fall into the predetermined income range - see Calculation of Eligible Households). So 22.29 % x 51 = 11 4. Estimated annual demand from new households 11 Total annual demand from existing and new renter households - 392 + 11 = 403 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-36______________________________________________ August 2013 Our last step would be to deduct existing affordable units from the existing household demand. For this calculation we will use only two & three bedroom tax credit units that are set aside for households with incomes at 40, 50 & 60 % of median. We have listed below a summary of those units: Existing Annual Demand 392 units Existing 2-3 BR Tax Credit Units - 241 units Vacant 0 units Current Annual Need 149 units New Household Growth + 11 units In Planning/Under Construction - 11 units New Unit Annual Demand 149 units We have determined that there is a need for an additional 149 affordable two and three bedroom units in the market area to meet the needs of households at the predetermined income levels (households at 40, 50 % & 60 % of area median). By 2015 (expected opening), the need will increase by 11 (11x 2 = 22 - 11 under construction = 11) + 149 = 160. Capture Rate Proposed units / projected income eligible tenants who will move in next year 1 Projected income eligible tenants who will move in next year 392 2. Proposed units 47 3. Capture Rate 12.0 % Absorption Rate Proposed Units/ existing competitive LIH market area units required 1. Proposed units 47 2. LIH units Required 149 3. Absorption Rate 31.5 % _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-37______________________________________________ August 2013 Penetration Rate Existing competitive LIH units / total eligible households 1. Existing competitive LIH Units 241 2. Total eligible households 1,129 3. Penetration Rate 21.3 % C. Absorption We unfortunately do not have the luxury of looking at a recent lease up of a similar project in the City. The last family tax credit project to open was the 48 unit Baxter project which opened in 2005. However, in looking at all of the factors in this report and taking into account its strong location and below market rents, we feel the subject will lease at a rate of about 14 - 16 units per month with stable occupancy achieved in three months. 5. Analysis of Projects Special Needs - NA 6. Conclusion: Proposed Projects Competitive Position The subject, Stoneridge Apartments will fill a very strong need in the Bozeman area, for affordable units for very low to low income families. The subject, with its below market rents, will have a very strong competitive position in the market area. In our survey of five existing family tax credit projects in the City, we found no vacant units out of 340 total units in the City. While the subject will be geared to families, it very well could attract some seniors in its two bedroom units due to its proximity to shopping. In our calculation of eligible households we have determined that there are currently 1,129 non- senior households in the market area with size, income and tenure eligibility. In addition, we have projected using figures from Nielsen / Ribbon, that another 22 size, tenure and income eligible households will enter the market area by 2015. That total does not include senior households that may show an interest. As we have noted, there is an 11 unit family project currently under construction in the eastern part of the City. Due to the subject’s location in the western part of Bozeman, we do not see any problems in leasing both projects quickly. Stoneridge Apartments will provide good quality affordable 2 and 3 bedroom units for low income households in the Bozeman area. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-38______________________________________________ August 2013 IV. COMPETITIVE RENTAL MARKET Description of Comparable Properties 1. Analysis of Rents, including Amenities and Utilities - All of the market rate projects surveyed would be similar to the subject in terms of condition, although slightly older on average in terms of age. The projects surveyed were built from the 1970's to 2008. Unit Amenities As for unit based, all eight included carpets, blinds, all basic kitchen appliances with seven of the eight including a dishwasher and/or disposal. Five included a microwave and patio or balcony (three w/outside storage), with three including washer/dryers in the units and ceiling fans. Two included washer/dryer hookups, AC and walk-in closets. We would rate unit features at the subject as slightly superior on average to these eight projects, as it includes a washer/dryer in the unit. Project Amenities Of the eight market rate projects surveyed, four included laundry facilities, a community room and fitness center with three including BBQ/picnic areas. Two included extra storage and a children’s play area with one including a business center, garages and a pool or spa. We should note that two of the projects in our survey would be superior to the subject when comparing project amenities. Those two projects, Mountain View and Trout Meadows include a business center, fitness center community room with Trout Meadows including a pool and spa. At all of the market rate comparables, tenants were responsible for their heat, electric, phone and cable, with the landlord paying water, sewer and trash, the same as at the subject. Rent Restricted At the five existing family projects, all included all appliances including a dishwasher and/or disposal, carpets and blinds. Two included a patio/balcony, air conditioning with one including washer/dryer hookups. None of the existing projects include washer/dryers or microwaves, as does the subject. As for project amenities at the five existing projects, all included a community room, laundry facilities, a BBQ/picnic area and a children’s play area, with one including a business center, basketball court and bike racks._______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-39______________________________________________ August 2013 2. Conclusion of Rents by Unit Type Rental Rates We have listed below a summary of rents we obtained in our rental survey of the Bozeman area. In addition, we have listed a “Net Adjusted Market Rent”, that is what we feel the rents would be at the proposed Stoneridge Apartments, if leased as a market rate project. We have looked at four factors to determine the net adjusted market rent. We have taken into account: 1) the age and condition of the comparable projects; 2) unit amenities; 3) project amenities; and 4) unit sizes. For each of the four factors we have adjusted the average rent by up to 5 %. Note, that for the three bedroom units we have reduced the average rent by 2.5 %, to determine the market rent. This is due to the very high rents at Mountain View and Trout Meadows. We would rate these two projects as slightly superior to the subject in terms of project based amenities and Trout Meadows for unit amenities. Unit sizes at these two projects are also slightly larger. Average rent Adjustment Adj. Mkt. Rent Two bedroom two bath $ 875.00 5.0 % or $ 44.00 $ 920.00 Three bedroom two bath $ 1,023.00 (2.5)% or $(26.00) $ 1,005.00 Mkt Rent Proposed Bozeman Area Stoneridge Two bedroom two bath $ 920.00 $ 519.00 - 743.00 Three bedroom two bath $ 1,005.00 $ 583.00 - 816.00 Detailed information with pictures of each project surveyed is listed in Section C _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-40______________________________________________ August 2013 V. ANALYSIS OF RENT GAP 40 % Rents Maximum Proposed Proposed Rent/Mkt. Rent Restricted Rent Net Rent Mkt. Rent Rent Gap 3 - Two Bdrm $ 614.00 $ 519.00 $ 920.00 $ 401.00 - 44 % 3 - Three Bdrm $ 709.00 $ 583.00 $ 1,005.00 $ 422.00 - 42 % 6 50 % Rents Maximum Proposed Proposed Rent/Mkt. Rent Restricted Rent Net Rent Mkt. Rent Rent Gap 19 - Two Bdrm $ 767.00 $ 672.00 $ 920.00 $ 248.00 - 27 % 10 - Three Bdrm $ 886.00 $ 760.00 $ 1,005.00 $ 245.00 - 24 % 29 60 % Rents Maximum Proposed Proposed Rent/Mkt. Rent Restricted Rent Net Rent Mkt. Rent Rent Gap 8 - Two Bdrm $ 921.00 $ 743.00 $ 920.00 $ 177.00 - 19 % 4 - Three Bdrm $ 1,064.00 $ 816.00 $ 1,005.00 $ 189.00 - 19 % 12 Maximum Restricted Rents from MBOH - 12/1/2011 The proposed rents at Stoneridge will run from 19 to 44 % under our net adjusted market rents. In fact, they will run from 15 to 43 % under the average rent from our survey. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-41______________________________________________ August 2013 VI. ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT’S EFFECT ON THE MARKET AREA Effect on Existing Market The vacancy rate in the Bozeman area is at 0 %, meaning that there are very few rentals available in the market, including market rate and income restricted. With a growing population and the low vacancy rates, it is our opinion that the subject, Stoneridge Apartments will simply fill an unmet demand in the community; for affordable family housing for very low to low income families. There may be some movement from other tax credit communities simply due to the subject’s unique location and close to employment opportunities. In addition, as the subject will offer above average unit amenities at below market rents, this may attract tenants from some older market rate projects who would naturally take an interest in the subject. Overall, we do not see the subject as having any real effect on existing projects in the market due to current unavailability of units. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-42______________________________________________ August 2013 VII. CONCLUSION a. Specific Questions 1.Is the project as proposed, viable? Yes - with its strong location and below market rents, it is our opinion that the subject will be very successful if built as planned. The subject’s location is close to employment opportunities including Target, Lowes, Home Depot, Smiths Grocery Store and Pharmacy and many other retail and commercial businesses. As we have noted, at the present time, there are currently very few options for renters in general, with the overall vacancy rate in the City at 0 %. In addition, all five of the area family tax credit projects with 356 are 100 % occupied. With increasing rents in the area, the subject will provide good quality rental units at below market rents. 2.Does the project meet a current or projected need? Yes - the current vacancy rate is at 0 % with a 5 % rate considered average. With 100 % occupancy, potential renters have few, if any, options and have no choices as to complex, floor location or in some cases, bedroom sizes. With the growing population, demand for housing will only increase in the near future. According to the City of Bozeman, there are 300+ units currently in planning or under construction with only about 50 of those units slated to open in 2013, with the remaining units opening in 2014 or 2015. Over the next five years, Nielsen is projecting an increase in population of 6.0 % or 1.2 % annually for Bozeman. In addition, Nielsen has projected that by the year 2018, the total number of non-senior households in the market area (City of Bozeman), will increase by 671 or 134 annually. Of those, they are projecting that 528 or 106 per year on average will be renter tenure. So in total by 2015 (expected date of project opening), there will be an addition of 212 renter tenure non-senior households. In our calculation of eligible households, we have determined that between 2013 and 2015 the number of age, size and income eligible households will grow by about 22, up from 1,129 currently (in 2013). 3.Does the project supply units below market rate? Yes - 47 of the 48 proposed units at the subject will be designated for persons with income at 40 - 60 % AMI level. Rental rates at Stoneridge will run from $ 177.00 to $ 422.00 or from 19 % to _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-43______________________________________________ August 2013 44 % below the net adjusted market rents in the area. These below market rents will be accomplished while providing unit amenities that are superior to the majority of market rate units in the City. Additionally, the rents at the subject will run from 15 to 43 % under the average rents from our survey. 4.If not, Does the Project Provide Some Other Public Benefit? - NA b. Summary 1. Recap of Project - The proposed Stoneridge Apartments to be located in Bozeman, Montana will be a 48 unit LIHTC community. Six (6) of the units will designated for households at the 40 % AMI level, with twenty-nine (29) units at 50 % AMI and the remaining twelve (12) units at 60 %. Thirty (30) of the units will be two bedroom two bath @ 950 S.F., with eighteen (18) being three bedroom two bath at 1,100 S.F. One of the three bedrooms will serve as a manager’s unit. The subject will include all kitchen appliances including a dishwasher, disposal and microwave, as well as washer/dryer in the unit, carpets, blinds, AC, ceiling fans, a patio/balcony and additional storage. Community features will include a community room with kitchen, computer area and manager’s office, as well as a play area and covered parking. 