Economic and demographic analysis of Montana : information in support of the Montana Consolidated Plan for the plan year beginning April 1, 2005.

2005·0.42 MB·English

by  Montana State University--Billings

ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC
ANALYSIS OF MONTANA

VOLUME III Appendix
Housing Data

Prepared by

Center for Applied Economic Research
1500 University Drive
Billings, MT 59101
[phone]
[email protected]

Information in Support of the Montana Consolidated Plan
For the Plan Year Beginning April 1, 2005

DECEMBER 2004
We make every effort to ensure that our
documents are fully accessible to
persons with disabilities. Alternative
accessible formats of this document will
be provided upon request.

Please contact:
Montana Department of Commerce
[phone] or TDD [phone]
TABLE OF CONTENTS

VOLUME III APPENDIX
Housing Affordability
Problems Mismatch
Table Table

Montana................................................................................................. 1 61
Beaverhead........................................................................................... 2 62
Big Horn................................................................................................. 3 63
Blaine..................................................................................................... 4 64
Broadwater............................................................................................ 5 65
Carbon................................................................................................... 6 66
Carter..................................................................................................... 7 67
Cascade ................................................................................................ 8 68
Chouteau............................................................................................... 9 69
Custer...................................................................................................10 70
Daniels..................................................................................................11 71
Dawson.................................................................................................12 72
Deer Lodge...........................................................................................13 73
Fallon....................................................................................................14 74
Fergus ..................................................................................................15 75
Flathead................................................................................................16 76
Gallatin .................................................................................................17 77
Garfield.................................................................................................18 78
Glacier..................................................................................................19 79
Golden Valley ......................................................................................20 80
Granite..................................................................................................21 81
Hill.........................................................................................................22 82
Jefferson...............................................................................................23 83
Judith Basin..........................................................................................24 84
Lake......................................................................................................25 85
Lewis and Clark....................................................................................26 86
Liberty...................................................................................................27 87
Lincoln..................................................................................................28 88
Madison................................................................................................29 89
McCone................................................................................................30 90
Meagher ...............................................................................................31 91
Mineral..................................................................................................32 92
Missoula ...............................................................................................33 93
Musselshell...........................................................................................34 94
Park......................................................................................................35 95
Petroleum.............................................................................................36 96
Phillips..................................................................................................37 97
Pondera................................................................................................38 98
Powder River........................................................................................39 99
Powell...................................................................................................40 100
Prairie...................................................................................................41 101
Ravalli...................................................................................................42 102
MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE December 2004
Econ. & Dem. Analysis – Volume IIIA i
VOLUME III APPENDIX (cont.)
Housing Affordability
Problems Mismatch
Table Table

Richland ...............................................................................................43 103
Roosevelt .............................................................................................44 104
Rosebud...............................................................................................45 105
Sanders................................................................................................46 106
Sheridan...............................................................................................47 107
Silver Bow ............................................................................................48 108
Stillwater...............................................................................................49 109
Sweet Grass.........................................................................................50 110
Teton....................................................................................................51 111
Toole....................................................................................................52 112
Treasure...............................................................................................53 113
Valley....................................................................................................54 114
Wheatland............................................................................................55 115
Wibaux.................................................................................................56 116
Yellowstone..........................................................................................57 117
Billings City...........................................................................................58
Great Falls City.....................................................................................59
Missoula City........................................................................................60

MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE December 2004
Econ. & Dem. Analysis – Volume IIIA ii
These tables are from a special tabulation of Census 2000 data. This data set is
typically referred to as the “CHAS Data”1.

Housing Problems Tables (tabulation of households)
The data is organized as follows:

Renter households

Owner households

MFI income 0% - 30% Extremely low income
31% - 50% Very low income
51% - 80% Low income
Over 80%

HUD-adjusted MFI for the area:
HUD sets income limits that determine the eligibility of applicants for assisted housing
programs. Using data from the Census, the American Community Survey, and the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, HUD estimates median family income (one-half of families
have higher income, one-half of families have lower income) for a family of four (base)
and adjusts this income number for different family sizes.

Elderly households: A one or two person household in which the head of the
household or spouse is at least 62 years of age.

Small related households: A household of 2 to 4 persons that includes at least one
person related to the householder by blood, marriage, or
adoption.

Large related households: A household of 5 or more persons that includes at least
one person related to the householder by blood, marriage,
or adoption.

Other households: A household of one or more persons that does not meet
the definition of a small related, large related or elderly
household (primarily unrelated households without an
elderly member).

1 “CHAS” refers to the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy which is part of the National
Affordability Housing Act of 1991.
MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE December 2004
Econ. & Dem. Analysis – Volume IIIA i
Housing Problems Tables (tabulation of households)
The data is organized as follows:

Cost burden: At least 30% of the household’s monthly income is spent on
housing costs.

Severe cost burden: At least 50% of the household’s monthly income is spent on
housing costs.

Overcrowding: Households with more than 1.00 person per room (total
rooms, not just bedrooms).

Lacking facilities: Households without complete plumbing and/or complete
kitchen facilities.

Affordability Mismatch Tables (tabulation of housing units)
The data is organized as follows:

Renter units by number of bedrooms

Rent amount <=30% Gross rent + utilities are affordable to households
at or below 0%-30% MFI

31-50% Gross rent + utilities are affordable to households
with 31%-50% MFI

51-80% Gross rent + utilities are affordable to households
with 51%-80% MFI

>80% Gross rent + utilities are affordable to households
above 80% MFI

Affordable is defined as gross rent + utilities less than or equal to 30% of a household’s
monthly gross income.

MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE December 2004
Econ. & Dem. Analysis – Volume IIIA ii
Affordability Mismatch Tables (tabulation of housing units)
The data is organized as follows:

Owner Units by number of bedrooms

Value of home <=50% Values are affordable to households
at or below 50% MFI

51-80% Values are affordable to households
with 51%-80% MFI

>80% Values are affordable to households
above 80% MFI

Affordable is defined as annual owner costs less than or equal to 30% of a household’s
annual gross income.

Annual owner costs are estimated using a 7.9% interest rate and national averages for
utilities, taxes, and insurance.

% occupants at MFI level <=30%
<=50%
<=80%

% built before 1980

% some problem (overcrowding and/or lacking facilities)

# occupied units

# vacant units
MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE December 2004
Econ. & Dem. Analysis – Volume IIIA iii