2. Conclusion and Recommendations We have looked at several factors in determining the success of the forty-eight (48) unit Stoneridge family apartment project to be located in Bozeman, Montana. a. Project Site - We would rate the site as very good in terms of a family rental project. The site is close to schools, retail, banks and employment opportunities. An elementary school is just 0.4 miles from the site with a large retail center with a Smiths Grocery & Pharmacy, a bank and 20 additional businesses within 0.6 miles. In addition, a Target, Ross, Borders and Costco, along with several other big box retailers are within 1.4 miles of the site. b. Between 2010 and 2012, Gallatin County was the 2nd fastest growing County in the State in overall numeric increase and ranked 6th by percentage increase. Over the past two years, the population of the County has increased by 3,101 or 3.5 %, a 1.75 % annual average increase. Those increases came after growth of 3.2 % per year on average from 2000 to 2010. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-44______________________________________________ August 2013 c. The City of Bozeman, the State’s fourth most populous city, saw its population increase by 35.5 % between 2000 and 2010. More recently, from 2010 to 2012, the City population increased by 1,415 or 3.8 %, a very good 1.9 % annually. Over the past two years, Bozeman ranked 3rd among all cities in the State by overall increase. Nielsen is projecting growth of 1.2 % annually over the next five years. d. Over the past three years (2010 to 2013), the number of households in the market area increased by 937 or 312 annually, compared to growth of 512 per year on average from 2000 to 2010. Nielsen has projected the total number of households will increase by 1,197 or 239 per year on average through 2018. Of those, 671 or 134 annually will be age eligible non-seniors. Of the 134 non-senior households entering the market area annually 106 are projected to be renter tenure. e. The City of Bozeman has issued building permits for 2,590 new multi-family units over the past ten years (2003 - 2012) or about 259 units per year on average. As noted, the many of these units were condominiums (for-sale). Since peaking in 2005 at 558 units, the number of units permitted dropped substantially to just 33 in 2011, before increasing to 156 in 2012. Through June, 2013, Bozeman has issued permits for 93 new multi-family units. While the City has averaged about 242 new single family homes per year since 2003, the yearly total dropped steadily since a decade high of 344 in 2003 to just 81 in 2009, before rebounding in 2010 to 2012. f. The average age of housing in Bozeman is quite new on average with 35.2 % of the units being built after 2000 with almost 73 % built since 1970. The City has a very high percentage of multi-family units, due in part to the fact that this is a college town with high numbers of student housing and apartment rentals designed for students. g. Of rental units in the City, Overcrowded housing units (more than 1.01 persons per room) made up 2.0 % of the total. In addition, a very high 42.7 % of renter households in Bozeman paid more than 35 % of their income towards rent, all according to the U.S. Census Bureau (2009 - 2011 American Community Survey). h. In our (Property Dynamics) apartment survey of 15 projects and 1,221 units, we found an overall vacancy rate of 0.0 %, with all projects 100 % occupied. The latest rate was down from 1.0 % in December 2011 and 1.5 % in December 2010. The vacancy rate for the eight (8) market rate projects surveyed with 767 units was at _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-45______________________________________________ August 2013 0.0 %, again down from December 2010 and 2011 when we found a vacancy rates of 1.3 & 1.8 %. At the five existing family tax credit communities in Bozeman, we also found no vacancies for a vacancy rate of 0.0 %. At the two low income family projects surveyed, both were full with both including wait lists (6 & 30 names). i. Rental rates at the subject Stoneridge Apartments will run from 19 % to 44 % under the net adjusted market rents in the Bozeman area. J. Overall, we would rate economic conditions in the County as good. Total employment in the County increased by 5.8 % or 2.9 % annually from 2010 to 2012 and was up by 1.1 % when comparing June 2013 to June 2012. In addition, the unemployment rate dropped from its decade high 6.5 % in 2010 to 5.3 % in 2012 and was down when comparing June 2013 to June 2012 (5.5 % to 4.5 %). k. In our “New Unit Demand Estimate” we have determined that there is currently a need for an additional 149 new affordable rental units to meet the need for non-senior households with incomes at 40 % to 60 % AMI. In 2013 there were 1,129 age, income, tenure and households size eligible households in the market area for this proposed forty-eight (48) unit project. Between 2013 and 2015 that number will increase by 22 households. l. Target Population - the forty-seven (47) tax credit units at the Stoneridge Apartments will target very low to low income non-senior households with incomes between 40 % and 60 % of area median income. Analysis of Stoneridge Apartments The proposed Stoneridge Apartments will consist of forty-eight (48) total units with the following unit mix: 30 - Two bedroom two bath units @ 950 S.F. 18 - Three bedroom two bath units @ 1,100 S.F. Both the two and three bedroom unit sizes at Stoneridge are well within the average sizes of existing tax credit and market rate apartment units in Bozeman. The subject’s two bedroom units will be 950 S.F., while the area average was 976 S.F. Three bedroom units at existing tax credit projects averaged 1,062 S.F., while units at the subject were_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-46______________________________________________ August 2013 slightly larger at 1,100 S.F. The proposed units are well designed and we would not recommend any changes. In looking at wait lists at the HRDC and taking into account our discussions with the managers of the existing family tax credit projects in Bozeman, it appears that the biggest need in the area would be for two bedroom units, followed by one’s, and finally three bedroom units. It does appear that the unit mix will work fine and we would not recommend any changes. The subject includes a community room with kitchen, computer area and a manager’s office as well as a children’s play area and covered parking. These services will be adequate and we would again not recommend any changes. Unit based amenities will include all kitchen appliances including a dishwasher, disposal and microwave, as well as a washer/dryer in the unit, air conditioning, a private patio/balcony, additional storage, carpets, blinds and ceiling fans. The subject will include all amenities offered at competitive projects, and more. Because of that, we would not recommend any changes. _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page A-47______________________________________________ August 2013 SECTION B POPULATION AND HOUSING STATE OF MONTANA COUNTIES POPULATION 2000, 2010 & 2012 2000 2010 2012 County Population Population Population Change % Change Change % Change Beaverhead 9,202 9,246 9,346 44 0.5% 100 1.1% Big Horn 12,671 12,865 13,061 194 1.5% 196 1.5% Blaine 7,009 6,491 6,683 (518) -7.4% 192 3.0% Broadwater 4,385 5,612 5,756 1,227 28.0% 144 2.6% Carbon 9,552 10,078 10,127 526 5.5% 49 0.5% Carter 1,360 1,160 1,177 (200) -14.7% 17 1.5% Cascade 80,357 81,327 81,723 970 1.2% 396 0.5% Chouteau 5,970 5,813 5,904 (157) -2.6% 91 1.6% Custer 11,696 11,699 11,888 3 0.0% 189 1.6% Daniels 2,017 1,751 1,786 (266) -13.2% 35 2.0% Dawson 9,059 8,966 9,249 (93) -1.0% 283 3.2% Deer Lodge 9,417 9,298 9,227 (119) -1.3% (71) -0.8% Fallon 2,837 2,890 3,024 53 1.9% 134 4.6% Fergus 11,893 11,586 11,435 (307) -2.6% (151) -1.3% Flathead 74,471 90,928 91,633 16,457 22.1% 705 0.8% Gallatin 67,831 89,513 92,614 21,682 32.0% 3,101 3.5% Garfield 1,279 1,206 1,261 (73) -5.7% 55 4.6% Glacier 13,247 13,399 13,711 152 1.1% 312 2.3% Golden Valley 1,042 884 839 (158) -15.2% (45) -5.1% Granite 2,830 3,079 3,109 249 8.8% 30 1.0% Hill 16,673 16,096 16,366 (577) -3.5% 270 1.7% Jefferson 10,049 11,406 11,401 1,357 13.5% (5) 0.0% Judith Basin 2,329 2,072 2,024 (257) -11.0% (48) -2.3% Lake 26,507 28,746 28,986 2,239 8.4% 240 0.8% Lewis and Clark 55,716 63,395 64,876 7,679 13.8% 1,481 2.3% Liberty 2,158 2,339 2,392 181 8.4% 53 2.3% Lincoln 18,837 19,687 19,491 850 4.5% (196) -1.0% Madison 6,851 7,691 7,733 840 12.3% 42 0.5% McCone 1,997 1,734 1,701 (263) -13.2% (33) -1.9% Meagher 1,932 1,891 1,924 (41) -2.1% 33 1.7% Mineral 3,884 4,223 4,167 339 8.7% (56) -1.3% Missoula 95,802 109,299 110,977 13,497 14.1% 1,678 1.5% Musselshell 4,497 4,538 4,665 41 0.9% 127 2.8% Park 15,694 15,636 15,567 (58) -0.4% (69) -0.4% Petroleum 493 494 511 1 0.2% 17 3.4% Phillips 4,601 4,253 4,128 (348) -7.6% (125) -2.9% Pondera 6,424 6,153 6,165 (271) -4.2% 12 0.2% Powder River 1,858 1,743 1,763 (115) -6.2% 20 1.1% Powell 7,180 7,027 7,096 (153) -2.1% 69 1.0% 2010 - 20122000 - 2010 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page B-1______________________________________________ August 2013 2000 2010 2012 County Population Population Population Change % Change Change % Change Prairie 1,199 1,179 1,157 (20) -1.7% (22) -1.9% Ravalli 36,070 40,212 40,617 4,142 11.5% 405 1.0% Richland 9,667 9,746 10,810 79 0.8% 1,064 10.9% Roosevelt 10,620 10,425 10,927 (195) -1.8% 502 4.8% Rosebud 9,383 9,233 9,396 (150) -1.6% 163 1.8% Sanders 10,227 11,413 11,408 1,186 11.6% (5) 0.0% Sheridan 4,105 3,384 3,580 (721) -17.6% 196 5.8% Silver Bow 34,606 34,200 34,403 (406) -1.2% 203 0.6% Stillwater 8,195 9,117 9,195 922 11.3% 78 0.9% Sweet Grass 3,609 3,651 3,605 42 1.2% (46) -1.3% Teton 6,445 6,073 6,053 (372) -5.8% (20) -0.3% Toole 5,267 5,324 5,220 57 1.1% (104) -2.0% Treasure 861 718 736 (143) -16.6% 18 2.5% Valley 7,675 7,369 7,505 (306) -4.0% 136 1.8% Wheatland 2,259 2,168 2,104 (91) -4.0% (64) -3.0% Wibaux 1,068 1,017 1,057 (51) -4.8% 40 3.9% Yellowstone 129,352 147,972 151,882 18,620 14.4% 3,910 2.6% Montana 902,195 989,415 1,005,141 87,220 9.7% 15,726 1.6% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2000 - 2010 2010 - 2012 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page B-2______________________________________________ August 2013 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000 POPULATION1990 2000 2010 2011 2012 YEAR GALLATIN COUNTY POPULATION 1990 - 2012 GALLATIN COUNTY HISTORICAL POPULATION 1990 - 2012 Year Population 1990 (Census)50,463 2000 (Census)67,831 2010 (Census)89,513 2011 (Estimate)91,354 2012 (Estimate)92,614 Between 1990 and 2000 the population increased by 17,368 or 34.4 % Between 2000 and 2010 the population increased by 21,682 or 32.0 % Between 2010 and 2012 the population increased by 3,101 or 3.5 % Source: U.S. Census Bureau _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page B-3______________________________________________ August 2013 STATE OF MONTANA POPULATION - CITIES OVER 3,000 - 2000, 2010 & 2012 2000 2010 2012 City Population Population Population Change % Change Change % Change Billings 89,847 104,170 106,954 14,323 15.9% 2,784 2.7% Missoula 57,053 66,788 68,394 9,735 17.1% 1,606 2.4% Great Falls 56,690 58,505 58,893 1,815 3.2% 388 0.7% Bozeman 27,509 37,280 38,695 9,771 35.5% 1,415 3.8% Butte/Silver Bow (Rmndr)33,892 33,525 33,730 (367) -1.1% 205 0.6% Helena 25,780 28,190 29,134 2,410 9.3% 944 3.3% Kalispell 14,223 19,927 20,487 5,704 40.1% 560 2.8% Havre 9,621 9,310 9,620 (311) -3.2% 310 3.3% Anaconda/Deer Lodge Co.9,417 9,298 9,227 (119) -1.3% (71) -0.8% Miles City 8,487 8,410 8,569 (77) -0.9% 159 1.9% Belgrade 5,728 7,389 7,556 1,661 29.0% 167 2.3% Livingston 6,851 7,044 7,053 193 2.8% 9 0.1% Laurel 6,255 6,718 6,931 463 7.4% 213 3.2% Whitefish 5,032 6,357 6,460 1,325 26.3% 103 1.6% Sidney 4,774 5,191 5,934 417 8.7% 743 14.3% Lewistown 5,813 5,901 5,857 88 1.5% (44) -0.7% Glendive 4,729 4,935 5,177 206 4.4% 242 4.9% Columbia Falls 3,645 4,688 4,712 1,043 28.6% 24 0.5% Polson 4,041 4,488 4,585 447 11.1% 97 2.2% Hamilton 3,705 4,348 4,508 643 17.4% 160 3.7% Dillon 3,752 4,134 4,201 382 10.2% 67 1.6% Hardin 3,384 3,505 3,583 121 3.6% 78 2.2% Shelby 3,216 3,376 3,327 160 5.0% (49) -1.5% Glasgow 3,253 3,250 3,319 (3) -0.1% 69 2.1% Deer Lodge 3,421 3,111 3,118 (310) -9.1% 7 0.2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010 - 20122000 - 2010 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page B-4______________________________________________ August 2013 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 POPULATION1990 2000 2010 2011 2012YEAR CITY OF BOZEMAN POPULATION 1990 - 2012 CITY OF BOZEMAN HISTORICAL POPULATION 1990 - 2012 Year Population 1990 (Census)22,660 2000 (Census)27,509 2010 (Census)37,280 2011 (Estimate)38,097 2012 (Estimate)38,695 Between 1990 and 2000 the population increased by 4,849 or 21.4 % Between 2000 and 2010 the population increased by 9,771 or 35.5 % Between 2010 and 2012 the population increased by 1,415 or 3.8 % Source: U.S. Census Bureau _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page B-5______________________________________________ August 2013 0 200 400 600 800 1000 PERMITS2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 YEAR SINGLE FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY TOTAL CITY OF BOZEMAN BUILDING PERMITS 2003 - JUNE 2013 CITY OF BOZEMAN BUILDING PERMITS 2003 - 2013 Year Single Family Multi-Family Total 2003 344 262 606 2004 328 515 843 2005 337 558 895 2006 303 348 651 2007 287 463 750 2008 128 114 242 2009 81 99 180 2010 164 44 208 2011 164 33 197 2012 285 154 439 Total 2,421 2,590 5,011 2013 *238 93 331 * Through June Summary of Permits Issued 2003 - 2012 Single Family 2,421 - 48.3 % Multi-Family 2,590 - 51.7 % Total 5,011 - 100.0 % Source: 2003 - 2009 Bozeman Building Department, 2010 - 2013 Census _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page B-6______________________________________________ August 2013 HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS - CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA Year Structure Built Units % of Total 04/10 - 06/13 782 4.3 % 04/00 - 03/10 5,820 31.9 % 1990 - 03/00 2,905 15.9 % 1980 - 1989 1,300 7.1 % 1970 - 1979 2,482 13.6 % 1960 - 1969 1,293 7.1 % 1940 - 1959 1,730 9.5 % 1939 or earlier 1,934 10.6 % 18,246 100.0 % Source: 2000 U.S. Census - Tale DP-4, 2010 U.S. Census Bureau 04/2010 - 06/2013 Housing Units: U.S. Census Bureau - Censtats Renter Selected Characteristics: Lacking complete plumbing facilities: 90 - 1.1 % Lacking complete kitchen facilities: 172 - 2.2 % Renter Occupants per Room: 1.00 or less 7,816 98.0 % 1.01 to 1.50 111 1.4 % 1.51 or more 52 0.6 % Total 7,979 100.0 % Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income: Percent Paid Units % Total Less than 20 percent 1,484 18.6 % 20 - 24.9 percent 981 12.3 % 25 - 29.9 percent 1,155 14.5 % 30 - 34.9 percent 639 8.0 % 35 percent or more 3,411* 42.7 % Not computed 309 3.9 % Total 7,979 100.0 % * 1,944 or 24.4 % was 50% and over Source: U.S. Census Bureau: 2009 - 2011 American Community Survey (3 Year Estimates)_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page B-7______________________________________________ August 2013 HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS - BOZEMAN CONTINUED Renter Tenure Housing by Number of Bedrooms: Bedrooms Units % of Total No Bedroom 435 5.4 % One Bedroom 1,155 14.5 % Two Bedrooms 3,459 43.3 % Three Bedrooms 2,290 28.7 % Four Bedrooms 449 6.3 % Five or More Bedrooms 141 1.8 % Total 7,979 100.0 % Renter Tenure Housing by Household Size: Household Size Units % of Total One Person 3,530 44.2 % Two Persons 2,502 31.4 % Three Persons 1,092 13.7 % Four Persons 479 6.0 % Five Persons 353 4.4 % Six Persons 0 0.0 % Seven or More Persons 23 0.3 % Total 7,979 100.0 % Source: U.S. Census Bureau: 2009 - 2011 American Community Survey (3 Year Estimates) _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page B-8______________________________________________ August 2013 SECTION C APARTMENT RENTAL SURVEY SUMMARY OF BOZEMAN APARTMENTS SURVEYED - AUGUST 2013Market Rate One Bdrm Two Bdrm Two Bdrm Three Bdrm Units Vac One BathOne Bath Two Bath Two Bath1. Bridger Village 88 0 $ 630.00 $730.002. Brookside 60 0 $ 650.00 $ 840.00 $ 990.003. Greentree 114 0 $ 600.00 $ 810.00 $ 950.004. Kagy Village 48 0 $ 650.00 $ 840.005. Kibbey Plaza 66 0 $ 675.00 $ 725.006. Mountain View 161 0 $ 850.00 $ 885.00 $ 1,175.007. Rose Park 96 0 $ 750.00 $ 800.00 $ 900.008. Trout Meadows 134 0 $ 791-843*$ 886-944* $ 978-997* $ 1,025-1,097*Total/Average 767 0 $ 716.00 $ 818.00 $ 875.00 $ 1,023.00* Reflects year lease price w/1/2 months free spread over the lease termDecember 2011Total/Average 767 10 $ 700.00 $ 788.00 $ 810.00 $ 974.00Change 12/11 - 08/13$ 16 - 2 % $ 30 - 4 % 65 - 8 % $ 49 - 5 %December 2010Total/Average 767 14 $ 682.00 $ 761.00 $ 697.00 $ 999.00Change 12/10 - 12/11$ 18 - 3 % $ 23 - 3 % $ 13 - 2 % $ (25 - 3)% _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-1______________________________________________ August 2013 Tax Credit Projects One Bdrm Two Bdrm Three BdrmUnitsVacWait ListOne BathOne BathTwo BathProgram9. Aspen Meadows 44 0 10 names $ 510-610 $ 625-670 $ 710.00 50 & 60 %10. Baxter 48 0 None $ 475-500 $ 455-620 40, 50 & 60 %11. Bridger 90 0 None $ 375-500 $ 580-620 $ 715.00 40, 50 & 60 %12. Castlebar I & II 72 0 None $ 503-803 $ 564-911 40, 50 & 60 % 13. Comstock I - III 86 0None $ 380-500 $ 560-610 $715.00 40, 50 & 60 %Totals 340 0 Low Income ProjectsUnits Vac R/A Wait ListType14. Gallatin Manor 64 0 13 3 names HUD/202/Family15. Greenwood Plaza 500 5030 names HUD/8/FamilyTotals 114 0 63Vacancy RateAugust 2013December 2011December 2010Conventional 0.0 %1.3 % 1.8 % Tax Credit - Family 0.0 %0.6 %1.0 %Low Income - Family 0.0 %0.0 %1.6 %Overall 0.0 %1.0 %1.5 % Total Units surveyed 1,2211,2211,434 All of the above information was obtained from the individual project managers or property managers and while we believe theinformation to be correct we cannot guarantee its accuracy_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-2______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman Apartments 0 mi 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-3______________________________________________ August 2013 Bridger Village 2307 W. Main St Bozeman, Montana 406-586-1441 Contact: Manager Units: 88 Type: Market Rate Vacant: 0 Vacancy Rate: 0.0 % Year Built: NA Studio one bath 400 S.F. $ 560.00 $ 1.40 P.S.F. One bedroom one bath 530 S.F. $ 630.00 $ 1.19 P.S.F. Two bedroom one bath 830 S.F. $ 730.00 $ .88 P.S.F. Rents have increased by $ 20.00 since December 2011 Community Features Laundry facilities - free wi-fi Unit Features All basic appliances - carpets/blinds Tenant paid utilities: Phone/cable Landlord paid: Electric/Heat/water/sewer/trash Heat/cooking/hot water: Electric Rent specials: None _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-4______________________________________________ August 2013 Brookside 2019 W. College Street Bozeman, Montana 406-556-9900 Contact: Bridger Property Management - JoAnn Units: 60 Type: Market Rate Vacant: 0 Vacancy Rate: 0.0 % Year Built: 2000 One bedroom one bath 650 S.F. $ 650.00 $ 1.00 P.S.F. Two bedroom one bath 850 S.F. $ 840.00 $ .99 P.S.F. Three bedroom two bath 1,000 S.F. $ 990.00 $ .99 P.S.F. Rents have increased by $ 25 or 4 % since December 2011 Community Features BBQ/picnic area - community room w/fitness center Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher/micro - carpets/blinds - washer/dryer in unit - deck w/storage Tenant paid utilities: Electric/phone/cable Landlord paid: Water/sewer/trash/internet Heat/cooking/hot water: Electric Rent specials: None _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-5______________________________________________ August 2013 Greentree 1104 S. Montana Avenue Bozeman, Montana 406-586-3396 Contact: Manager Units: 114 Type: Market Rate Vacant: 0 Vacancy Rate: 0.0 % Year Built: NA Vac One bedroom one bath 785 S.F. $ 600.00 $ .73 P.S.F. 0 Two bedroom one bath 830 S.F. $ 810.00 $ .81 P.S.F. 0 Three bedroom 1.5 bath S.F. - NA $ 950.00 $ NA 0 Rents have increased by $ 25 or 4 - 5 % since December 2011 Community Features Laundry facilities - Storage/garage available @ $ 60/mo. Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher/disposal/micro - carpets/blinds - walk-in closet Air conditioning (top 2 floors) Tenant paid utilities: Electric/phone/cable Landlord paid: Heat/water/sewer/trash Heat/cooking/hot water: Gas boiler Rent specials: None _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-6______________________________________________ August 2013 Kagy Village 2211 Remington Way Bozeman, Montana 406-556-9900 Contact: Property Management Units: 48 Type: Market Rate Vacant: 0 Vacancy Rate: 0.0 % Year Built: NA One bedroom one bath 600 S.F. $ 650.00 $ 1.08 P.S.F. Two bedroom one bath 850 S.F. $ 840.00 $ .99 P.S.F. Rents have increased by $ 15 - 25 or 2 - 4 % since December 2011 Community Features Community room w/pool table, fireplace, fitness center - BBQ/picnic area Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher/micro - high speed internet - washer/dryer in unit deck/patio w/storage Tenant paid utilities: Electric/phone/cable Landlord paid: Water/sewer/trash Heat/cooking/hot water: Electric Rent specials: None _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-7______________________________________________ August 2013 Kibbey Plaza 805 M. Villard Street Bozeman, Montana 406-586-4933 Contact: Witt Property Management Units: 66 Type: Market Rate Vacant: 0 Vacancy Rate: 0.0 % Year Built: 1979 & 1994 Two bedroom one bath 865 S.F. $ 675.00 $ .78 P.S.F. Two bedroom 1½ bath 1,052 S.F. $ 725.00 $ .69 P.S.F. Rents have increased by $ 25 - $ 30 or 4 % since December 2011 Community Features Laundry on site - plug-ins Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher - carpets/blinds - patios Tenant paid utilities: Electric/phone/cable Landlord paid: Water/sewer/trash/Heat Heat: Gas Rent specials: None _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-8______________________________________________ August 2013 Mountain View 603 Emily Drive Bozeman, Montana 406-587-7788 Contact: Manager Units: 161 Type: Market Rate Vacant: 0 Wait List: 5 names Vacancy Rate: 0.0 % Year Built: 1997 20 - One bedroom one bath 624 S.F. $ 850.00* $ 1.28 P.S.F. 90 - Two bedroom one bath 950 S.F. $ 885.00 $ .87 P.S.F. 51 - Three bedroom one bath 1,200 S.F. $ 1,175.00 $ .90 P.S.F. * One bedroom rents include all utilities Rents have increased by $ 50 - $ 100 or from 6 to 9 % since December 2011 Community Features Community room w/business center/fitness center - laundry facilities - children’s play area BBQ/picnic area - storage unit available Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher/disposal - carpets/blinds - ceiling fans deck/balcony w/storage closet - washer/dryer connections Tenant paid utilities: Water/electric/phone/cable Landlord paid: Trash/cable Heat: gas, Cooking/hot water: Electric Rent specials: None _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-9______________________________________________ August 2013 Rose Park North 25th Ave. & West Oak Street Bozeman, Montana 406-586-4933 Contact: Witt Rentals Units: 96 Type: Market Rate Vacant: 0 Vacancy Rate: 0.0 % Year Built: NA Two bedroom one bath 725 S.F. $ 750.00 $ 1.03 P.S.F. Two bedroom 1½ bath 900 S.F. $ 800.00 $ .89 P.S.F. Three bedroom 1½ bath 1,124 S.F. $ 900.00 $ .80 P.S.F. Rents have increased by $ 55 - 75 or from 8 - 10 % since Dec 2011 Community Features Garages Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher/disposal/micro - washer/dryer hookups carpets/blinds - patios Tenant paid utilities: Electric/gas/trash/phone/cable Landlord paid: Water/sewer/lawn maintenance/snow removal Heat/cooking/hot water: Gas Rent specials: None _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-10______________________________________________ August 2013 Trout Meadows 2890 Trout Meadows Rd Bozeman, Montana 406-556-0500 Contact: Manager Units: 134 Type: Market Rate Vacant: 0 Vacancy Rate: 1.49 % Year Built: 2008/09 Studio one bath 518 S.F. $ 676 - 714.00 $ 1.31 - 1.38 P.S.F. One bedroom one bath 608 - 868 S.F. $ 791.00 - 843.00 $ 1.12 - 1.37 P.S.F. Two bedroom one bath 868 - 875 S.F. $ 886.00 - 944.00 $ 1.01 - 1.08 P.S.F. Two bedroom two bath 990 S.F. $ 978.00 - 997.00 $ .99 - 1.01 P.S.F. Three bedroom two bath 1,189 - 1,224 S.F. $ 1,025 - 1,097.00 $ .86 - .93 P.S.F. Rents reflect lease price w/1/2 mo. free spread over lease term Community Features Pool - spa - community room w/exercise facility - trails - 12 acre lake/boat dock/picnic area children’s play area Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher/disposal/micro - full size washer/dryer in unit carpets/blinds - vaulted ceilings - ceiling fans - deck/balcony w/storage closet Tenant paid utilities: Electric/phone/cable Landlord paid: Water/sewer/trash Heat/cooking/hot water: Electric Rent specials: ½ mo. free w/12 mo. lease _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-11______________________________________________ August 2013 Aspen Meadows 1062 Oak Street Bozeman, Montana 406-556-1394 Units: 44 Type: Tax Credit - Family Vacant: 0 Wait List: 10 names Year Built: 2000 50 % Units 60 % Units 10 - One bedroom one bath 750 S.F. $ 510.00 $ 610.00 16 - Two bedroom one bath 900 S.F. $ 625.00 $ 670.00 18 - Three bedroom two bath 1,050 S.F. $ 710.00 $ 710.00 8 units @ 50 % AMI 36 units @ 60 % AMI Community Features BBQ area - laundry on site - children’s play area - b-ball court - covered parking Unit Features Carpets/blinds - all basic appliances including dishwasher/disposal - patios - attached garages Tenant paid utilities: Gas/electric/cable/phone Landlord paid: Water/sewer/trash Heat source: Gas _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-12______________________________________________ August 2013 Baxter 2625 Trade Winds Ln Bozeman, Montana 406-556-9870 Contact: Alliance Property Management Units: 48 Type: Tax Credit - Family Vacant: 0 Wait List: None Year Built: 2005 40 %50 %60 % 17 - One bedroom one bath 550 S.F. $ 475.00 $ 500.00 31 - Two bedroom 1½ bath 800 S.F. $ 455.00 $ 575.00 $ 620.00 Community Features Laundry on site - BBQ/picnic area - community room - bike racks Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher/disposal - carpets/blinds Tenant paid utilities: Electric/cable/phone Landlord paid: Water/sewer/trash Heat source: Electric _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-13______________________________________________ August 2013 Bridger I & II 2517 W. College Street Bozeman, Montana 406-587-9481 Source: Alliance PM Units: 90 Type: Tax Credit - Family Vacant: 0 Wait List: None Year Built: 2002/04 40 %50 %60 % 18 - One bedroom one bath S.F. - NA $ 375.00 $ 480.00 $ 500.00 64 - Two bedroom one bath S.F. - NA $ 485/570 $ 580.00 $ 620.00 8 - Three bedroom two bath S.F. - NA $ 715.00 Community Features Laundry on site - children’s play area - community room - BBQ/picnic area - library Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher/disposal - carpets/blinds Tenant paid utilities: Gas/electric/cable/phone Landlord paid: Water/sewer/trash Heat source: Gas _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-14______________________________________________ August 2013 Castlebar 1201 N. 25th Street Bozeman, Montana 406-522-8778 Contact: Candace Casey - Manager Units: 72 Type: Tax Credit - Family Vacant: 0 Wait List: None Year Built: 1999 & 2003 40, 50 & 60 % Two bedroom one bath 879 S.F. $ 503.00 - 653.00 - 803.00 Three bedroom two bath 1,136 S.F. $ 564.00 - 737.00 - 911.00 Community Features Community room w/TV & VCR - business center w/computers with Internet/access/copier/ fax machine - tot lot - BBQ/picnic area - garages available Unit Features Washer/dryer hookups - all appliances including dishwasher/disposal - patio/balcony w/storage -bay windows - ceiling fans (some units) - European style cabinets - carpets/blinds Tenant paid utilities: Electric/gas/cable/phone Landlord paid: Water/sewer/trash/snow removal Heat source: Gas _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-15______________________________________________ August 2013 Comstock 1 - 3 777 Haggerty Lane Bozeman, Montana 406-585-9351 Units: 86 Type: Tax Credit - Family Vacant: 0 Wait List: None Year Built: 1994, 1998 & 2000 40 %50 % 60 % 52 - One bedroom one bath 440 - 626 S.F. $ 380.