HOUSING PROBLEMS TABLES

STATE: Montana Renter Households Owner Households
Small Large Total Small Large Total Total
Elderly Related Related Other Renters Elderly Related Related Other Owners Households
Households with Income <=30% MFI 4,938 7,210 1,480 10,265 23,893 5,938 4,655 1,065 3,998 15,656 39,549
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 57.1 74.2 80.7 75.6 71.7 71.6 75.8 83.1 75.5 74.6 72.8
% with cost burden 54.4 71.4 62.5 73.9 68.4 70.5 73.6 70.0 72.9 72.0 69.8
% with severe cost burden 37.1 54.9 42.9 60.2 52.7 44.4 60.5 56.3 58.7 53.6 53.1
Households with Income 31% to 50% MFI 5,027 6,765 1,630 8,579 22,001 10,595 6,299 1,829 3,838 22,561 44,562
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 52.4 62.9 74.5 67.3 63.1 37.8 66.4 76.8 63.5 53.3 58.1
% with cost burden 50.4 58.3 44.5 64.7 58.0 37.1 63.9 62.5 61.3 50.8 54.3
% with severe cost burden 15.8 14.7 11.0 18.1 16.0 15.8 40.1 30.6 36.8 27.3 21.7
Households with Income 51 to 80% MFI 3,887 9,357 2,425 10,222 25,891 15,753 15,228 4,528 6,684 42,193 68,084
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 33.9 28.3 44.5 27.8 30.4 22.0 50.1 56.1 49.7 40.2 36.5
% with cost burden 33.1 20.8 15.3 24.2 23.4 21.2 47.8 40.4 48.3 37.1 31.9
% with severe cost burden 8.0 1.1 1.2 1.9 2.4 7.5 16.2 10.2 17.7 12.6 8.7
Households with Income >80% MFI 4,798 16,862 2,695 14,715 39,070 37,578 94,835 15,413 19,494 167,320 206,390
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 12.0 5.9 26.0 5.3 7.8 7.8 12.4 18.9 19.2 12.8 11.8
% with cost burden 9.0 1.6 1.3 2.6 2.9 7.3 11.3 9.8 17.8 11.0 9.5
% with severe cost burden 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 1.4 1.7 0.9 2.5 1.6 1.4
Total Households 18,650 40,194 8,230 43,781 110,855 69,864 121,017 22,835 34,014 247,730 358,585
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 39.4 33.0 50.9 39.2 37.8 21.0 22.4 33.9 36.8 25.0 29.0
% with cost burden 37.2 28.1 25.0 36.5 32.7 20.3 21.0 22.9 35.2 22.9 26.0
% with severe cost burden 17.0 12.6 10.3 18.1 15.3 8.6 7.8 7.7 15.9 9.1 11.0
MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE December 2004
Econ. & Dem. Analysis – Volume IIIA – CHAS Data 1
HOUSING PROBLEMS TABLES
COUNTY NAME: Beaverhead Renter Households Owner Households
Small Large Total Small Large Total Total
Elderly Related Related Other Renters Elderly Related Related Other Owners Households
Households with Income <=30% MFI 79 76 12 138 305 44 52 8 54 158 463
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 64.6 89.5 66.7 89.1 82.0 77.3 84.6 100.0 63.0 75.9 79.9
% with cost burden 39.2 89.5 66.7 89.1 75.4 77.3 84.6 100.0 55.6 73.4 74.7
% with severe cost burden 29.1 84.2 66.7 54.3 55.7 45.5 76.9 100.0 37.0 55.7 55.7
Households with Income 31% to 50% MFI 42 78 8 143 271 68 82 38 33 221 492
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 42.9 50.0 50.0 54.5 51.3 48.5 63.4 60.5 87.9 62.0 56.1
% with cost burden 19.0 37.2 0.0 49.0 39.5 48.5 63.4 60.5 87.9 62.0 49.6
% with severe cost burden 9.5 12.8 0.0 14.0 12.5 26.5 48.8 50.0 45.5 41.6 25.6
Households with Income 51 to 80% MFI 31 139 14 125 309 168 140 38 72 418 727
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 12.9 13.7 28.6 32.0 21.7 20.2 54.3 63.2 52.8 41.1 32.9
% with cost burden 12.9 10.8 28.6 32.0 20.4 17.9 48.6 63.2 47.2 37.3 30.1
% with severe cost burden 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.8 17.1 10.5 13.9 11.0 6.3
Households with Income >80% MFI 80 170 30 149 429 449 819 142 138 1,548 1,977
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4 3.3 5.3 8.4 16.2 20.3 9.3 8.0
% with cost burden 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4 3.3 3.6 7.9 13.4 14.5 7.8 6.8
% with severe cost burden 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 2.3 0.9 3.7 2.8 7.2 3.1 2.9
Total Households 232 463 64 555 1,314 729 1,093 226 297 2,345 3,659
% with cost burden/overcrowding/lacking facilities 31.5 27.2 25.0 45.9 35.8 17.1 22.0 34.5 43.4 24.4 28.5
% with cost burden 18.5 24.2 18.8 44.5 31.5 15.5 21.0 32.7 38.0 22.6 25.8
% with severe cost burden 11.6 16.0 12.5 18.9 16.3 6.9 12.3 15.5 18.5 11.7 13.3
MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE December 2004
Econ. & Dem. Analysis – Volume IIIA – CHAS Data 2