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 24 - Two bedroom one bath 825 S.F. $ 560.00 $ 610.00 8 - Three bedroom 1½ bath 1,000 S.F. $ 715.00 1 - Four bedroom 1½ bath S.F. - NA $ NA Community Features Community room - children’s play area - laundry facilities on site Unit Features All basic appliances including dishwasher/disposal - carpets/blinds Tenant paid utilities: Electric/gas/cable/phone Landlord paid: Water/sewer/garbage Heat Source: Phase I - Electric, Phase II - Electric/Gas, Phase III - Electric/Gas _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-16______________________________________________ August 2013 Gallatin Manor 1806 W. Beall Street Bozeman, Montana 406-587-1591 Units: 64 Type: HUD/8/236 Family Project Vacant: 0 Units w/Rental Assistance: 13 Wait List: 3 Names Year Built:1972 32 - Two bedroom one bath 768 S.F. 32 - Three bedroom one bath 928 S.F. Community Features Laundry facilities on site - children’s play area Unit Features All basic appliances including disposal - carpets/blinds - balconies Tenant paid utilities: Phone/cable Landlord paid: Heat/electric/water/sewer/trash Heat source: Hot water boiler _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-17______________________________________________ August 2013 Greenwood Plaza 802 N. Grand Ave. Bozeman, Montana 406-587-3921 Units: 50 Type: HUD/8 Family Project Vacant: 0 Units w/Rental Assistance: 50 Wait List: 30 names Year Built: 1983 32 - Two bedroom one bath 675 S.F. 10 - Three bedroom one bath 845 S.F. 6 - Four bedroom one bath S.F. - NA Community Features: Laundry facilities - community building - children’s play area Unit Features Air conditioning - all basic appliances including disposal - carpets/blinds Tenant paid utilities: Phone/cable Landlord paid: Heat/electric/water/sewer/trash Heat source: Electric _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page C-18______________________________________________ August 2013 SECTION D ECONOMIC DATA 2 4 6 8 10 UNEMPLOYMENT RATE2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 YEAR U.S.MONTANA GALLATIN COUNTY UNEMPLOYMENT RATE COMPARISON 2003 - 2012 COMPARISON OF UNEMPLOYMENT RATES 2003 - 2013 Year United States Montana Gallatin County 2003 6.0 %4.3 %3.3 % 2004 5.5 %4.0 %3.1 % 2005 5.1 %3.6 %2.6 % 2006 4.6 %3.2 %2.3 % 2007 4.6 %3.4 %2.5 % 2008 5.8 %4.5 %3.7 % 2009 9.3 %6.0 %6.1 % 2010 9.6 %6.8 %6.5 % 2011 8.9 %6.6 %5.9 % 2012 8.1 %6.0 %5.3 % 2013*7.8 %5.5 %4.5 % * June Only 2003 - 2012 are Annual Averages - Not Seasonally Adjusted Source: Montana Department of Labor and Industry - Research & Analysis Bureau _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page D-1______________________________________________ August 2013 ANNUAL CHANGE FOR EMPLOYMENT & UNEMPLOYMENT 2002 - 2013 GALLATIN COUNTY Unemployment Year Employment Change % Change Rate 2002 40,497 3.4 % 2003 41,445 948 2.3 % 3.3 % 2004 42,995 1,550 3.7 % 3.1 % 2005 45,011 2,016 4.7 % 2.6 % 2006 48,013 3,002 6.7 % 2.3 % 2007 49,214 1,201 2.5 % 2.5 % 2008 49,081 (133) (0.3)% 3.7 % 2009 45,274 (3,807) (7.8)% 6.1 % 2010 44,991 (283) (0.6)% 6.5 % 2011 46,377 1,386 3.1 % 5.9 % 2012 47,643 1,266 2.7 % 5.3 % 2002 - 2012 Change 7,146 17.6 % 2002 - 2012 Annual Averages - Not Seasonally Adjusted June 2012 48,205 5.5 % June 2013* 48,742 537 1.1 % 4.5 % * Preliminary Source: Montana Department of Labor & Industry - Research & Analysis Bureau _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page D-2______________________________________________ August 2013 EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY Gallatin County 2012 Annual 2002 2012 Change % Change Wage Agriculture, Forestry, 406 520 114 28.1 % $ 28,444 Fishing & Hunting Mining 42 231 189 450.0 % $ 59,280 Utilities 69 * NA NA % $ NA Construction 3,264 3,414 150 4.6 % $ 42,276 Manufacturing 2,303 2,337 34 1.5 % $ 38,116 Wholesale Trade 1,093 1,397 304 27.8 % $ 47,892 Retail Trade 5,663 6,781 1,118 19.7 % $ 25,896 Transportation & Warehousing 697 1,043 346 49.6 % $ 31,148 Information 467 583 116 24.8 % $ 45,656 Financial & Insurance 875 1,277 402 86.1 % $ 56,680 Real Estate, Rental & Leasing 754 786 32 4.2 % $ 30,628 Professional & Technical Services 1,938 3,311 1,373 70.8 % $ 87,308 Management of Companies & 22 158 136 618.2 % $ 56,680 Enterprises Administrative & Waste Services 888 1,288 400 45.0 % $ 30,680 Educational Services 303 605 302 99.7 % $ 19,916 Health Care & Social Assistance 2,816 4,544 1,728 61.4 % $ 40,300 Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 1,111 1,280 169 15.2 % $ 22,620 Accommodation and Food Service 5,478 5,739 261 4.8 % $ 15,444 Other Services, except 1,270 1,679 409 32.2 % $ 26,104 Public Administration Government 6,539 7,674 1,135 17.4 % $ 41,756 Total All Industries 36,000 44,753 8,753 24.3 % $ 37,596 Source: Montana Department of Labor - Research & Analysis Bureau _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page D-3______________________________________________ August 2013 GALLATIN COUNTY TOP PRIVATE EMPLOYERS Listed in Alphabetical Order Employer Class Size Albertsons 6 Bozeman Deaconess Hospital 9 Community Food Co-op 6 Costco 6 First Security Bank 6 Gibson Guitar 6 Kenyon Noble Lumber & Hardware 6 Lowes 6 Martel Construction 6 McDonald’s 6 Murdoch’s Ranch & Home Supply 6 Reach Inc.6 Ressler Motor 6 RightNow Technologies 8 Rosauers 6 Target 6 Town & Country Foods 6 Town Pump Convenience Stores 6 Wal-Mart 7 Zoot Enterprises 6 Class Size Breakdown: 6 = 100 - 246 employees, 7 = 250 - 499 Employees, 8 = 500 - 999 Employees, 9 = 1,000+ Employees Source: Montana Department of Labor and Industry, Research & Analysis Bureau Based on 2nd Quarter 2011 Data _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page D-4______________________________________________ August 2013 SECTION E APPENDIX SOURCES OF INFORMATION U.S. Census Bureau State, County & City - population, households & housing units, building permits Nielsen / Ribbon Demographics Market area and city information - population, household, household incomes, housing units, market area map State of Montana - Department Employment & Labor Force information, of Labor and Industry Major employers City of Bozeman Planning Department Projects in planning & zoning, building Doug Riley - Associate Planner Human Resource Development Council Section 8/Wait List/Overall need Bob Ballard Apartment Managers Rental information on existing projects _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-1______________________________________________ August 2013 DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 2010 Demographic Profile Data NOTE: For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/dpsf.pdf. Geography: Bozeman city, Montana Subject Number Percent SEX AND AGE Total population 37,280 100.0 Under 5 years 2,054 5.5 5 to 9 years 1,659 4.5 10 to 14 years 1,382 3.7 15 to 19 years 3,462 9.3 20 to 24 years 7,794 20.9 25 to 29 years 4,568 12.3 30 to 34 years 3,141 8.4 35 to 39 years 2,259 6.1 40 to 44 years 1,728 4.6 45 to 49 years 1,674 4.5 50 to 54 years 1,690 4.5 55 to 59 years 1,598 4.3 60 to 64 years 1,259 3.4 65 to 69 years 788 2.1 70 to 74 years 520 1.4 75 to 79 years 469 1.3 80 to 84 years 510 1.4 85 years and over 725 1.9 Median age (years)27.2 ( X ) 16 years and over 31,940 85.7 18 years and over 31,433 84.3 21 years and over 26,998 72.4 62 years and over 3,696 9.9 65 years and over 3,012 8.1 Male population 19,624 52.6 Under 5 years 1,020 2.7 5 to 9 years 826 2.2 10 to 14 years 722 1.9 15 to 19 years 1,858 5.0 20 to 24 years 4,425 11.9 25 to 29 years 2,607 7.0 30 to 34 years 1,743 4.7 35 to 39 years 1,241 3.3 40 to 44 years 923 2.5 45 to 49 years 841 2.3 50 to 54 years 822 2.2 55 to 59 years 756 2.0 60 to 64 years 653 1.8 65 to 69 years 368 1.0 70 to 74 years 230 0.6 1 of5 08/12/2013_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-2______________________________________________ August 2013 Subject Number Percent 75 to 79 years 184 0.5 80 to 84 years 178 0.5 85 years and over 227 0.6 Median age (years)26.6 ( X ) 16 years and over 16,926 45.4 18 years and over 16,670 44.7 21 years and over 14,272 38.3 62 years and over 1,547 4.1 65 years and over 1,187 3.2 Female population 17,656 47.4 Under 5 years 1,034 2.8 5 to 9 years 833 2.2 10 to 14 years 660 1.8 15 to 19 years 1,604 4.3 20 to 24 years 3,369 9.0 25 to 29 years 1,961 5.3 30 to 34 years 1,398 3.8 35 to 39 years 1,018 2.7 40 to 44 years 805 2.2 45 to 49 years 833 2.2 50 to 54 years 868 2.3 55 to 59 years 842 2.3 60 to 64 years 606 1.6 65 to 69 years 420 1.1 70 to 74 years 290 0.8 75 to 79 years 285 0.8 80 to 84 years 332 0.9 85 years and over 498 1.3 Median age (years)28.1 ( X ) 16 years and over 15,014 40.3 18 years and over 14,763 39.6 21 years and over 12,726 34.1 62 years and over 2,149 5.8 65 years and over 1,825 4.9 RACE Total population 37,280 100.0 One Race 36,504 97.9 White 34,910 93.6 Black or African American 174 0.5 American Indian and Alaska Native 414 1.1 Asian 715 1.9 Asian Indian 85 0.2 Chinese 273 0.7 Filipino 67 0.2 Japanese 88 0.2 Korean 107 0.3 Vietnamese 18 0.0 Other Asian [1]77 0.2 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 39 0.1 Native Hawaiian 23 0.1 Guamanian or Chamorro 5 0.0 Samoan 8 0.0 Other Pacific Islander [2]3 0.0 Some Other Race 252 0.7 2 of5 08/12/2013_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-3______________________________________________ August 2013 Subject Number Percent Two or More Races 776 2.1 White; American Indian and Alaska Native [3]264 0.7 White; Asian [3]230 0.6 White; Black or African American [3]102 0.3 White; Some Other Race [3]61 0.2 Race alone or in combination with one or more otherraces: [4] White 35,641 95.6 Black or African American 314 0.8 American Indian and Alaska Native 725 1.9 Asian 1,006 2.7 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 83 0.2 Some Other Race 358 1.0 HISPANIC OR LATINO Total population 37,280 100.0 Hispanic or Latino (of any race)1,096 2.9 Mexican 665 1.8 Puerto Rican 64 0.2 Cuban 26 0.1 Other Hispanic or Latino [5]341 0.9 Not Hispanic or Latino 36,184 97.1 HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE Total population 37,280 100.0 Hispanic or Latino 1,096 2.9 White alone 696 1.9 Black or African American alone 6 0.0 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 30 0.1 Asian alone 9 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 7 0.0 Some Other Race alone 217 0.6 Two or More Races 131 0.4 Not Hispanic or Latino 36,184 97.1 White alone 34,214 91.8 Black or African American alone 168 0.5 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 384 1.0 Asian alone 706 1.9 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 32 0.1 Some Other Race alone 35 0.1 Two or More Races 645 1.7 RELATIONSHIP Total population 37,280 100.0 In households 34,250 91.9 Householder 15,775 42.3 Spouse [6]5,228 14.0 Child 6,451 17.3 Own child under 18 years 5,642 15.1 Other relatives 725 1.9 Under 18 years 120 0.3 65 years and over 70 0.2 Nonrelatives 6,071 16.3 Under 18 years 66 0.2 65 years and over 54 0.1 Unmarried partner 1,349 3.6 In group quarters 3,030 8.1 Institutionalized population 199 0.5 Male 93 0.2 3 of5 08/12/2013_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-4______________________________________________ August 2013 Subject Number Percent Female 106 0.3 Noninstitutionalized population 2,831 7.6 Male 1,650 4.4 Female 1,181 3.2 HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE Total households 15,775 100.0 Family households (families) [7]6,900 43.7 With own children under 18 years 3,241 20.5 Husband-wife family 5,228 33.1 With own children under 18 years 2,228 14.1 Male householder, no wife present 569 3.6 With own children under 18 years 304 1.9 Female householder, no husband present 1,103 7.0 With own children under 18 years 709 4.5 Nonfamily households [7]8,875 56.3 Householder living alone 5,288 33.5 Male 2,566 16.3 65 years and over 302 1.9 Female 2,722 17.3 65 years and over 899 5.7 Households with individuals under 18 years 3,356 21.3 Households with individuals 65 years and over 2,216 14.0 Average household size 2.17 ( X ) Average family size [7]2.80 ( X ) HOUSING OCCUPANCY Total housing units 17,464 100.0 Occupied housing units 15,775 90.3 Vacant housing units 1,689 9.7 For rent 799 4.6 Rented, not occupied 29 0.2 For sale only 271 1.6 Sold, not occupied 34 0.2 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 337 1.9 All other vacants 219 1.3 Homeowner vacancy rate (percent) [8]3.8 ( X ) Rental vacancy rate (percent) [9]8.2 ( X ) HOUSING TENURE Occupied housing units 15,775 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 6,865 43.5 Population in owner-occupied housing units 15,916 ( X ) Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.32 ( X ) Renter-occupied housing units 8,910 56.5 Population in renter-occupied housing units 18,334 ( X ) Average household size of renter-occupied units 2.06 ( X ) X Not applicable. [1] Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories. [2] Other Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories. [3] One of the four most commonly reported multiple-race combinations nationwide in Census 2000. [4] In combination with one or more of the other races listed. The six numbers may add to more than the total population, and the six percentages may add to more than 100 percent because individuals may report more than one race.[5] This category is composed of people whose origins are from the Dominican Republic, Spain, and Spanish-speaking Central or South 4 of5 08/12/2013_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-5______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman, MT Pop-Facts: Demographic Quick Facts 2013 Report Place, (see appendix for geographies), aggregate Place Total %Description Population 41,687 2018 Projection 39,315 2013 Estimate 37,706 2010 Census 27,292 2000 Census 38.16% Growth 2000 - 2010 Households 18,038 2018 Projection 16,841 2013 Estimate 15,904 2010 Census 10,783 2000 Census 47.49% Growth 2000 - 2010 2013 Est. Population by Single Classification Race 39,315 36,670 93.27 White Alone 194 0.49 Black or African American Alone 450 1.14 American Indian and Alaska Native Alone 782 1.99 Asian Alone 41 0.10 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Alone 280 0.71 Some Other Race Alone 898 2.28 Two or More Races 2013 Est. Population Hispanic or Latino 39,315 1,218 3.10 Hispanic or Latino 38,097 96.90 Not Hispanic or Latino 2013 Tenure of Occupied Housing Units 16,841 7,642 45.38 Owner Occupied 9,199 54.62 Renter Occupied 2012 Average Household Size 2.15 Nielsen Solution Center 1 800 866 6511 Prepared By: Prepared For: Property Dynamics Project Code: Bozeman, MT 31OfPage © 2013 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved. Sun Jun 30, 2013Prepared On: _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-6______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman, MT Household Trend 2013 Place (see appendix for geographies), Total 2013-20182000-2013 %ChangeDescriptionCensusEstimateProjection 2000 2013 2018%Change Universe Totals Population 41,687 6.03%27,292 39,315 44.05% Households 18,038 7.11%10,783 16,841 56.18% Families 8,125 7.53%5,040 7,556 49.92% Housing Units 19,908 7.19%11,443 18,572 62.30% Group Quarters Population 3,044 0.16%2,895 3,039 4.97% Average Household Size 2.142.26 2.15 %% 201820132000 %ProjectionEstimateCensusDescription Total Household Income 18,03810,778 16,841 19.32% 15.44% 15.22% Income Less than $15,000 2,7452,082 2,600 18.09% 14.92% 14.89% Income $15,000 - $24,999 2,6861,950 2,513 16.13% 13.09% 13.02% Income $25,000 - $34,999 2,3491,739 2,204 18.30% 14.77% 14.70% Income $35,000 - $49,999 2,6521,972 2,488 16.15% 17.31% 17.37% Income $50,000 - $74,999 3,1331,741 2,916 6.76% 10.53% 10.62% Income $75,000 - $99,999 1,916729 1,774 2.79% 5.33% 5.42% Income $100,000 - $124,999 978301 898 0.99% 2.72% 2.82% Income $125,000 - $149,999 508107 458 1.09% 3.05% 3.08% Income $150,000 - $199,999 555117 514 0.23% 0.85% 0.88% Income $200,000 - $249,000 15925 143 0.13% 1.35% 1.34% Income $250,000 - $499,999 24214 227 0.01% 0.63% 0.64% Income $500,000 or more 1151 106 Average Household Income $60,667$40,875 $60,248 Median Household Income $42,008$32,803 $41,653 Median HH Inc. by Single Race Class White Alone 42,40633,085 42,026 Black or African American Alone 44,45714,999 44,205 Amer Indian and Alaska Native Alone 27,33334,565 27,500 Asian Alone 30,71418,649 31,071 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islan 22,5000 21,000 Some Other Race Alone 41,51320,385 40,423 Two or More Races 42,40030,147 42,143 Hispanic or Latino 49,16722,414 49,688 Not Hispanic or Latino 41,85932,949 41,495 Nielsen Solution Center 1 800 866 6511 Prepared By: Prepared For: Property Dynamics Project Code: Bozeman, MT 31OfPage © 2013 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved. Sun Jun 30, 2013Prepared On: _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-7______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman, MT Pop-Facts: Demographic Trend 2013 Place (see appendix for geographies), Total %%Description Census Estimate Projection% 2000 2013 2018 41,68739,31527,292Population by Age 4.72%5.51%5.59% Age 0 - 4 1,289 2,166 2,331 3.92%5.06%5.61% Age 5 - 9 1,071 1,990 2,337 4.30%4.16%5.05% Age 10 - 14 1,174 1,636 2,104 2.72%2.01%2.02% Age 15 - 17 742 789 840 14.98%10.55%8.98% Age 18 - 20 4,087 4,149 3,745 17.27%13.24%8.31% Age 21 - 24 4,712 5,205 3,465 16.60%20.95%21.99% Age 25 - 34 4,531 8,237 9,168 11.64%12.05%14.22% Age 35 - 44 3,177 4,737 5,927 10.56%9.12%9.49% Age 45 - 54 2,882 3,584 3,955 4.76%8.61%8.67% Age 55 - 64 1,299 3,386 3,615 3.59%4.57%6.14% Age 65 - 74 980 1,796 2,558 3.51%2.41%2.43% Age 75 - 84 958 949 1,012 1.43%1.76%1.51% Age 85 and over 390 691 630 86.12%84.62%83.10% Age 16 and over 23,503 33,270 34,640 84.33%83.26%81.74% Age 18 and over 23,016 32,734 34,075 69.36%72.71%72.76% Age 21 and over 18,929 28,585 30,330 8.53%8.74%10.08% Age 65 and over 2,328 3,436 4,200 31.629.526.3Median Age 34.8033.8032.50Average Age 41,68739,31527,292Population by Sex 52.76%52.76%52.68% Male 14,399 20,743 21,960 47.24%47.24%47.32% Female 12,893 18,572 19,727 Male/Female Ratio 1.12 1.12 1.11 Prepared By: © 2013 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved. Nielsen Solution Center 1 800 866 6511 4Of1Page Prepared For: Property Dynamics Project Code: Bozeman, MT Sun Jun 30, 2013Prepared On: _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-8______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman, MT Pop-Facts: Demographic Trend 2013 Place (see appendix for geographies), Total %%Description Census Estimate Projection% 2000 2013 2018 Pop. by Single Race Class. and Hispanic or Latino 1,4331,218423Hispanic or Latino: 55.56%63.88%64.97% White Alone 235 778 931 1.42%0.66%0.56% Black or African American Alone 6 8 8 3.31%2.63%2.72% American Indian and Alaska Native Alone 14 32 39 0.47%0.90%1.05% Asian Alone 2 11 15 0.00%0.49%0.56% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Alone 0 6 8 28.37%19.79%18.84% Some Other Race Alone 120 241 270 10.87%11.66%11.30% Two or More Races 46 142 162 40,25438,09726,869Not Hispanic or Latino: 95.71%94.21%93.79% White Alone 25,717 35,892 37,754 0.31%0.49%0.53% Black or African American Alone 84 186 213 1.14%1.10%1.12% American Indian and Alaska Native Alone 305 418 451 1.46%2.02%2.17% Asian Alone 391 771 874 0.06%0.09%0.09% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Alone 15 35 38 0.08%0.10%0.10% Some Other Race Alone 22 39 39 1.25%1.98%2.20% Two or More Races 335 756 885 18,03816,84110,783Households by Age of Householder 22.80% 15.84% 10.37% Householder Under 25 Years 2,459 2,667 1,871 22.35% 26.62% 27.28% Householder 25 to 34 Years 2,410 4,483 4,920 17.17% 16.90% 19.77% Householder 35 to 44 Years 1,851 2,846 3,567 16.43% 13.32% 13.63% Householder 45 to 54 Years 1,772 2,244 2,459 7.56% 13.03% 12.89% Householder 55 to 64 Years 815 2,195 2,325 5.67% 7.24% 9.53% Householder 65 to 74 Years 611 1,220 1,719 6.04% 3.98% 3.89% Householder 75 to 84 Years 651 670 702 1.98% 3.06% 2.63% Householder 85 Years and over 214 516 475 41.239.537.8Median Age of Householder Prepared By: © 2013 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved. Nielsen Solution Center 1 800 866 6511 4Of2Page Prepared For: Property Dynamics Project Code: Bozeman, MT Sun Jun 30, 2013Prepared On: _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-9______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman, MT Pop-Facts: Demographic Snapshot 2013 Report Place, (see appendix for geographies), aggregate Place Total %Description 3,350 44.34 Married-Couple Family, no own children 192 2.54 Male Householder, own children 595 7.87 Male Householder, no own children 688 9.11 Female Householder, own children 325 4.30 Female Householder, no own children 2013 Est. Households by Household Size 16,841 5,778 34.31 1-person household 6,024 35.77 2-person household 2,731 16.22 3-person household 1,594 9.46 4-person household 510 3.03 5-person household 151 0.90 6-person household 53 0.31 7 or more person household 2013 Est. Average Household Size 2.15 2013 Est. Households by Presence of People 16,841 3,856 22.90Households with 1 or more People under Age 18: 2,724 70.64 Married-Couple Family 326 8.45 Other Family, Male Householder 796 20.64 Other Family, Female Householder 1 0.03 Nonfamily, Male Householder 9 0.23 Nonfamily, Female Householder 12,985 77.10Households no People under Age 18: 3,684 28.37 Married-Couple Family 484 3.73 Other Family, Male Householder 323 2.49 Other Family, Female Householder 4,058 31.25 Nonfamily, Male Householder 4,436 34.16 Nonfamily, Female Householder 2013 Est. Households by Number of Vehicles 16,841 981 5.83 No Vehicles 6,198 36.80 1 Vehicle 6,625 39.34 2 Vehicles 2,012 11.95 3 Vehicles 630 3.74 4 Vehicles 395 2.35 5 or more Vehicles 2013 Est. Average Number of Vehicles 1.80 Nielsen Solution Center 1 800 866 6511 Prepared By: Prepared For: Property Dynamics Project Code: Bozeman, MT 127OfPage © 2013 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved. Sun Jun 30, 2013Prepared On: _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-10______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman, MT Pop-Facts: Demographic Snapshot 2013 Report Place, (see appendix for geographies), aggregate Place Total %Description Family Households 8,125 2018 Projection 7,556 2013 Estimate 7,114 2010 Census 5,040 2000 Census 7.53% Growth 2013-2018 6.21% Growth 2010-2013 41.15% Growth 2000-2010 2013 Est. Families by Poverty Status 7,556 6,810 90.13 2013 Families at or Above Poverty 2,967 39.27 2013 Families at or Above Poverty with Children 746 9.87 2013 Families Below Poverty 554 7.33 2013 Families Below Poverty with Children 2013 Est. Pop Age 16+ by Employment Status 33,270 50 0.15 In Armed Forces 21,221 63.78 Civilian - Employed 1,855 5.58 Civilian - Unemployed 10,144 30.49 Not in Labor Force 2013 Est. Civ Employed Pop 16+ Class of Worker 22,947 14,513 63.25 For-Profit Private Workers 2,050 8.93 Non-Profit Private Workers 1,164 5.07 Local Government Workers 2,211 9.64 State Government Workers 247 1.08 Federal Government Workers 2,747 11.97 Self-Emp Workers 15 0.07 Unpaid Family Workers 2013 Est. Civ Employed Pop 16+ by Occupation 22,947 902 3.93 Architect/Engineer 755 3.29 Arts/Entertain/Sports 832 3.63 Building Grounds Maint 992 4.32 Business/Financial Ops 488 2.13 Community/Soc Svcs 485 2.11 Computer/Mathematical 1,321 5.76 Construction/Extraction 1,780 7.76 Edu/Training/Library Nielsen Solution Center 1 800 866 6511 Prepared By: Prepared For: Property Dynamics Project Code: Bozeman, MT 128OfPage © 2013 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved. Sun Jun 30, 2013Prepared On: _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-11______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman, MT Pop-Facts: Demographic Snapshot 2013 Report Place, (see appendix for geographies), aggregate Place Total %Description 197 0.86 Farm/Fish/Forestry 2,048 8.92 Food Prep/Serving 983 4.28 Health Practitioner/Tec 501 2.18 Healthcare Support 560 2.44 Maintenance Repair 515 2.24 Legal 534 2.33 Life/Phys/Soc Science 1,827 7.96 Management 2,823 12.30 Office/Admin Support 896 3.90 Production 236 1.03 Protective Svcs 2,596 11.31 Sales/Related 1,037 4.52 Personal Care/Svc 639 2.78 Transportation/Moving 2013 Est. Pop 16+ by Occupation Classification 22,947 3,416 14.89 Blue Collar 14,680 63.97 White Collar 4,851 21.14 Service and Farm 2013 Est. Workers Age 16+, Transp. To Work 22,320 15,122 67.75 Drove Alone 2,456 11.00 Car Pooled 267 1.20 Public Transportation 1,973 8.84 Walked 1,194 5.35 Bicycle 182 0.82 Other Means 1,126 5.04 Worked at Home 2013 Est. Workers Age 16+ by Travel Time to Work * 12,115 Less than 15 Minutes 6,449 15 - 29 Minutes 1,404 30 - 44 Minutes 341 45 - 59 Minutes 807 60 or more Minutes 2013 Est. Avg Travel Time to Work in Minutes 17.67 2013 Est. Tenure of Occupied Housing Units 16,841 7,642 45.38 Owner Occupied 9,199 54.62 Renter Occupied Nielsen Solution Center 1 800 866 6511 Prepared By: Prepared For: Property Dynamics Project Code: Bozeman, MT 129OfPage © 2013 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved. Sun Jun 30, 2013Prepared On: _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-12______________________________________________ August 2013 Bozeman, MT Pop-Facts: Demographic Snapshot 2013 Report Place, (see appendix for geographies), aggregate Place Total %Description 2013 Owner Occ. HUs: Avg. Length of Residence 12.1 2013 Renter Occ. HUs: Avg. Length of Residence 4.9 2013 Est. All Owner-Occupied Housing Values 7,642 373 4.88 Value Less than $20,000 212 2.77 Value $20,000 - $39,999 84 1.10 Value $40,000 - $59,999 76 0.99 Value $60,000 - $79,999 128 1.67 Value $80,000 - $99,999 821 10.74 Value $100,000 - $149,999 1,396 18.27 Value $150,000 - $199,999 2,565 33.56 Value $200,000 - $299,999 1,216 15.91 Value $300,000 - $399,999 312 4.08 Value $400,000 - $499,999 336 4.40 Value $500,000 - $749,999 22 0.29 Value $750,000 - $999,999 101 1.32 Value $1,000,000 or more 2013 Est. Median All Owner-Occupied Housing Value $228,499 2013 Est. Housing Units by Units in Structure 18,572 1,486 8.00 1 Unit Attached 8,771 47.23 1 Unit Detached 1,490 8.02 2 Units 2,405 12.95 3 or 4 Units 2,522 13.58 5 to 19 Units 366 1.97 20 to 49 Units 600 3.23 50 or More Units 930 5.01 Mobile Home or Trailer 2 0.01 Boat, RV, Van, etc. 2013 Est. Housing Units by Year Structure Built 18,572 3,108 16.73 Housing Unit Built 2005 or later 2,975 16.02 Housing Unit Built 2000 to 2004 2,882 15.52 Housing Unit Built 1990 to 1999 1,847 9.95 Housing Unit Built 1980 to 1989 2,862 15.41 Housing Unit Built 1970 to 1979 1,041 5.61 Housing Unit Built 1960 to 1969 1,085 5.84 Housing Unit Built 1950 to 1959 Nielsen Solution Center 1 800 866 6511 Prepared By: Prepared For: Property Dynamics Project Code: Bozeman, MT 1210 OfPage © 2013 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved. Sun Jun 30, 2013Prepared On: _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-13______________________________________________ August 2013 HISTA 2.2 Summary Data © 2012 All rights reserved Nielsen Claritas 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 537 179 47 123 6 0 892 $10,000-20,000 856 539 219 159 3 0 1,776 $20,000-30,000 892 443 244 39 7 1 1,626 $30,000-40,000 447 246 265 39 24 12 1,033 $40,000-50,000 227 403 205 83 36 19 973 $50,000-60,000 55 259 74 52 25 8 473 $60,000+ 209 716 391 131 107 34 1,588 Total 3,223 2,785 1,445 626 208 74 8,361 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates*Total $0-10,000 131 37 1 3 7 0 179 $10,000-20,000 141 42 1 11 4 0 199 $20,000-30,000 52 34 3 9 9 0 107 $30,000-40,000 83 48 3 4 4 0 142 $40,000-50,000 60 37 4 8 4 0 113 $50,000-60,000 75 31 2 5 5 0 118 $60,000+ 144 117 22 17 30 0 330 Total 686 346 36 57 63 0 1,188 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 108 34 0 2 7 0 151 $10,000-20,000 88 32 1 8 3 0 132 $20,000-30,000 28 33 2 8 8 0 79 $30,000-40,000 42 46 2 3 3 0 96 $40,000-50,000 39 30 4 6 4 0 83 $50,000-60,000 49 14 1 5 3 0 72 $60,000+ 85 78 12 14 25 0 214 Total 439 267 22 46 53 0 827 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 645 213 47 125 13 0 1,043 $10,000-20,000 944 571 220 167 6 0 1,908 $20,000-30,000 920 476 246 47 15 1 1,705 $30,000-40,000 489 292 267 42 27 12 1,129 $40,000-50,000 266 433 209 89 40 19 1,056 $50,000-60,000 104 273 75 57 28 8 545 $60,000+ 294 794 403 145 132 34 1,802 Total 3,662 3,052 1,467 672 261 74 9,188 * Estimates based on household size ratios; not cross tabulated data Renter Households www.ribbondata.com Bozeman, MT Renter Households Under Age 62 Years Year 2013 Estimates All Age Groups Year 2013 Estimates Aged 55+ Years Year 2013 Estimates Renter Households Aged 62+ Years Year 2013 Estimates Renter Households _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-14______________________________________________ August 2013 HISTA 2.2 Summary Data © 2012 All rights reserved Nielsen Claritas 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 39 38 10 12 2 0 101 $10,000-20,000 252 170 46 26 4 0 498 $20,000-30,000 226 136 29 31 21 6 449 $30,000-40,000 191 72 44 11 11 5 334 $40,000-50,000 158 109 125 42 21 12 467 $50,000-60,000 158 214 185 43 34 16 650 $60,000+ 335 1,055 660 728 153 58 2,989 Total 1,359 1,794 1,099 893 246 97 5,488 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates*Total $0-10,000 130 94 16 6 7 1 254 $10,000-20,000 142 145 23 9 4 0 323 $20,000-30,000 173 214 15 3 4 1 410 $30,000-40,000 182 112 25 3 2 0 324 $40,000-50,000 79 200 46 2 11 3 341 $50,000-60,000 86 278 18 8 16 5 411 $60,000+ 295 776 195 61 21 2 1,350 Total 1,087 1,819 338 92 65 12 3,413 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 102 63 12 4 7 1 189 $10,000-20,000 129 71 9 5 3 0 217 $20,000-30,000 86 151 12 2 4 1 256 $30,000-40,000 119 105 10 1 1 0 236 $40,000-50,000 39 159 14 0 4 1 217 $50,000-60,000 65 205 10 5 16 5 306 $60,000+ 212 405 95 13 17 2 744 Total 752 1,159 162 30 52 10 2,165 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 141 101 22 16 9 1 290 $10,000-20,000 381 241 55 31 7 0 715 $20,000-30,000 312 287 41 33 25 7 705 $30,000-40,000 310 177 54 12 12 5 570 $40,000-50,000 197 268 139 42 25 13 684 $50,000-60,000 223 419 195 48 50 21 956 $60,000+ 547 1,460 755 741 170 60 3,733 Total 2,111 2,953 1,261 923 298 107 7,653 * Estimates based on household size ratios; not cross tabulated data Owner Households www.ribbondata.com Bozeman, MT Owner Households Under Age 62 Years Year 2013 Estimates All Age Groups Year 2013 Estimates Aged 55+ Years Year 2013 Estimates Owner Households Aged 62+ Years Year 2013 Estimates Owner Households _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-15______________________________________________ August 2013 HISTA 2.2 Summary Data © 2012 All rights reserved Nielsen Claritas 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 544 182 48 120 3 0 897 $10,000-20,000 937 561 219 171 2 0 1,890 $20,000-30,000 974 439 257 44 6 0 1,720 $30,000-40,000 498 250 274 41 28 12 1,103 $40,000-50,000 246 415 216 86 42 19 1,024 $50,000-60,000 64 266 78 48 27 7 490 $60,000+ 232 786 442 155 113 37 1,765 Total 3,495 2,899 1,534 665 221 75 8,889 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates*Total $0-10,000 158 49 4 4 4 0 219 $10,000-20,000 170 49 2 4 7 0 232 $20,000-30,000 57 39 3 10 6 0 115 $30,000-40,000 96 51 3 5 5 0 160 $40,000-50,000 66 50 3 8 6 0 133 $50,000-60,000 78 29 3 7 4 0 121 $60,000+ 160 142 25 22 24 0 373 Total 785 409 43 60 56 0 1,353 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 130 44 2 3 4 0 183 $10,000-20,000 103 33 1 3 7 0 147 $20,000-30,000 31 38 3 8 6 0 86 $30,000-40,000 44 50 2 3 5 0 104 $40,000-50,000 44 44 3 7 4 0 102 $50,000-60,000 48 13 1 7 3 0 72 $60,000+ 97 94 15 18 21 0 245 Total 497 316 27 49 50 0 939 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 674 226 50 123 7 0 1,080 $10,000-20,000 1,040 594 220 174 9 0 2,037 $20,000-30,000 1,005 477 260 52 12 0 1,806 $30,000-40,000 542 300 276 44 33 12 1,207 $40,000-50,000 290 459 219 93 46 19 1,126 $50,000-60,000 112 279 79 55 30 7 562 $60,000+ 329 880 457 173 134 37 2,010 Total 3,992 3,215 1,561 714 271 75 9,828 * Estimates based on household size ratios; not cross tabulated data Renter Households www.ribbondata.com Bozeman, MT Renter Households Under Age 62 Years Year 2018 Projections All Age Groups Year 2018 Projections Aged 55+ Years Year 2018 Projections Renter Households Aged 62+ Years Year 2018 Projections Renter Households _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-16______________________________________________ August 2013 HISTA 2.2 Summary Data © 2012 All rights reserved Nielsen Claritas 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 43 34 9 10 2 0 98 $10,000-20,000 253 158 52 23 2 0 488 $20,000-30,000 237 140 27 35 17 4 460 $30,000-40,000 197 69 44 10 12 5 337 $40,000-50,000 155 104 137 48 20 9 473 $50,000-60,000 167 222 195 34 43 14 675 $60,000+ 358 1,050 701 763 166 62 3,100 Total 1,410 1,777 1,165 923 262 94 5,631 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates*Total $0-10,000 157 112 15 6 7 2 299 $10,000-20,000 178 164 23 8 8 0 381 $20,000-30,000 193 244 18 4 8 1 468 $30,000-40,000 212 116 28 6 2 0 364 $40,000-50,000 85 230 49 4 9 2 379 $50,000-60,000 96 336 23 7 15 5 482 $60,000+ 343 843 210 70 23 6 1,495 Total 1,264 2,045 366 105 72 16 3,868 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 124 81 11 4 6 2 228 $10,000-20,000 161 85 8 4 7 0 265 $20,000-30,000 99 176 15 3 6 1 300 $30,000-40,000 146 107 12 4 2 0 271 $40,000-50,000 45 190 14 1 5 1 256 $50,000-60,000 77 255 15 5 14 5 371 $60,000+ 260 474 106 21 21 6 888 Total 912 1,368 181 42 61 15 2,579 1‐Pers 2‐Pers 3‐Pers 4‐Pers 5‐Pers 6+‐Pers HH HH HH HH Estimates* Estimates* Total $0-10,000 167 115 20 14 8 2 326 $10,000-20,000 414 243 60 27 9 0 753 $20,000-30,000 336 316 42 38 23 5 760 $30,000-40,000 343 176 56 14 14 5 608 $40,000-50,000 200 294 151 49 25 10 729 $50,000-60,000 244 477 210 39 57 19 1,046 $60,000+ 618 1,524 807 784 187 68 3,988 Total 2,322 3,145 1,346 965 323 109 8,210 * Estimates based on household size ratios; not cross tabulated data Owner Households www.ribbondata.com Bozeman, MT Owner Households Under Age 62 Years Year 2018 Projections All Age Groups Year 2018 Projections Aged 55+ Years Year 2018 Projections Owner Households Aged 62+ Years Year 2018 Projections Owner Households _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-17______________________________________________ August 2013 Property Dynamics 15625 NE 191st Street ! Woodinville, WA 98072 Phone (425) 489-9780 ! Fax (425) 806-0760 COMPANY GENERAL INFORMATION Property Dynamics is a sole proprietorship family business that was founded in 1971 by Timothy Fahey. Since then, the company has prepared market and feasibility studies for apartments, condominiums, retirement centers, assisted living care, paraplegic centers, condominium conversions, shopping centers, industrial parks, single family sub-divisions, P.U.D.’s, tax-credit (LIHTC) projects, and Rural Development (USDA-FmHA RRH 515/514) projects. Currently, the company is primarily engaged in the preparation of Market Studies for Tax Credit and Rural Development affordable housing projects. The company is owned by Greg and Diane Fahey. Greg Fahey, Market Consultant, has worked with Property Dynamics for 36 years, and Diane Fahey has worked with the company for 16 years. As of March 31, 2013, studies have been prepared for 1,074 projects in Washington; 184 in Oregon; 108 in California; 110 in Montana; 102 in Wyoming; 89 in Arizona; 83 in Idaho; 39 in Utah; 29 in Colorado; 26 in Alaska; 24 in Nevada; 16 in Nebraska; 12 in North Dakota; 10 in New Mexico; 9 in Texas; 7 each in North Carolina and South Carolina; 6 each in Michigan and South Dakota; 5 in Minnesota; 4 each in Illinois and Wisconsin; 3 each in Oklahoma and Kansas; 2 each in Hawaii, Missouri, and West Virginia; 1 each in Alabama and Indiana, for a total of 1,968. By Classification of study, there were 1,213 apartment, including 509 Rural Development & 498 Tax Credit studies; 166 condominiums; 97 condominium conversions; 80 retirement centers; 72 assisted living care; 51 single family sub-divisions; 41 office/warehouses; 27 shopping centers; 18 P.U.D.’s; 14 motels; and 189 special or not classified. From 1973 - 2004, we published a newsletter covering general information about the construction and real estate industries in the state of Washington. It was published six (6) times a year and included issues encompassing rental and vacancy surveys, new condominiums, building permits, population movements, and special studies. The company has provided statistical data and information about the Pacific Northwest for the “U.S. Housing Reports” publication. We also provided condominium information for the “Central Puget Sound Real Estate Report”. MARKET SURVEYS AND FEASIBILITY STUDIES_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-18______________________________________________ August 2013 TAX CREDIT (LIHTC) PROJECTS ON WHICH WE HAVE PREPARED MARKET STUDIES THROUGH MARCH 2013 ALABAMA: Prichard, Total - 1 ARIZONA: Benson; Buckeye; Bullhead City; Casa Grande; Chino Valley; Cottonwood (2); Douglas (2); Flagstaff; Globe (2); Huachuca City; Mesa; Nogales; Safford; Sierra Vista (5); Taylor; Tucson (5); Winslow, Total - 28 CALIFORNIA: Anderson (3); Arcata (2); Armona; Arvin (2); Bakersfield (2); Chico (4); Chowchilla; Dixon; Elk Grove; Eureka; Farmersville (4); Fresno(3); Greenfield (4); Hanford; Hesperia (4); Huron; Kerman; Lakeport; Lindsay (2); Lompoc; Madera; Mendota (3); Mojave; Orange Cove; Oxnard; Parlier; Porterville; Red Bluff; Ridgecrest; Riverbank (2); San Joaquin; Sanger; Sonoma County; Tehachapi; Tulare; Victorville (6); Wasco; Watsonville; Williams; Willows; Willow Creek (2); Woodlake, Total - 71 COLORADO: Bayfield; Cortez; Fort Collins (4); Grand Junction; Pagosa Springs (3); Pueblo (4); Rifle, Total - 15 IDAHO: American Falls; Ammon; Blackfoot (3); Buhl; Caldwell; Chubbuck (2); Driggs; Emmett (2); Nampa; Payette (2); Rexburg (2); Rigby; St. Anthony; Salmon(2); Shelley; Twin Falls (4), Total - 26 KANSAS: Chanute; Kansas City; Olathe, Total - 3 MONTANA: Belgrade; Big Fork; Billings (12); Bozeman (5); Butte; Corvallis (2); Cut Bank; Darby (3); Dillon (2); Glendive (2); Great Falls (3); Hamilton (5); Havre; Helena; Kalispell (4); Lewistown (2); Libby; Lolo; Miles City; Missoula (17); Pablo; Plains; Polson (2); Ronan; Shelby (2); Sidney (2); Somers; St. Regis; Stevensville (3); Superior; White Sulphur; Whitefish; Whitehall; Wolf Point, Total - 85 MICHIGAN: Battle Creek; Harrison; Hayes Township; Kalamazoo (3), Total - 6 MINNESOTA: Moorhead, Total - 1 MISSOURI: St. Ann; Hazelwood , Total - 2 NEBRASKA: Aurora (2); Columbus; Dawson County; Gering (2); Kearney (6); North Platte (2); Omaha; Papillion; Sidney; Waverly, Total - 17 NEVADA: Douglas County; Elko; Jackpot (2); Minden; Pahrump (2); Reno; Winnemucca; West Wendover, Total - 10 NEW MEXICO: Albuquerque (3); Rio Rancho (2), Total - 5 NORTH CAROLINA: Charlotte, Total - 1 NORTH DAKOTA: Bismark; Casselton (3); Dickinson (3); Grafton; Mandan; Mayville; Williston (2), Total - 12 OKLAHOMA Lawton (2); Perkins; Shawnee; Stillwater, Total - 5 OREGON: Astoria; Bend; Brookings (2); Coos Bay; Florence; Grants Pass; Joseph (2); Klammath Falls; Lebanon (2); Lincoln City (2); Medford; McMinnville (2); Newport (2); Redmond; Sandy; Tillamook (2); Umatilla (2), Total - 25 UTAH: Brigham City; Cedar City (2); Grantsville; Ogden (3); Salt Lake City; Tooele; West Valley City, Total - 10 SOUTH DAKOTA: Brookings; Canistota; Huron; Salem; Spearfish; Vermillion,, Total - 6 WASHINGTON: Auburn; Bainbridge Island (3); Belfair (2); Bellevue (3); Bremerton; Burien; Cashmere; Centralia; Ephrata (3); Elma; Enumclaw (2); Everett; Federal Way (3); Friday Harbor; Graham; Grandview; Hoquiam; Kingston (2); Leavenworth; Marysville; Mount Vernon (4); Moses Lake (2); Oak Harbor (2); Omak (3); Pasco; Port Hadlock (2); Poulsbo (2); SeaTac; Seattle (3); Selah; Sequim (3); Shoreline; South Bend; Spokane Valley; Tacoma; Tukwila; Vancouver (3); Washougal; White Center; Yakima; Yelm (3), Total - 70 WEST VIRGINIA: Oak Hill; Philippi, Total - 2 WYOMING: Buffalo (2); Casper (12); Cheyenne (10); Cody (3); Douglas (6); Evanston (4); Gillette (10); Glenrock; Green River (2); Guersney; Jackson (4); Lander (2); Laramie (4); Marbleton; Pinedale; Powell (3); Sheridan (9); Rawlins; Riverton (3); Rock Springs (8); Thermopolis; Torrington; Worland (2), Total - 95 SUMMARY OF TAX CREDIT MARKET STUDIES: STATES: 22 CITIES: 253 STUDIES: 498_______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-19______________________________________________ August 2013 RURAL DEVELOPMENT (USDA-FmHA) PROJECTS ON WHICH WE HAVE PREPARED MARKET STUDIES THROUGH 03/13 ALASKA: Haines; Ketchikan (2); Palmer; Sitka; Soldotna; Wasilla (3) Total - 9 ARIZONA: Avondale (2); Arizona City; Buckeye (2); Bullhead City (5); Casa Grande (2); Chino Valley (2); Coolidge (2); Cottonwood (3); Eloy; Florence; Fort Mohave; Goodyear (2); Globe; Green Valley (2); Holbrock; Kingman (3); Lake Havasu City; Miami; Page; Parker; Payson; Pinetop; Prescott Valley (2); Quartzsize; Show Low (2); Snowflake; Thacher. Total - 44 CALIFORNIA: Arcata; Arvin; Burney; Clearlake; Dixon; Dunsmuir; Farmersville; Grass Valley; Healdsburg; Hollister (2); Hughson; Ione; Lakeport; Livingston; McFarland; Nice; Oakley; Oxnard; Patterson; Polluck Pines; Red Bluff; St. Helena; Watsonville; West Point; Williams. Total - 24 COLORADO: Brighton; Cortez; Delta; Durango; Fort Morgan; Silverthorn. Total - 6 FLORIDA: Ferdindina Beach; Flagler Beach; Orange City (2); Sun City Center; Winter Garden; Zephyrhills. Total - 7 HAWAII: Kaloa, Kauai; Kehei, Maui. Total - 2 IDAHO: Bonners Ferry (2); Burley; Caldwell (3); Emmett; Grangeville; Heyburn; Jerome; Kellogg; New Plymouth; Payette; Pinehurst; Post Falls (2); Priest River (2); Rexburg (3); Rigby; Salmon; Sandpoint (3); St. Maries (2); Sugar City; Wallace; Weiser (2); Wendell. Total - 33 MONTANA: Big Fork; Columbia Falls (2); Hamilton; Kalispell (3); Polson; White Fish. Total - 9 NEVADA: Boulder City (2); Carlin; Douglas County; Minden; Pahrump; Winnemucca. Total - 7 NEW MEXICO: Belen Total - 1 OREGON: Ashland; Astoria (3); Baker; Bandon (3); Boardman (2); Brookings (3); Burns; Canby (2); Cannon Beach (2); Canyonville; Cave Junction (2); Central Point; Cottage Grove; Creswell; Dallas; The Dalles; Eagle Point (2); Florence (3); Gold Beach (2); Grants Pass (4); Hood River (3); Independence; Jacksonville; Jon Day; LaGrande (2); Lebanon; Lincoln City (3); Madras (3); McMinnville (4); Mollalla; Monmouth; Mosier; Newberg (3); Newport (2); North Bend; Oak Ridge; Ontario (4); Phoenix (2); Philomath; Port Orford; Prineville (2); Rainier; Redmond (4); Rogue River (5); Sandy (2); Scappoose; Seaside (3); Shady Cove; Sheridan; Silverton; Sisters; St. Helens (2); Sweet Home (3); Talent (3); Tillamook (5); Umatilla; Union (2); Vale; Wheeler; Wilsonville (2). Total - 116 UTAH: Blanding (3); Brigham City; Cedar City (4); Gunnison; Hurricane (2); LaVerkin; Manti; Moab; Payson (4) Richfield (2); Smithfield; St. George; Tooele. Total - 23 WASHINGTON: Anacortes (5); Arlington (3); Battle Ground (5); Belfair (3); Brewster; Buckley (3); Burlington (3); Carnation; Cashmere; Centralia (7); Chelan (3); Chehalis (4); Cheney; Cle Ellum (2); Colville (7); Connell; Coupeville (2); Darrington; Duvall; Eatonville; Enumclaw (3); Elma (2); Everson (2); Ellensburg (6); Ephrata (2); Ferndale (3); Forks; Friday Harbor (4); Frontier Village (2); Grandview (6); Graham; Granger; Gig Harbor (3); Goldendale (2); Illwaco (3); Langley (3); LaCenter; LaConner (2); Leavenworth (3); Lopez; Lynden (4); Lake Stevens (2); Marysville (4); McCleary (2); Monroe (2); Morton (2); Montesano; Moses Lake (4); Mount Vernon (3); Moxee; Napavine; Newport (3); North Bend (3); Oak Harbor (8); Ocean Shores; Okanogan (3); Omak (7); Oroville; Orting; Othello; Prosser; Port Angeles (5); Port Orchard (3); Port Townsend (4); Poulsbo (4); Quilcene; Quincy (4); Raymond; Rainier; Ridgefield; Rochester; Roslyn; Republic (2); Stillaquamish; Selah (4); Sequim (8); Sedrow Wooley (5); Shelton (4); Stanwood (3); South Bend; Sunnyside (9); Sumas; Sultan (2); Tanasket; Tenino (2); Toppenish (3); Twisp (2); Vashon Island (2); Westport; Winslow (3); Wapato (2); West Sound; Winthrop; Woodland; Yelm (3); Zillah. Total - 226 SUMMARY OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT (USDA-FmHA) MARKET STUDIES: STATES: 13 CITIES:275 STUDIES:509 _______________________________________________________ Property Dynamics Page E-20______________________________________________ August 2013 City of Bozeman Affordable Housing Support Application Project Name: Stoneridge Apartments, LP Developer(s): Summit Housing Group, Inc. Non-profit partner (if applicable): HRDC IX, Inc. Project Address: TBD Tschache Lane – at the corner of Thomas Drive and Tschache Lane Number of Buildings: 2 residential and 1 community building Number of Units: 48 Affordability Period: 45 years Type of request (grant, loan, grant sponsorship, or support letter): Letter of support and impact fee payment for units below 40% AMI Please provide responses to the following questions as an attachment to this form. 1) Provide a brief description of the proposed project. Include information regarding project location, number of units, type of units, development/unit amenities and any other information you would like the city to consider. 2) Describe how the proposed project meets or exceeds the Green Building standards outlined in Appendix C of the City of Bozeman Affordable Housing Action Plan. 3) Explain how the proposed project is in support of the City of Bozeman’s Affordable Housing plan and serves a target income group identified by the plan. 4) How will your firm ensure that the long-term management of the project will 1) provide adequate funding for project sustainability, and 2) be responsive to the needs of low-income residents? If your project is an ownership project, explain how your firm will support homeowners to promote long-term success. Attachments (for all support requests): • Narrative responses • Site plan • For each unit type: proposed rent, # of bedrooms, # of bathrooms, rent level (AMI targets) • Market Study • Project financial data – sources and uses; 10 year operating budget (rental projects); if supportive services are identified as crucial to the project, the operating budget must include forecasted revenue and expenditures for these services • List of development team, including relevant experience in developing/owning similar projects. Please attach resumes for key staff and firm principals. If the project is requesting financial assistance, please answer the following: Amount of financial assistance requested: approximately $25,000 – final amount dependent on actual impact fees Number of units for which assistance is requested: 6 Please provide responses to the following narrative questions as an attachment to your request. 1) Explain how this request meets a critical housing need for the City of Bozeman. 2) Please list the other subsidies the project has applied for, the amount requested from those sources, if the funds have been awarded, or the anticipated award date. 3) Explain how your firm will ensure that funding provided by the City will be used to promote long-term affordability. For instance, will your project have an affordability period, resale, or recapture provisions? Is your firm proposing a loan or grant of assistance? City of Bozeman Low Income Housing Tax Credit Request for Support Application Supplement Project Name: Stoneridge Apartments, LP Developer(s): Summit Housing Group, Inc. Non-profit partner (if applicable): HRDC IX, Inc. Project Address: TBD Tschache Lane – at the corner of Thomas Drive and Tschache Lane Number of Buildings: 2 residential and 1 community building Number of Units: 48 Amount of Credits being requested: $647,500 Affordability Period: 45 years Proposed Unit Mix: # baths # at 30% AMI or less # at 40% AMI or less # at 50% AMI or less # at 60% AMI or less Studio 1BR 2BR 2 bath 3 19 8 3BR 2 bath 3 10 4 TOTAL at rent level 6 29 12 TOTAL # of Units 6 29 12 Proposed Rents: 30% AMI or less 40% AMI or less 50% AMI or less 60% AMI or less Studio 1BR 2BR 542 702 776 3BR 609 794 852 Narrative responses Provide a brief description of the proposed project. Include information regarding project location, number of units, type of units, development/unit amenities and any other information you would like the city to consider. Stoneridge Apartments Project Information Stoneridge Apartments is located at the eastern half of Lot 5 Block 8, West Winds Major Subdivision, Phases 2A and 2B, Plat J-445 which is at the corner of Thomas Drive and Tschache Lane. The site, which is already owned by Summit Housing Group, Inc. is currently vacant but does have all utilities and infrastructure in place. With the infrastructure and flat topography of the site, construction of proposed development will be cost effective. Additionally, the site is already zoned R-3 for multifamily and under the PUD and conditional use permit for the West Winds Major subdivision the site has been specifically set aside for the development of affordable housing. All units will target Bozeman families and will consist of thirty (30) two bedroom units at 950SF and eighteen (18) three bedroom units at 1100SF. The community will also contain a 1200SF community building which will include an office, computer room, and a community room. The site is located less than half a mile from 19th Avenue which has multiple desirable services and off site amenities for the resident in our community. These include: • Smith Food and Drugs • Lowe's and Home Depot • Access to several convenience stores • Access to numerous retail stores • Access to numerous banking centers • Rose Park • Sage Learning Center and Emily Dickinson School • US Post Office Indoor Amenities Amenities are those elements in a home that are not essential but are provided to increase the efficiency, comfort, or aesthetic appearance of the apartment s. Specific amenities include: • High efficiency windows • High quality flooring in living spaces and hallways • Carpeting in all bedrooms • ENERGY STAR Washer in each unit • Dryer in each unit • ENERGY STAR lighting • ENERGY STAR appliances • Low-Flow shower heads and toilet fixtures • Energy efficient HVAC systems • Handicap accessible units Additional Amenities As you walk through the site you will find indoor and outdoor amenities that will provide entertainment in a safe, secure, natural environment. Please see additional amenities below: Outdoor Areas • Picnic areas with Pavilions with gazebos • Playground Community Amenities • Computer room with high speed internet • Community room In our conceptual plan we believe the project presents a rich communal environment that celebrate the moments of arrival, the transitions from collective activity to privacy, and the discovery of common interest and chance encounters. The encouragement of social interaction and sense of place are achieved through architecture, site layout and interior and exterior amenities. Financing Summit Housing Group, Inc.’s finance team will be directly involved with the financing for the project from inception. The finance team will be responsible for all financial analysis and coordination with the lender and equity investors, and the development team to determine the most effective financing plan for this project. Our finance team will update and sensitize project finance models so that as market conditions change, decisions can be made to adjust our plan accordingly. To this end, the financing team will negotiate all business points, terms and guarantees for the financing approach and will also provide the required due diligence to bring the project to closing. Once the project is closed and construction commences, the financing team will remain involved throughout the construction period. The finance team will work with the development team to monitor construction progress and construction draws and will interface with lenders and equity providers to ensure that funding occurs as needed keeping the project moving forward. Financial Assumptions • Approximately $5,397,245 in hard construction costs with $257,012 in Contingency • Total annual operating expenses = $198,223 of which $14,400 or $300/unit is replacement reserve • The property will cover all resident water, sewer and waste disposal expenses • There will be one three bedroom unit set aside for a manager. Operations would also include a maintenance employee. • Financing assumes $5,438,456 in Tax Credit Equity, a $5,735,000 construction loan, a $2,135,101 permanent loan and no Deferred Developer Fee. • Federal Tax Credit Price of $0.84 per credit • Rent and expense growth rates are underwritten and 2% and 3 % respectively • 7% vacancy rate Describe how the proposed project meets or exceeds the Green Building standards outlined in Appendix C of the City of Bozeman Affordable Housing Action Plan. Sustainable Design Sustainable design practices are utilized on all of Summit Housing Groups, Inc.’s new communities. Whether our design calls for certain building materials, building components, building systems or even the building locations, we strive to utilize new technologies and building practices to ensure our communities have little impact on the environment. These sustainable building practices also create long term financial benefits for residents and the community as a whole. Our design will incorporate the following sustainable design and construction standards: All appliances and equipment will reduce energy consumption by installing only EnergyStar products. All lighting fixture will also be EnergyStar product and will have either compact florescent or other high- efficiency bulbs. Water heaters will carry an efficiency rating of .93 or better will be well-insulated to reduce heat loss. Water conservation devices will be installed through the community and will meet the following standards: • Showerheads — 3.0 gpm (gallons per minute) or less • Kitchen and bathroom faucets — 2.75 gpm or less • Toilets – 1.6 gallon per flush or less Additionally the insulation of all hot water supply and heating pipes will carry an R-3 value or higher. Seal all exposed hot air duct joints and add insulating wraps with an R-3 value or higher. Our design will assure good indoor air quality by designing our community using the following Green Building Standards: • Provide local mechanical exhaust ventilation to the outdoors in each bathroom and kitchen. • In addition, all bathroom ventilation fans shall be ENERGY STAR qualified unless multiple bathrooms are exhausted with a multi-port fan. • Conventional clothes dryers shall be vented to the outdoors. Electric condensing dryers are • not vented and shall be plumbed to a drain according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Value Engineering Strategy Our Construction Management Team will endeavor to create value engineering options to further increase project cost savings that can be utilized toward project enhancements and site amenities without compromising the quality of the development. This effort will require a design/build approach during the early stages of the construction plans and specifications with the architect, engineers and general contractor. Construction Phase Beyond the design phase and permitting, we will hold construction meetings that will include the Owner, Architect and Contractor (OAC). OAC meetings are held monthly. OAC meetings are an open forum for all field observations, requests for information, change order review, value engineering, material selections, trouble-shooting and interaction with all respective disciplines to achieve maximum efficiency during construction. Summit Housing Group, Inc. and the general contractor will utilize the OAC meeting as a tool to further enhance the construction process and maintain scheduled milestones. During the Construction Phase we will also coordinate the following meetings with our Development Team: • Manage monthly OAC meetings • Coordinate bank inspector reviews during construction • Conduct construction testing (i.e. concrete, soil, asphalt) • Coordinate with local building inspectors • Sustainable design meetings Asset Management The finance team will act as asset manager during lease-up until stabilization is achieved. We will organize the necessary documents to obtain cost certification and 8609 completion and convert the construction loan to permanent financing. Additionally during this time period, the financing team will interface with property management to prepare an appropriate management plan for the project including pre-leasing and lease-up goals along with the marketing and lease-up budgets to support the overall plan. Summit Housing Group, Inc. has formed a team of firms that are experts in their fields. Each of our partners has strong experience and relationships on a variety of projects resulting in a partnership that understands how its members work, what they require and how to ensure deadlines are met. This team is committed to the success of this project. Explain how the proposed project is in support of the City of Bozeman’s Affordable Housing plan and serves a target income group identified by the plan. The City of Bozeman’s affordable housing plan looks to increase and preserve the supply of affordable housing by building 200 affordable family rental units between 2012 and 2016. This community would add 48 family units to Bozeman a on a site that is already designated for affordable housing. Over the last 10 years the following transactions Low Income Housing Tax Credit developments have been awarded by the Montana Board of Housing: 1. 2004 Bridger Apartments 46 2. 2005 Baxter Apartments 48 3. 2012 Haggerty Lane Apartments 11 The following are the guiding principles for the City of Bozeman’s Affordable Housing Plan: All residents should have access to decent and affordable housing. Stoneridge Apartments will provide residents with quality, safe, and decent housing at rates that are and will continue to be affordable. Successful delivery of affordable housing should not be measured only by sale prices and rents, but its performance in terms of minimizing energy use and maintenance costs. Summit Housing Group, Inc. uses sustainable design and high quality building products to ensure that residents and our communities as a whole minimize energy use and reduce ongoing maintenance cost. There is no single home price or rent benchmark that defines “affordable” housing.” Stoneridge Apartments will provide units to Bozeman families that have an income level of 40%, 50% and 60% of the Area Median Income. The Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program does have guidelines and maximum rent levels that are based on the resident’s income level. When setting our rents we take into consideration not only the LIHTC Program maximum rent level, but also research the market place to ensure our rents can be obtained. Stoneridge Apartments has an 18% market advantage over the current market rate rents. Affordability for residents of various incomes levels should be based on ability to pay, since affordability is a function of both housing costs and income. Similarly to the answer above our rent levels are not only set by LIHTC maximum rent levels but also consider what residents from specific income levels are able to pay for rent. Additionally, our sustainable design does help the financial burden considerably for our residents. The solutions to providing affordable housing should involve using diverse approaches and mechanisms. Summit Housing Group, Inc. continually looks to better the lives of our residents by looking at our past developments and studying areas that we could improve our design, and become more cost efficient, which in turn provides a better quality of housing and amenities for our residents. Sustainable design, efficient use of land and innovative building practices are the key to providing quality affordable housing. Availability of housing for residents of all income levels is essential for attracting and retaining the employers that provide the jobs that are essential to the community’s prosperity. Summit Housing Group, Inc. could not agree more and are dedicated to providing quality housing at affordable rents to each community we develop an apartment complex. Stoneridge Apartments will provide this quality housing. Economic viability is the lifeblood of any successful community and employment is one of the keys to growth and maintaining the community’s economic viability. Economic growth can be measured in part by the number of additional jobs created within a community. In the initial construction phases, Summit Housing Group, Inc. will create countless jobs as subcontractors construct the apartment complex. After completion, ongoing employment will be created through the operational phase of the developments. The ongoing operations from the developments will create jobs such as property managers, assistant property managers, maintenance staff, extermination, cleaning services, and repair contractors. Provision of Community and Supportive Services Programs benefiting residents with families: Through our partnership with HRDC, our residents will receive a tailored social service plan to address specific social issues within our community. These services will empower residents, nurture family values, facilitate community partnerships, and foster a supportive environment that cultivates economic growth and stability. This service plan will advocate self-sufficiency by offering social, economic, and educational services to residents that will aid them in unlocking their potential for growth and prosperity. Some of the programs Summit Housing Group, Inc. has utilized in the past are: Adult Literacy; Computer Classes; English/Spanish instruction; GED preparation; Job Training/Preparation; Budgeting; Communication Skills; Conflict Resolution; Fire and Personal Safety Awareness; Substance Abuse; Tax Assistance; and Time and Stress Management. How will your firm ensure that the long-term management of the project will 1) provide adequate funding for project sustainability, and 2) be responsive to the needs of low-income residents? Summit Housing Group, Inc.’s internal underwriting standards are constantly adjusting to the market place based on tax credit pricing, interest rates, operational cost and construction cost. Since we own and manage all 760 of our units, we have the benefit of having detailed historical information on development cost and operational cost. This information allows us to accurately budget our development cost but also us to conservatively set our operational budget and permanent debt amount so that the community will have continued financial health. The Montana Board of Housing and our Equity partners in the transaction will require both replacement reserves and operating deficit reserves. Stoneridge Apartments, LP will accrue $300 per unit or $14,400 for replacement reserves annually and will be used to replace any broken or damaged building components. This reserve is in addition to the $531.25 per unit or $39,800 we budget annually for general repairs and maintenance. The operating deficit reserve consists of four months of operating expense, debt service and replacement reserves and will equal approximately $116,000. This operating deficit reserve is put in place to cover any shortfalls or expense overruns that might occur due to unforeseen circumstances. If the operating deficit reserve is utilized during a calendar year it must be replenished at year end at the owner’s expense. For each unit type: proposed rent, # of bedrooms, # of bathrooms, rent level (AMI targets) Income Level # of units Gross Max Rent Utility Allowance Proposed Rent 1-BR @ 40% 0 533 82 451 2-BR @ 40% 3 640 98 542 3-BR @ 40% 3 739 130 609 TOTAL @ 40% 6 12.77% 1-BR @ 50% 0 666 82 584 2-BR @ 50% 19 800 98 702 3-BR @ 50% 10 924 130 794 TOTAL @ 50% 29 61.70% 1-BR @ 60% 0 800 82 718 2-BR @ 60% 8 960 98 776 3-BR @ 60% 4 1,109 130 852 TOTAL @ 60% 12 25.53% Total LIHTC units 47 Mgrs. Unit 1 - 3 BR MGR unit TOTAL UNITS 48 Unit Sq. Ft. 2 Bedroom with 2 Baths 950 SF 3 Bedroom with 2 Baths 1,100 SF List of development team, including relevant experience in developing/owning similar projects. Please attach resumes for key staff and firm principals. Developer: Summit Housing Group, Inc. 283 W. Front Street, Suite 1 Missoula, MT 59802 Ph: 406-541-0999 ext. 233 Fax: 406-541-0997 Contact: Rusty Snow rusty@summithousinggroup.com www.summithousinggroup.com Non-profit partner: Human Resource Development Council of District IX, Inc. (HRDC) 32 South Tracy Bozeman, MT 59715 Ph: 406-587-4486 Contact: Heather Grenier hgrenier@hrdc9.org www.thehrdc.org Architect: Encompass Architecture, PLLC 1535 Liberty Lane, Suite 110B Missoula, MT 59808 Ph: 406-880-2841 Contact: Jenn Clary Jenn@encompassdesigninc.com General Contractor: Oakwood Construction Co. 2380 Science Parkway Suite 101 Okemos, MI 48864 Ph: 517-347-1980 Fax: 517-347-0968 Contact: Bernie Aulgur oakwoodcompanies@gmail.com http://www.oak.cc Civil Engineer: JKC Engineering 111 West 2nd Street, Suite 420 Casper, WY 82601 Ph: 307-265-4601 Fax: 307-265-4672 Contact: Lewis James lewis@jkcengineering.com http://www.jkcengineering.com Property Management: Highland Property Management, Inc. 283 W. Front Street, Suite 1 Missoula, MT 59802 Ph: 406-541-0999 ext. 224 Fax: 406-541-0997 Contact: Casey Overland casey@highland-propertymanagement.com http://www.highland-propertymanagement.com/ If the project is requesting financial assistance, please answer the following: Amount of financial assistance requested: Summit Housing Group, Inc. estimates that the Transportation Impact Fees, Water Impact Fees, Wastewater Impact Fees, and Fire/Emergency Medical Services Fees for a community with 48 units would be approximately $216,881. We would like to request a 12% reduction of these fees or $26,025 in financial assistance, representing those units renting for less than 40% AMI. Number of units for which assistance is requested: This reduction in impact fees is for the 6 units targeted to households earning less than 40% AMI, in accordance with the City’s Affordable housing plan. Please list the other subsidies the project has applied for, the amount requested from those sources, if the funds have been awarded, or the anticipated award date. We have not requested any other subsidies at this time.